The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

kromak

New Member
How exactly do they locate it in your hypothetical? We've seen drones quiet enough and fast enough for there to be split seconds between dispersed infantry identifying the drone and then getting hit, and that's in the open. How do you do it in terrain, trees or buildings?
The few videos posted here that I saw of human vs drones, usually shows a bunch of unaware people being hit a few seconds before spotting the drones. Or even not noticing them. I am not sure I saw any video that fits your description of "split seconds" between detection and being hit. The worst case I remember seeing had a reasonable number of seconds for people to disperse before the first soldier could be hit.

The identification issue can easily be nullified by keeping one or two persons permanently watching the skies for drones. To spot a drone should be doable at least, at a few hundred of meters away, given the contrast between their colors and a blue, white or even grey sky.

At hundred of meters, it would take a decent amount of time to arrive, enough to the soldiers to disperse at safety enough distance one another.

Even if the detection distance was not enough, it could be easily improved using drones that would precede the soldiers and probe the sky for the enemy drones many kilometers away.

This assuming open areas. On trees and buildings, it depends if one would have enough visibility to look for the drones efficiently. One possibility would be to keep the watchers on specific spots between the trees where there is better visibility. On buildings, to keep the watchers outside. Another possibility is to keep using drones permanently to watch the sky.




Haha. This is most definitely not the case. These two incompetent sides have been doing this for the last few years, going through the entire evolution of this type of warfare. Frankly, no one else has done or gone through anything like this. I am sure both sides are hiring volunteers (or “well paid” contractors) though that could give them tips and show them how this is done on the competent level. Maybe ask the Americans and other westerners fighting in the Chosen Company and the Foreign Legion (is that the name?) in Ukraine.

This perception of Russians and Ukrainians (though by way less people in the case of the latter) being just meat and fighting WW1 type of stuff is very unhealthy. I would wager a good amount of money that if you put your described battalion of any other military in the middle of it, without proper introduction and training, regardless whose side they fight for, they would likely get picked off rather quickly by the opposing side. Some would probably have more success than others, I am fairly certain they would all get wiped out in the end, for the most part, if they persist.


An article on the subject of revolution. It is in French though, so you would have to use the translate function. The article itself is a brief, there is a pdf link within for the full report (also in French).
I read the article (more of an introduction) and might read the future English translation, depending on its size.


without proper introduction and training
But that's precisely the contrary of what I am suggesting here. No one under a reasonable risk of being attacked should be submitted to it without proper training. People should train against their own drone teams before going into any offensive operation.

Also, imagine someone knows a secret and not telling Ukraine (or Russia, for that matter) how to do better, but letting them get slaughtered instead.
No secret here, just basic logical thinking, that's clearly not being used by most involved.
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
Can you provide some detail of why you believe volunteers are fighting in Ukraine for money ,you would have to supply some evidence of what they were being paid in their normal jobs back home for that comparison ,a lance corporal in the A.D.F starts at a minimum $49,000 aus dollars to $88.000
 

rsemmes

Active Member
I've got this...

and this...

I guess that in a couple of days or so, Kalibrated will be right.
 

rsemmes

Active Member
No Taurus for Kiev, from the horse's mouth.

This is one little inconvenience of living on promises. (What does Zelenski have?, What can he do?)
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
I've got this...

and this...

I guess that in a couple of days or so, Kalibrated will be right.
He might be right already. Often the issue isn't one of the event happening but one of OSINTers being able to confirm it. Suriyakmaps has, in my opinion, a fairly high standard which means sometimes he can't confirm advances as happening, and he defaults to either increasing the grey area, or leaving it unchanged until he can get it confirmed. It makes his map more valuable as a conservative estimate of what's going on, on the ground, and since there is a general trend of Russian advances and Ukrainian retreats, it gives us a good picture of what we know Russia has captured.

No Taurus for Kiev, from the horse's mouth.

This is one little inconvenience of living on promises. (What does Zelenski have?, What can he do?)
The thing is... Ukraine's a large country. So another piece of this is that Russian advances are still relatively small in the overall scale of things. This lets many decisions be made in a context that's mostly political, and the military reality can be ignored, or misrepresented as whatever someone wants it to be. Decisions will likely be made differently if Russia forces start taking cities like Kharkov, Sumy, or even Slavyansk and Kramatorsk. I suspect this war is heading for a decision fork that will come towards the end of the Russian campaign for the Donbas. Russia will likely face a Ukraine that isn't ready to give up, isn't willing to sign any peace that involves recognizing any loss of territory, and isn't fully defeated by any reasonable definition. Western support for Ukraine will be low compared to earlier parts of the war, but not negligible, and continuous. Capturing Zaporozhye or Kherson will still be very unlikely goals at that point in time. What does Russia do then? My suspicion is that they will push into Poltava, Dnepropetrovsk, Sumy, and Kharkov regions*. And they will likely declare some region or other to also be annexed or be targeted for annexation once enough territory is "liberated". The intent would be to force Ukraine to face increasingly worse prospects as the war continues.

The west will then renew their use of Hitler analogies, and will be faced with an unpleasant choice. You can try to twist Ukraine's arm to force them to give up territory and agree to Russian terms. This is what Russia would like the west to do. You can simply continue as is, and the war will continue, with steadily increasing Russian gains. Or you can increase aid to Ukraine and start crossing red lines of various sorts. There are other variations on this, including a change of leadership within Ukraine, or Russia (Putin is old, and Zelensky is increasingly unpopular). Ukraine could also start facing large scale collapses, that shift the direction of the war.

*Though it's possible they will instead stubbornly try to take Kherson or Zaporozhye instead, and this could give us another positional phase to the war.
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
Ukraine is also developing its own missiles so perhaps not so reliant on the German Taurus
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
A couple of articles about what being wounded may mean ,certainly an exact number of amputees is still a state secret but liely a hard road ahead for these people
 

rsemmes

Active Member
Ukraine is also developing its own missiles so perhaps not so reliant on the German Taurus
Yes, it is about to surpass German production of missiles (and US production too?).
Not to mention all the intelligence data Ukraine is providing UK and France to use of those missiles.

Edit.
I guess the only important thing is when is Ukraine going to be launching the same number or more missiles than Russia. To achieve what exactly?
 
Last edited:
Top