4 ms·

The intel sharing arrangements (I wonder who's actually calling the shots—literally—for fire control purposes... every link in the chain slows things down, and

The intel sharing arrangements (I wonder who's actually calling the shots—literally—for fire control purposes... every link in the chain slows things down, and they seem to be working very effectively, which implies few links indeed) seem to me to be clearly the most interesting and effective facet of this war. Pity we may never get the story of what's actually going on, because it seems to be a really remarkable effort.

pjc50 4y ago
The impression I get is that the US feeds them satellite info on the general disposition of Russian forces, but the individual targeting seems to be done by drones, some of which are consumer-grade. They seem incredibly accurate. It seems unlikely that there is direct US involvement - the US doesn't want that and it would slow the Ukranians down. They seem to have their own networked fire control: https://en.defence-ua.com/events/digitization_of_ukrainian_army_capacities_of_hermes_c2_tactical_control_system-1649.html https://en.defence-ua.com/events/digitization_of_ukrainian_a... , and have said that Starlink was critical, after the Russian cyberattack bricked a lot of satellite terminals. They even have a local drone startup: https://interestingengineering.com/ukraines-combat-drone-the-punisher https://interestingengineering.com/ukraines-combat-drone-the...
- trhway 4y ago
  >the individual targeting seems to be done by drones, some of which are consumer-grade. They seem incredibly accurate. a very impressive example https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/tttrzs/ukrainian_strikes_targeting_russian_armored/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/tttrzs/ukrai... Wrt. original article - Moskva's air-defenses weren't upgraded during last modernization (completed 2020) due to budget. They upgraded its cruise missiles which got land attack capabilities though - that tells about Russian priorities. The old air-defenses - S-300 and OSA - had issues against such a low flying missiles like Neptunes (i.e. 2-4 meters) though AK-630 CIWS could have potentially shot down those missile if activated on time by the info from the main radar. There are also unconfirmed reports that a Bayraktar was hanging around and took away a lot of attention and probably took down the main S-300 radar antenna of the Moskva right before the attack. The Bayraktar also was doing the mid-course guidance of the missiles thus allowing to not use the main radar of the Neptune battery thus avoiding the battery position detection by Russia.
- syntheweave 4y ago
  The irony is that as warfare increasingly goes in the direction of technological signals and controls, the meaning of "direct involvement" diffuses such that belligerents cannot be pinned down on the nature or degree of their involvement. If the US provided people that deployed in Ukraine to do reconnaissance, that would be "direct". But if it's satellite data or drones, they're shielded from blame; and yet, the generals would in almost every case prefer more technology over more troops, because it automates away a slew of logistical and operational issues and gives them more options moment-to-moment, even if it creates a larger dependency on having the best tech. If the trend towards use of technology continues in this way, future wars between nations will be stopped before they go kinetic by reframing the entire coordination problem that causes them into something addressed through information warfare instead. At worst, you might see low-level stochastic violence.
  - pjc50 4y ago
    > At worst, you might see low-level stochastic violence Perhaps worth looking at all the stochastic violence in the US (and occasionally exported) to see where that's driven from.
    - dredmorbius 4y ago
      And not 16 hours later: https://text.npr.org/1101037902 https://text.npr.org/1101037902
- nradov 4y ago
  Not just satellites. The US and other NATO allies are also feeding Ukraine intelligence from a variety of reconnaissance and electronic warfare aircraft operating just outside the border.

pjc50 4y ago

The impression I get is that the US feeds them satellite info on the general disposition of Russian forces, but the individual targeting seems to be done by drones, some of which are consumer-grade. They seem incredibly accurate. It seems unlikely that there is direct US involvement - the US doesn't want that and it would slow the Ukranians down. They seem to have their own networked fire control: https://en.defence-ua.com/events/digitization_of_ukrainian_army_capacities_of_hermes_c2_tactical_control_system-1649.html https://en.defence-ua.com/events/digitization_of_ukrainian_a... , and have said that Starlink was critical, after the Russian cyberattack bricked a lot of satellite terminals. They even have a local drone startup: https://interestingengineering.com/ukraines-combat-drone-the-punisher https://interestingengineering.com/ukraines-combat-drone-the...

trhway 4y ago
>the individual targeting seems to be done by drones, some of which are consumer-grade. They seem incredibly accurate. a very impressive example https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/tttrzs/ukrainian_strikes_targeting_russian_armored/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/tttrzs/ukrai... Wrt. original article - Moskva's air-defenses weren't upgraded during last modernization (completed 2020) due to budget. They upgraded its cruise missiles which got land attack capabilities though - that tells about Russian priorities. The old air-defenses - S-300 and OSA - had issues against such a low flying missiles like Neptunes (i.e. 2-4 meters) though AK-630 CIWS could have potentially shot down those missile if activated on time by the info from the main radar. There are also unconfirmed reports that a Bayraktar was hanging around and took away a lot of attention and probably took down the main S-300 radar antenna of the Moskva right before the attack. The Bayraktar also was doing the mid-course guidance of the missiles thus allowing to not use the main radar of the Neptune battery thus avoiding the battery position detection by Russia.
syntheweave 4y ago
The irony is that as warfare increasingly goes in the direction of technological signals and controls, the meaning of "direct involvement" diffuses such that belligerents cannot be pinned down on the nature or degree of their involvement. If the US provided people that deployed in Ukraine to do reconnaissance, that would be "direct". But if it's satellite data or drones, they're shielded from blame; and yet, the generals would in almost every case prefer more technology over more troops, because it automates away a slew of logistical and operational issues and gives them more options moment-to-moment, even if it creates a larger dependency on having the best tech. If the trend towards use of technology continues in this way, future wars between nations will be stopped before they go kinetic by reframing the entire coordination problem that causes them into something addressed through information warfare instead. At worst, you might see low-level stochastic violence.
- pjc50 4y ago
  > At worst, you might see low-level stochastic violence Perhaps worth looking at all the stochastic violence in the US (and occasionally exported) to see where that's driven from.
  - dredmorbius 4y ago
    And not 16 hours later: https://text.npr.org/1101037902 https://text.npr.org/1101037902
nradov 4y ago
Not just satellites. The US and other NATO allies are also feeding Ukraine intelligence from a variety of reconnaissance and electronic warfare aircraft operating just outside the border.