Lawman

Battle of 73 Easting was the last major tank on tank engagement during the 91 Gulf war. Started in a sand storm as a movement to contact (the big left hook of the ground war), named after the geographic position that it took place on since it happened literally in the middle of nowhere. It was a complete routing of the Republican Guard unit encountered which was vastly superior in size to the force that encountered it. 2nd ACR basically conducted a text book example of movement to contact by a Cavalry unit conducting “covering” (security mission) for a Division and decimated a larger force through speed, surprise, and violence of action. I’m doing so they cemented the Abrams (and Bradley) reputation in the question of what would happen when it came up against T-72. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting Leo is the shorthand nickname for the German Leopard tank. Widely considered the only real competitive model of tank to achieve the same prominence and capability of the Abrams because of its wide export market. The A5-7 series are impressive, but I’d argue the limits on the Leo are more to do with the way countries use them rather than specific capability of an individual model. Personally I really like what the Koreans did with K2, but they have a lot of unique capes built into that tank specific for where they plan to fight with it that we don’t necessarily need for the cost it would add to the unit price. Honestly the greatest tank improvement would be including a true ECS system to provide and maintain crew comfort. You wouldn’t suffer nearly the danger to having hatches unbuttoned if it could maintain a viable temperature inside the hull. It would also vastly increase crew effectiveness from a rest/fatigue mindset, but the Army doesn’t think about that hence no requirements paperwork until we spent 30 years deploying tanks to the desert. We are only now starting to see that get into fighting vehicles of all types. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think a lot of people have built some sort of mythic reputation to the Abrams kind of like the A-10. It’s not invincible, in fact we have had them knocked out of action in every major fight they’ve ever been part of often times to RPGs. It’s just that story doesn’t override the “legend of 73 Easting.” Abrams and Leo are both just as vulnerable to action as would be expected of any Armor vehicle. But what they do remarkably better than other tanks (specifically Russian ones) is crew survivability. We can always make a new tank (with the exception of the British which is a whole other issue). It takes a lot longer to make and train good tankers much less teach them to fight as a combined arms unit. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not only that, but in order to join NATO following the illegal annexation of its territory in 2014, Ukraine would have had to officially recognize the Donbas and Crimea as Russian due to the requirements in NATO for applying. Since Ukraine has refused to do that (along with most of the western aligned world) it would be impossible for them to join NATO. Putin’s narrative of NATO expansion as some existential crises to Russia is built on bullshit. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Wait I thought they had to invade to stop the Nazis… Which Russian talking point are we committed too this month? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You’re deliberately misquoting or cutting out statements of context and then misrepresenting or ignoring parts of those statements for your own twisted up ends. Absolutely nothing I said in the first 2 paragraphs were disconnected from the actual 3rd one you decided to cherry pick from, nor did I ever imply that these systems were the end all replacement for higher cost munitions you did. You made that part up in space to circle us back to a wider “we can’t afford and therefore,” narrative., and now you’re trying to pretend you didn’t. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We get our touring USO cheerleaders… they get theirs. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No it isn’t “logical” to assume anything, because you aren’t assuming anything you’re deliberately misrepresentation the facts of the conversation for your regular drum beat of abandon Ukraine. That’s the “point” you’re trying to make. I specifically said a COIN mode of usage for a low cost kinetic system (which we have similar programs in active acquisition), and you’re screaming about Ukraine which is without a doubt not a COIN fight. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In other news…after two years of war… The last Russian Black Sea vessel with the ability to conduct Kalibr strikes against Ukraine is gone. https://maritime-executive.com/article/ukraine-confirms-strike-on-last-russian-guided-missile-warship-in-crimea Russia has apparently now lost its ability to conduct strike from an entire domain of modern warfare to a country which has no significant Naval power. On top of that the Ukrainians have begun targeting Novorossiysk which the Russians evacuated most of their fleet too after Sevastopol became untenable. This is probably the greatest embarrassment for the Russian Navy since the Russo-Japanese war. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So again… you don’t know what’s going on or what’s funded or what we are/aren’t doing. You don’t have any idea what is in testing, in the field, or been shown to be suitable in one fight but not another. You’re just here to continue sport bitching. Very useful. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well I’m trying to think of a better way you could demonstrate you’re so far removed as to have no idea what’s going on in the current military modernization efforts, but damn if I can think of one. What do you think the Replicator initiative is? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The funny thing is this absolutely has a COIN application. You could have replaced a huge portion of the air assets over Mosul or Raqqa in 16/17 if you had this technological solution. Just put something the size of a C17 flying as an airborne arsenal of FPVs with a Wolfhound or similar sized platform acting as the “crew quarters” full of operators. Now you’re literally just hunting people until you’ve killed enough to break their will or their means instead of dropping a 2k lbs bomb or pounding M36s into a target to reduce it, because you can literally chase a single bad guy with a backpack or on a motorcycle down. Effectively air delivered mobility denial and sanitation of any force that wanted to move underneath the wide arc it could cover. And it would be a F load more economical than spending a 100k dollar anti tank missile on a Toyota full of 3rd world dipshits. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So the STRAC drives what a unit can or can’t do with regard to ammunition for training. It is based off the type of unit in classification, and swings a very wide arc in how much or how little incentive is placed on weapons qualification. Echelon of that unit also changes it. I’m for example in a position where they allot exactly 0x5.56 for me in the grand total of rounds, same as grenades, AT4 rounds or HMG rounds are 0 for anybody in a flying paragraph number because wtf there are other people to train. We used 40k rounds of 9mm for a reflexive fire event and another 15k of 5.56…. That two week 70 person event was two years of 9mm for an aviation battalion of ~500 soldiers. Meanwhile your regular light infantry unit will have tens of thousands of rounds of small arms for a similar number of troops…. But they also don’t get a strac of ammunition for aircraft or main gun rounds for tanks. They’ll also get a buttload of 81mm mortar and grenades compared to a mech unit which gets more 120mm and 25mm for the Bradleys to train with. I don’t need my quartermasters or Chemo’s to shoot like infantry though…same as I don’t need cyber guys doing that. I need them good at their job. But if you want to play the “look at the dumb Army game” posting some support troop (seriously look at her kit) I’d be happy to post videos of some of our AF weather kids the next time we have a range. I mean when they hit the ECP at Bagram and all the kids in the CJOC were running around losing their shit, there is a reason all the Army guys just went outside to the wall. That was the safe place to be. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I’m just imagining a Betty voice saying “Inshallah…” with the broken syllables like Pull-Up. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Apparently some crazy guy in Oregon with some machining capacity that we should probably all check on… Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Stumbled upon this randomly and while I’m not a big shotgun guy I know a lot of people that slug hunt. If you don’t want to sit through the whole video just jump to about the 16min mark where they shoot the ballistic gel. These might be the most wickedly destructive round I’ve ever seen when thinking about the potential wounding capacity to a target. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No you asked a loaded question (which we could all see coming) and then implied if that standard of “victory” can’t be achieved we should give up now and force the Ukrainians to capitulate. And another thing, no leader is going to publicly proclaim victory is short of an ultimate end goal, doing so would be suicidal to any negotiation. Plus this isn’t a new thing for Ukraine, they’ve been fighting to get their land back since it was annexed illegally, we just widely didn’t pay attention until 2022. If you think there isn’t a real scenario currently playing out where outcomes like Crimea is no longer under Russian control you are paying attention to the wrong talking heads in the info space. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No now you’re moving goal posts. If they can’t have it all back it’s not a win therefore we shouldn’t help them “lose.” And what’s more you only want to evaluate based off the last 6 months of Russian “success” as some would misrepresent it given how little it has achieved, its costs, and the restrictions we placed on the Ukrainians. That’s absolutely ludicrous given that they’ve retaken ground, sit in a position where Crimea is becoming an untenable position for the Russians to maintain combat forces, and have only very recently been given tools necessary for shaping actions necessary to precede any offensive action like taking back territory. And what does it achieve? Despite the sapping of any Russian combat power necessary for future aggression and rebuilding our own deficient military supply structure? Well there is the fact that Ukraine is positioned on the southern flank and effectively the most powerful ground force in a Europe, acting as a check against future Russian aggression to take the Baltics (which Putin has stated his intent towards). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Russia isn’t “advancing.” And while we are at it, Ukraine has taken back and is holding ground they didn’t have this last January. There is a mutual exchange of tactical positions to which one side is spending exorbitantly more human capital and resources to achieve. Again, if people don’t know what a mobile defense is, or understand concepts as to why Ukraine adopted the tactics it did for the last six months, or pretend that our decision to withhold combat aid or restrict use of Corps/Division depth shaping systems like ATACM… yeah the fact Russia didnt make it the Dnieper yet along its Luhansk axis or dislodge the Ukrainians on their side of it says a lot. The Russians enjoy a fire power and manpower advantage, are attacking a non static defense, and still can’t achieve a breakthrough, not that they would be able to exploit one because of the depletion of their mechanized forces (also why you are seeing artillery tied with human wave tactics). Russia isn’t “winning” anything. That’s a misrepresentation of the realities of ground combat that you and others seem to want to avoid to advance this idea that we need to force the Ukrainians to just accept the new reality and use our hand at the spigot to turn off their means to fight a war effectively. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Crimea is currently under effective siege. If it wasn’t the Russian Black Sea fleet would still be in harbor there and the biggest airfield on the Island wouldn’t have spent the last several days on fire. If this ends at the tables as all wars have, negotiation positions will make all the impact in what final terms are. The lunacy is people like Gearhog demanding that there is some kind of righteousness in the west abandoning Ukraine to its self like it can then enter those negotiations with any kind of leg to stand on. Germany tried that in WWI with the allies basically saying “sign this or else” and the inability to continue fighting. They were done because means = 0. Russia would simply demand absurd amounts and swallow the largest land mass in Europe through ineptness by the west, and then look at the Baltics (which Putin thinks are his by right) like “who is really gonna stop me.” We should cease our more active efforts of support only after hostilities have ended, not as some sort threat of withholding it to beat the peace out of the a Ukrainians. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Russia has neither the demonstrated competency nor the troop trained and equipped to actual attempt a war of maneuver. Again, since you’re apparently so smart on the subject of the ground domain why don’t you tell me and the wider room why Ukraine actively chose to execute a mobile defense and what that would grant them in producing actual strategic effect for the hundreds to at most single digit kilometer gains in a country the size of Texas. Be sure to factor in that part where the Russians enjoy a 10 to 1 fires ratio advantage because we spent 6 months dicking away time in Congress for the sake of idiots like Greene. Again according to you Ukraine is now “losing the war.” At the current pace of the Russian Army they will be “losing the war” until some time in 2036. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Capacity to make war is Will x Means, with successful victory being chosen by the capitulation of whichever side zero’s out in that math. That’s been the same for centuries. The temporary matter of Position means nothing, by your conflict calculus Germany was “winning” WWI…… all the way up to the point it lost. Same could be said for the Revolutionary war. At no point does the Russian movement on the ground (especially given the exchange they’ve given for it) change the equation to that especially since from your previous posts you don’t understand mobile defense or why a ground force would chose to trade strategic depth for some other factor. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Because people actually familiar with ground warfare are aware of the magnitudes of higher difficulty in conducting offense vs conducting defense. And also because most of the assets that one would use to conduct and exploit a breach weren’t given to them until later in the summer thanks largely to objections by Germany. Artillery shells don’t cross minefields for you. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I like how over an 800km front they’ve taken to the choice of saying “square kilometers seized” and other such nonsense to try and doomsday the plight of the Ukrainians. The Russians can literally see the line of departure their offensives started from in their current positions after 6 months and this is the end of the world. Imagine what they’d have “achieved” had the Ukrainians actually had the back supply of shells to spend on them. “Da! 86 square KM seized this week for our glorious soldiers! Only 600,000 to go! Onward to victory comrades.” Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I mean they made that same mistake during early Covid. “It’s decimating Italy” sounds impressive to anyone who hasn’t been to Italy. That’s a “first world country” in name only with a geriatric population. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk