6 ms·

There are so many assumptions packed in that post it feels weird to try to unpack them; eg, the implication the "local" Ukrainian equipment would be by default

There are so many assumptions packed in that post it feels weird to try to unpack them; eg, the implication the "local" Ukrainian equipment would be by default inferior to Russian equipment, which doesn't seem obvious at all to me. But empirically speaking, the idea that Russian equipment will be better than OTAN equipment because of their combat experience is pretty bold considering the current domination of OTAN equipment in the Ukraine-Russia war.

fhub 3y ago
What is OTAN? NATO?
- dboreham 3y ago
  See: UTC
- htrp 3y ago
  French for Nato Organisation du traité de l'Atlantique nord
- edgyquant 3y ago
  OTAN is the acronym in French
- ziddoap 3y ago
  Apparently it's the French term for NATO ("Organisation du Traité de l’Atlantique Nord"), directly translating to "North Atlantic Treaty Organization". At least according to some random website I found after a search. I wish there was a rule that forced people to spell out an acronym the first time they use it, regardless of how much they think the acronym is common knowledge.
  - subandi 3y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO It kinda is common knowledge though, the French version is right on the official flag and displayed all the time.
    - jorvi 3y ago
      Given by the confusion in this thread and it being literally the first time I have ever read of heard of the acronym “OTAN”, I’d go with not-so-common knowledge :)
    - ziddoap 3y ago
      I don't have the flag memorized, and wouldn't know to look at the flag unless I already knew what the acronym was.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  One of the two official acronyms of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (Organisation Traité de l'Atlantique Nord), used svery proninently by the organization, both on its flag and elsewhere. https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pictures/2011_03_110310d-nac-meeting/20110310_110310d-001_rdax_775x516.jpg https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pictures/2011...
paganel 3y ago
> which doesn't seem obvious at all to me. A post I submitted 85 days ago [1], an Ukrainian drone guy talking about Russian-made drones. A more recent post [2], also from an Ukrainian POV when it comes to Russian drones' capabilities. > OTAN equipment because of their combat experience is pretty bold considering Direct combat experience will always have the upper hand compared to militaries which are still watching from the sidelines. Seeing how you spelled NATO I highly recommend these two books by Michel Goya talking about this in connection to France's industrial-military evolution in WW1: [3] and [4] [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/178npoi/ua_pov_interesting_information_about_1001/ https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/178npo... [2] https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/18zyauc/ua_pov_ukrainian_volunteer_anxious_about_new/ https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/18zyau... [3] https://www.tallandier.com/livre/linvention-de-la-guerre-moderne/ https://www.tallandier.com/livre/linvention-de-la-guerre-mod..., English translation here: https://www.westernfrontassociation.com/world-war-i-book-reviews/flesh-and-steel-during-the-great-war-the-transformation-of-the-french-army-and-the-invention-of-modern-warfare-by-michel-goya/ https://www.westernfrontassociation.com/world-war-i-book-rev... [4] https://www.cairn.info/revue-defense-nationale-2020-1-page-130.htm https://www.cairn.info/revue-defense-nationale-2020-1-page-1...
cpursley 3y ago
> the current domination of OTAN equipment in the Ukraine-Russia war Exactly which OTAN/NATO equipment is "dominating" in that conflict?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- greedo 3y ago
  I'm assuming you're asking in good faith: Patriot. NASAMs. SAMP-T and IRIS. All proving themselves at least as good as any Russian SAM system. ATACMS, GMLRS, HARM, Javelin, TOW, Gepard, PZH-2000, M-777, Paladin, SCALP/STORM, Bradley... The list goes on. Of course the Ukrainians are not being provided with enough equipment and munitions to actually win, but the equipment itself is dominating when used in even a close approximation to sound strategy.
  - cpursley 3y ago
    This is just a list of equipment, most of which Russia has equivalents of that are at least a match (or close enough).
    - practicemaths 3y ago
      Does Russia have access to said equipment in sufficient quantities? Having stats in a spreadsheet is a lot different than what the tool is actually in the field. i.e. equipment manufacturered to code, inspected, and maintenance schedules followed.
    - greedo 3y ago
      ATACMS and GMLRS don't have Russian equivalents that are worth a damn. Same with Javelin, PZH-2000, Paladin, and the cruise missiles I listed. And hell, the ancient Bradley is knocking out the latest Russian tanks with it's 25mm chain gun...
rainworld 3y ago
current domination of OTAN equipment in the Ukraine-Russia war Back in the real world: Hangar queens: http://archive.today/2024.01.09-023929/https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ukraine-krieg-kiews-problem-mit-den-deutschen-pannen-panzern-a-cd9421ae-4a96-4d4f-983a-6205a063ae15 http://archive.today/2024.01.09-023929/https://www.spiegel.d... Barrel trouble: https://x.com/DcDxii/status/1731800411965645092 https://x.com/DcDxii/status/1731800411965645092 Death traps: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMX-10_RC#Operational_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMX-10_RC#Operational_history And so on. If anything this war is a vindication of the Soviet approach.
- petre 3y ago
  They have not been sufficiently trained to man and maintain modern NATO equipment built for a different purpose: combined arms operations. Old Leopard 1 tanks would have been a better choice than Leopard 2. This is a war that could be won with lots of artillery shells, combined with targeting computers and drone surveillance, highly mobile artillery.
  - rainworld 3y ago
    not been sufficiently trained FTA: In Mali they discovered a 10x breakdown rate compared to home in Germany. And that wasn’t even war. Also, they lack spare parts. The beauty of just-in-time logistics. Read up on how much of a typical NATO army is operational at a given (peace) time. '91 was a long time ago. Old Leopard 1 tanks would have been a better choice There goes “crew survived”. built for a different purpose: combined arms operations “Easy. Just win before the tanks break down. Just destroy the enemy before you ever get close.” Someone should have explained that to the Ukrainians. could be won with lots of artillery shells Shells that NATO can neither supply nor produce in sufficient quantities. highly mobile artillery They have (had) enough of those. Barrel wear ruins the range, Lancets ruin the paint job.
    - greedo 3y ago
      I'm not sure the issues with Leopard 2 tanks is indicative of quality, or more a reflection of how shallow the German military has become. And I agree with you that Leo 1 tanks aren't suitable. They have nice fire control systems, and good mobility, but their armor protection is terrible. The war in Ukraine is showing that the West is woefully unprepared for a major conflict. We saw signs of this with NATO air forces running short of PGMs during the Libya intervention. Shells won't be a problem in a year or so, and worldwide there's enough production to move enough to Ukraine if the political will is there. But Western defense contractors have been starved for so many years that expanding production won't occur rapidly. Look at the backlog for F-16s.

fhub 3y ago

What is OTAN? NATO?

dboreham 3y ago
See: UTC
htrp 3y ago
French for Nato Organisation du traité de l'Atlantique nord
edgyquant 3y ago
OTAN is the acronym in French
ziddoap 3y ago
Apparently it's the French term for NATO ("Organisation du Traité de l’Atlantique Nord"), directly translating to "North Atlantic Treaty Organization". At least according to some random website I found after a search. I wish there was a rule that forced people to spell out an acronym the first time they use it, regardless of how much they think the acronym is common knowledge.
- subandi 3y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO It kinda is common knowledge though, the French version is right on the official flag and displayed all the time.
  - jorvi 3y ago
    Given by the confusion in this thread and it being literally the first time I have ever read of heard of the acronym “OTAN”, I’d go with not-so-common knowledge :)
  - ziddoap 3y ago
    I don't have the flag memorized, and wouldn't know to look at the flag unless I already knew what the acronym was.
dragonwriter 3y ago
One of the two official acronyms of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (Organisation Traité de l'Atlantique Nord), used svery proninently by the organization, both on its flag and elsewhere. https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pictures/2011_03_110310d-nac-meeting/20110310_110310d-001_rdax_775x516.jpg https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pictures/2011...

paganel 3y ago

> which doesn't seem obvious at all to me. A post I submitted 85 days ago [1], an Ukrainian drone guy talking about Russian-made drones. A more recent post [2], also from an Ukrainian POV when it comes to Russian drones' capabilities. > OTAN equipment because of their combat experience is pretty bold considering Direct combat experience will always have the upper hand compared to militaries which are still watching from the sidelines. Seeing how you spelled NATO I highly recommend these two books by Michel Goya talking about this in connection to France's industrial-military evolution in WW1: [3] and [4] [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/178npoi/ua_pov_interesting_information_about_1001/ https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/178npo... [2] https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/18zyauc/ua_pov_ukrainian_volunteer_anxious_about_new/ https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/18zyau... [3] https://www.tallandier.com/livre/linvention-de-la-guerre-moderne/ https://www.tallandier.com/livre/linvention-de-la-guerre-mod..., English translation here: https://www.westernfrontassociation.com/world-war-i-book-reviews/flesh-and-steel-during-the-great-war-the-transformation-of-the-french-army-and-the-invention-of-modern-warfare-by-michel-goya/ https://www.westernfrontassociation.com/world-war-i-book-rev... [4] https://www.cairn.info/revue-defense-nationale-2020-1-page-130.htm https://www.cairn.info/revue-defense-nationale-2020-1-page-1...

cpursley 3y ago

> the current domination of OTAN equipment in the Ukraine-Russia war Exactly which OTAN/NATO equipment is "dominating" in that conflict?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
greedo 3y ago
I'm assuming you're asking in good faith: Patriot. NASAMs. SAMP-T and IRIS. All proving themselves at least as good as any Russian SAM system. ATACMS, GMLRS, HARM, Javelin, TOW, Gepard, PZH-2000, M-777, Paladin, SCALP/STORM, Bradley... The list goes on. Of course the Ukrainians are not being provided with enough equipment and munitions to actually win, but the equipment itself is dominating when used in even a close approximation to sound strategy.
- cpursley 3y ago
  This is just a list of equipment, most of which Russia has equivalents of that are at least a match (or close enough).
  - practicemaths 3y ago
    Does Russia have access to said equipment in sufficient quantities? Having stats in a spreadsheet is a lot different than what the tool is actually in the field. i.e. equipment manufacturered to code, inspected, and maintenance schedules followed.
  - greedo 3y ago
    ATACMS and GMLRS don't have Russian equivalents that are worth a damn. Same with Javelin, PZH-2000, Paladin, and the cruise missiles I listed. And hell, the ancient Bradley is knocking out the latest Russian tanks with it's 25mm chain gun...

rainworld 3y ago

current domination of OTAN equipment in the Ukraine-Russia war Back in the real world: Hangar queens: http://archive.today/2024.01.09-023929/https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ukraine-krieg-kiews-problem-mit-den-deutschen-pannen-panzern-a-cd9421ae-4a96-4d4f-983a-6205a063ae15 http://archive.today/2024.01.09-023929/https://www.spiegel.d... Barrel trouble: https://x.com/DcDxii/status/1731800411965645092 https://x.com/DcDxii/status/1731800411965645092 Death traps: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMX-10_RC#Operational_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMX-10_RC#Operational_history And so on. If anything this war is a vindication of the Soviet approach.

petre 3y ago
They have not been sufficiently trained to man and maintain modern NATO equipment built for a different purpose: combined arms operations. Old Leopard 1 tanks would have been a better choice than Leopard 2. This is a war that could be won with lots of artillery shells, combined with targeting computers and drone surveillance, highly mobile artillery.
- rainworld 3y ago
  not been sufficiently trained FTA: In Mali they discovered a 10x breakdown rate compared to home in Germany. And that wasn’t even war. Also, they lack spare parts. The beauty of just-in-time logistics. Read up on how much of a typical NATO army is operational at a given (peace) time. '91 was a long time ago. Old Leopard 1 tanks would have been a better choice There goes “crew survived”. built for a different purpose: combined arms operations “Easy. Just win before the tanks break down. Just destroy the enemy before you ever get close.” Someone should have explained that to the Ukrainians. could be won with lots of artillery shells Shells that NATO can neither supply nor produce in sufficient quantities. highly mobile artillery They have (had) enough of those. Barrel wear ruins the range, Lancets ruin the paint job.
  - greedo 3y ago
    I'm not sure the issues with Leopard 2 tanks is indicative of quality, or more a reflection of how shallow the German military has become. And I agree with you that Leo 1 tanks aren't suitable. They have nice fire control systems, and good mobility, but their armor protection is terrible. The war in Ukraine is showing that the West is woefully unprepared for a major conflict. We saw signs of this with NATO air forces running short of PGMs during the Libya intervention. Shells won't be a problem in a year or so, and worldwide there's enough production to move enough to Ukraine if the political will is there. But Western defense contractors have been starved for so many years that expanding production won't occur rapidly. Look at the backlog for F-16s.