Definitely scary, but they have failed to launch an offensive now of any real momentum this spring, what will change in the medium term? Russia essentially demechanized its army by blasting through most of its armor. It is building up T90 tanks, but that is a longer term process.
What I think we will see are drone attacks meant to evoke mass media coverage without Russia being able to gather serious momentum in an organized armored offensive at least at a broad level.
Totally different
I have also not had great interactions tbh
Plot Twist All actual ant species are derived from antcestor that was simply mimicking another species, and so thus all ants are total frauds.
Good thing I don't come from an evolutionary branch like that!
Ok, I don't know the specifics of the leopard tanks that were given to Ukraine, and great I am glad they were given but the problem isn't really that the abrams tanks were outdated without modernization (although especially at night, even an older abrams will if used correctly delete entire armored columns of even very modern armored fighting vehicles, it is an incomprehensibly effective weapons system when used correctly especially because of the superb fire control and stabilization of the abrams gun, but Ukraine was not given the tools to use main battle tanks effectively PERIOD until recently!!!!), though that was a critical issue... the problem is that giving the main battle tanks themselves was part of a dangerous lie... that contributed to the idea that Ukraine was being set up for success in any meaningful way from the perspective of generals sitting at a map and talking logistics.
Listen to my words, you can track how serious the rest of the world was about helping Ukraine out by the number of artillery systems and ammunition that were donated vs. how much capacity that nation had to donate artillery systems and ammunition. The reality is that stark and direct, at the 1000 meter zoomed out level war becomes a question of logistics, primarily artillery shells and cannons, and how efficiently you can get them and apply them in battle.
I would have traded the bulk of the rest of western aid in exchange for fast tracking the bohdana 155mm self propelled howitizer program much much earlier in the war and fielding it along with a domestic ammunition supply line. It would have saved countless more lives, and the shameful thing is anybody who isn't an idiot inside the western military industrial complex (I will admit, that eliminates a lot of them but still) knew that and knows that.
Any bullshit you see in Wired or Popular Mechanics about how the future of war is drones and artillery is outdated or something is lazy hype advertisement and covering up for a much crueler, simpler truth. The people with actual power in the US wanted Ukraine to do much worse than it did, they wanted more Ukranians to die, they wanted Ukraine to become a war torn drawn out counter insurgency occupation that would bleed Russia dry slowly and mak8e the west a ton of money selling arms over a longer period. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON the western military industrial complex wouldn't have already had pumped Ukraine full of artillery before the invasion in the first place (which probably would never have happened at least to the same catastrophic level if Russia knew Ukraine had a powerful artillery arsenal).
See this for what it is, the western military industrial complex did not and does not want the average voter to understand the critical role artillery plays in warfare because it makes it far easier to manipulate the public and for professional armies to absolutely crush ones that aren't as well equipped or don't have as much experienced staff at a higher level. It makes it easier for the rich to set up "allies" to fail so they can profit off the resulting disaster capitalism. It is better for everyone to focus on the drones ("everyone" in this case being only the rich and powerful on both sides of whatever theater of war is going on at the moment) lest people figure out how to stop the kinds of wars that must keep happening from keeping on happening..
Artillery, Artillery, Artillery!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=znJyqmEuKq4
Edit2 Notice in this recent video that the targets hit here are all the kind of setbacks in moving the logistics required for a mechanized offensive that would set things back categorically. Motor pools and staging areas that depots crews had been using for some extended duration of time assuming it was a safe distance back from the front waking up to the sound of it all being toppled by a fighterbomber launched glide bomb, trains carrying entire armored columns held up by small drone attacks a disposable tiny weapon to wrench an artery of the Russian war machine to a halt... worst of all battalion level command posts hit simultaneously... you have to ask why this kind of deadly attack is happening so much more consistently now than it was earlier in the war. There are many reasons why, but the most consistent answer is that Ukraine now has the distributed, organic artillery support to actually engage in armored warfare with Russia and even when Ukraine is only intending to use this capability defensively it is beginning to punch serious holes in the Russian defenses.... and the problem with holes is fighter jets don't need a long time to go and out of them... what was before a reliable, generally impenetrable territory behind the Russian Front is now the space behind a wall full of large... alarming holes...
THEN tanks
Edit It is worth emphasis to point out that the public conversation around the abrams mbt and main battle tanks right now is very warped because of the unique aspects of a lack of artillery in Ukraine's arsenal until recently. The general dismissiveness of western media to the performance of the abrams tank in Ukraine as if it wasn't a product of a tool being used in an aggressively self sabotaging way is comical and no writer would ever put such words on paper if they actually witnessed a proper armored breakthrough with abrams main battle tanks in the absolute most hellish, intense flashpoint of a conflict involving fully mechanized armies.
For example this random youtube video about the abrams I found states confidently that the abrams turned out to be just another armored fighting vehicle with no significant impact on the Ukranian battlefield when it was actually fielded, as if the weapon system had been hyped up and was actually a cold war relic (like the a10 warthog aircraft ACTUALLY is to give a counter example).
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=u6IBcyWy8W0
I don't really care about the abrams, I have no desire to defend it but I promise you a handful of abrams properly supported by artillery could punch through an arbitrary amount of Russian armor blindly rushing towards them, the numbers become meaningless quick, rocket artillery counterattack is least effective against the most heavily armored type of vehicle on the battlefield as well...
Without artillery however, tanks can be swarmed in a million different ways. Drones aren't some new shocking way to destroy extremely heavily armored tanks, they certainly pose a new serious threat to tanks, but they are just an application of the age old counter to fighting tanks... if you can't field a better tank you swarm their tanks with smaller vulnerable combatants and hope to move so fast and in such number that the tank is overwhelmed. This is not actually a new concept at all from a tactics standpoint, drones/technology has just made it not so suicidal of a tactic. The answer to this counter as it has always been for main battle tanks is you guessed it artillery.
I don't know, the average person is fucking brain dead when it comes to understanding what a modern main battle tank can do or even really is ("That is a tank!" people say emphatically and confidently pointing at an MRAP/armored car).
Sending tanks terribly suited for a tactical/strategic situation is for this reason kind of a problematic thing to do since the average USian and Ukranian will go "hell yeah, we are helping them now!" when the Abrams aren't actually helping just serving as a PR opportunity to take some footage of the Abrams tanks firing and driving around.
The primary use of abrams tanks as far as I am aware up until this point by Ukraine (I don't think Ukraine has a significant amount of operational abrams of the original 30 anymore?) was as a subpar, extremely limited firing angle and accuracy artillery piece.
I would rather have had honesty and lucidity about what Ukraine needed, and given them that directly while emphasizing to the general public why those specific things would be vital to the survival of innocent human civilians in Ukraine.
If Canada can survive a couple more years there is going to be a booming disaster tourism industry of taking tours along Canada's southern border with the Zone tho.
The Next Generation Of Canadians?
Thank goodness for all the "both sides!" handwringing we did to get here.
Yes, but no... well drones confirm the trends identified here they don't subvert them. I would say this book anticipates why UAV/drones are so vital to integrate with and defend from for artillery in Ukraine, but while it discusses drones and loitering munitions it was written before the Ukraine invasion.
The bottom line with any new technology and artillery is the classic Upright Citizens Brigade improv mantra "yes and".
Ukraine from what I can gather has thoroughly answered that question.
Modern mechanized warfare against a near peer foe is a rock paper scissors game, armor is the rock, infantry paper, ok so drones are in some cases scissors/rocksaws... but artillery is the anvil you drop on the rock paper scissors game the same as it ever was.
The need for a large number of shells is primarily related to the number of enemy troops confronting our troops on a wide front. This is also due to the inability to fully utilize the aviation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which is due to the presence of a modern and multi-echeloned enemy air defence system and the outdated fleet of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
This is also due to the periodic impossibility of conducting precision fire due to the operation of enemy electronic warfare systems, which suppresses the operation of our command post.
Analysing the course of hostilities, we can say that it is possible to reduce the number of conventional shells by increasing the proportion of high-precision ammunition, as well as long-range firepower, such as tactical missiles, and increasing the effectiveness of other means of destruction. Also, the availability of high-precision weapons, kamikaze drones, and unmanned aerial vehicles that will be resistant to enemy electronic warfare may reduce the consumption of conventional ammunition.
The main factor that will affect the need for conventional ammunition will be the technological and numerical component of the means of destruction, which is objectively proportional to the number of enemy forces.
Also consider that autonomous vehicles supercharge "last mile" logistics of artillery resupply, you know what job no one should have? Driving a vehicle loaded with artillery shells through a plausibly dangerous area.
The Field Artillery (FA) has demonstrated itself as the primary casualty producing weapon of the last century, earning the moniker “King of Battle” during the World Wars. As the technology of conflict has advanced in the post-war era, the FA branch has evolved along with it, becoming more accurate and lethal. The focus of the last two decades has been on accuracy, precision and range; enhancing the effectiveness of fires while reducing the total amount of munitions needed to service targets. This growth in capability has come at a cost: the increased lethality of the system has forced adversaries to focus on targeting FA units, while the logistical trains necessary to “feed” the guns has only increased in step with increases in range of systems.
Integrating autonomous and semi-autonomous systems to reduce the manpower necessary to execute sustained operations is imperative for the future of the branch. Utilizing semi-autonomous vehicles to support casualty evacuation, ammunition and fuel resupply, reconnaissance and security will increase the survivability and lethality of artillery units while also reducing their manpower costs. Although seemingly divergent, these three Lines of Effort (LOEs) require a significant number of personnel to execute. Autonomous systems assisting in these operations would allow more personnel to focus on the execution of accurate and effective fires. Utilizing commercial off the shelf (COTs) products and retrofitting existing systems with readily available systems would be a fast, efficient way of reducing manpower requirements and increasing capability.
...
The promise that fewer, smarter munitions would be the way of the future has been negated by the realization that massed, effective fires are just as critical now as they were in the past and will be in the future. It is evident that the logistical requirements for ammunition alone are already staggering without considering the fuel, food and water needed for vehicles and personnel in the firing unit. To account for the natural attrition of the battlefield, notwithstanding potential mass casualty events to both personnel and equipment, it is imperative that the focus of the artillery be on reducing manpower requirements for anything other than the firing of artillery. As mentioned, the FA has several critical friction points that must be addressed soon.
I think the answer is both
wonder if I could seduce your mom that way