Sono traduzioni dal russo fatte con Google Lens o simili.Citazione:
Originariamente Scritto da gmork
Visualizzazione Stampabile
Sono traduzioni dal russo fatte con Google Lens o simili.Citazione:
Originariamente Scritto da gmork
Citazione:
Originariamente Scritto da showa
THE RED LINE COMRADE, THE RED LINE WAS CROSSED. AGAIN.
ah ok thxCitazione:
Originariamente Scritto da ZTL
sui social stanno whinando duro "l'ucraina è brutta e cattiva, ci attacca il giorno prima dei colloqui"Citazione:
Originariamente Scritto da showa
Medvedev è come la mamma che dice che te le dà quando arriva a contare fino a tre, lui è arrivato a due e centosettantotto centosettantanovesimi.
<3
Ma francamente questi grandi aerei quadrimotori in stile Dr. Stranamore hanno ancora un senso? Al di là di AWACS non ci vedo grande utilità a meno che il nemico non sia dei sabbipodi senza tecnologia.
Non so se è fake o meno, ma fosse vero.... :rotfl:
https://x.com/frontlinekit/status/1929289616227487857
Govny... GOVNY!! Torna, non ti facciamo niente.... :rotfl:
Trollaggio ai massimi livelli :rotfl:Citazione:
Originariamente Scritto da showa
https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...attack-russia/Citazione:
Originariamente Scritto da Stefansen
ha finito il copium da mischiare alla vodka poverino :asd:Citazione:
Originariamente Scritto da showa
ma che fine hanno fatto sti droni?Citazione:
Originariamente Scritto da showa
Un'analisi obiettiva sugli effetti dell'attacco
Thread on the Ukrainian drone attack on Russia's strategic air assets
Yep, another Budanov classic. Ukrainian sources say this attack was in the works for 18 months, certainly with the support of Western intelligence and ISR. I'm going to skip over the details of the attack, which are still murky, and focus on the results and their affect on the strategic picture. At the moment I'm writing this, reports suggest the following assets have been damaged or destroyed:
• 6x Tu-95 (likely M or MS variants)
• 2x Tu-22M3
The Tu-95 has been the workhorse of the Russian strategic missile campaign because its latest variants can carry up to 16 cruise missiles. To assess the strategic effect of this attack, let's try to create a rough estimate of how much of Russia's missile-launching capacity has been lost in this attack. We'll determine which aircraft participate in missile attacks, make an estimate of how many operational airframes exist, and how many missiles they can carry in total.
This analysis will be very rough, because not every airframe can carry every type of missile, and due to the size differences between missile platforms, an airframe maybe be able to carry 10 of one missile but only 4 of another. I'm also aiming to describe operational, combat ready air assets here, not total airframes, discounting airframes in storage. Depending on the aircraft, as much of 50% of the fleet may not be operational at any given time.
Tu-95 (modern variants)
• 20-40 operational (assume 30)
• 8-16 missiles per airframe (assume 12)
• Total capacity: 360 missiles
Tu-22M3
• 25-55 operational (assume 40)
• Up to 10 missiles per airframe (assume 6)
• Total capacity: 240 missiles
Tu-160
• 16-20 operational (assume 18)
• Up to 12 missiles per airframe (assume 10)
• Total capacity: 180
MiG-31
• This is hard to answer, but probably >50 operational missile carrying variants (K/BM/BSM)
• Up to 4 missiles per airframe (assume 2)
• Total capacity: 100
While other aircraft like the Su-34, 35, and 57 are capable of carrying air-to-surface missiles, they're rarely used for this role in Russia's strategic missile campaign.
• Total missile capacity across entire fleet: ~880
• Total capacity lost in this attack: ~84
• Total capacity degraded: 11%
This is not insignificant. However, it's important to put this in context. Russia does not use its entire strategic missile fleet in an attack. The most aircraft used in a single attack (very rough estimate) for each is:
• Tu-95: 16
• Tu-22M3: 8-10
• Tu-160: 6
• MiG-31: 12
The largest air launched missile salvos fired in a single day of attacks probably have not exceeded 70. Considering the total missile capacity of these aircraft, and the peak number of airframes used in a single attack, we can safely assume that's it's rare for the Tu-95, 22M3, or 160 to be loaded to capacity, likely to increase range.
This means that the VKS has significant capacity to spare. Even in an exceptionally large attack, only 10% of the total fleet's missile capacity is used.
So while I won't be able to take into account operational concerns, maintenance, etc in this analysis without it doubling in size, but the key point here is that it's possible that while this attack certainly *did* degrade Russia's strategic missile assets, we will *not* see any decrease in their capacity to conduct attacks on Ukraine from this. The fleet is large enough, and air-to-surface missile salvos small enough, that the remainder of the fleet can pick up the slack. The fleet isn't static either, as more strategic bombers are being modernized at a steady pace.
That being said, if the SBU were to conduct more attacks with similar results (perhaps two more), there would likely be a visible strategic effect. And the attack will result in Russia needing to expend resources to protect airbases thousands of kilometers from the front line, which isn't insignificant either.
I russi :bua: bravissimi gli ucraini, spero continuano ancora così
Inviato dal mio CPH2307 utilizzando Tapatalk
Madonna i milioni di metri cubi di copium che stanno consumando, non so se ci stanno dietro con la produzione
Di Feo su repubblica ha scritto che hanno capacità nucleari, quindi si, sono aerei dell’apocalisseCitazione:
Originariamente Scritto da Nightgaunt
:oCitazione:
Originariamente Scritto da LordOrion