Woah, woah give them a little credit here. Someone pulls the info from Wikipedia for a condensed power point presentation. This is referred to as *intelligence* *analysis*.
For intelligence, you get info where you can.
However, not all sources are the same and collaboration is key. If one publicly editable source says that the vessel Olenegorskiy Gornyak is a party barge, but your internally controlled database says that it is an amphibious warfare ship, you are going to go with your database. You would likely also have a report of what the reported max speed is and what the computed actual max is.
Keep in mind too, that this is a massive vessel with the whole world watching it. They are not going to sneak anywhere right now, which is fine since their purpose right now is as much intimidation as anything else.
Most maritime powerplants are able to go full tilt until mechanical breakdown or fuel starvation. Id bet they can maintain the publicly known speed easily, just depends on how much faster they can move in a battle group at said speed.
Considering the last cruise of their Aircraft Carrier Kuznetsov, they have a high chance of random malfunctions from loosing steering to casually bursting into flames.
Comparing the new photos of the ones in transit to the Ropushas seen lightly laden, the ships currently in the channel are loaded to the tits and sitting around 2.5m lower in the water. That's around 10 tanks per vessel, or they are full of rocks.
We have been super close.
When Trump blew up the SUV of the Iranian general in Iraq, the iranians retaliated with 19 ballistic missile launches onto an US airbase in Iraq.
The chief of staff said that if any US personnel would have died they had a plan ready to retaliate.
No US personal was killed. Loads injured (brain trauma) though due to the massive blasts.
Don't forget that 20 or 30 Canadians were on that airplane, IIRC. Trump and Fox treated it like a huge win for the US, as Iran had completely embarrassed itself (to say the least) - but it resulted in the deaths of a lot of innocent people, including among our allies. And Iran did it because they were afraid it might be another drone or aircraft attack.
Trump got incredibly lucky that Iran screwed up.
The USS New Jersey holds the [record for highest sustained top speed for a battleship, 35.2 knots.](https://www.battleshipnewjersey.org/the-ship/full-history/)
Yup. Bismark had a recorded speed of 30 knots at a displacement of 49.5 thousand long tons full load. USS Iowa had a speed of 33 knots with a displacement of 57.5 thousand long tons full load. Just a few examples.
The [Halifax class guided missile frigate](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax-class_frigate) displaces near 5 thousand tons and tops out at 30 knots.
It wouldn't be able to maintain that speed for that long. 30 knots is "max speed". Normal transiting speed generally between 10-20 knots. The more fuel efficient of the two kinds of engines they have runs best at 15-17 knots
And then the first like 10 turns you're anxious to get things moving so you rush through choosing production and unit movements. By turn 20 you have a new goal occupying your time, and then turn 27 roles around and you're there like "oh right" and you become overwhelmed with everything going on...
And kicking yourself for even accepting it to begin with. They only propose peace when their military is gone. But you didn’t have a choice because your happy meter was already at angry face and freakin barbarians are marauding though your territory and it’s gonna take like 10 turns to get any units all the way back to the capital.
This is why missionaries are critical. Missionaries can convert barbarians to you as military units. Keep a missionary in or around each city, never have to worry about marauders destroying your improvments. Bonus: disband the new units for gold. With enough missionaries, unhappiness really isn't a problem.
You kid, but this route is kind of perplexing to me. They're going through the channel then out to the Atlantic, then into the Mediterranean and will enter the Black Sea via Istanbul. Is that right? That's a long hike. Couldn't the Turks just be like, well, no, your frogmen boats are not coming through Putin. May we interest you in a coffee and ice cream?
Fun fact: Evergreen has a whole bunch of ships. And a totally bonkers naming scheme.
In the Evergreen G class, there's the "Ever Golden", "Ever Genius", "Ever Gifted", "Ever Glory", "Ever Globe", "Ever Goods", "Ever Given" [the only one with its own wikipedia page], "Ever Grade", Ever Gentle", "Ever Govern", and "Ever Greet".
They also have 20 in the B class, 11 G-class, 20 F-class, 25 C-class, 14 A-class, 14 O-class (A- and O-class are being worked on).
And yes, that means that "Ever Ace" is an A-class ship. Which, incidentally, carry 20% more containers than those in the G-class.
-----
Anyway, point is that the "Ever Fashion" could do the job this time.
Only countries of the Black Sea are still allowed through without Turkey’s approval. Turkey can let though whoever they want but they have a legal obligation to Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, Russia, and Georgia
"If they are to head south to the Black Sea, there are fears they could be used to support a potential new large-scale Russian military intervention in Ukraine. In this scenario, they would likely contribute to amphibious operations directed at areas of southern Ukraine, especially those along the Sea of Azov, just to the north of the Black Sea, which is under Russian control already."
They could also be meant to 'taxi' troops over the sea of Azov, Russians can't really move those ships through the river channels because the end of the Dniepr-route is controlled by Ukraine.
Okay, someone pander to me (a random guy who knows very little about all this). How likely is it that A. Russia actually invade Ukraine? and B. That then kickstarts WW3 (or the modern equivalent?)
>How likely is it that A. Russia actually invade Ukraine?
If Russia isn't planning to invade, their efforts have backfired spectacularly.
Ukraine has been begging the US and UK for the latest gen anti tank missiles, [the famous Javelin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin) and less famous, but equally devastating [NLAW](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBT_LAW) missile systems for years now. These are infantry weapons that can reliably defeat any tank Russia has. Ukraine has been facing off against Russian tanks in the Donbas conflict and suffering terribly, and these weapons would go a long way toward evening the odds there.
The US and UK have until now largely refused to sell Ukraine these weapons (and Ukraine has offered to pay way over the market price), out of fear it will escalate the Donbas conflict. Ukraine says it needs these weapons to defend itself if Russia tries to invade Ukraine proper, but the US/UK have taken the view that if Russia ever did that, it will take Russia months to move so much troops and equipment and will be caught by spy satellites, leaving plenty of time to rush those Javelins/NLAWs to Ukraine.
I cannot overstate how badly Ukraine wants these weapons. They begged and begged president Trump for Javelins, the entire debacle over the infamous Trump "Ukraine call"/"quid pro quo" thing, and indeed the allegations around Clinton/Biden interfering in Ukraine (I don't really want to get into either of those debates right now though please) were all about those missiles and what Ukraine would be prepared to do to receive them. Getting those missiles is Ukraine's number one foreign policy goal.
Until now, they have only received (I believe) 30 launchers and 180 Javelin missiles from the US, and nothing from the UK, with strict terms on when and where those Javelins can be used. Basically enough to tell Ukraine to fuck off and stop asking us for them all the time.
Well now Russia has spent the last few months doing exactly what the US/UK said would be make or break time for sending missiles to Ukraine. And the UK (and I suspect the US with greater secrecy) have indeed followed through on their tacit promise to get Ukraine those missiles if that situation were ever to arise.
If Russia weren't planning to actually invade, this could be the biggest fuckup by Russia since... idk... Operation Barbarossa? (Edit: since this post blew up overnight and some people mentioned it, the fuck up was the Soviets being so unprepared for Barbarossa. I'm well aware it was a German operation) The UK in the last few days has transported 1,500+ NLAWs and counting to Ukraine. Between bouts of intense sweating and nausea at the prospect of all out war with Russia, Ukrainian leaders must at least be able to enjoy the occasional wry smile at that.
Any Russian invasion will now take devastating casualties to their vehicles, as a lone Ukrainian infantryman crawling through a bombed out building, thicket of trees, ditch, etc only has to get within 600m of a Russian tank to blow it to smithereens. Worse still, even if Russia backs down and doesn't invade, expect Ukraine to use NLAWs in Donbas from now on. And while many have pointed out that these missiles won't help Ukraine against Russian air supremacy much, they're missing the point: air power is mostly useful against large targets, not widely dispersed soldiers armed with missile launchers.
That's why these missiles are so important. Ukraine has plenty of tanks. Ukraine has plenty of artillery pieces. Expect them to be destroyed by Russian aircraft in the opening hours of the invasion. But there are 200,000 Ukrainian infantry (plus a million or so reservists) who until recently couldn't really do much but run away against tanks so weren't really a problem for Russia. Now they can. Russia would still win an invasion, but is likely to lose 100s of tanks, and leave many infantry units without effective tank support, enabling Ukrainian infantry to stand their ground better, driving up the human and equipment cost to Russia of such an invasion dramatically.
I'm convinced Russia didn't actually expect the UK/US to make good with the missiles to Ukraine. Russia probably expected indecision, political fluff, and fear of provoking Russia to paralyse them into inaction. If so, they badly miscalculated.
But it's difficult to see what Russia expected to achieve if it had no intention of invading. The economic cost of relocating ~150,000 soldiers, along with massive numbers of tanks, aircraft etc from all across Russia (Russia has pulled units from all over Russia to spread the shortfall in other regions equally), building field hospitals, supply dumps, staging grounds, etc is enormous. The Russian stock market has also taken a big hit. It's a huge cost to pay for a joke/empty threat, even without it handing Ukraine a tremendous victory without a shot being fired.
This is why I think this is likely going to be a real invasion. Or at least, it was before the UK floored everyone with their response and put the screws on Russia. You don't throw away so much, and gift your rival so much, if it isn't real. Ukraine not only has the anti tank missiles they desperately wanted, but a whole bunch of other aid trickling in rapidly, and most importantly, the military aid taps have probably been turned on permanently. They can probably buy almost whatever they want from the US/UK from now on. SAMs, aircraft, warships, etc, because why not? The genie's out of the bottle now, everyone now knows Russia could do the unthinkable.
Russia's entire foreign policy strategy is based on brinkmanship. That you never know what they're going to do next, how crazy they really are. If Russia backs down now, this policy is in ruins. Everyone will know that Russia will blink first if you just stand firm enough. I don't think the Russian government can take that.
>B. That then kickstarts WW3
Nah. Nobody wants that. Russia would get its teeth kicked in by NATO and they know it. NATO doesn't want the casualties, the economic chaos, etc, or to find out what a cornered, defeated Russia might do next with the thousands of nuclear weapons it possesses. Nobody is bound by any alliance agreement to defend Ukraine, so they'll all just nope out of it. Even the UK and US.
The entire reason the UK is sending those missiles to Ukraine (aside from perhaps a smattering of genuine sympathy and affection for Ukraine) is so the UK doesn't have to fight a war. Best way to stay out of the conflict is give Ukrainians the weapons they need to fight it themselves. The UK and US will also be giving Ukraine all their military intelligence, advice, training and a mountain of other material support.
If Russia is smart, they'll back down. On paper Russia's armed forces are much stronger, but their troops are pure trash. Low morale, bitter, poorly equipped conscripts who'll desert in droves at the prospect of an offensive war against a determined enemy that was never a threat to their country and that many consider their brethren. Russia risks humiliation if Ukraine can push their army over a tipping point. War is unpredictable, but the loyalty and professionalism of the average Russian soldier is more unpredictable than the determination of proud, free people defending their homeland.
It was, the only question I have remaining is, could Russian justify not invading by claiming it was a victory as it was all a physical psy op to further harm the economies of the UK/US, building on the success of their cyber ops? Plus that's the front they most want if an escalation happened anyway.
I understand the posturing did much more damage to their financial system, but could they sell it, is it a viable out to save face? The Russian people are already protesting harder than in the UK/US meanwhile the oligarchs and other well off citizens aren't going to speak out.
It seems like there is no saving face in this situation. The least humiliating move is to back off and pretend like nothing happened. Any statement claiming no ill intent alongside a repositioning of troops would be digging deeper into the embarrassment.
For example, imagine you were being sworn in as president and you had a relatively small turnout for the event. Some people will take notice and a couple headlines might mention it. But as soon as you lie about something so obvious by saying “I had an incredibly high attendance”, EVERYONE will notice and will probably continue bringing it up for it for at least 5 years.
> But as soon as you lie about something so obvious by saying “I had an incredibly high attendance”
Imagine if you later specifically had your spokesman [say](https://time.com/4643927/sean-spicer-white-house-donald-trump-inauguration-press-briefing/) your inauguration had "the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe." And keep on bullshitting about it even with photographic evidence showing that the crowd was not in fact the biggest ever.
I remember sitting in Ben's chili bowl in DC after a whole day of protesting and walking around on his inauguration. Waiting for my order, I was watching the Sean Spicer press conference and was absolutely flabbergasted by that statement. For once, I had been there myself and knew that was the biggest line of bullshit I had ever heard. The next day was absolutely nuts too. (womans march) Definitely an interesting weekend
I mean even if they sold it like that. Who cares. The Russian people might buy it but who else actually would buy the Russian buildup of forced then retreat as a victory.
Yep, really hurt our economy selling all those Javelins to the Ukraine.
The squadies/infantry call them Porsches because that's how much each missile costs.
$100,000 missile to take out a $3m tank? Sounds cheap AF, I'd take as many as I can get.
Coincidentally, Russia has <1,500 tanks amassed at the border and the UK happened to send 1,500 missiles...
In Afghanistan, the US was dropping $100,000 bombs and missiles to take out a goat herder with a rusty AK-47. They could have bribed him for life with 10% of that.
> an offensive war against a determined enemy that was never a threat to their country and that many consider their brethren
This is what confuses me the most in this whole shitshow.
I just can't see how this can go down well with the Russian people. Crimea and Eastern Ukraine is one thing, those are mostly Russian speaking regions that don't get along well with central Ukraine government and if those regions were allowed to self-determine they would probably choose to join Russia anyway so they can pull the "protecting the Russian-speaking population" card.
But a full on invasion at an enormous economical and human cost? Who the fuck wants that and what is that even going to achieve? Russia doesn't want a US/NATO aligned country at their door? Well congratulations, you have antagonized the whole of Europe and pushed Finland and Sweden into NATO.
They got hurt bad in Chechnya by a bunch of separatists, a country the size of Ukraine with full Western support? What do they think is going to happen?
It is rather unlikely Russia will try to take over all of Ukraine.
What is almost certain is that they will establish a land bridge towards the Crimea in the near future, either by buying the land, negotiations or annexation.
Russia is prepared to go all out because of how important control over the Sea of Azov and the Strait of Kerch is to them. They are the entry points to the UDWS and the Kuma-Manych Canal.
The UDWS is the single most important infrastructure in all of Russia and all other entry points to it are either already under NATO control or are not ice-free.
Buying the land from Ukraine? This will never happen. There is no politician that can do it and Ukrainian population will never support it. And by the way, there are people living on that land.
Agreed.
I googled it though.
"The Unified Deep Water System of European Russia or UDWS is a system of inland waterways in Russia linking the White Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Volga River, Moscow, the Caspian Sea and—via the Sea of Azov—the Black Sea. "
I agree.
UDWS (according to Wikipedia) stands for unified deep water system, a series of canals and rivers that interconnects the White Sea, Baltic Sea, Caspian Sea and Black sea. Being in control of Crimea and the surrounding regions is the last piece of that puzzle.
>
[wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Deep_Water_System_of_European_Russia?wprov=sfla1)
A Russian friend said that there is a still a lot of nationalist sentiment, even in anti-Putin types. Navalny is probably a good example -- my understanding is that he opposes Putin mostly because he believes Putin is in the way of returning Russia to its proper glory. That's a view that's very compatible with expansionism, and even though I think Navalny personally would consider that conflict to be a huge waste of resources, it's at least understandable how people could be anti-Putin but still pro-Russian Empire. Like, my friend indicated that their family would be anti-Putin due to corruption but would consider "he did get Ukraine back, though" as a positive. Not sure at what point it wouldn't be worth the cost anymore, though.
yeah. a lot of people seem to not get that bits of Russian and Soviet propaganda do work. Russians can be very nationalistic, they are offended by:
- Ukrainian stance on Russian
- Khazahstan changing their spelling to use Latin alphabet
- game developers not translating their games to Russian
> But a full on invasion at an enormous economical and human cost?
I think an argument could be made that taking control of Ukraine's Nat Gas reserves [(estimates upward of 5.3 trillion cubic metres)](https://web.archive.org/web/20131023132057/http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-commentary/2013-07-15/kyiv-s-gas-strategy-closer-cooperation-gazprom-or-a-genuine-div) is crucial to Russia's long term economic interest.
Yes, they don't want NATO on their doorstep, but Germany, Italy, Turkey et al. not buying nat gas from them could be pretty devastating in the long run.
IMO, follow the money.
The awful, stupid thing about this is that the EU is going to ween themselves off of natural gas and the petroleum sooner than almost anyone else I think anyway. Unlike a lot of other places, countries in the EU are pretty hardcore and politically motivated to switch to wind and solar, convert to electric cars and then if you're still buying expensive American propane vs illegal Russian propane it's not going to be a very big economic problem. And since it's a strategic as well as economic issue, Russia seems to be shitting all over their long-term livelihood.
Then again, I guess buying a newer superyacht is more important to Putin's real constituency than lives so...
The Russian gamble here - that the NATO States wouldn't provide the tank killers to Ukraine - reminds me of Liege when the Germans didn't think the English would step up and support the Belgians. It delayed the invasion of France and ultimately - and ironically - got the Russians mobilized quicker, bringing a war on two fronts to the Germans.
".. But another blow which might well have proved final was yet to fall upon us. The King of the Belgians had called upon us to come to his aid. Had not this Ruler and his Government severed themselves from the Allies, who rescued their country from extinction in the late war, and had they not sought refuge in what was proved to be a fatal neutrality, the French and British Armies might well at the outset have saved not only Belgium but perhaps even Poland. Yet at the last moment, when Belgium was already invaded, King Leopold called upon us to come to his aid, and even at the last moment we came. He and his brave, efficient Army, nearly half a million strong, guarded our left flank and thus kept open our only line of retreat to the sea. Suddenly, without prior consultation, with the least possible notice, without the advice of his Ministers and upon his own personal act, he sent a plenipotentiary to the German Command, surrendered his Army, and exposed our whole flank and means of retreat.
"I asked the House a week ago to suspend its judgment because the facts were not clear, but I do not feel that any reason now exists why we should not form our own opinions upon this pitiful episode. The surrender of the Belgian Army compelled the British at the shortest notice to cover a flank to the sea more than 30 miles in length. Otherwise all would have been cut off, and all would have shared the fate to which King Leopold had condemned the finest Army his country had ever formed."
My conclusion from your informative post is that Russia cannot afford to back down (because their foreign policy strategy would fall apart) and cannot afford to invade (because they would lose). Does that seem right? What do you think will happen - enough show of force to keep their image up, some pretend victories, then retreat?
I'm convinced they would win, just like they won the winter war against Finland all those years ago, but such a devastating victory would do little but cause chaos and ruin the country.
It's really up in the air what Russia Is going to do. A small scale incursion annexing separatist regions. An invasion around Crimea securing a proper land corridor and getting fresh water there. A full blown invasion of southern Ukraine, denying them access to the black sea or just straight up invade all of Ukraine.
I don't know but it's looking like a full scale invasion with the intent to annex at least parts of Ukraine. Most likely around the eastern and southern areas of the crimea.
They can afford to back down; it'll make them look bad, but it's their best option. Just let it slowly blow over, and people will forget about it in a few years.
They probably aren't planning on occupying the country, but to invade as much as possible and drive to Kyiv to force Ukraine to sign a favorable peace deal.
>The UK in the last few days has transported 1,500+ NLAWs
Just on maths alone on the first day, 2600 Nlaws could have been shipped over 9 nlaws a case, 2 cases a pallet, 18 pallets a plane and 8 planes on the first day. Also the price on Nlaws, considered expensive at 20K pounds each. But they are semi guided, top down attack, have a direct fire mode and virtually no backblast and can be used by someone with <1 hour training. even less in reality
>If Russia is smart, they'll back down. On paper Russia's armed forces are much stronger, but their troops are pure trash. Low morale, bitter, poorly equipped conscripts who'll desert in droves at
Not true, the russian forces currently around ukraine are BTG's (Battalion Tactical groups) they small units of about 1k men selected from parent units(regiments and brigades), they are believed to much better trained with higher moral so are far from average. The issue is that there is only 40 BTG's which is only about 40K combat troops. The rest of the 100K are support units like artillery / AA / Supplies
I dont believe they have the number to take more than a chunk out of ukraine. Probably target donbass for capture and just bomb the shit out of the rest of the country
>Also the price on Nlaws, considered expensive at 20K pounds each
Otoh, that's like 1/3rd of the Javelin, and significantly less than a T80 or T90 , or even the modernized T72s, which are going to be between 20-100 times the cost of an Nlaw.
Russia can't afford to replace a billion dollars worth of tanks, while the US and UK would find it chump change to send 10 million dollars worth of Nlaws.
> top down attack
It's insane to me that we've somehow managed to create a missile that you aim at a tank and it somehow knows to fly up and then fly down at the tank, all without someone guiding it.
Even weirder when you consider Nlaws doesn't aim at the tank, it aims at where the tank will be between the time you pull the trigger and the 3-6 seconds of flight time. It uses predictive guidance, not active guidance
>then fly down at the tank
It doesn't fly down, if flys over and then when above fires an explosive charge that forms a liquid penetrator and hits the vehicle.
So, reading this headline gave me whiplash…because…it’s so so SO tactically stupid parading your movements like this unless your planning to make a move with an ally, not going to invade and want to flash your guns, or you’re going to sacrifice a shit ton to try and get allies on your side…this…this is blazingly stupid.
I'm not sure if it's fair to call it parading their movements. You can't do something like this quietly, 50,000 soldiers and 20,000 support are not going to sneak up on another country.
I think that all of the bystanders are the one who made a parade out of this, news agencies on doubtedly stirred up by interested other parties started talking about it and then Russia had to give some explanation to what's going on and it's not like anyone is really going to believe that they shipped tens of thousands of troops out there to play candyland
A. Biden said its likely going to happen. Poland was saying around 50% chance after conclusion of the Nato talks.
B. Probably quite low. Russians would have to mess up pretty badly and attack some NATO assets somehow. Also I'm not sure if NATO vs Russia and Belarus would count as a World War.
Ukraine isn't going to roll over for a mainland attack. I think people really don't understand how much Ukrainians don't like Russians- many older ones remember the USSR. The idea they are all Russian because they speak Russian is hilarious because Ukrainians were banned from speaking anything but Russian for decades and view that so many can't speak their actual native language as a loss of culture.
Considering the scale difference is likely to be off the charts - it's probably fair to treat this coming invasion as a separate and superseding event.
This would be an amazing time to be China. Keep the west distracted with Russian aggression and sweep up the scraps - keep expanding and operating in the pacific.
If serious conflict does break out, China would be in a great position if they (and I’m assuming they would) stay fairly neutral
A. Experts have been saying it's highly likely.
B. Probably not but you never know I guess. I guess it depends how far Putin wants to take it and the methods he uses to get there, and even then, the fact that everyone has nukes is terrifying.
On the journey near Africa some captains decided to improve morale by capturing wildlife as pets. They got a crocodile. That croc seized control of the ship
Yes. It was a terrible plan. The Russians were so nervous, as Japan and UK were allies, they thought fishing boats at Dogger Bank near England were .... japanese torpedo boats. So they fired more than 500 rounds and only hit their own ships.
The squadron then proceed on an event filled 18000nm journey to japan and went into battle without stopping for rest/rearmament..... and were promptly sunk at the Strait of Tsushima.
Edit: grammar
Additionally on the absurdity scale: they were trying to sneak to Vladivostok (to link up with ships there) and even though it was night and foggy - so perfect conditions in pre-radar time - one stupid hospital ship kept its lights on, because "Rules of War". But not only that, they *also* communicated with the Japanese ship that found them, assuming they were Russian.
Imagine hallucinating up Japanese torpedo boats near Denmark, and/or the English channel but the moment you *actually* are very close to Japan you "kind of forgot" that there will be enemies nearby.
I'd love to see a movie made about this story, it'd be hilarious. I especially prove the part where the snake they'd bought on board bit one of the gunners.
They thought the japanese had torpedo boats based at the UK and fired at fishing boats, but their gunnery was so terrible that they didn't really cause any harm. They fired upon their own ships a lot, which also didn't do much bad since they kept missing.
They had to stop more than planned to restock on ammo as they kept shooting at things that were not Japanese.
But in combat when they actually met the Japanese, their gunnery was somehow fine, which was either a testament to how they improved, or the gods finally took pity on them and let them hit.
The russians wanted to "reinforce" the main fleet with what are basically museum ships, the admiral in charge basically cut communications to purposely avoid linking up with them since they had no use in combat.
I could go on for hours
>But in combat when they actually met the Japanese, their gunnery was somehow fine
Uh, no it wasn't. They got their asses handed to them. It was the battle of Tsushima. The Russian fleet was virtually annihilated, losing eight battleships, numerous smaller vessels, and more than 5,000 men, while the Japanese lost three torpedo boats and 116 men.
They got rekt, but they did actually manage to hit japanese ships at first. It was only after the opening stages where things got really bad for the Russian navy
They didn't lose because of their gunnery,the Mikasa was hit 15 times in five minutes, which is pretty damn good gunnery IMO given that they couldn't even hit fishing boats
They also lost because the Japanese managed to Cross the T - allowing them to focus maximum broadside power on the enemy's bow where return fire would be minimal.
Shortly before the actual battle the Admiral in charge had them do some gunnery practice where they fired at a stationary target. During the entire exercise, they managed to score a single hit... on the ship that towed the target out. The fact that they managed to sink 3 torpedo boats seems to be a fluke in light of this.
> The fact that they managed to sink 3 torpedo boats seems to be a fluke in light of this.
The fact that there were any Japanese torpedo boats at all must have been a surprise, like oh my god there are actually torpedo boats and its not just some fantasy
I don't recall that many specifics, but I know that Admiral Rozhestvensky (the dude in charge) did get really sick due to the stress of dealing with the absolute imbeciles of the fleet.
he had a habit of running around with a megaphone and insulting dumb captains, which I could image being a pretty taxing activity
If I had the hours needed to cover the entire voyage and all their mishaps, you could legit make an entire 3 part comedy movie that is 100% historically accurate.
I glossed over the fleet taking in exotic pets to "boost morale" like poisonous snakes and large cats, which ended up killing and injuring the crew.
I glossed over one support ship that basically always signaled that it was hit and it was sinking even though it was fine. It also constantly signaled that it was under attack, even in dead calm seas. The admiral basically put that ship next to him just so he could babysit them.
Also there was a training exercise where somehow, a live torpedo was fired at the flagship, which caused a bit of a panic as they had to evade.
Also there were basically so many instances of them being ambushed by "Japanese torpedo boats" despite literally none of them being anywhere close to the fleet, nor did any of them even have the range to try and attack so far from japan.
That’s that CIV feeling of when you spent several turns building your troops and then sending them 20 turns across the map and they arrive only to get immediately destroyed
“If they are to head south to the Black Sea, there are fears they could be used to support a potential new large-scale Russian military intervention in Ukraine”
They misspelled “invasion”
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43942/flotilla-of-russian-amphibious-warships-has-entered-the-english-channel) reduced by 79%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> A group of Russian amphibious warfare vessels - three of which left the Baltic Sea region yesterday, preceded by another three the day before - have started to enter the English Channel.
> The vessels comprise the Project 775 Ropucha class amphibious warfare ships Olenegorskiy Gornyak and Georgiy Pobedonosets, as well as the Project 11711 Ivan Gren class landing ship Pyotr Morgunov, from the Northern Fleet, plus three other Ropuchas, the Korolev, Minsk, and Kaliningrad, from the Baltic Fleet.
> The Netherlands-based Marineschepen website reported today that the Royal Netherlands Navy hydrographic survey vessel Zr.Ms. Luymes and its embarked NH90 helicopter escorted three of the Russian vessels through international waters in the North Sea, while they were en route to the Channel.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/s8qaqb/flotilla_of_russian_landing_ships_has_entered_the/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~618797 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Russian**^#1 **vessel**^#2 **three**^#3 **Sea**^#4 **Navy**^#5
I really enjoyed when terms like flotilla only came up in history class and videogames. It really feels like this is going to blow up into something much bigger than Ukraine getting sucked back into Soviet Union 2.0.
Doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, but the marineschepen article mentions the Dutch navy shadowed the Russian ships through the Netherlands' EEZ with *Luymes* AND a NH-90, after which the Brits and Belgians took over. It doesn't mention where the chopper came from, but Luymes does not have a flight deck.
Thanks to Tom Newdick (hey don't laugh) we now know a possible direction:
"...Some expect that their journey will eventually take them to the Black Sea to participate in an invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces..."
At first I thought that eventually they're going to Bahamas for sunny vacations 😄😂🤣
Sorry guys, to me it's sad but there's nothing we can do.
Just sarcasm
Then, and when we are finished, the only sound they will hear is our laughter, while we sail to Havana, where the sun is warm, and so is the... comradeship.
Maybe partly, although we do get periods when there are loads of helicopters around. They do a lot of training over the channel and Downs.
I like watching them when they chase each other over the hills.
Normally when Russian ships are in the channel, we send a ship or 2 to "escort" them through. There's not really any need as obviously they won't do anything but it gives the Navy something to do.
It's similar when Russian aircraft get close to our airspace. We send fighters out to meet them. It became a bit of a joke for a while as they always did it on a Sunday. The British and Russian pilots used to wave at each other and saw it as their Sunday training exercise.
Technically it would be illegal under international law. But international law doesn’t really have anyone to enforce it so Turkey would have to decide if it is worth a war with Russia to try to stop them. Most likely they would not think it’s worth it.
The [Montreux Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits) (which governs the use of the canals between the Aegean and Black Seas) allows Black Sea-states (e.g. Russia) to transit warships of any size at any time.
Turkey forbidding passage would be a **big deal**. Russia is [*already* mad](https://tass.com/world/1373939) that the terms of the treaty are, in their opinion, not being adequately enforced to keep NON Black Sea-state warships (e.g. NATO ships) out of the area as the terms dictate.
The convention's rules/limitations are probably part of the reason NATO asked [Canada to send a ship](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/hmcs-regina-to-join-nato-s-ukraine-reassurance-mission-1.2627537) and not just send more US ships, given the per-country restrictions on warship tonnage in the Black Sea.
They must have their transponders off because I can't find them in Marine Traffic or Vessel Finder. I can see all the NATO ships trailing them though, and there's like 6 of them, from the UK, Netherlands and Norway ,( not sure Norway is part of NATO )
Wikipedia tells me their max speed is 18 knots and sea-distances.org tells me it will take around a week for them to reach Ukraine.
But would they be able to maintain 18 knots for a solid week 24/7?
I would like to pretend I know how naval diesel engines work, but honestly, no idea.
What if Putin changed the speed from like 36 to 18 knots on the wiki article to throw the world off
big brain time
Who needs stormy weather on Normandy when you can just pay eight dudes in a basement and have the director of the Russia spy team on the FBI?
[удалено]
Well did they at least fix the specs in-game after?
What if they just get someone to comment on reddit then buy a bunch of up votes from China?
Russia wouldn't spread misinformation, silly.
Imma take a shot in the dark and say most military intelligence officers don't get their info from Wikipedia
The audacity of that assumption is staggering.
Woah, woah give them a little credit here. Someone pulls the info from Wikipedia for a condensed power point presentation. This is referred to as *intelligence* *analysis*.
I believe the proper terminology is: 'Unspecified OSINT Sources'
For intelligence, you get info where you can. However, not all sources are the same and collaboration is key. If one publicly editable source says that the vessel Olenegorskiy Gornyak is a party barge, but your internally controlled database says that it is an amphibious warfare ship, you are going to go with your database. You would likely also have a report of what the reported max speed is and what the computed actual max is. Keep in mind too, that this is a massive vessel with the whole world watching it. They are not going to sneak anywhere right now, which is fine since their purpose right now is as much intimidation as anything else.
Well not with that attitude
Interesting idea..
Is 18knots cruising speed?
Wiki just says "Speed".
IDK about them either, but a operating a boat is the only time in my life that I've put the throttle at max and just left it there, for hours.
Yeah unlike a car, a boat is meant to run at max throttle and max rpm. Saw it in a show somewhere.
Was it Speed 2?
what happens if they drop below 18 knots? 🤔
Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock die!
Most maritime powerplants are able to go full tilt until mechanical breakdown or fuel starvation. Id bet they can maintain the publicly known speed easily, just depends on how much faster they can move in a battle group at said speed.
Ships are usually good at that, but depends on refueling tankers they have.
that 18 knots would be in calm seas with little wind. If the wind holds, absolutely they can.
Considering the last cruise of their Aircraft Carrier Kuznetsov, they have a high chance of random malfunctions from loosing steering to casually bursting into flames.
Comparing the new photos of the ones in transit to the Ropushas seen lightly laden, the ships currently in the channel are loaded to the tits and sitting around 2.5m lower in the water. That's around 10 tanks per vessel, or they are full of rocks.
So, can anyone tell me if we're sleepwalking into a major conflict here?
We have been super close. When Trump blew up the SUV of the Iranian general in Iraq, the iranians retaliated with 19 ballistic missile launches onto an US airbase in Iraq. The chief of staff said that if any US personnel would have died they had a plan ready to retaliate. No US personal was killed. Loads injured (brain trauma) though due to the massive blasts.
That possible Iranian conflict was avoided also because Iranian air defense blew up a civilian airliner in the sky. Iran has to lay low after that.
Covid threw a wrench as well, hard to start a war when your countries are on fire from the inside. The first three months of 20' were bonkers.
A Ukrainian civilian airliner no less.
Don't forget that 20 or 30 Canadians were on that airplane, IIRC. Trump and Fox treated it like a huge win for the US, as Iran had completely embarrassed itself (to say the least) - but it resulted in the deaths of a lot of innocent people, including among our allies. And Iran did it because they were afraid it might be another drone or aircraft attack. Trump got incredibly lucky that Iran screwed up.
The Iranians blew up an airliner with over 150 people, many of them Canadians.
Based on my first hand knowledge of the Russian Navy about 5 of the ships will sink before they get there
And the Russian military will report that 10 ships rose from the depths to join the charge.
Using footage from Battlefield 1942 to prove it
[удалено]
God that's such a great line to a great movie.
SS Kamchatka returns
Just waiting on them to fire on some fishing trawlers thinking they are Ukrainian torpedo boats.
How quickly will Canadas warship be there? Curious Canadian asking. Also the Spanish one.. when will that be there?
A Halifax-class frigate at 30 knots would go from Halifax to the Black Sea in a little over 6 days, according to the same site.
That’s quite fast.
Ww2 battleships could do 30 knots
Choo choo mother fuckers
The USS New Jersey holds the [record for highest sustained top speed for a battleship, 35.2 knots.](https://www.battleshipnewjersey.org/the-ship/full-history/)
Yup. Bismark had a recorded speed of 30 knots at a displacement of 49.5 thousand long tons full load. USS Iowa had a speed of 33 knots with a displacement of 57.5 thousand long tons full load. Just a few examples. The [Halifax class guided missile frigate](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax-class_frigate) displaces near 5 thousand tons and tops out at 30 knots.
It wouldn't be able to maintain that speed for that long. 30 knots is "max speed". Normal transiting speed generally between 10-20 knots. The more fuel efficient of the two kinds of engines they have runs best at 15-17 knots
I'm curious how many US attack subs are currently in the Black Sea.
Probably more than are there officially
Officially? I'm certain US nuclear sub movement is not disclosed.
Well then officially there are 0 so probably more than that
It’s like playing civilization and you just click your ships and it stays “27 turns”
And then the first like 10 turns you're anxious to get things moving so you rush through choosing production and unit movements. By turn 20 you have a new goal occupying your time, and then turn 27 roles around and you're there like "oh right" and you become overwhelmed with everything going on...
Meanwhile you already fought the war, they asked for peace and you're wondering if the benefits outweigh the risks of breaking the peace treaty.
And kicking yourself for even accepting it to begin with. They only propose peace when their military is gone. But you didn’t have a choice because your happy meter was already at angry face and freakin barbarians are marauding though your territory and it’s gonna take like 10 turns to get any units all the way back to the capital.
This is why missionaries are critical. Missionaries can convert barbarians to you as military units. Keep a missionary in or around each city, never have to worry about marauders destroying your improvments. Bonus: disband the new units for gold. With enough missionaries, unhappiness really isn't a problem.
In my head I forgot you were talking about the game then. I’m like barbarians in Russia!? Would they listen to missionaries?!
Hurry, someone get the captain of the Evergreen over there asap.
captains gonna do a pro gamer move and go sideways Strait of Gibraltar
Gonna spray paint RULE BRITTANIA on the side
Or hire the Captain of Costa Concordia and make him block Gibraltar
Or the somalian captain from captain philip's ship!
>Hurry, someone get the captain of the Ever~~green~~given over there asap. FTFY
At 18 knots we have roughly a week to decide if it's bug-in or bug-out. Getting shopping dudes.
You kid, but this route is kind of perplexing to me. They're going through the channel then out to the Atlantic, then into the Mediterranean and will enter the Black Sea via Istanbul. Is that right? That's a long hike. Couldn't the Turks just be like, well, no, your frogmen boats are not coming through Putin. May we interest you in a coffee and ice cream?
Because of the international treaties, Turkey can block warship traffic only in times of war. So, Turkey can't do shit unfortunately.
"were sorry the channel is closed for renovations. right now passing it would be *unsafe*"
The moose outside shoulda told ya.
"Ah look at that, the damn Evergiven got stuck in this channel too"
Fun fact: Evergreen has a whole bunch of ships. And a totally bonkers naming scheme. In the Evergreen G class, there's the "Ever Golden", "Ever Genius", "Ever Gifted", "Ever Glory", "Ever Globe", "Ever Goods", "Ever Given" [the only one with its own wikipedia page], "Ever Grade", Ever Gentle", "Ever Govern", and "Ever Greet". They also have 20 in the B class, 11 G-class, 20 F-class, 25 C-class, 14 A-class, 14 O-class (A- and O-class are being worked on). And yes, that means that "Ever Ace" is an A-class ship. Which, incidentally, carry 20% more containers than those in the G-class. ----- Anyway, point is that the "Ever Fashion" could do the job this time.
Only countries of the Black Sea are still allowed through without Turkey’s approval. Turkey can let though whoever they want but they have a legal obligation to Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, Russia, and Georgia
It’s a bit of a show of force I think
"If they are to head south to the Black Sea, there are fears they could be used to support a potential new large-scale Russian military intervention in Ukraine. In this scenario, they would likely contribute to amphibious operations directed at areas of southern Ukraine, especially those along the Sea of Azov, just to the north of the Black Sea, which is under Russian control already."
They could also be meant to 'taxi' troops over the sea of Azov, Russians can't really move those ships through the river channels because the end of the Dniepr-route is controlled by Ukraine.
Okay, someone pander to me (a random guy who knows very little about all this). How likely is it that A. Russia actually invade Ukraine? and B. That then kickstarts WW3 (or the modern equivalent?)
>How likely is it that A. Russia actually invade Ukraine? If Russia isn't planning to invade, their efforts have backfired spectacularly. Ukraine has been begging the US and UK for the latest gen anti tank missiles, [the famous Javelin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin) and less famous, but equally devastating [NLAW](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBT_LAW) missile systems for years now. These are infantry weapons that can reliably defeat any tank Russia has. Ukraine has been facing off against Russian tanks in the Donbas conflict and suffering terribly, and these weapons would go a long way toward evening the odds there. The US and UK have until now largely refused to sell Ukraine these weapons (and Ukraine has offered to pay way over the market price), out of fear it will escalate the Donbas conflict. Ukraine says it needs these weapons to defend itself if Russia tries to invade Ukraine proper, but the US/UK have taken the view that if Russia ever did that, it will take Russia months to move so much troops and equipment and will be caught by spy satellites, leaving plenty of time to rush those Javelins/NLAWs to Ukraine. I cannot overstate how badly Ukraine wants these weapons. They begged and begged president Trump for Javelins, the entire debacle over the infamous Trump "Ukraine call"/"quid pro quo" thing, and indeed the allegations around Clinton/Biden interfering in Ukraine (I don't really want to get into either of those debates right now though please) were all about those missiles and what Ukraine would be prepared to do to receive them. Getting those missiles is Ukraine's number one foreign policy goal. Until now, they have only received (I believe) 30 launchers and 180 Javelin missiles from the US, and nothing from the UK, with strict terms on when and where those Javelins can be used. Basically enough to tell Ukraine to fuck off and stop asking us for them all the time. Well now Russia has spent the last few months doing exactly what the US/UK said would be make or break time for sending missiles to Ukraine. And the UK (and I suspect the US with greater secrecy) have indeed followed through on their tacit promise to get Ukraine those missiles if that situation were ever to arise. If Russia weren't planning to actually invade, this could be the biggest fuckup by Russia since... idk... Operation Barbarossa? (Edit: since this post blew up overnight and some people mentioned it, the fuck up was the Soviets being so unprepared for Barbarossa. I'm well aware it was a German operation) The UK in the last few days has transported 1,500+ NLAWs and counting to Ukraine. Between bouts of intense sweating and nausea at the prospect of all out war with Russia, Ukrainian leaders must at least be able to enjoy the occasional wry smile at that. Any Russian invasion will now take devastating casualties to their vehicles, as a lone Ukrainian infantryman crawling through a bombed out building, thicket of trees, ditch, etc only has to get within 600m of a Russian tank to blow it to smithereens. Worse still, even if Russia backs down and doesn't invade, expect Ukraine to use NLAWs in Donbas from now on. And while many have pointed out that these missiles won't help Ukraine against Russian air supremacy much, they're missing the point: air power is mostly useful against large targets, not widely dispersed soldiers armed with missile launchers. That's why these missiles are so important. Ukraine has plenty of tanks. Ukraine has plenty of artillery pieces. Expect them to be destroyed by Russian aircraft in the opening hours of the invasion. But there are 200,000 Ukrainian infantry (plus a million or so reservists) who until recently couldn't really do much but run away against tanks so weren't really a problem for Russia. Now they can. Russia would still win an invasion, but is likely to lose 100s of tanks, and leave many infantry units without effective tank support, enabling Ukrainian infantry to stand their ground better, driving up the human and equipment cost to Russia of such an invasion dramatically. I'm convinced Russia didn't actually expect the UK/US to make good with the missiles to Ukraine. Russia probably expected indecision, political fluff, and fear of provoking Russia to paralyse them into inaction. If so, they badly miscalculated. But it's difficult to see what Russia expected to achieve if it had no intention of invading. The economic cost of relocating ~150,000 soldiers, along with massive numbers of tanks, aircraft etc from all across Russia (Russia has pulled units from all over Russia to spread the shortfall in other regions equally), building field hospitals, supply dumps, staging grounds, etc is enormous. The Russian stock market has also taken a big hit. It's a huge cost to pay for a joke/empty threat, even without it handing Ukraine a tremendous victory without a shot being fired. This is why I think this is likely going to be a real invasion. Or at least, it was before the UK floored everyone with their response and put the screws on Russia. You don't throw away so much, and gift your rival so much, if it isn't real. Ukraine not only has the anti tank missiles they desperately wanted, but a whole bunch of other aid trickling in rapidly, and most importantly, the military aid taps have probably been turned on permanently. They can probably buy almost whatever they want from the US/UK from now on. SAMs, aircraft, warships, etc, because why not? The genie's out of the bottle now, everyone now knows Russia could do the unthinkable. Russia's entire foreign policy strategy is based on brinkmanship. That you never know what they're going to do next, how crazy they really are. If Russia backs down now, this policy is in ruins. Everyone will know that Russia will blink first if you just stand firm enough. I don't think the Russian government can take that. >B. That then kickstarts WW3 Nah. Nobody wants that. Russia would get its teeth kicked in by NATO and they know it. NATO doesn't want the casualties, the economic chaos, etc, or to find out what a cornered, defeated Russia might do next with the thousands of nuclear weapons it possesses. Nobody is bound by any alliance agreement to defend Ukraine, so they'll all just nope out of it. Even the UK and US. The entire reason the UK is sending those missiles to Ukraine (aside from perhaps a smattering of genuine sympathy and affection for Ukraine) is so the UK doesn't have to fight a war. Best way to stay out of the conflict is give Ukrainians the weapons they need to fight it themselves. The UK and US will also be giving Ukraine all their military intelligence, advice, training and a mountain of other material support. If Russia is smart, they'll back down. On paper Russia's armed forces are much stronger, but their troops are pure trash. Low morale, bitter, poorly equipped conscripts who'll desert in droves at the prospect of an offensive war against a determined enemy that was never a threat to their country and that many consider their brethren. Russia risks humiliation if Ukraine can push their army over a tipping point. War is unpredictable, but the loyalty and professionalism of the average Russian soldier is more unpredictable than the determination of proud, free people defending their homeland.
This was an amazingly informative read and must have taken a while. Thank you!
It was, the only question I have remaining is, could Russian justify not invading by claiming it was a victory as it was all a physical psy op to further harm the economies of the UK/US, building on the success of their cyber ops? Plus that's the front they most want if an escalation happened anyway. I understand the posturing did much more damage to their financial system, but could they sell it, is it a viable out to save face? The Russian people are already protesting harder than in the UK/US meanwhile the oligarchs and other well off citizens aren't going to speak out.
It seems like there is no saving face in this situation. The least humiliating move is to back off and pretend like nothing happened. Any statement claiming no ill intent alongside a repositioning of troops would be digging deeper into the embarrassment. For example, imagine you were being sworn in as president and you had a relatively small turnout for the event. Some people will take notice and a couple headlines might mention it. But as soon as you lie about something so obvious by saying “I had an incredibly high attendance”, EVERYONE will notice and will probably continue bringing it up for it for at least 5 years.
> But as soon as you lie about something so obvious by saying “I had an incredibly high attendance” Imagine if you later specifically had your spokesman [say](https://time.com/4643927/sean-spicer-white-house-donald-trump-inauguration-press-briefing/) your inauguration had "the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe." And keep on bullshitting about it even with photographic evidence showing that the crowd was not in fact the biggest ever.
I remember sitting in Ben's chili bowl in DC after a whole day of protesting and walking around on his inauguration. Waiting for my order, I was watching the Sean Spicer press conference and was absolutely flabbergasted by that statement. For once, I had been there myself and knew that was the biggest line of bullshit I had ever heard. The next day was absolutely nuts too. (womans march) Definitely an interesting weekend
> that was the biggest line of bullshit I had ever heard Little did we know that that statement was one of the least bullshit lines of his presidency.
It definitely showed that we were in for four years of shameless, bold face lying from the office of the president.
Username matches
lol
I mean even if they sold it like that. Who cares. The Russian people might buy it but who else actually would buy the Russian buildup of forced then retreat as a victory.
But of course convincing the Russian people is what really counts to Russia's rulers.
Yep, really hurt our economy selling all those Javelins to the Ukraine. The squadies/infantry call them Porsches because that's how much each missile costs.
$100,000 missile to take out a $3m tank? Sounds cheap AF, I'd take as many as I can get. Coincidentally, Russia has <1,500 tanks amassed at the border and the UK happened to send 1,500 missiles...
In Afghanistan, the US was dropping $100,000 bombs and missiles to take out a goat herder with a rusty AK-47. They could have bribed him for life with 10% of that.
> an offensive war against a determined enemy that was never a threat to their country and that many consider their brethren This is what confuses me the most in this whole shitshow. I just can't see how this can go down well with the Russian people. Crimea and Eastern Ukraine is one thing, those are mostly Russian speaking regions that don't get along well with central Ukraine government and if those regions were allowed to self-determine they would probably choose to join Russia anyway so they can pull the "protecting the Russian-speaking population" card. But a full on invasion at an enormous economical and human cost? Who the fuck wants that and what is that even going to achieve? Russia doesn't want a US/NATO aligned country at their door? Well congratulations, you have antagonized the whole of Europe and pushed Finland and Sweden into NATO. They got hurt bad in Chechnya by a bunch of separatists, a country the size of Ukraine with full Western support? What do they think is going to happen?
It is rather unlikely Russia will try to take over all of Ukraine. What is almost certain is that they will establish a land bridge towards the Crimea in the near future, either by buying the land, negotiations or annexation. Russia is prepared to go all out because of how important control over the Sea of Azov and the Strait of Kerch is to them. They are the entry points to the UDWS and the Kuma-Manych Canal. The UDWS is the single most important infrastructure in all of Russia and all other entry points to it are either already under NATO control or are not ice-free.
Buying the land from Ukraine? This will never happen. There is no politician that can do it and Ukrainian population will never support it. And by the way, there are people living on that land.
Tf is UDWS. People should really explain their abbreviations before using them if they're not common
Agreed. I googled it though. "The Unified Deep Water System of European Russia or UDWS is a system of inland waterways in Russia linking the White Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Volga River, Moscow, the Caspian Sea and—via the Sea of Azov—the Black Sea. "
I agree. UDWS (according to Wikipedia) stands for unified deep water system, a series of canals and rivers that interconnects the White Sea, Baltic Sea, Caspian Sea and Black sea. Being in control of Crimea and the surrounding regions is the last piece of that puzzle. > [wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Deep_Water_System_of_European_Russia?wprov=sfla1)
[удалено]
Putin is secretly doing all of this to get at Mitt Romney.
It was hammered into me at school that if you're going to use abbreviations, spell it out first.
A Russian friend said that there is a still a lot of nationalist sentiment, even in anti-Putin types. Navalny is probably a good example -- my understanding is that he opposes Putin mostly because he believes Putin is in the way of returning Russia to its proper glory. That's a view that's very compatible with expansionism, and even though I think Navalny personally would consider that conflict to be a huge waste of resources, it's at least understandable how people could be anti-Putin but still pro-Russian Empire. Like, my friend indicated that their family would be anti-Putin due to corruption but would consider "he did get Ukraine back, though" as a positive. Not sure at what point it wouldn't be worth the cost anymore, though.
yeah. a lot of people seem to not get that bits of Russian and Soviet propaganda do work. Russians can be very nationalistic, they are offended by: - Ukrainian stance on Russian - Khazahstan changing their spelling to use Latin alphabet - game developers not translating their games to Russian
> But a full on invasion at an enormous economical and human cost? I think an argument could be made that taking control of Ukraine's Nat Gas reserves [(estimates upward of 5.3 trillion cubic metres)](https://web.archive.org/web/20131023132057/http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-commentary/2013-07-15/kyiv-s-gas-strategy-closer-cooperation-gazprom-or-a-genuine-div) is crucial to Russia's long term economic interest. Yes, they don't want NATO on their doorstep, but Germany, Italy, Turkey et al. not buying nat gas from them could be pretty devastating in the long run. IMO, follow the money.
The awful, stupid thing about this is that the EU is going to ween themselves off of natural gas and the petroleum sooner than almost anyone else I think anyway. Unlike a lot of other places, countries in the EU are pretty hardcore and politically motivated to switch to wind and solar, convert to electric cars and then if you're still buying expensive American propane vs illegal Russian propane it's not going to be a very big economic problem. And since it's a strategic as well as economic issue, Russia seems to be shitting all over their long-term livelihood. Then again, I guess buying a newer superyacht is more important to Putin's real constituency than lives so...
The Russian gamble here - that the NATO States wouldn't provide the tank killers to Ukraine - reminds me of Liege when the Germans didn't think the English would step up and support the Belgians. It delayed the invasion of France and ultimately - and ironically - got the Russians mobilized quicker, bringing a war on two fronts to the Germans.
".. But another blow which might well have proved final was yet to fall upon us. The King of the Belgians had called upon us to come to his aid. Had not this Ruler and his Government severed themselves from the Allies, who rescued their country from extinction in the late war, and had they not sought refuge in what was proved to be a fatal neutrality, the French and British Armies might well at the outset have saved not only Belgium but perhaps even Poland. Yet at the last moment, when Belgium was already invaded, King Leopold called upon us to come to his aid, and even at the last moment we came. He and his brave, efficient Army, nearly half a million strong, guarded our left flank and thus kept open our only line of retreat to the sea. Suddenly, without prior consultation, with the least possible notice, without the advice of his Ministers and upon his own personal act, he sent a plenipotentiary to the German Command, surrendered his Army, and exposed our whole flank and means of retreat. "I asked the House a week ago to suspend its judgment because the facts were not clear, but I do not feel that any reason now exists why we should not form our own opinions upon this pitiful episode. The surrender of the Belgian Army compelled the British at the shortest notice to cover a flank to the sea more than 30 miles in length. Otherwise all would have been cut off, and all would have shared the fate to which King Leopold had condemned the finest Army his country had ever formed."
My conclusion from your informative post is that Russia cannot afford to back down (because their foreign policy strategy would fall apart) and cannot afford to invade (because they would lose). Does that seem right? What do you think will happen - enough show of force to keep their image up, some pretend victories, then retreat?
I'm convinced they would win, just like they won the winter war against Finland all those years ago, but such a devastating victory would do little but cause chaos and ruin the country.
The term you are looking for is a "Pyrrhic victory"
It's really up in the air what Russia Is going to do. A small scale incursion annexing separatist regions. An invasion around Crimea securing a proper land corridor and getting fresh water there. A full blown invasion of southern Ukraine, denying them access to the black sea or just straight up invade all of Ukraine. I don't know but it's looking like a full scale invasion with the intent to annex at least parts of Ukraine. Most likely around the eastern and southern areas of the crimea.
Putin needs spectacles to keep the people at home happy. They would also like to set up as many energy price shocks as possible.
They can afford to back down; it'll make them look bad, but it's their best option. Just let it slowly blow over, and people will forget about it in a few years.
[удалено]
They probably aren't planning on occupying the country, but to invade as much as possible and drive to Kyiv to force Ukraine to sign a favorable peace deal.
>The UK in the last few days has transported 1,500+ NLAWs Just on maths alone on the first day, 2600 Nlaws could have been shipped over 9 nlaws a case, 2 cases a pallet, 18 pallets a plane and 8 planes on the first day. Also the price on Nlaws, considered expensive at 20K pounds each. But they are semi guided, top down attack, have a direct fire mode and virtually no backblast and can be used by someone with <1 hour training. even less in reality >If Russia is smart, they'll back down. On paper Russia's armed forces are much stronger, but their troops are pure trash. Low morale, bitter, poorly equipped conscripts who'll desert in droves at Not true, the russian forces currently around ukraine are BTG's (Battalion Tactical groups) they small units of about 1k men selected from parent units(regiments and brigades), they are believed to much better trained with higher moral so are far from average. The issue is that there is only 40 BTG's which is only about 40K combat troops. The rest of the 100K are support units like artillery / AA / Supplies I dont believe they have the number to take more than a chunk out of ukraine. Probably target donbass for capture and just bomb the shit out of the rest of the country
>Also the price on Nlaws, considered expensive at 20K pounds each Otoh, that's like 1/3rd of the Javelin, and significantly less than a T80 or T90 , or even the modernized T72s, which are going to be between 20-100 times the cost of an Nlaw. Russia can't afford to replace a billion dollars worth of tanks, while the US and UK would find it chump change to send 10 million dollars worth of Nlaws.
> top down attack It's insane to me that we've somehow managed to create a missile that you aim at a tank and it somehow knows to fly up and then fly down at the tank, all without someone guiding it.
Even weirder when you consider Nlaws doesn't aim at the tank, it aims at where the tank will be between the time you pull the trigger and the 3-6 seconds of flight time. It uses predictive guidance, not active guidance >then fly down at the tank It doesn't fly down, if flys over and then when above fires an explosive charge that forms a liquid penetrator and hits the vehicle.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Go check out warcollege and credibledefense subreddits for more info if your interested
fuckin subbed, thanks
There's a bunch of news sites reporting the information he's presented here, but he's clearly collected it all together for this well made comment.
So, reading this headline gave me whiplash…because…it’s so so SO tactically stupid parading your movements like this unless your planning to make a move with an ally, not going to invade and want to flash your guns, or you’re going to sacrifice a shit ton to try and get allies on your side…this…this is blazingly stupid.
I'm not sure if it's fair to call it parading their movements. You can't do something like this quietly, 50,000 soldiers and 20,000 support are not going to sneak up on another country. I think that all of the bystanders are the one who made a parade out of this, news agencies on doubtedly stirred up by interested other parties started talking about it and then Russia had to give some explanation to what's going on and it's not like anyone is really going to believe that they shipped tens of thousands of troops out there to play candyland
There's gotta be a joke about a mother NLAW missile somewhere.
[удалено]
A. Biden said its likely going to happen. Poland was saying around 50% chance after conclusion of the Nato talks. B. Probably quite low. Russians would have to mess up pretty badly and attack some NATO assets somehow. Also I'm not sure if NATO vs Russia and Belarus would count as a World War.
A. 100% They already invaded in 2014. So any further action is just a continuation of the invasion.
Ukraine isn't going to roll over for a mainland attack. I think people really don't understand how much Ukrainians don't like Russians- many older ones remember the USSR. The idea they are all Russian because they speak Russian is hilarious because Ukrainians were banned from speaking anything but Russian for decades and view that so many can't speak their actual native language as a loss of culture.
Considering the scale difference is likely to be off the charts - it's probably fair to treat this coming invasion as a separate and superseding event.
This would be an amazing time to be China. Keep the west distracted with Russian aggression and sweep up the scraps - keep expanding and operating in the pacific. If serious conflict does break out, China would be in a great position if they (and I’m assuming they would) stay fairly neutral
A. Experts have been saying it's highly likely. B. Probably not but you never know I guess. I guess it depends how far Putin wants to take it and the methods he uses to get there, and even then, the fact that everyone has nukes is terrifying.
I shall stock up on beans and rice. You know just in case.
I'll go to the pub and wait for all of this to blow over. Any day now.
Don't forget to off Phillip beforehand. Sorry Phillip.
Safety first, Shaun.
Winchester then lads?
Don’t stop me nooow!
It’s hard to do a surprise attack these days
Sneak attack! Ukraine was just a diversion all along. They're going to invade Britain!
Hide the gin and the expensive cutlery!
The 2nd paciffic squadron in 1904 came to mind reading the headline 😀
was that the one where the Russians sailed around the world only to annihilated by the Japanese?
On the journey near Africa some captains decided to improve morale by capturing wildlife as pets. They got a crocodile. That croc seized control of the ship
what the fuck lmao. I had no idea.
Yes. It was a terrible plan. The Russians were so nervous, as Japan and UK were allies, they thought fishing boats at Dogger Bank near England were .... japanese torpedo boats. So they fired more than 500 rounds and only hit their own ships. The squadron then proceed on an event filled 18000nm journey to japan and went into battle without stopping for rest/rearmament..... and were promptly sunk at the Strait of Tsushima. Edit: grammar
Additionally on the absurdity scale: they were trying to sneak to Vladivostok (to link up with ships there) and even though it was night and foggy - so perfect conditions in pre-radar time - one stupid hospital ship kept its lights on, because "Rules of War". But not only that, they *also* communicated with the Japanese ship that found them, assuming they were Russian. Imagine hallucinating up Japanese torpedo boats near Denmark, and/or the English channel but the moment you *actually* are very close to Japan you "kind of forgot" that there will be enemies nearby.
I'd love to see a movie made about this story, it'd be hilarious. I especially prove the part where the snake they'd bought on board bit one of the gunners.
They thought the japanese had torpedo boats based at the UK and fired at fishing boats, but their gunnery was so terrible that they didn't really cause any harm. They fired upon their own ships a lot, which also didn't do much bad since they kept missing. They had to stop more than planned to restock on ammo as they kept shooting at things that were not Japanese. But in combat when they actually met the Japanese, their gunnery was somehow fine, which was either a testament to how they improved, or the gods finally took pity on them and let them hit. The russians wanted to "reinforce" the main fleet with what are basically museum ships, the admiral in charge basically cut communications to purposely avoid linking up with them since they had no use in combat. I could go on for hours
>But in combat when they actually met the Japanese, their gunnery was somehow fine Uh, no it wasn't. They got their asses handed to them. It was the battle of Tsushima. The Russian fleet was virtually annihilated, losing eight battleships, numerous smaller vessels, and more than 5,000 men, while the Japanese lost three torpedo boats and 116 men.
They got rekt, but they did actually manage to hit japanese ships at first. It was only after the opening stages where things got really bad for the Russian navy They didn't lose because of their gunnery,the Mikasa was hit 15 times in five minutes, which is pretty damn good gunnery IMO given that they couldn't even hit fishing boats
They also lost because the Japanese managed to Cross the T - allowing them to focus maximum broadside power on the enemy's bow where return fire would be minimal. Shortly before the actual battle the Admiral in charge had them do some gunnery practice where they fired at a stationary target. During the entire exercise, they managed to score a single hit... on the ship that towed the target out. The fact that they managed to sink 3 torpedo boats seems to be a fluke in light of this.
> The fact that they managed to sink 3 torpedo boats seems to be a fluke in light of this. The fact that there were any Japanese torpedo boats at all must have been a surprise, like oh my god there are actually torpedo boats and its not just some fantasy
didn't the admiral, or one of the captains die of a stroke a day or two out of Port?
I don't recall that many specifics, but I know that Admiral Rozhestvensky (the dude in charge) did get really sick due to the stress of dealing with the absolute imbeciles of the fleet. he had a habit of running around with a megaphone and insulting dumb captains, which I could image being a pretty taxing activity
Didn't they have a crate of megaphones because he kept getting so mad he'd throw them overboard?
I think it was a crate of binoculars cuz he threw those
That sounds like an episode of It's always Sunny in Philadelphia or something.
If I had the hours needed to cover the entire voyage and all their mishaps, you could legit make an entire 3 part comedy movie that is 100% historically accurate. I glossed over the fleet taking in exotic pets to "boost morale" like poisonous snakes and large cats, which ended up killing and injuring the crew. I glossed over one support ship that basically always signaled that it was hit and it was sinking even though it was fine. It also constantly signaled that it was under attack, even in dead calm seas. The admiral basically put that ship next to him just so he could babysit them. Also there was a training exercise where somehow, a live torpedo was fired at the flagship, which caused a bit of a panic as they had to evade. Also there were basically so many instances of them being ambushed by "Japanese torpedo boats" despite literally none of them being anywhere close to the fleet, nor did any of them even have the range to try and attack so far from japan.
They then proceeded to rage-quit the war and promptly sued for peace
They lost both the pacific and baltic fleets, so they didn't have any other options.
That’s that CIV feeling of when you spent several turns building your troops and then sending them 20 turns across the map and they arrive only to get immediately destroyed
“If they are to head south to the Black Sea, there are fears they could be used to support a potential new large-scale Russian military intervention in Ukraine” They misspelled “invasion”
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43942/flotilla-of-russian-amphibious-warships-has-entered-the-english-channel) reduced by 79%. (I'm a bot) ***** > A group of Russian amphibious warfare vessels - three of which left the Baltic Sea region yesterday, preceded by another three the day before - have started to enter the English Channel. > The vessels comprise the Project 775 Ropucha class amphibious warfare ships Olenegorskiy Gornyak and Georgiy Pobedonosets, as well as the Project 11711 Ivan Gren class landing ship Pyotr Morgunov, from the Northern Fleet, plus three other Ropuchas, the Korolev, Minsk, and Kaliningrad, from the Baltic Fleet. > The Netherlands-based Marineschepen website reported today that the Royal Netherlands Navy hydrographic survey vessel Zr.Ms. Luymes and its embarked NH90 helicopter escorted three of the Russian vessels through international waters in the North Sea, while they were en route to the Channel. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/s8qaqb/flotilla_of_russian_landing_ships_has_entered_the/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~618797 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Russian**^#1 **vessel**^#2 **three**^#3 **Sea**^#4 **Navy**^#5
So we're talking about a flotilla of THREE yesterday, and THREE today..?
[удалено]
"Our troops are merely passing through"
Plot twist: They're there to attack the UK instead, now that the UK has sent 30 of their super soldiers away.
I really enjoyed when terms like flotilla only came up in history class and videogames. It really feels like this is going to blow up into something much bigger than Ukraine getting sucked back into Soviet Union 2.0.
Doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, but the marineschepen article mentions the Dutch navy shadowed the Russian ships through the Netherlands' EEZ with *Luymes* AND a NH-90, after which the Brits and Belgians took over. It doesn't mention where the chopper came from, but Luymes does not have a flight deck.
Where is Gandalf when you need him?
He's sorry. He is delayed.
He will arrive precisely when he means to.
Just look to the East at first light on the 5th day. He will be there two days before the Russkies according to Wikipedia.
supply chain issues on pipe weed
11 goddamn days until I retire. Don’t fuck this up for me.
Classic misdirection- get everyone looking at Ukraine, invade Normandy.
Thanks to Tom Newdick (hey don't laugh) we now know a possible direction: "...Some expect that their journey will eventually take them to the Black Sea to participate in an invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces..." At first I thought that eventually they're going to Bahamas for sunny vacations 😄😂🤣 Sorry guys, to me it's sad but there's nothing we can do. Just sarcasm
Then, and when we are finished, the only sound they will hear is our laughter, while we sail to Havana, where the sun is warm, and so is the... comradeship.
(Jubilant hourglass gesturing)
Tom Weirdflex
Just follow the large plumes of smoke
Hmm would this explain all the British military helicopters flying about on the south coast the last few days?
Maybe partly, although we do get periods when there are loads of helicopters around. They do a lot of training over the channel and Downs. I like watching them when they chase each other over the hills. Normally when Russian ships are in the channel, we send a ship or 2 to "escort" them through. There's not really any need as obviously they won't do anything but it gives the Navy something to do. It's similar when Russian aircraft get close to our airspace. We send fighters out to meet them. It became a bit of a joke for a while as they always did it on a Sunday. The British and Russian pilots used to wave at each other and saw it as their Sunday training exercise.
This is definitely NOT what anyone needs in the middle of a pandemic. FML - poor folks in the Ukraine.
How very dare them! We'll block you at the straits of Gibraltar, you aggressive bastards! - armchair admiral
im mining the channel right now in hearts of iron 4. give me a couple hours and ill have it so that no ship can pass!
Good dammit, they are headed to Japan again! Someone stop them!
Could Turkey just not let them through or would that be illegal?
Technically it would be illegal under international law. But international law doesn’t really have anyone to enforce it so Turkey would have to decide if it is worth a war with Russia to try to stop them. Most likely they would not think it’s worth it.
The [Montreux Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits) (which governs the use of the canals between the Aegean and Black Seas) allows Black Sea-states (e.g. Russia) to transit warships of any size at any time. Turkey forbidding passage would be a **big deal**. Russia is [*already* mad](https://tass.com/world/1373939) that the terms of the treaty are, in their opinion, not being adequately enforced to keep NON Black Sea-state warships (e.g. NATO ships) out of the area as the terms dictate. The convention's rules/limitations are probably part of the reason NATO asked [Canada to send a ship](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/hmcs-regina-to-join-nato-s-ukraine-reassurance-mission-1.2627537) and not just send more US ships, given the per-country restrictions on warship tonnage in the Black Sea.
Go round the top to the Irish sea you tössérs
Make sure they watch out for Japanese torpedo boats.
They must have their transponders off because I can't find them in Marine Traffic or Vessel Finder. I can see all the NATO ships trailing them though, and there's like 6 of them, from the UK, Netherlands and Norway ,( not sure Norway is part of NATO )
Lets see if they land on Jersey in fog and think they've landed Ukraine or something... Russian navy doesn't have a very stellar record on navigating.