Ukraine Conflict

[Chilloutman]

could have been AA as well if it was S300

[Malcador]

5 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Russian planes did already shoot their missile at Ukrainian targets from Belarus airspace though.

Yah but those are cruise missiles, don't think the S-300 in ground attack's got that great a range - 85 km if I recall.

 

[Mamoulian War]

We’ll se, so far the most probable outcome which is currently talked about is invocation of Article 4.

[kanisatha]

I don't know what to make of this story. Certainly very interesting, but is it credible? I would think something like this would come out in the regular press. But I have seen some US think-tank academics presenting similar "deals" in articles recently, because the consensus among war specialists and US defense officials appears to be that Russia's defeat in Kherson is a strategic catastrophe for them. Anyways, thought it'd at least be entertaining reading for people here:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11417563/Putin-offered-surrender-terms-West-loses-control-Kherson.html

[Malcador]

41 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

We’ll se, so far the most probable outcome which is currently talked about is invocation of Article 4.

 

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Malcador

[Elerond]

49 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Yah but those are cruise missiles, don't think the S-300 in ground attack's got that great a range - 85 km if I recall.

 

S-300VM had range of 200-250km and S-300 has range of 400km.

Most of Ukraine's S-300 are either S-300V variant which has range of 85km or S-300P which had 75km range

[Zoraptor]

The long range versions aren't being used for ground attack though- hence the 85km range Malc cited. The debris matches a 5v55R, which Russia uses for ground attack and Ukrainian uses for AD. Don't think it's anywhere near solid enough to say definitively it is debris from that model, but if it is it has to be Ukrainian as a Russian one physically could not fly that far. There's a workable scenario below where it is a Russian long range missile, that just isn't a very likely scenario.

At this point near definite they (if there actually were two) were S-300 missiles. The debris is a near precise match, crater fits, everything.

41 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Yah but those are cruise missiles, don't think the S-300 in ground attack's got that great a range - 85 km if I recall.

They would not have been fired in ground attack mode, but they could still have been Russian missile(s) fired at Ukrainian planes. Fundamentally not very likely- long way away, Ukrainian planes always fly low, missiles have a self destruct- which to be sure doesn't always work...) but possible. Far, far more likely to be Ukrainian AD missiles though.

[Elerond]

They can be used but they suffer from poor accuracy which is why they are used even less often than shorter range variants.

Edit: none of the S-300 variants have designed to be used primarily against ground targets. But all of them are technically cabale to target ground targets 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Elerond
More info

[Malcador]

 

Where I came across the range, although a guy from RUSI may not know exactly.

Also came across this, amusing uber-hawk rant

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Malcador

[Mamoulian War]

The target was most likely the TPP very close to the borders, and AD was working.

Edited November 15, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[Zoraptor]

Heh, our news has just downgraded it to "Russian made" missile rather than "Russian".

17 minutes ago, Elerond said:

They can be used but they suffer from poor accuracy which is why they are used even less often than shorter range variants.

Yes, the longer range versions definitely can be used for ground attack in theory. End of the day you can use any missile for ground attack in theory though, due to gravity. They've just never been used for it before, they would be a really weird choice for a precision attack and there are far better alternatives (ie drones) if you don't want as big a bang as a cruise missile. The only scenarios that would make sense are failed AD from Russia or Ukraine, not ground attack.

 

[Mamoulian War]

In other news, here is, what Wagnerites are thinking about the missile strikes. TLDR they are useless, as they do not target any military infrastructure They have finally admitted publicly, what I was saying few months ago already

 

[Elerond]

6 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Heh, our news has just downgraded it to "Russian made" missile rather than "Russian".

Yes, the longer range versions definitely can be used for ground attack in theory. End of the day you can use any missile for ground attack in theory though, due to gravity. They've just never been used for it before, they would be a really weird choice for a precision attack and there are far better alternatives (ie drones) if you don't want as big a bang as a cruise missile. The only scenarios that would make sense are failed AD from Russia or Ukraine, not ground attack.

 

Russia has started to use high velocity anti ship missiles because Ukraine's air defense can't intercept them because their anti air missiles don't have enough speed to hit one, even though they aren't accurate against land targets. And as stock of Russian high speed cruise missiles get thinner and Ukraine does not have air force or missiles which Russia needs high speed air defense missiles to defend against it would not be surprise if they have decided to use those missiles to bombard Ukraine as even though they are less accurate they still be more effective than lower speed missiles as Ukraine is not able to shoot them down 

[Mamoulian War]

Out of 90 missiles launched yesterday, 70 were shot down though. Still passed enough, to make a lot of damage to civilian infrastructure…

[xzar_monty]

Hard to ascertain the significance of this as of yet, but looks interesting to me, at least. Russian code spotted in places where it probably shouldn't be spotted. Two reports:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-russian-software-disguised-american-finds-its-way-into-us-army-cdc-2022-11-14/

https://9to5mac.com/2022/11/14/us-army-ios-app/

[Bartimaeus]

Quote

“There is preliminary information that contests that,” Biden told reporters when asked if the missile had been fired from Russia. “It is unlikely in the lines of the trajectory that it was fired from Russia, but we’ll see.”

Quote

Initial findings suggest that the missile that hit Poland was fired by Ukrainian forces at an incoming Russian missile, Associated Press reported on Wednesday, citing U.S. officials.

 

Edited November 16, 2022 by Bartimaeus

[Sarex]

Paints a picture of how willing they are to join the conflict directly, considering how fast they responded.

[Mamoulian War]

Some polish news are reporting, that based on pictures, it might be Kh-101 missile as well. The article in the link bellow is also speaking that the other option is UA AD.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/11/16/7376552/

[BruceVC]

50 minutes ago, Sarex said:

Paints a picture of how willing they are to join the conflict directly, considering how fast they responded.

Nah, thats not the main reason for this response. For NATO\US to go to war with Russia there has to be a legitimate and proven infringement of NATO war rules which translates to a deliberate attack on a NATO member and then they would still discuss the response and how things would need to escalate 

This is not  a deliberate and proven attack on a NATO member until the facts  are clear. The US is making the right statement 

 

[Lexx]

I'm not an expert, but maybe this wouldn't have happened if russia wouldn't have launched missiles again.

[Elerond]

1 hour ago, Bartimaeus said:

“There is preliminary information that contests that,” Biden told reporters when asked if the missile had been fired from Russia. “It is unlikely in the lines of the trajectory that it was fired from Russia, but we’ll see.”

Considering that if Russia fired it they would have fired it from Belarus or Black Sea, so statement that it wasn't fired from Russia is true almost every possible scenario 

[xzar_monty]

20 minutes ago, Lexx said:

I'm not an expert, but maybe this wouldn't have happened if russia wouldn't have launched missiles again.

Sounds plausible, I agree. I have also sometimes wondered that places like Mariupol might still be standing if Russia hadn't shelled them with abandon for so long. Plenty of Ukrainians might also be living peacefully at home if Russia hadn't invaded.

But of course this is conjecture. Let us not be too hasty to blame Russia.

 

EDIT: Biden has apparently told the G7 that it was a Ukrainian air defence missile.

Edited November 16, 2022 by xzar_monty

[Elerond]

Court of arbitration decided today that Gazprom broke it contracts when it demanded payments in rubles and stopped delivering gas. Which could mean that Gazprom needs to pay hundreds of billions of euros compensations to gas companies around Europe. 

[xzar_monty]

"Needs to pay" in this case comes down to "Will absolutely not pay", I would guess -- simply on the basis of what Russia has already done, in terms of foreign airplanes, nationalization, keeping other contracts etc.

[Zoraptor]

2 hours ago, Elerond said:

Russia has started to use high velocity anti ship missiles because Ukraine's air defense can't intercept them because their anti air missiles don't have enough speed to hit one, even though they aren't accurate against land targets. And as stock of Russian high speed cruise missiles get thinner and Ukraine does not have air force or missiles which Russia needs high speed air defense missiles to defend against it would not be surprise if they have decided to use those missiles to bombard Ukraine as even though they are less accurate they still be more effective than lower speed missiles as Ukraine is not able to shoot them down 

Russia really doesn't seem to be running short of cruise missiles, or at least no shorter than they were meant to be after one week. They just fired off ~100 supposedly after all.

Kh-22 (the anti ship missiles) is nowhere near like for like with S3/400. It's got more than twice as much explosive as a cruise missile, literally literally 1t of HE. They've got a lot of built in margin of error for accuracy from that. The only similarity is their relevance to their original role; a Kh-22 is defunct as an anti ship missile and the short range S-300 missiles are- for Russia- defunct as SAMs so can be used at basically zero cost.