Ukraine
-
On the downside, the cost of fuel and food is skyrocketing globally; but on the upside there are tangible benefits and opportunities on the domestic homefront.
Exclusive:
-
I remember Thatcher having to borrow weapons from the US because they didn't have enough to wage the Falklands War
From what I recall, the UK had enough weapons, ships and aircraft, but the Royal Navy dipped into reserved NATO stocks for the latest Sidewinder AAM's.
But I can't be arsed to re-read Max Hasting's book on the matter to confirm that.
Those sidewinders made a huge difference. Allowed the sub-sonic Harrier to outfight the supersonic jets of the Argentians.
I've read the Sea Harrier was way, way better in air-air combat than the Argentinian Mirages. It was much more manoeuvrable and faster at actual combat altitude than its opponents and had better radar and avionics. Perhaps @Machpants can add something.
-
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@Rapido armour advance through narrow corridor in wooded terrain. What could possibly go wrong?
Meanwhile Russia sends missiles to the border with Finland.
There's a theory I've read where Mikhail Khodarenok's comments have been allowed on Russian state TV to shift the narrative from Putin's "Special Military Operation to de-nazify Ukraine" to one of "we're fighting the entire west which is why things aren't going well"
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
I remember Thatcher having to borrow weapons from the US because they didn't have enough to wage the Falklands War
From what I recall, the UK had enough weapons, ships and aircraft, but the Royal Navy dipped into reserved NATO stocks for the latest Sidewinder AAM's.
But I can't be arsed to re-read Max Hasting's book on the matter to confirm that.
Those sidewinders made a huge difference. Allowed the sub-sonic Harrier to outfight the supersonic jets of the Argentians.
I've read the Sea Harrier was way, way better in air-air combat than the Argentinian Mirages. It was much more manoeuvrable and faster at actual combat altitude than its opponents and had better radar and avionics. Perhaps @Machpants can add something.
There's a good Falklands War podcast going on at the moment. By 2 journalists who accompanied the task force. Comes out weekly.
In it, they said the sidewinders allowed the Harriers to fire front-on etc as they approached the contact, while the Argentinian jets still needed to get behind the harriers with their older missiles (like an old-fashioned dogfight). Can't remember if that comment was by a Harrier pilot they were interviewing, or by one of the hosts themselves (which would have been less gospel).
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
I remember Thatcher having to borrow weapons from the US because they didn't have enough to wage the Falklands War
From what I recall, the UK had enough weapons, ships and aircraft, but the Royal Navy dipped into reserved NATO stocks for the latest Sidewinder AAM's.
But I can't be arsed to re-read Max Hasting's book on the matter to confirm that.
Those sidewinders made a huge difference. Allowed the sub-sonic Harrier to outfight the supersonic jets of the Argentians.
I've read the Sea Harrier was way, way better in air-air combat than the Argentinian Mirages. It was much more manoeuvrable and faster at actual combat altitude than its opponents and had better radar and avionics. Perhaps @Machpants can add something.
Nah, it was more about their training, and SA than anything technical. A lot of the kills were on unaware Argentinians, and even when they engaged the argies were pretty clueless. The all aspect sidewinder certainly helped, tho, also that they had some direction from the ships and more fuel to use
-
@Machpants said in Ukraine:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
I remember Thatcher having to borrow weapons from the US because they didn't have enough to wage the Falklands War
From what I recall, the UK had enough weapons, ships and aircraft, but the Royal Navy dipped into reserved NATO stocks for the latest Sidewinder AAM's.
But I can't be arsed to re-read Max Hasting's book on the matter to confirm that.
Those sidewinders made a huge difference. Allowed the sub-sonic Harrier to outfight the supersonic jets of the Argentians.
I've read the Sea Harrier was way, way better in air-air combat than the Argentinian Mirages. It was much more manoeuvrable and faster at actual combat altitude than its opponents and had better radar and avionics. Perhaps @Machpants can add something.
Nah, it was more about their training, and SA than anything technical. A lot of the kills were on unaware Argentinians, and even when they engaged the argies were pretty clueless. The all aspect sidewinder certainly helped, tho, also that they had some direction from the ships and more fuel to use
Thanks.
Interestingly, I was a talk yonks ago by an ex-RN officer who did the same sort of business stuff I did. He pointed out the availability of the Harriers was very high due to the productivity of aircraft technicians. And a key reason their productivity was good was the quality of the accommodation on the carriers which allowed good sleep/recuperation.
-
Shot, chaser.
-
@mariner4life said in Ukraine:
So who's winning?
weapons manufacturers and arms dealers
same as always
“The criminals are even now, as we speak, focusing on them.”
-
Sanctions blowback. Another empire backfire?
-
@Kruse yeah, out of professional interest.
edit - hmm, that's a bit vague so I'll give an example: The importance of secure battlefield communications. as we know a disproportionate number of generals have been killed, mainly because they've been using unsecured comms - mobile phones - to communicate.
Now we can operate vehicles and weapon systems autonomously, that combined with drones and smart weapons has changed the face of warfare. Outside of the rapid advancement in technology, my experience was practically largely devoted to brown enemies hopelessly outgunned. This conflict is much closer to the doctrine we learnt.
-
-
@Kiwiwomble 'President Zelensky calls it a "unique and historical moment...Ukraine's future is within the EU."'
Well, those bits that remain in Ukraine...
-
Morale is collapsing.
“The reality is different from the official comments.”
-
-
Entirely predictable, so much so, the cynical conspiracist waving a Big Red Flag inside your head begins to wonder whether it’s all by design.
Nato and EU states are pushing for better tracking of weapons supplied to Ukraine in response to fears that criminal groups are smuggling them out of the country and on to Europe’s black market. […]
“All these weapons land in southern Poland, get shipped to the border and then are just divided up into vehicles to cross: trucks, vans, sometimes private cars,” said one of the western officials. “And from that moment we go blank on their location and we have no idea where they go, where they are used or even if they stay in the country.”