3 ms·

I think the article has some interesting points, like that artillery is the true all-weather weapon, and it's obvious the Russians heavily rely on this. That s

by the_af 5y ago

I think the article has some interesting points, like that artillery is the true all-weather weapon, and it's obvious the Russians heavily rely on this. That said, it understates the C&C problems of the Russian army, and also some claims have really not aged well given what we know of the current war, such as when it guesses that in a NATO-Russia confrontation, NATO's airforce may become grounded due to weather (ok), SAMs (ok), "and the actions of the Russian Air Force" (yeah... I seriously doubt this).

dragontamer 5y ago
Russia had the brute force power to destroy Ukraines air force. But somehow, Russia did not. There are lots of rumors floating around, the biggest of which is that Russian long range cruise missiles have far less accuracy than was once assumed. So if Russia launches 300 missiles at the start of the war (and they did do something close to that), only 180 would find their target. That's 120 radar systems or airplanes that should have been disabled by the Russian plans, but somehow we're not (either Ukrainian anti missile defense, or maybe incompetence from the Russians) Of the 180 targets that were hit, how many were out of date information and just empty space? It is clear that the Russian battle maps are extremely old, and that they are targeting locations of old Ukrainian bases that have long been abandoned. Etc. Etc . Suddenly, that 300 missile salvo doesn't look very good or useful. Far fewer targets were destroyed than expected, and the Ukrainian air force continued to fly and counterattack.
- the_af 5y ago
  Yes. I think we are actually agreeing? Still, even with those observations, it's still true that artillery (true artillery, not just rockets/missiles, but actual dumb shells raining over your enemy) is a devastating all-weather weapon, the only true all-weather weapon. I guess it's also comparatively cheap. If the Russians don't care about casualties (either civilians or their own troops), and they are in no rush to gain air superiority, they can continue raining semi-accurate shells on their enemies, inaccurate intel be damned. Eventually they'll hit something. I think it's unrealistic to think this strategy will win in a war against NATO though, even without nukes being involved.
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    > Yes. I think we are actually agreeing? Yeah. It wasn't my intent to disagree with you. Just chiming in with my own $0.02. > they can continue raining semi-accurate shells on their enemies, inaccurate intel be damned. Eventually they'll hit something. I dunno. Every "bang" can be triangulated using microphones and a bit of math, especially because artillery is just so loud when it goes off. I'm sure the Russians are doing shoot-and-scoot when possible, but its not like you can rain down artillery for more than 1 or 2 minutes at a time on the modern battlefield. As soon as your shell hits, you have a limited window before the enemy returns fire. You want to be running away from your location at that point. ------- USA's "counter-artillery radar", which can detect 1500mph shells flying through the air, can triangulate where shells came from before they even strike the ground. So the "timer" may start even before the enemy gets hit by your first shell.

by the_af 5y ago

dragontamer 5y ago

Russia had the brute force power to destroy Ukraines air force. But somehow, Russia did not. There are lots of rumors floating around, the biggest of which is that Russian long range cruise missiles have far less accuracy than was once assumed. So if Russia launches 300 missiles at the start of the war (and they did do something close to that), only 180 would find their target. That's 120 radar systems or airplanes that should have been disabled by the Russian plans, but somehow we're not (either Ukrainian anti missile defense, or maybe incompetence from the Russians) Of the 180 targets that were hit, how many were out of date information and just empty space? It is clear that the Russian battle maps are extremely old, and that they are targeting locations of old Ukrainian bases that have long been abandoned. Etc. Etc . Suddenly, that 300 missile salvo doesn't look very good or useful. Far fewer targets were destroyed than expected, and the Ukrainian air force continued to fly and counterattack.

the_af 5y ago
Yes. I think we are actually agreeing? Still, even with those observations, it's still true that artillery (true artillery, not just rockets/missiles, but actual dumb shells raining over your enemy) is a devastating all-weather weapon, the only true all-weather weapon. I guess it's also comparatively cheap. If the Russians don't care about casualties (either civilians or their own troops), and they are in no rush to gain air superiority, they can continue raining semi-accurate shells on their enemies, inaccurate intel be damned. Eventually they'll hit something. I think it's unrealistic to think this strategy will win in a war against NATO though, even without nukes being involved.
- dragontamer 5y ago
  > Yes. I think we are actually agreeing? Yeah. It wasn't my intent to disagree with you. Just chiming in with my own $0.02. > they can continue raining semi-accurate shells on their enemies, inaccurate intel be damned. Eventually they'll hit something. I dunno. Every "bang" can be triangulated using microphones and a bit of math, especially because artillery is just so loud when it goes off. I'm sure the Russians are doing shoot-and-scoot when possible, but its not like you can rain down artillery for more than 1 or 2 minutes at a time on the modern battlefield. As soon as your shell hits, you have a limited window before the enemy returns fire. You want to be running away from your location at that point. ------- USA's "counter-artillery radar", which can detect 1500mph shells flying through the air, can triangulate where shells came from before they even strike the ground. So the "timer" may start even before the enemy gets hit by your first shell.