Ukraine Conflict - "An empire founded by war has to maintain itself by war"

[Malcador]

5 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Well, some people were successful with downing them that way. There is also one case of old guy downing Su bomber, with his old gun during start of the war

 

https://meaww.com/ukrainian-pensioner-shot-down-an-85-million-russian-fighter-jet-just-with-his-rifle

Come on, you really believe that ? It's like the Iraqi that took out an Apache with a Brno rifle.  Can take it down for sure, but probably should leave that for AAA, at least that'll benefit from radar - they lit up the sky this morning with it as well.

[Mamoulian War]

I did not said, I believe it, just there are reports of it, including video. I didn’t care to click on it, considered it as a clickbait . But drones are much much smaller, than planes, and drones have been before taken down with shotguns, handguns stones and other stuff all around the world. If you see such a drone going your way, and there is a risk of civilian casualties, you will do everything possible to stop it. Especially if you are policeman or soldier and have a weapon at hand…

[Sarex]

1 hour ago, Malcador said:

Come on, you really believe that ? It's like the Iraqi that took out an Apache with a Brno rifle.  Can take it down for sure, but probably should leave that for AAA, at least that'll benefit from radar - they lit up the sky this morning with it as well.

One guy during the 1999 NATO aggression hit a F117a with his AK, or was it an F-16...maybe both.

Edited October 17, 2022 by Sarex

[Mamoulian War]

@Malcador

here is a video of one successful destruction of drone with small arms from today.

 

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/10/17/7372288/

[Malcador]

1 hour ago, Mamoulian War said:

I did not said, I believe it, just there are reports of it, including video. I didn’t care to click on it, considered it as a clickbait . But drones are much much smaller, than planes, and drones have been before taken down with shotguns, handguns stones and other stuff all around the world. If you see such a drone going your way, and there is a risk of civilian casualties, you will do everything possible to stop it. Especially if you are policeman or soldier and have a weapon at hand…

"There is also one case" had me thinking you believed it.   I can understand wanting to do something, but still seems foolish.  For fun, switch the sides and imagine the comments

[Mamoulian War]

31 minutes ago, Malcador said:

"There is also one case" had me thinking you believed it.   I can understand wanting to do something, but still seems foolish.  For fun, switch the sides and imagine the comments

Reading it now again, after you mention it, it really seems that way. my proper wording should have been “there is allegedly one case” hehe

anyways, as much as it seems foolish, they downed at least one. And there is definitely one more case from few days/week ago, where they have been able to shoot down another shaheed. (Link to this one case is already lost in time and space). 
 

Vatniks can have fun as much as they want, these guys even with such an improvised action shot one of them down, and save some lives. Few streets away in Kyiv, one shaheed killed a pair with unborn baby…

[Mamoulian War]

108 women prisoners, some of them imprisoned since 2019 in LNR/DNR, have been successfully exchanged during last PoW swap.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/10/17/7372330/ 

[xzar_monty]

The Russian Su-34 crash from yesterday sounds like something exceedingly rare in other parts of the world, although I am not sure. Anyway, yet again: wow. Astonishing. Hit a Russian residential building, too.

And in other news: Russian troops murder an Ukrainian conductor for refusing to take part in a concert in Kherson. What can you say. The most Russian part of the whole episode is that the concert was “intended by the occupiers to demonstrate the so-called ‘improvement of peaceful life’ in Kherson”. War is peace, murder is love. So no surprises here, at all: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/16/russian-troops-kill-ukrainian-musician-yuriy-kerpatenko-for-refusing-role-in-kherson-concert

[Zoraptor]

Military aircraft crashes are pretty common.

eg John McCain the presidential candidate lost 4 aircraft as pilot- though you could forgive him for two of them. He nearly lost one more as well.

Edited October 18, 2022 by Zoraptor

[BruceVC]

13 hours ago, Mamoulian War said:

Reading it now again, after you mention it, it really seems that way. my proper wording should have been “there is allegedly one case” hehe

anyways, as much as it seems foolish, they downed at least one. And there is definitely one more case from few days/week ago, where they have been able to shoot down another shaheed. (Link to this one case is already lost in time and space). 
 

Vatniks can have fun as much as they want, these guys even with such an improvised action shot one of them down, and save some lives. Few streets away in Kyiv, one shaheed killed a pair with unborn baby…

Drones can definitely be shot down, it requires people to see them and be aware of them 

https://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/drones/how-to/a16756/how-to-shoot-down-a-drone/

And then we dont know if this number is accurate but the Ukrainians have been shooting down drones for ages and not just this weekend 

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-shot-down-85-86-russian-drones-involved-latest-attacks-air-force-2022-10-17/

https://news.yahoo.com/ukrainian-defenders-shoot-down-10-212215833.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

 

 

[xzar_monty]

1 hour ago, Zoraptor said:

Military aircraft crashes are pretty common.

Wow! Thanks. More common than civilian aircraft crashes, it seems to me, although I'm not sure. What are the reasons? Simply more take-offs and thus a larger number of potential crashes?

[BruceVC]

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-set-train-15000-ukrainian-troops-provide-more-arms-funding-kyiv-2022-10-17/

More examples of EU aid to Ukraine 

[Zoraptor]

1 hour ago, xzar_monty said:

What are the reasons? Simply more take-offs and thus a larger number of potential crashes?

The primary concern for civilian craft is not killing the people on board- if for no other reason than anything else is bad for business, per Boeing's MAX fiasco or the later DC series. Then you have size, efficiency, reliability etc but safety really is top priority 99% of the time.

The main concern for a military craft is that it does its military job. If you're designing a fighter you want fast and manoevrable which are intrinsically less safe than slow and sedate and allows for less margin for error in pretty much every design and response parameter. That's balanced out somewhat by rigorous training and a vigorous maintenance regime but it can only be balanced out somewhat. Many modern fighters literally cannot be flown if the flight computer fails and the only option if that happens is to bail out. Takeoff and landing are when most crashes occur whether civil or military, since that's when you have least margin for error.

[non exhaustive; there are a bunch of other factors too like having to simulate war conditions which contribute as well]

Edited October 18, 2022 by Zoraptor

[Gorth]

Look up Lockheed F-104 Starfighter to see how important safety is in the design of military aircraft 🫣

 

Edit: Its nickname Widowmaker was well earned and not for its combat prowess 

[xzar_monty]

3 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

The main concern for a military craft is that it does its military job.

I understand this but cannot help noticing that if the plane crashes or cannot even take off, it won't be able to do its military job, so safety should be paramount here, too. I know that you're aware of this, and I'm not trying to nitpick, but there's a bit of a logic problem in the priorities -- which, strangely enough, is both understandable and weird.

[Chilloutman]

also military tech is usually pretty costly so I would assume military want to make sure it just not break down on its own...

[Lexx]

Unless your name is Boeing and you want some more of that sweet government money.

Edited October 18, 2022 by Lexx

[Malcador]

Wartime conditions means they push the machines pretty hard, I'd imagine a lot of aircraft need as many maintenance man hours as flight ones. Could have sworn someone here was a mechanic in the USAF.

Re: Drones. I am a bit puzzled at the fuss about them, past couple of days my local media has been going on as if these things will annihilate Ukraine.  Bolton's probably aroused as hell, have an excuse to go bomb Iran over this (something something rule based international order)

Edited October 18, 2022 by Malcador

[ShadySands]

Once upon a time when I was driving to or from (this was some 22 years ago) high school an Osprey crashed near me. Not so close that I was in any danger but scary close. 19 people died.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Marana_V-22_crash

PS Haven't heard from my wife's cousin in Kiev since the latest strikes, hope he's okay.

Edited October 18, 2022 by ShadySands

[pmp10]

1 hour ago, Malcador said:

Re: Drones. I am a bit puzzled at the fuss about them, past couple of days my local media has been going on as if these things will annihilate Ukraine.  Bolton's probably aroused as hell, have an excuse to go bomb Iran over this (something something rule based international order)

They might be just cheap and numerous enough to wreck Ukrainian power infrastructure and exhaust anti-aircraft munitions.
And chances are they are just the beginning as Iranian ballistic missiles are rumored to follow soon.

Either way, they are a largely unexpected boost to Russian capabilities.

[Mamoulian War]

Iranians providing missiles to Russia just made a pretty big uproar in Israel, and one of their ministers have already spoken up, that Israel should finally get involved in defence of Ukraine. 
 

https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-719942

[Gfted1]

Id love to see the Arrow 3 in action.

[Zoraptor]

6 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

I understand this but cannot help noticing that if the plane crashes or cannot even take off, it won't be able to do its military job, so safety should be paramount here, too. I know that you're aware of this, and I'm not trying to nitpick, but there's a bit of a logic problem in the priorities -- which, strangely enough, is both understandable and weird.

The aircraft are expensive, and pilots take a long time and are expensive to train- and yeah, if the planes cannot fly or crash too much they're potentially worse than useless- so reliability is certainly as major factor in a successful military aircraft as well. It just cannot be the main focus, as it often clashes on an absolutely fundamental level with being a good military aircraft.

That fundamental difference is... well, for example a safe and reliable civilian jet might have a max speed of .8 mach or similar. A fighter might have 3 times that. Even by base physics (ie excluding fluid dynamics, and at high speed that plays an ever increasing role as airs behaviour gets increasingly water like as speed increases) you need 9x the power/ thrust to get 3x the speed. That requires highly engineered jet engines and specific design adaptations which are inherently less stable/ safe at low speeds (esp landing/ takeoff) like delta wing or significantly swept wing designs (--> reduced wing area/ edge to reduce drag at high speed -->--> reduced lift at low speeds, no way to avoid that except to an extent swing wing, and that introduces other potential issues which is why it's more or less abandoned as a concept now). You can of course design a fighter that flies at .8 mach instead, it will just be near useless, as a fighter, against any design that places safety as a lower priority. Still plenty of subsonic planes in other roles though.

It's a balance, but militarily a plane that can do its job properly rather than maximising safely has to be #1 priority. As much as it cannot do its job if it's crashed or is constantly being serviced it also cannot do its job if it's useless for its job- and that's true even if it's 100% reliable and requires almost no maintenance.

[Malcador]

Here's some red meat for a bunch of you - https://ekspress.delfi.ee/artikkel/120083694/human-life-has-no-value-there-baltic-counterintelligence-officers-speak-candidly-about-russian-cruelty

 

[rjshae]

I wonder if we'll start seeing large nets as a defense against "suicide" drones? Perhaps around the power stations anyway.