Russia-Ukraine War

[mr.WHO]

... not any longer, putler gonna bring in his new "laser weapon"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rones.html

21st century has finally arrived ^^ (not seriously .. reminds me of hitler in his final days, inventing jet engines / ballistic missiles / what not ^^, and still lost the war)

Wanna bet there are some cheap stuff inside, like plastic bottle and toy telescope lenses you can get in any western store ?
Hell, maybe they just bought a few thousand cheap handheld toy lasers and called a day (those fancy exotic mansions don't gonna build themselves for free)

[felter]

So it looks like no one believes the veracity of Russia's claim to have a laser that can shoot down drones, even the Israelis doubt it and they are probably the ones to go to for this sort of thing, with most saying it is more than likely just propaganda. Once again, I think Zelensky hut it on the head again when he said it is just Russia trying to make out that they have a Wonder Weapon that will turn the tide of the war, while in reality even if they do have such a weapon, it will make little to no difference just through the way lasers work.

What the BBC are saying on the subject.

It also made me think of the other day there, where the Russians claimed they had made 50 new T90M tanks and were shipping them to the frontline. 50 new tanks will not change the way things are going, especially as the Ukrainians have already shown that they can destroy the T90M just like they can with any of the Russian tanks. But it wasn't just that they showed these supposed tanks on a train, which in itself is not unusual, but these tanks were all covered, so you couldn't actually see what they were or even the condition of them, normally they don't cover up their tanks as they ship them so why do it this time. It's all just smoke and mirrors, I doubt very much they actually have 1 new T90M tanks, let alone 50 of them.

But just like the laser, even if they do, it will make little to no difference, and it all just reeks of desperation on their part.

[JSDD]

--> what is a laser weapon ??
a device that emits concentrated laser light, that can destroy enemy devices (be it drones / missiles / teddy bears)

--> how can light destroy enemy devices ??
just need to get a "energy density" high enough to melt or vaporise (laser cutting) that material
energy density = light energy / area (the light it distributed on)

the critical thing here is energy density ...
light tends to disperse as it travels through the air, that is it covers more area. double the distance and you get only a quarter of energy density ...

what are telecentric lenses ??
these are lenses that minimise that dispersion (or perspective distortion)

... so using a telecentric lense solves that problem ??
not completely, light interacts with matter (air is matter, too). depending on the light frequency you use, the laser interacts differently with air
UV light tends to create ozone from oxygen, and infrared tends to warm up air ... gamma rays tend to ionize matter

the main question to solve is (at least thats how i see this problem):
what "special" frequency (for the special operation ^^) can you use that "ignores" air molecules and heats up / destroys the matter of a drone ??

... i dont have the answer to this ...
the alternative it to just use infrared, in giant amounts and highly focussed (to "cut" a hole into the enemy device)

so my conclusion (or guess) is that lasers can be quite effective in blinding the camera of a drone ... destroying it is quite difficult, if not impossible at the moment

[felter]

You do realize that there are lenses that protect eyesight against the effects of a laser, I imagine that those same lenses could also protect the workings of a camera against a laser.

[mr.WHO]

You do realize that there are lenses that protect eyesight against the effects of a laser, I imagine that those same lenses could also protect the workings of a camera against a laser.

Unfortunately it's not that easy - there are different frequencies of laser and there is no universal protection (you can only have like 99% protection against one frequency and at best, partial against some of others).

While for big lasers the easiest part is just to have spies know what is the frequency to protect, for handheld lasers and eyesight protection it's not so easy to pick right glasses/eyeprotection.

The only somewhat safe, but very unconfortable and expensive, would be a full helmet with camera and display screen - something like Tau FIre Warrior helmet from W40k.
The other somewhat more practical, would be the personal laser warning system and helmet with dynamic protection cover.



Edit: BTW The Ukrainian Defense minister said that to this moment Germany still haven't send a single piece of heavy equipment.
However, there is at least confirmed weapon swap with Czech T-72 send to Ukraine, Germany will send Leopards 2 to Czech.

[JSDD]

... "terminator" sighted in luhansk, going for severodonetsk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McYirDx ... T-PU-IN-UA
https://youtu.be/G6-bmnZpG_E?t=145
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/russi ... bas-2022-5

russians gonna get serious now

[mr.WHO]

... "terminator" sighted in luhansk, going for severodonetsk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McYirDx ... T-PU-IN-UA
https://youtu.be/G6-bmnZpG_E?t=145
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/russi ... bas-2022-5

russians gonna get serious now

Terminators are overated and overhyped - the idea was good to use tank hull to make urban warfare IFV, but they put rudiculously too many weapons on rather fragile turret - thus it's kinda glass cannon - it suppose to go ahead of tanks to clear the way, but after turret is taken down (you can basically sneeze at it) it's just durable, but teetchless vechicle.
We'll see soon the wreckeges as it will eat NLWAS and Javelins like all others.

Something like slightly upgunned IDF Namer would be much better as it would also allow infantry carry capability, which makes much more sence for Urban warfare.

[felter]

... "terminator" sighted in luhansk, going for severodonetsk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McYirDx ... T-PU-IN-UA
https://youtu.be/G6-bmnZpG_E?t=145
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/russi ... bas-2022-5

russians gonna get serious now

What do you think they have just been playing around and have not been taking it serious. Also, the terminators, like most of the Russian equipment, is just an old piece of junk that will end up on the scrap heap like the rest of it has so far.

[mr.WHO]

Another funny moment on par with digging trenchesh in Chernobyls' Red Forest.

https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/sta ... 8115042305

Someone made a great idea to fill sandbags...with ammonium nitrate.

[felter]

That's what happens when you are educated by the state television of a mad state. I mean seriously, who doesn't know ammonium nitrate goes BOOM, especially a soldier, just ask anyone from Beirut they'll certainly tell you.

[JSDD]

they just need to watch TV regularly and attentively to avoid such stupidity (beirut, lebanon 2 years ago)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yFZsGA ... treetWorks

(question is: can you believe that extraordinary claim on twitter ??)

[burger1]

Germany to deliver first 15 Gepard tanks to Ukraine in July, defence minister says.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/be ... 022-05-20/

They waiting until the end of the war? Hopefully the money they donated has been delivered.

May 18, 2022 stats

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/sta ... 16/photo/1

May 19, 2022 stats

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/sta ... 49/photo/1

May 20, 2022 stats

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/sta ... 76/photo/1

[chew-ie]

Germany to deliver first 15 Gepard tanks to Ukraine in July, defence minister says.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/be ... 022-05-20/

They waiting until the end of the war?

Seems like it

[Falcrack]

Germany to deliver first 15 Gepard tanks to Ukraine in July, defence minister says.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/be ... 022-05-20/

They waiting until the end of the war?

Seems like it

It is just absolutely ridiculous how little they actually want to help. Seriously, they couldn't make it move a little bit faster? If it was their wife or child being threatened with death, don't you think they could make those AA tanks move just a wee bit faster?

[Alan Phipps]

I suspect that just sticking the Gepards on a train to Lviv would not be a good idea as the Russians know about and anticipate such targets.

Anyway, would you really want to announce in public when they will actually arrive in theatre? Any enemy confusion about their presence or not is itself a potential tactical advantage.

[Tamina]

It is just absolutely ridiculous how little they actually want to help. Seriously, they couldn't make it move a little bit faster? If it was their wife or child being threatened with death, don't you think they could make those AA tanks move just a wee bit faster?

From mdr, translated with deepl. This gives a good reality check.

Problem #1 / Training

Show

The Gepard anti-aircraft tank is an extremely complex weapon system. The tank is equipped with two 35 mm machine guns and is primarily used against aerial targets, such as helicopters, low-flying aircraft, drones or missiles. The targets are tracked and detected by a radar system integrated into the vehicle. Its complexity is an advantage, but also a disadvantage.

This is because it requires special training of the personnel to operate the tank and thus also to be able to use it sensibly. There is disagreement about how long such training would take. The German government does not want to give any information on the necessary training time for soldiers with the Gepard and instead refers to the weapons manufacturer. The manufacturer, in turn, would not comment.

Inadequate training would be a risk
Roland Kather is a former Bundeswehr general in the army and held various positions there, including commander of an armored infantry division in Leipzig. Until 2011, he was also the German military representative on NATO and EU military committees. Kather told MDR that two to six months would have to be planned for the Gepard training of the Ukrainian servicemen and women, depending on the prerequisites. So whether, for example, previous knowledge was available. "It would be irresponsible not to send servicemen and servicewomen perfectly trained into a brutal war of extermination," Kather said.

Importantly, a single training is not sufficient for the Gepard's mission. That's because three different positions must be filled in the tank. It needs a driver, a so-called Richtkanonier and a commander. While the gunner is responsible for operating the weapons, the commander gives the orders and communicates with other units. He also operates the radar.

Two semitrailers with two covered armored personnel carriers each on the loading platform.
For all three positions, forces must be specially trained to handle the Gepard. "The decisive factor is the gunner and the commander, who must master this state-of-the-art technology in the Gepard," explains ex-General Kather. For the commander, it's not just about mastering the technology on board. That commander must learn and practice the tactical interaction of the Gepard with other weapons systems, he says. "Otherwise, you'll shoot down your own people. We've seen it all before," Kather says. In contrast, he says, training the drivers is easier. That can be completed in a matter of days or weeks, he says.

Lack of time
It also remains unclear who can provide practical training for the Ukrainian servicemen and women. The Bundeswehr shunted out the Gepard anti-aircraft tanks ten years ago. According to MDR information, the German government assumes a training period of six to eight weeks. The Ukrainian soldiers are to be trained on the equipment in Germany. The plan is apparently to use former instructors and deployed forces for the training.

However, this leaves open the question of when training on the Gepard can actually start. This is because, in addition to the instructors, interpreters also have to be organized - not an easy task in view of the necessary assistance for Ukrainian refugees in Germany. What's more, Gepard manufacturer KMW still has to overhaul the anti-aircraft tanks that have been taken out of service by the Bundeswehr - the company has not yet given any precise details of how long this would take.

"The Ukrainian servicemen and women can be flown to Germany. That would work," said ex-General Kather. However, the time factor worries him more. Because the training would probably have to be done with the help of interpreters and that would make everything even slower.

In expert circles, many have fundamental doubts about the suitability of the Gepard anti-aircraft tanks for use in the war in Ukraine because of the relatively long training period. This is because the Ukrainian armed forces need to deploy the required heavy weapons such as tanks quickly in order to be able to defend themselves against Russia's invasion.

Problem #2 / Ammunition

Show

There are also question marks over the ammunition: It remains unclear so far where it will come from for the 50 tanks. The Gepard consumes much more ammunition than most other weapon systems. Unlike main battle tanks, the anti-aircraft tank does not fire its ammunition individually. Rather, it fires salvos with large amounts of ammunition of up to 1,100 rounds per minute to destroy aircraft and helicopters in the air.

According to MDR information, the German government is holding talks with Brazil and Romania, among others. Gepard ammunition from Switzerland is not an option. This is because Switzerland, which is committed to neutrality, banned the export of ammunition to Ukraine.

The Federal Ministry of Defense refers the question of ammunition to the responsible arms industry. Although Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht (SPD) announced an export, the weapons systems in question do not come from Bundeswehr stocks. The ammunition manufacturer "Rheinmetall" and also the Swiss subsidiary "RWM Schweiz AG" could not be reached for comment when asked by MDR. The Gepard producer KMW, which owns the 50 available tanks, also declined to comment.

Problem #3 / Actual use of the delivery

Show

Doubts about the sense of the Gepard delivery
The pressure on the German government to quickly find suitable ammunition is high. The Ukrainian ambassador in Berlin, Andrij Melnyk, already announced that his country would have to renounce the offer to supply tanks if the ammunition continues to be lacking.

Ex-general Kather doesn't think much of the Gepard delivery anyway: "I haven't yet found a rationale for sending the Gepard in particular." In countries of the former Warsaw Pact, on the other hand, there are still heavy weapons of Soviet production for which Ukrainian servicemen and women could be trained more quickly. More suitable than the German Gepard, according to Cather, are the Soviet-made T-72 tanks, BMP-1s and howitzers.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

[mr.WHO]

I still think that Gepard is literally the most useless direct weapon help that Germany could pick.
The only saving grace is the weapon swap deal with Czech, but I wonder, if Germany will backpedal on this as well.
Apparently there was a proposal to send Polish PT-91 for Ukraine, if they could be swapped for more Leopard 2 - Germany wasn't interested at all.

There is a reason why Poland decided that Leopards will be decomission and replaced, as you cannot rely on Germany nor German industry (their cooperation with Leopard 2PL modernisation was sub-par).

I wouldn't be suprised if ex-Polish Leopards would end up in Ukraine somewhere 10-15 years in future.

I suspect that just sticking the Gepards on a train to Lviv would not be a good idea as the Russians know about and anticipate such targets.

Most of weapons are ferry via wheeled trucks and in dispersed covoys - no singular Russian attack would be able to do any significant dammage.
As for rail transport, you can bomb the rail lines, but properly motivated repair effort can bring it back in a few days - if anything the biggest problems is different rail widith between ex USSR and rest of Europe(e.g Poland, Slovakia, Hungary), which make the need to switch entire trains and wagons on the border (this is laso reason why wheeled convoys are prefered as well).

[Tamina]

Apparently there was a proposal to send Polish PT-91 for Ukraine, if they could be swapped for more Leopard 2 - Germany wasn't interested at all.

Do you know if Poland wanted to pay for them? Because in the German media the wording can be interpreted both ways in that Poland wants permission to buy them or wants to have them gifted.

What I also read is that the PT91 was planned to be replaced by the Abrams, already 2 years ago. This doesn't make any sense. Why would Poland ask Germany to get Leo 2s in exchange for them sending the PT91 to Ukraine then? This seems to me as if they are trying to sell the same deal twice.

[mr.WHO]

Apparently there was a proposal to send Polish PT-91 for Ukraine, if they could be swapped for more Leopard 2 - Germany wasn't interested at all.

Do you know if Poland wanted to pay for them? Because in the German media the wording can be interpreted both ways in that Poland wants permission to buy them or wants to have them gifted.

What I also read is that the PT91 was planned to be replaced by the Abrams, already 2 years ago. This doesn't make any sense. Why would Poland ask Germany to get Leo 2s in exchange for them sending the PT91 to Ukraine then? This seems to me as if they are trying to sell the same deal twice.

That's actually a good question - I'm saying swap/donate, but there is also a question if those EU and US Leand-and-lease programs actually involve money exchange.
It might be EU/US paying for the deal or cover the price cost between swapped equipment or paying the producer directly (e.g. German industry selling the equipment).

As for PT-91, no they are yet to be replaced by next tank program, the current Abrams sep v3 deal was to replace all T-72, that are now fighting in Ukraine.
US seems to work on speed up delivery (was planned to get first tanks next year) to fill the gap for T-72.


The rumor was that PT-91 was on the table, coz we would get rid of another tank type in favor of Leopard 2 which we already operate.
It would be convinient, as current Polish tank force is logistical nightmare:
T-72 --> off to Ukraine
T-72R --> off to Ukraine
PT-91 --> tbd how to get rid
Leopard 2A4 --> modernize to 2PL
Leopard 2A5 --> modernize to 2PL
Leopard 2PL --> keep but start to replace in 10-20 years with next tank program.
Abrams Sep v3 --> as replacement for T-72

Next tank program:
- Either Abrams for standarization with incoming Abrams and US industry capable of getting a lot tanks fast.
- Alternatively South Korea offer to set-up entire K2PL production line, as they are starting to penetrate European market already with Norway K2N. Possibly in future if Ukraine would want to switch to NATO compactibile tank, the K2 production line would be good long term investment. Koreans also would want to open the door for K3 development cooperation. So far we have rather good and fruitful cooperation with South Korea, so this deal looks good on paper.

Both offers have some pros and cons, but the luxury is that both are good.
With Abrams we would actually have ONE main battle tank, but K2PL production line could be more beneficial in long term. Having 2 tank types instead of 6 is still an improvement

[burger1]

Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute accidentally burns in Russia.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/fi ... ar-AAXy4Oc