3 ms·

Weapons on their own are dumb, stupid devices. Weapons in a system can be dangerous when deployed appropriately. For ASBM or hypersonic missiles, there are seve

by greedo 5y ago

Weapons on their own are dumb, stupid devices. Weapons in a system can be dangerous when deployed appropriately. For ASBM or hypersonic missiles, there are several steps in a successful engagement: 1. Detect the carrier. Sounds easy but they can move at 30+ knots, and can be quite difficult to detect when they want to hide. 2. Provide targeting data. This is needs to be much more accurate than just detecting that a carrier is operating "near" this point. Most weapons will require relatively precise data for this. 3. Transmit this data rapidly to the launch systems. Every minute counts as old targeting data is relatively useless. 4. Launch the weapon. This means keeping aircraft or missile batteries safe from attack, and getting the weapons in range of the carrier. 5. Have the weapon reach the target area. This means a reliable weapon with a low failure rate. 6. Have the weapon avoid any ECM or other countermeasures that might affect its targeting. 7. Have the weapon avoid any defenses, either the layered defenses (SAMS, point defence guns), fighters, etc. 8. Have the weapon detonate properly, in the best spot. Lots of things to go wrong in this "kill-chain." Lots of places to interrupt, disrupt or out-right kill the weapon. And sure we hear a lot about Russian super weapons like Zircon and the silly torpedoes. But as the Ukraine war is showing, a lot of Russian stuff sounds great until you see it in action. Or it's a Potemkin weapon, or too expensive. Look at all the burning Russian tanks. These aren't monkey models sent to client states like Iraq. These are top of the line, with ERA etc. Yet most don't have Arena/Trophy, and are getting killed by a weapon designed 30 years ago. Now perhaps the DF-21 deployed by the PLAN is more reliable than the Russian crap. But unless things get hot in the South China Sea we'll never know.

chrisco255 5y ago
Russia has been rather subdued in the Ukraine invasion, but they have won 95%+ of every military engagement in Ukraine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements_during_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine# https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements... They have taken nearly the entire Black Sea coastline and most major cities east of the Dnieper River. That entire eastern part of Ukraine will collapse imminently under Russian advances. And meanwhile none of the aforementioned weapons systems have been engaged. Detecting a carrier is trivial. They are large above surface vessels that leave a huge wake. 30 knots is nothing. And once locked its trivial for satellites or spy planes to track. We even publish the location of our carriers: https://www.marinevesseltraffic.com/vessels/USS-Enterprise-(CVN-65)/CURRENT-POSITION/1/338164423 https://www.marinevesseltraffic.com/vessels/USS-Enterprise-(... Russia is a spacefaring, highly advanced military. They have all of the targeting capabilities you describe. 100 megaton nuclear torpedoes aren't silly. They're extremely dangerous. They can trigger tsunamis, and destroy anything within tens of miles and cause third degree burns out to hundreds of miles. I'm not sure you understand the scale of what you're dismissing.
- astrange 5y ago
  > Russia has been rather subdued in the Ukraine invasion, but they have won 95%+ of every military engagement in Ukraine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements... You mean 95% of the ones on that list, which was made by an external observer. It's also a military engagement each time one of their vehicles gets exploded by a TB2 drone strike. Their equipment losses: https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-docum... Most of these aren't in battle, it's because their equipment breaks on its own because they didn't maintain the tires for years, or runs out of fuel because everyone in the supply chain sold it for food money. The Wikipedia map is good, but it's also out of date on that page, and the positions haven't moved much since then. https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-16 https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offens...
  - chrisco255 5y ago
    "Their equipment losses:" I'm skeptical of any list of equipment losses being comprehensive on both sides. We are very much in a fog of war situation. The map you linked looks fairly dire to me. The Russians control the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea at this point, and all of Ukraine's eastern border. With Belarus to the north, it leaves Ukraine landlocked with only its western border for imports and exports (mainly via Poland). There's a cauldron Russia has already captured many of the major cities east of the Dnieper, and it will be harder and harder for Ukraine to supply the eastern front, particularly across that river.
- greedo 5y ago
  The aforementioned weapons systems only exist in labs if that. Hypersonics are expensive and Russia is poor. Look at their GDP. And you do realize that satellites don't "lock" onto anything. They orbit around the earth. Geosynchronous orbits aren't used by RORSATs. Spyplanes? What spy planes? Russian maritime surveillance aircraft have limited range, (as do the PLANs) and can't see an infinite distance. Google the earth's curvature and you'll be able to find out how radar is limited. Russia's military is a Potemkin village. Has been for decades if not longer. The only thing they have that's a threat is their nuclear weapons, and I'm even starting to wonder how reliable those are. You keep talking about how dangerous Poseidon is. But Status-6 hasn't even been deployed, and probably never will. Why not talk about how dangerous Tsar Bomba is? And it's estimated speed is closer to 60mph. I grew up when the Soviets were all 10 feet tall, with super T-80 tanks, with SS-20 missiles, nuclear powered cruisers and all sorts of scary stuff. Most of it turned out to be junk or too expensive for the USSR to afford. Same with Russia.

by greedo 5y ago

chrisco255 5y ago

Russia has been rather subdued in the Ukraine invasion, but they have won 95%+ of every military engagement in Ukraine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements_during_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine# https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements... They have taken nearly the entire Black Sea coastline and most major cities east of the Dnieper River. That entire eastern part of Ukraine will collapse imminently under Russian advances. And meanwhile none of the aforementioned weapons systems have been engaged. Detecting a carrier is trivial. They are large above surface vessels that leave a huge wake. 30 knots is nothing. And once locked its trivial for satellites or spy planes to track. We even publish the location of our carriers: https://www.marinevesseltraffic.com/vessels/USS-Enterprise-(CVN-65)/CURRENT-POSITION/1/338164423 https://www.marinevesseltraffic.com/vessels/USS-Enterprise-(... Russia is a spacefaring, highly advanced military. They have all of the targeting capabilities you describe. 100 megaton nuclear torpedoes aren't silly. They're extremely dangerous. They can trigger tsunamis, and destroy anything within tens of miles and cause third degree burns out to hundreds of miles. I'm not sure you understand the scale of what you're dismissing.

astrange 5y ago
> Russia has been rather subdued in the Ukraine invasion, but they have won 95%+ of every military engagement in Ukraine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements... You mean 95% of the ones on that list, which was made by an external observer. It's also a military engagement each time one of their vehicles gets exploded by a TB2 drone strike. Their equipment losses: https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-docum... Most of these aren't in battle, it's because their equipment breaks on its own because they didn't maintain the tires for years, or runs out of fuel because everyone in the supply chain sold it for food money. The Wikipedia map is good, but it's also out of date on that page, and the positions haven't moved much since then. https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-16 https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offens...
- chrisco255 5y ago
  "Their equipment losses:" I'm skeptical of any list of equipment losses being comprehensive on both sides. We are very much in a fog of war situation. The map you linked looks fairly dire to me. The Russians control the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea at this point, and all of Ukraine's eastern border. With Belarus to the north, it leaves Ukraine landlocked with only its western border for imports and exports (mainly via Poland). There's a cauldron Russia has already captured many of the major cities east of the Dnieper, and it will be harder and harder for Ukraine to supply the eastern front, particularly across that river.
greedo 5y ago
The aforementioned weapons systems only exist in labs if that. Hypersonics are expensive and Russia is poor. Look at their GDP. And you do realize that satellites don't "lock" onto anything. They orbit around the earth. Geosynchronous orbits aren't used by RORSATs. Spyplanes? What spy planes? Russian maritime surveillance aircraft have limited range, (as do the PLANs) and can't see an infinite distance. Google the earth's curvature and you'll be able to find out how radar is limited. Russia's military is a Potemkin village. Has been for decades if not longer. The only thing they have that's a threat is their nuclear weapons, and I'm even starting to wonder how reliable those are. You keep talking about how dangerous Poseidon is. But Status-6 hasn't even been deployed, and probably never will. Why not talk about how dangerous Tsar Bomba is? And it's estimated speed is closer to 60mph. I grew up when the Soviets were all 10 feet tall, with super T-80 tanks, with SS-20 missiles, nuclear powered cruisers and all sorts of scary stuff. Most of it turned out to be junk or too expensive for the USSR to afford. Same with Russia.