happened to be browsing Marketplace and found this (fake listing but this is actually his yacht). For those who don't know, its name is "Graceful."
happened to be browsing Marketplace and found this (fake listing but this is actually his yacht). For those who don't know, its name is "Graceful."
incidentally, it has a sweet indoor pool.
More interestingly, here is the aft dining deck. Particularly the part on the far left of the photo....
Nice place for refugee accommodations, does price include delivery?
fastoldfart said:Nice place for refugee accommodations, does price include delivery?
sadly, it's sitting in a Russian military shipyard in Kaliningrad now (hiding behind a Russian Frigate), after it escaped from Germany 2 weeks before the invasion.....so not sure the refugees want to go there.
On the upside, it'll spend the rest of its life cruising the dirty Pregolya River, which doesn't have very good views.
irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:On the upside, it'll spend the rest of its life cruising the dirty Pregolya River, which doesn't have very good views.
This is a great picture to share when people start whining about the EPA's general existence.
- Pete (53 years since the last river fire)
WARNING OPINION AHEAD:
I think that Putin has already shown his hand. It is my opinion that, with the threat of chemical warfare published, it's time to enlist the might of NATO and specifically the aggregate sum of the west's air might and just raze the highways and supply lines all the way back to a kilometer inside the border. I mean utter decimation of the standing Russian army. Surrender? Fine. Step three steps left while we recycle your vehicle. Big boats in the water? Make them all big boats under water. All at once. No press release. Nothing more than turning on the hot lead taps and run the guns until they glow.
/opinionrantthing.
China is amplifying Russian claims about US/Ukranian chemical/biological weapons, so I guess the veneer of neutrality is gone. Makes some sense, though. While Russia will never be a puppet state to China with Putin in power, they need to support the lie in the hopes that when he is gone (deposed, dies, whatever), that the authoritarian regime still exists, and that Russia will have a more malleable leader. The last thing China wants is another large democracy sharing a land border with them, and a potentially porous one at that.
I've already been trying to cut back on buying Made in China stuff, I think I need to work harder at it, when it is actually possible.
So, here's an interesting bit I have been mulling over.
US losses in Iraq/Afganistan vs Russian losses in Ukraine.
US losses from over 10 years Iraq and Afganistan TOTAL as of October 2021 - 7,054 Source
Russian losses in two weeks - 5-6,000* Estimate Source
Probably not fair comparisons to rate our military vs theirs, differring levels of resistance and all that. But, when you consider militrary attrician rates.... Yikes.
I feel bad saying this, but I dont have the heart to look up a comparison of non-combatant deaths.
fastoldfart said:Any thoughts on this:
US Warns Russia May Use Biological Weapons In Ukraine
"The Kremlin is intentionally spreading outright lies that US and Ukraine are conducting chemical weapons activities in Ukraine," White House said.
"Now that Russia has made these false claims... we should all be on the lookout for Russia to possibly use chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine, or to create a false flag operation using them,.
There is so much news about this from the fringe on both sides (of the issue, not politically), some adamantly saying there are no bio weapons in Ukraine, some basically justifying Russian invasion on this idea. With the news cycle as susceptible as it is to fake information being picked up and cross reported as true, it's really hard to know what's really happening. I think at the very least we can evidently see that Russia didn't use this, and used lots of other contradictory reasons, for their invasion. We can also safely assume that if Ukrainians had some secret bioweapons facility hidden in their cities, then they would have used them.
I am going to remain incredibly skeptical on this particular topic until I learn more verifiable facts.
The drone video this morning of an entire Russian tank column getting blasted while leisurely convoying through a Ukrainian village outside Kiev speaks to the total disregard for combat tactics the Russians have. Even after all the losses they've taken they still think sheer numbers of tanks are going to accomplish something. To make it worse after they come under fire they try to spread out into the nearby farm fields and it appears they all get stuck in the mud....
If this war is done anything it's shown they total effectiveness of handheld anti-tank weapons like the javelin. I hope that US army is paying close attention when it decides how much budget is going to future tank purchases. Because every two bit insurgency that we fight against in the future is going to have stuff like this, And they can kill our tanks just as well as they can kill the Russian ones I'm sure.
irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:I hope that US army is paying close attention when it decides how much budget is going to future tank purchases. Because every two bit insurgency that we fight against in the future is going to have stuff like this, And they can kill our tanks just as well as they can kill the Russian ones I'm sure.
Welllll, I think you have to be specific about which PART of the US Army needs to hear it... This is from a few years ago, I remember it making the rounds quite a bit:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/army-says-no-to-more-tanks-but-congress-insists
Note: No affiliation and definitely no endorsement of Foxnews, it's literally the first returned valid link when you put "Army wants less tanks" into duckduckgo.
irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:The drone video this morning of an entire Russian tank column getting blasted while leisurely convoying through a Ukrainian village outside Kiev speaks to the total disregard for combat tactics the Russians have. Even after all the losses they've taken they still think sheer numbers of tanks are going to accomplish something. To make it worse after they come under fire they try to spread out into the nearby farm fields and it appears they all get stuck in the mud....
If this war is done anything it's shown they total effectiveness of handheld anti-tank weapons like the javelin. I hope that US army is paying close attention when it decides how much budget is going to future tank purchases. Because every two bit insurgency that we fight against in the future is going to have stuff like this, And they can kill our tanks just as well as they can kill the Russian ones I'm sure.
I promised the staff I would show myself the door but at the risk of incurring permanent punishment I cant help but comment on this...
Your assessment is incorrect. The reason Russian armor is taking such losses to AT weapons is that they have ZERO infantry support dismounted and complementing the movement/advance of their armor. Our doctrine differs radically (at least it used to until the clown who currently runs the USMC axed tank units) in that we utilize infantry to support the movement of tanks. (See Operation Al Fajr, 2004) for a perfect implementation of this in a tightly contested battle space.
Because the Russians cant/dont utilize infantry to support their tanks, the Ukrainian defenders are free to lay in the ambush and take uncontested shots at armor.
In addition, the appalling lack of CAS capability by the Russian air force further cements the problem. For US forces, the rotoary wing CAS would screen for the armor and infantry and ensure a level of protection. Any bad guys that would evade CAS would then be engaged by infantry who would then use armor to finish the bad guys.
The Russians have poor training, E36 M3 doctrine, and abysmal discipline and cant apply combined arms warfare utilizing the concept of fire and maneuver with mutually supporting elements.
I can write pages and pages about this, but I think the above captures my point.
Dont get me wrong - Im not saying the Javelin and other man portable AT weapons arent effective in the defense. They certainly are - but our doctrine takes into account for that and we utilize specific TTPs to mitigate the threat.
In reply to QuasiMofo (John Brown) :
Isn't that what Putin wants and follow his narrative that NATO is a threat to Russia therefore they must conquer Ukraine. So if NATO intervenes then Putin is proved right that NATO is a threat. NATO Article
As Mongo says (thanks for your direct perspective, it is very useful here), unsupported tanks have almost always been easy meat to infantry, even when if was just Molotov and sticky bombs. With the longer range stuff, you will of course need extend that protection at bit farther. With the launch and forget (run away) stuff, it's going to make it harder but not impossible.
If you do see a launch (or sniper etc), you blast the area with massive fire and make they don't live through their attack. As noted, with the long range stuff, helicopters will be useful.
Think of it this way: it's like any ambush / sneak attack situation. There is little you can do to prevent the attack in some cases (sucks to be the lead tank, or the pint guy), but what you can do is make damn sure any attacker is pretty much assuredly killed. This of course is not as big a deal with the zealot types (see Iraq), but most people have strong sense of self-preservation, and won't be willing to sacrifice themselves for a tank.
Also as noted, the Russian close air support is apparently crap, there is almost no direct connection to the soldiers (done at a higher level), so they will be of little help. They of course have their own issue in general(!)
Feel free to correct me on any of this Mongo, my knowledge is only indirect, historically based.
I find it hilarious how many people are advocating for the creation of a no-fly-zone recently, the "just the tip" approach to formally entering a war with Russia...
The history of warfare is filled with what amounts to a back and forth engineering battle of attack and defend. Arrowheadss V plate armor, etc.
I wonder if we are at the point where guided munitions and evolution of armor penetrating warheads are pretty much making tanks (at least as we knew them in the cold war) such sitting ducks as to just about be on the verge of obsolescence on todays battlefield due to just being a big (expensive) target and a liability for infantry and air support to defend?
(might be worthy of a stand alone thread, dont mean to draw mongo where he should be backing out of)
Sorry guys - I dont meant to claim to be the end all be all of expertise.
My experience comes from being an infantry NCO, a generation ago, Im not an armor expert by any means. Also I certainly don't mean to stifle other folks opinions and I am sure there are other people that have more knowledge than me on what the application of armor on the modern battlefield looks like.
Please dont feel like you need to defer to me on any of the subject matter here.
Regarding US funded Biological Research Laboratories in Ukraine, yes there is some truth. The United States Embassy web page has info: https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/sections-offices/defense-threat-reduction-office/biological-threat-reduction-program/
The U.S. Department of Defense’s Biological Threat Reduction Program collaborates with partner countries to counter the threat of outbreaks (deliberate, accidental, or natural) of the world’s most dangerous infectious diseases. The program accomplishes its bio-threat reduction mission through development of a bio-risk management culture; international research partnerships; and partner capacity for enhanced bio-security, bio-safety, and bio-surveillance measures. The Biological Threat Reduction Program’s priorities in Ukraine are to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern and to continue to ensure Ukraine can detect and report outbreaks caused by dangerous pathogens before they pose security or stability threats. ...
Further, this document about managing and controlling inventory of dangerous pathogens implies that there are dangerous pathogens being managed and controlled: https://ua.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/151/Pathogen-Asset-Control-System-Eng-ver3.pdf
The official info I have found clearly states that the purpose is "threat identification and reduction" and not development of biological weapons in secret labs. Generally, secret bio-weapon labs are not discussed in official public web pages, so this neither confirms nor denies that it is possible. It does lay enough key words that people and institutions that want to infer something sinister can use it as a source document to be twisted into conspiracy theory and propaganda.
I know nothing....
But I think Putin will make a "deal" after he has control over all the ports and a highway / train route to get Russian goods to these ports..
Capturing Kiev just gets you into the problem of controlling the "natives" and you have seen how good that works in Afghanistan etc.
Putin needs to look like the winner before he will make a deal , And backing down is not a winners plan to him.
We will see.....
FatMongo said:The Russians have poor training, E36 M3 doctrine, and abysmal discipline and cant apply combined arms warfare utilizing the concept of fire and maneuver with mutually supporting elements.
I heard on the radio yesterday that Russia finally admitted that at least some of the troops sent in are conscripts, which I think was pretty widely known anyway. The question is how many of them are conscripts and how many are professional soldiers - it sounds like a lot of them were surprised to suddenly find themselves in a war.
Another tidbit I heard: The Russians are sending in MP units to the occupied areas. This is of course to control THEIR soldiers. Anyone familiar with the behaviors of the Russian soldiers in WWII (which apparently still lives on a bit) will know this is a bad thing for the civilians.
On the point / counterpoints of tanks etc: This has always been a thing through military history. The end of the dogfight... 1962... not so much. Military land vehicles can be though of as what they are resistant to. A truck is resistant to nothing. An APC is resistant to small arms, a tank is resistant to cannons. It's a bit like the old warship concept. You need to out run what you can't out fight. So a destroyer need to outfight a PT boat, but a PT boat will out run it. A cruiser out guns a destroyer, but can't out run it etc.
The modern tank is probably in the position currently as the battleship was post WWII. The battleship is there primarily because of other battleships (main battle tanks are primarily to counter other main battle tanks). Now, once guided missiles became popular (planes play a bit part of course, but lets keep it simple), the battleship is gone. With missiles, armor is almost useless, so the current "battleships" have missiles and missile defenses.
Tanks and APC will always be somewhat useful in lesser combat environments but will likely evolve. I think I read (the Israelis?) are developing an active missile defense system for tanks? So, something that actively defeats the missile before it hits (e.g. big shotgun, small missiles etc). There is of course spoofing (flares etc), which will depend on the weapon being used.
The point / counterpoint is always somewhat fascinating to watch for me. Probably why I like Battlebots (tangent!).
I think where it is most relevant to the current conflict is that the Russians are of course aware of anti-tank missiles. But as this thing was getting going, the Ukrainians certainly had them, but they are rather expensive an somewhat cumbersome, so they didn't have all that many, and the Russians are certainly not afraid to take some losses. But.... they are and are getting a CRAPLOAD of them now. This changes the situation entirely. Ukrainians can use them with almost abandon.
Same goes for Stingers. They probably didn't have a huge amount of Manpads (Man Portable Air Defense), but they certainly do now! I have heard the Ukrainians are even using ripple fire tactics with the Stingers: a Stinger fires at a helicopter from one angle, which forces it to maneuver and drop flares, just before another Stinger from a different angle puts one right up the old tailpipe! Not something you do when you are sort on ammo!
aircooled said:Another tidbit I heard: The Russians are sending in MP units to the occupied areas. This is of course to control THEIR soldiers. Anyone familiar with the behaviors of the Russian soldiers in WWII (which apparently still lives on a bit) will know this is a bad thing for the civilians.
I'm almost glad that reporting hasn't started on this yet. They pretty much raped as a rule as they went through Europe. As I recall there were several cities and villages occupied by Nazi's that fled in terror when they heard the Russians were coming to liberate them.
You'll need to log in to post.
