How the USA deals with Russian bombers: How Ukraine deals with Russian bombers: Ukraine has wiped out about 1/3d of the Russian bombers that would attack the USA. Bob Wilson
...according to the Ukies. If the Rooskies ever attack us, they're NOT going to use bombers. If this is true, it's nice to see that Ukraine can prosecute the wah without us cutting a check with a so many commas in it. There is no doubt that they at least damaged 13-41 so-called 'strat' bomb trucks but I do not assess that they destroyed a third of them. Ukraine targeted cruise missile haulers....but as it turns out you can haul a cruise missile on a lot of different platforms. -even a drone.... I've always been a proponent of supporting the Ukies and I think several things can be true at the same time: The last administration encouraged the war in the first place through their placidity, both in the Afghanistan debacle AND telling the Rooskies that it would not be too bad if they just invaded 'a little bit.' The current administration isn't much better but they're at least back stabbing the Ukies at cut-rate pricing. Jaw Jaw > War War, but seeing some 'throw back' bombers burning on the ramp is gratifying. BT-Dubbs. The Tupolev that you see the F4 riding herd on is a Maratime Reccie bird. You can tell by the "Big Bulge" (Uspekh) radar that they slung underneath the fuselage. If you hear it on an ESM set? There's a 'bear in the air' looking for you. Or? Just making a statement by busting your ADIZ overtly. Those old TU-95s were (and still ARE) bigly impressive! First flown 73 years ago you can still find pictures of them being intercepted today by F35 Lightnings if you look hard enough. Of course.....F35s are no 'spring chickens' either.....
A slightly more realistic BDA.....and some otha stuff. @Mendel Leisk BDA = Bomb (or battle) Damage Assessment. Airdales exaggerate. S2 brings up some valid points about Pyrrhic victories and 'mission creep.' I personally think that the current administration is trying to play both sides of the street in this conflict and that we at least KNEW the attack was inbound......'left of bang.' I also believe that this might be the Ukie's 'dead cat bounce.' The Rooskies might just wind up gobbling up the whole breadbasket - they've done it before. HOWEVER (comma!) They will have to also KEEP it - and that might just prove to be a little more difficult. Either way.....I do not have any problem helping the Ukies out, but I also want deadbeat nations to get off THEIR tails and start paying for their security.
A teenager, I visited Marine base "Cherry Point" and saw an F4 take off in a very. short distance, stand on its tail, and climb into haze. Small wonder that I chose an image with an F4. IMHO, I would buy a Ukrainian drone in a heartbeat but they are doing more good with them than I would. While I wait, I have a COSTCO, DJI which is perfect for home photography and soon to test at the range. Set up the target and fly the drone to make sure it can see the target. Then have it land to the side. Take my shots and have the drone examine the target and take pictures. Park the drone nearby, correct the sights, take my shots, and drone examine the results. Bob Wilson
I grew up close enough to a NATGUARD field to have very fond memories of the F4. I can still see those airdales on final with their J79s smoking like John Wayne in an old western.... You got your first drones at COSTCO. The Ukies got theirs from the Turkeys (Bayraktar) initially, but one of my intel sources indicate they they bought many DJI drones - even from Amazon. I suppose they do not have a COSTCO card. Ukraine uses some of their drones for the same things that you use yours: ......artillery (shell) guidance...or 'spotting' which beats heck out of a scared as %$#@ Second Lieutenant close to the target. (First Lieutenants simply won't do it! ) SO.... It tickles my irony bone to see the ChiComms being sourced for military hardware.......for the Ukies. The "COMPANY" states that: "DJI was founded 16 years ago to develop drone technology that can make the world better. We have never designed or manufactured military-grade equipment; we have never marketed or sold our products for combat use in any country; and we take active steps to try to keep our drones from being modified for use as weapons. We have followed these principles for our entire existence, and we are emphasizing them again in light of recent developments." ....which is complete and utter 'Trump next-level' B.S.!!! EVEN the people driving Biden's autopens were not fooled by that! https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/19/dji-drone-lawsuit-00184482
I would like to see: using: on this: Line up a half dozen water drones with an inventory of RPG carry drones and "beaver" some of the bridge columns. Repeated hits on the same spot over time should chew it across and then go for the next one, on one side. Wait for the repair crews and do it again. I would also like to see the same used here: Just puncture one rail over the middle of the bridge and soon, Russian logistics would become even softer targets. Perhaps anti-tank mine with magnetic fuse laid between ties over the creek or river. Ukraine has already used audio from a network of cell phones to identify noisy drones. Hidden in the bushes, they could alert on noisy trains and trucks. No so much to hit the target as much as alert where to look for them. Bob Wilson
