Look at the aim of that gun, no wonder they can’t hit them for shit.
Also, very funny propaganda video overall when you keep in mind that it was destroyed by small surface drone. Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Also, very funny propaganda video overall when you keep in mind that it was destroyed by small surface drone. To be fair, it is easy to claim you don't have to do anything to counter a threat if you've never really faced it.
One of the common ways to overcome a layered defence, is saturation. Sure, a CIWS could probably shoot down 4-5 drones, arriving simultaneously, in time. Could it should down 100 drones fast enough though, before one gets through or before the CIWS overheats and malfunctions? Can its radar recognise and pick up, smaller and slow-flying loitering munitions? What happens if a drone gets through and hits the CIWS, is the ship now unprotected to drone attacks?
I doubt these scenarios have been adequately tested, it probably wasn't even possible to conduct such tests 10 years ago.
The Russian army was never really effective. They won due to sheer numbers. No other nation could afford/accept such of equipment and humans.
How many western navy ships has the Houthi rebels been able to hit so far with their drones and missiles?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
One was very close to hit a warship, apparently. And I wonder if they are still getting supplies from the likes of Iran nowadays to test the U.S. ships defense with an overwhelming number. I also think Ukraine may be a bit ahead in how to use them. In fact, they might be the first to use them so effectively?
Last edited:
The Houthi disaster is the result of another master stroke of the greatest of all presidents by withdrawing unilateral from the Iran nuclear treaty.
White House to brief lawmakers on 'serious national security threat' related to Russia
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/na...onal-security-threat-ahead-planned-rcna138848
Apparently Russia wants to put a nuclear weapon into space for possible use against satellites. Would be a violation of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty according to some account I follow.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/whi...akers-house-chairman-warns/story?id=107232293
Last edited:
Russian state media TASS reporting negatively on the Tucker interview. Interesting...
https://t.me/tass_agency/231727
Tucker , the silent assasinSo, Tuckers should be worried of windows and his drinks now?
Well, I think a lot of Western navies will actually (they better do) take notes about the new reality of naval drones because this is arguably as revolutionary as the impact from anti-ship missiles fired by planes back during in the Falklands War. Most navies started equipping their ships with the very best in CIWS after they saw what happened to HMS Sheffield.
Last edited:
The gist was more that the Russian ships aren't protected like Western ships so it's unclear what lessons Western navies can learn. If Russian ships are as protected as Western ones and Ukraine still got their drones through those defenses, that'd be more alarming.
Isn't a nuclear weapon overkill? wouldn't a grenade be enough to just to put a satellite out of commission?
If you get Rory Delap to throw it, perhaps.
From reading a couple of articles it seems that Low Earth Orbiting satellites don't have to transgress the Van Allen belts and so are not, as a rule, protected against radiation. Any nuclear explosion in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) would increase radiation at that level which would then swiftly spread round the planet, degrading and ultimately destroying the vast majority of satellite networks orbiting at that level.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Apparently it's not a new consideration. Here's a letter from a space systems analyst way back in 1998 that succinctly describes the threat:
Glen Kweder said:
Oh, i see the purpose now. Thanka a lot.
Bonus question. Could that low orbit nuclear radition spread down land?
That's not quite the right claim.
Last edited:
It would. While the explosion would blow part of the debris further into space, some will be blown down to earth or on a trajectory slowly dropping down to earth (everything in low earth orbits will drop down at some point due to the resistance of the extremely faint atmosphere in that height. For satellites we are talking about 10-100 years of lifetime until they fall back to earth). But I would not really worry about that - it would be so widespread that it probably is measurable, but not really affecting anyone or increasing the existing background radiation to a meaningful degree.
Thanks for the explanation!
If we're talling WW2 then that's a bit of a myth. Deep Battle for example was a pretty solid innovation/strategy.
I think you might be asking the wrong questions. In my opinion, the right questions are "How many were actually targeted and with what volume of drones/missiles?" Without knowing the answer to those, the answer to your question is meaningless.
But we know that Houthis only get a small fraction of the materiel Iran produces. Iran also supplies Russia, Hezbollah and a score of other military movements in the region. I suspect that if US Navy ships were in the Persian Gulf and targeted in earnest by Iran, it would be a whole different matter. And targeted by China in the straight of Taiwan, it would be a whole different matter again.
Do you have access to what it says behind the paywall?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
LONDON — European nations are setting up a drone coalition, led by Latvia and Britain, to supply and support the production of thousands of first-person-view drones for the Ukrainian military.
https://www.defensenews.com/global/...-to-rush-first-person-view-drones-to-ukraine/
Communication on this has been...bad. There is a difference between nuclear-powered and a nuclear weapon. Still unclear what it is.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I did sort of slightly wonder. Surely Russia would have been capable of exploding a LEO nuke for multiple decades.
Johnson's put the House on recess.
https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...-going-on-recess-without-passing-ukraine-aid/
https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...-going-on-recess-without-passing-ukraine-aid/
Really, go figure what Mike Turner was even thinking when he did that stunt. Several Democrats, former CIA directors and former officers are not particularly happy at the turn of events as there are rules for dealing with such sensitive intel. In other words, you cannot leak stuff like that when it doesn't tell the whole story.
Bad news. Hopefully the European countries can ramp up ammunition production quickly now to prevent this happening again.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
WTF is that?
30mm round. @Dr. Dwayne , any clue as to what type this is?