Sometimes you get the impression that they are actually deliberately trolling him
Two thirds apparently. And wasn't it the Waves we ruled?
You're kidding?! That's hilarious!!Having officially listed the Moskva as a new diving site in the Black Sea, I think they are.
You're kidding?! That's hilarious!!
While we're condemning Russians for war crimes, let's not forget that we British deliberately killed German civilians in WW2 Germany's forgotten victims.
Don't get me started on the Harrying of the North.While we're condemning Russians for war crimes, let's not forget that we British deliberately killed German civilians in WW2 Germany's forgotten victims.
This is a dumpster fire of a military. This is basic defense critical levels of bad.John Spencer now saying he reckons the Russians are actually starting to lose this war. Seen a few other military types cautiously advancing this possibility.
Has Russia been beaten? This military expert says that moment is coming soon
Russia had a decent plan, says warfare expert John Spencer. But military incompetence has led to total failurewww.salon.com
You spoke my branes!
John Spencer speaks a lot of sense. His Urban Defence mini-manual is an interesting read...This is a dumpster fire of a military. This is basic defense critical levels of bad.
Don't get me started on the Harrying of the North.
Not all NATO, the UA have plenty of tricks up their sleeve. IIRC it was one of their missiles that sank the Moskva and if this thread is anything to go by then they have other very effective home grown weapons systems, (there are people in the comments that say it isn't, would be interested in kk's view if he has the time, it's long. Main point of contention seems to be his comparison between US etc. firing in anti insurgent ops hence less appetite for collateral damage leading to longer fire times.).
Summary, UA have developed uber for artillery and instead of a battery of guns firing from one field they can vector in lots of different artillery pieces from various fields to targets.
I've never really been able to get into Lindisfarne. Or God, for that matter.For God and Lindisfarne! Death to Denmark!
They've been trolling Russia since the beginning. Remember Zelenskiy and the "micSometimes you get the impression that they are actually deliberately trolling him
Occasionally fancy a Danish?I've never really been able to get into Lindisfarne. Or God, for that matter.
Still trying to cross that river...
OK, so what's the 4-D chess interpretation of what's going on here?
OK, so what's the 4-D chess interpretation of what's going on here?
That thread is well worth a read - it looks as if the original UA fire control system was just TOO damn good, and ended up putting all the shells on pretty much exactly the same spot, which probably isn't ideally what you want (plus, is there an issue with fratricide if multiple shells explode together in a very small area? kebabking?)
I must say that I am seriously impressed with the fact that it is possible to fire a huge lump of (mostly) steel out of an enormous tube, and achieve that kind of repeatability and accuracy...It can be an issue, but it tends to manifest when you're fusing for airburst rather than contact or delay. If you're not using guided munitions then your gunlaying has got to be pretty spectacular to keep hitting the same spot with different guns, and even with the same gun little differences like barrel temperature, the limbers digging in with each firing, shell temperature, wind, and turbulence from the last shell will cause small differences in the ballistics that will move the impact point about a bit.
With the 155's we get a CEP of about 10m for each gun at 15 miles, if we're doing a battery mission (6 guns) at a point target - an 8 figure grid ref gives a 10x10m square - we'll get about 50% of the rounds landing in that square, with another 40% landing (landscape permitting) within 5 to 10m of the border of that square, though they tend to fall within an oval shape, with the longer axis being distance from the gun.
We can be more accurate with a 10 figure grid - it's a square 1x1m point target - and we'll get a shell landing in that square with four or five shots, with 2 or 3 of them landing within 10 metres of it - and a 155 will fuck shit up. A direct hit will kill any tank ever built, at 10 metres it'll turn people into pink mist.
I must say that I am seriously impressed with the fact that it is possible to fire a huge lump of (mostly) steel out of an enormous tube, and achieve that kind of repeatability and accuracy...
Yeah amazing, never miss, no random civilians ever dieI must say that I am seriously impressed with the fact that it is possible to fire a huge lump of (mostly) steel out of an enormous tube, and achieve that kind of repeatability and accuracy...