Considering that the 90s are remembered as a nightmare by most Russians, I doubt the vast majority would prefer yeltsin over Putin.
Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments
- Thread starter T-SaGe
- Start date
- Status
Tamerlane
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 30, 2012
- Messages
- 1,308
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Day 11 – Putin’s last warning before beginning of the 2nd phase of the operation
The west is clearly determined to heroically fight Russia down to the last Ukrainian. Russia wants to stop this operation as soon as possible, but only after her double goals of 1) disarmament and 2) denazification are achieved.
Right now the big question is Kiev. It’s a big city with plenty of civilians and probably 30-50 thousand combatants of all different kinds (VSU, SBU, Volkssturm, deathsquads, looters, etc.). The logical solution would be to offer the combatants (and the civilians) corridors to exit the city, but the West can’t have that.
Now if the Ukies won’t vacate Kiev, then some rather serious fighting will take place inside the city and clearing the city from the Nazis will demand the involvement of a major Russian force. It appears that these forces are now in their staging areas all around the city (except for the south).
Russia was willing, when forced, to intervene in the Ukraine. If forced, Russia will take on any country, including any NATO member country, which will assist the Ukrainians militarily. If forced, Russia will even fight all of NATO and the USA together and, if forced, she will use all her weapons, including nuclear ones. And if that means that the entire planet is nuked then, as Putin said, “we have no need for a planet without Russia”. All this is to say that Russia is not bluffing, Putin will not back down and that there is no price which Russia would not be willing to pay to prevail in this existential war.
Russia will not stop until her existence is made safe again.
What about the West?
I believe that the West has a “smartass policy”: we do fight down the the last Ukie, and we get as many Steppe Niggers and Snow Niggers to kill each other, but then we stop just short of nuclear war with Russia.
Question: do you trust the geniuses in power in the West to successfully walk this tightrope?
I sure don’t.
Reach your own conclusions.
Andrei
thesaker.is
The west is clearly determined to heroically fight Russia down to the last Ukrainian. Russia wants to stop this operation as soon as possible, but only after her double goals of 1) disarmament and 2) denazification are achieved.
Right now the big question is Kiev. It’s a big city with plenty of civilians and probably 30-50 thousand combatants of all different kinds (VSU, SBU, Volkssturm, deathsquads, looters, etc.). The logical solution would be to offer the combatants (and the civilians) corridors to exit the city, but the West can’t have that.
Now if the Ukies won’t vacate Kiev, then some rather serious fighting will take place inside the city and clearing the city from the Nazis will demand the involvement of a major Russian force. It appears that these forces are now in their staging areas all around the city (except for the south).
Russia was willing, when forced, to intervene in the Ukraine. If forced, Russia will take on any country, including any NATO member country, which will assist the Ukrainians militarily. If forced, Russia will even fight all of NATO and the USA together and, if forced, she will use all her weapons, including nuclear ones. And if that means that the entire planet is nuked then, as Putin said, “we have no need for a planet without Russia”. All this is to say that Russia is not bluffing, Putin will not back down and that there is no price which Russia would not be willing to pay to prevail in this existential war.
Russia will not stop until her existence is made safe again.
What about the West?
I believe that the West has a “smartass policy”: we do fight down the the last Ukie, and we get as many Steppe Niggers and Snow Niggers to kill each other, but then we stop just short of nuclear war with Russia.
Question: do you trust the geniuses in power in the West to successfully walk this tightrope?
I sure don’t.
Reach your own conclusions.
Andrei
Day 11 – Putin’s last warning before beginning of the 2nd phase of the operation | The Vineyard of the Saker
A bird's eye view of the vineyard
jhungary
MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2012
- Messages
- 19,295
- Reaction score
- 387
- Country
- Location
Well, 90s it not at all that bad for most Russian sure, he was blamed for the corruption and the breaking up of Soviet Union, and Putin is not exactly the best leader to the people either. Just look at why Putin want to take Crimea in 2014? Without that, his popularity would have tanked
It's like everyone think GW Bush is shit back in early 2000, but 1 term of Trump, Bush is now seen as a saint by some, depends on your political affiliation
Or like how the Hong Konger want to revert to British control after China start clamping down. Life under British Control is not at all rosy, in fact, they probably did more bad stuff than China ever could (Not so sure about it now) All these are relativity.
As I said, not sure if you know, Russia life even before Putin started this is not rosy either.
Last edited:
Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
the protesters get arrested for one and half year and they get violent when they get bitten by police. and you seems for a long time only heard of approved news by big media
I'm sure the heaviest Mig-29 is way lighter than Il-76Myth...??? Yeah...
To start, you need aircrafts DESIGNED for partially finished runways. The preferred phrase is 'improvised runway'. But even if the aircraft can use improvised runway, there is still a need to defend, maintain, and repair the normal runway system as much as possible.
Now, here is something for you to consider...
Aircraft load can, not always, be affected by improvised runway. The more 'improvised' the runway, you have two choices: Either you take longer for TO/L or you reduce your combat load to use the same length as the normal runway. The improvised runway do not have the same load rating, surface constant, traction value, and several other factors. You think am making this up?
Here is just ONE examples of many docs regarding runways...
Why did I used a US Army doc? Because the Army have a lot of experience in living/working with improvised runways. Use keyword 'soil' for example. You will see issues such as load rating, jet blasts because often the Army has to make runways for AF cargo jets. There is a section in there for C-130 and C-17 operations.
The following are standard design requirements for most airfield construction or restoration missions:Design of drainage system structure.Geometric design of RWY, TWYs, and hardstands (including overruns, blast areas, and turnarounds).Selection of soils found in cuts and use of soil to improve subgrade.Compaction or stabilization requirements of the subgrade.Determination of type and thickness of the base and surface courses.Selection of grade to minimize earthwork while still meeting specifications.Design of access and service roads.Design of ammunition and petroleum, oils, and lubricants (POL) storage areas, NAVAIDs; hardstands, maintenance and warm up aprons, corrosion control facilities, control towers, airfield lighting, and other facilities
See the highlighted: construction or restoration.
Restoration from what? Maybe the improvised runway was also damaged in the attack. Or maybe harsh weather washed off some surface soil. Or maybe freezing temperature made the improvised runway too slick to be used.
Table 4-1. Army airfield and heliport classes Class Definition (controlling aircraft weights reflect operational weight)I Heliports/pads with aircraft 25,000 lbs. (11,340 kgs) or less. Controlling aircraft (UH-60)-16,300 lbs. (7,395 kgs).II Heliports/pads with aircraft over 25,000 lbs. (11,340 kgs). Controlling aircraft (CH-47)-50,000 lbs. (22,680 kgs).III Airfield with class A runways. Controlling aircraft (combination of C-23 aircraft-24,600 lbs. (11,200 kgs) and a CH-47 aircraft at 50,000 lbs. (22,680 kgs). Class A runways are primarily used for small aircraft (C-12 and C-23).IV Airfields w/class B runways. The controlling aircraft is a C-130 aircraft at 155,000 lbs. (70,310 kgs) operational weight or a C-17 aircraft at 580,000 lbs. (263,100 kgs) operational weight. Class B runways are primarily used for high performance and large heavy aircraft (C-130, C-17, and C-141).V Heliports/pads supporting Army assault training missions. Controlling aircraft (CH-47)-50,000 lbs. (22,680 kgs).VI Assault landing zones for operations supporting Army training missions that have semi-prepared or paved landing surfaces. Controlling aircraft (C-130-155,000 lbs. [70,310 kgs] or C-17-580,000 lbs. [263,100 kgs]). Legend: lbs= pounds, kgs= kilogramsDo you see those tonnage ratings for different aircrafts? Even smaller and lighters fighters, like my F-16, are affected.
5-36. Weather, terrain, RWY conditions, amount of available equipment and remaining fuel, and crash location are some factors that govern placing equipment at an aircraft's crash operation. Prefire plans can only cover general placement procedures and should allow for flexibility, based on the situation. Other factors to consider include—Aircraft's landing speed.Wind direction and speed.Aircraft's stopping distance.
Do you see the highlighted above?
The literature on runways and airfields are enormous, even if dealing with austere airfields and improvised runways. Everything in that Army doc are applicable to the AF in either making improvised runways to supplement the main system, or in deploying to austere airfields with improvised runways. I may have no choice but to sortie with reduced loads because the improvised runway cannot handle the full load.
People like you who have no experience looks at a picture and thinks they know everything about the subject. Runway denial is a myth? I hope the entire Iranian military leadership is filled with people like you.
khansaheeb
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2008
- Messages
- 17,009
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
Brave Ukraine being given a hammering, it is a one sided battle as most weapons they are using are Russian and Russians know their strengths, weaknesses and limitations.
militarywatchmagazine.com
March-5th-2022
Russian Su-35 Launches R-37M: UkAF Su-27
On the evening of March 5 it was reported that the Ukrainian Air Force had taken unprecedented losses in air to air engagements, with Russian ground based air defences shooting down an Mi-8 helicopter, Su-25 attack jet and Bayraktar drone while four of Ukraine’s top fighters, the elite Su-27 Flankers, were lost near the city of Zhytomir in the country’s western regions. It was implied that the Su-27s were shot down by Russian aircraft, although this remains uncertain. The engagements of March 5 represent a significant escalation of the air war between Russia and Ukraine, with the former having refrained from making extensive use of its air force since initiating a campaign in Ukraine on February 24. The engagement marks the first confirmed loss of a Su-27 in air to air combat, which was widely considered the most capable fighter fielded by any air force during the Cold War era and from 1985 had formed the elite of the Soviet Air Force. While it remains uncertain which Russian assets were responsible for shooting down the fighters, this can be speculated based on where the engagement took place and the forces Russia has available.
Ukrainian Air Force Su-27 Flanker Heavyweight Fighter
Having taken significant losses, including to friendly fire and to Russian missile strikes on its airfields, the Ukrainian Air Force has increasingly relegated its relatively small fighter fleet to patrolling the county’s western regions. An engagement over Zhytomir, where Russian ground units are not known to be operating, was thus likely initiated by the Russian Air Force as an escalation of the air campaign, with its demonstration of overwhelming superiority potentially grounding the Ukrainian fleet. The large majority of Russian fighters are capable of comfortably prevailing in an air to air engagement with Ukrainian Su-27s, as although the fighter had an elite status when it was first commissioned Ukraine has invested very little in modernising the airframes since the Soviet era leaving them effectively obsolete. Russia’s Su-35 air superiority fighter, its more well balanced Su-30SM multirole fighter, and Su-34 strike fighter, would all potentially be capable, as would its Su-27SM2/3 air superiority fighters which are Su-27s with weaponry, avionics and sensors modernised to Su-35 standards in the 2010s. Nevertheless, it is likely that the Su-35 would have been chosen to contest air superiority against the Ukrainian jets for a number of reasons.
Russian Air Force Su-35 and Su-34 Fighters
Ukrainian Su-27s, although old and flown by pilots who enjoy few hours of flight training, are still potentially dangerous and represent one of the more capable fighters deployed by an Eastern European country. The Su-35, which enjoys the largest performance advantage over them as Russia’s prime air superiority fighter, would thus be the most likely fighter to be deployed to tackle them and more comfortably ensure superiority. The fact that Russia's most experienced pilots are thought to be assigned to the aircraft is another notable factor. Su-35s are deployed in significant numbers under Russia’s Western Military District, and some were even redeployed from the country’s Far Eastern regions to Baranovichi Airfield in Belarus in January which would have been well positioned to operate over Zhytomir from the north. The Su-35 entered service from 2014, and is based on Su-27’s airframe but with under a third of the radar cross section, new AL-41 engines putting out 17 percent more power, an Irbis-E radar with 500 percent the detection range, and strong improvements in all areas of performance ranging from electronic warfare and data links to armaments and endurance.
K-77M Missiles Carried by Su-57 Fighter
Although Russia fields newer fighters than the Su-35 which are also well optimised for air to air combat, namely the Su-30SM2 which pairs the Su-30SM’s airframe with the Su-35’s engines, and the Su-57 next generation fighter, the former has only been in service for a number of weeks while the latter is not considered fully combat ready. Thus neither are ideal for such operations. If Russia did indeed deploy Su-35s, it is likely they relied on R-77-1 active radar guided missiles with an estimated 110km engagement range which entered service from around 2015. The missiles are far from the most capable for long range engagements in Russian service, those being the K-77M and R-37M, although neither of these have been widely deployed by Su-35 units meaning reliance on the older R-77 remains likely. With Ukraine lacking any active radar guided air to air missiles whatsoever, and its ageing R-27 missiles having Soviet era electronic warfare countermeasures, the R-77-1 would likely be sufficient to comfortably secure superiority. Another possibility remains that, although it was implied otherwise, the Su-27s were shot down by Russian ground based air defence systems. No long range systems have been observed in Ukraine capable of neutralising targets near Zhytomir from current Russian positions, however, indicating that the four jets from the Ukrainian elite were likely brought down from the air.
Russia’s S-400 Missile System Gains First Blood in Ukraine: Su-27 Shot Down 150km Away - Reports
Russia’s S-400 long range air defence system has reportedly seen its first combat and gained its first kill during the country’s military intervention in Ukraine,
militarywatchmagazine.com
Four Su-27 Flankers Shot Down Over Western Ukraine in March 5 Battle: Which Russian Asset Could Have Done It?
March-5th-2022
Russian Su-35 Launches R-37M: UkAF Su-27
On the evening of March 5 it was reported that the Ukrainian Air Force had taken unprecedented losses in air to air engagements, with Russian ground based air defences shooting down an Mi-8 helicopter, Su-25 attack jet and Bayraktar drone while four of Ukraine’s top fighters, the elite Su-27 Flankers, were lost near the city of Zhytomir in the country’s western regions. It was implied that the Su-27s were shot down by Russian aircraft, although this remains uncertain. The engagements of March 5 represent a significant escalation of the air war between Russia and Ukraine, with the former having refrained from making extensive use of its air force since initiating a campaign in Ukraine on February 24. The engagement marks the first confirmed loss of a Su-27 in air to air combat, which was widely considered the most capable fighter fielded by any air force during the Cold War era and from 1985 had formed the elite of the Soviet Air Force. While it remains uncertain which Russian assets were responsible for shooting down the fighters, this can be speculated based on where the engagement took place and the forces Russia has available.
Ukrainian Air Force Su-27 Flanker Heavyweight Fighter
Having taken significant losses, including to friendly fire and to Russian missile strikes on its airfields, the Ukrainian Air Force has increasingly relegated its relatively small fighter fleet to patrolling the county’s western regions. An engagement over Zhytomir, where Russian ground units are not known to be operating, was thus likely initiated by the Russian Air Force as an escalation of the air campaign, with its demonstration of overwhelming superiority potentially grounding the Ukrainian fleet. The large majority of Russian fighters are capable of comfortably prevailing in an air to air engagement with Ukrainian Su-27s, as although the fighter had an elite status when it was first commissioned Ukraine has invested very little in modernising the airframes since the Soviet era leaving them effectively obsolete. Russia’s Su-35 air superiority fighter, its more well balanced Su-30SM multirole fighter, and Su-34 strike fighter, would all potentially be capable, as would its Su-27SM2/3 air superiority fighters which are Su-27s with weaponry, avionics and sensors modernised to Su-35 standards in the 2010s. Nevertheless, it is likely that the Su-35 would have been chosen to contest air superiority against the Ukrainian jets for a number of reasons.
Russian Air Force Su-35 and Su-34 Fighters
Ukrainian Su-27s, although old and flown by pilots who enjoy few hours of flight training, are still potentially dangerous and represent one of the more capable fighters deployed by an Eastern European country. The Su-35, which enjoys the largest performance advantage over them as Russia’s prime air superiority fighter, would thus be the most likely fighter to be deployed to tackle them and more comfortably ensure superiority. The fact that Russia's most experienced pilots are thought to be assigned to the aircraft is another notable factor. Su-35s are deployed in significant numbers under Russia’s Western Military District, and some were even redeployed from the country’s Far Eastern regions to Baranovichi Airfield in Belarus in January which would have been well positioned to operate over Zhytomir from the north. The Su-35 entered service from 2014, and is based on Su-27’s airframe but with under a third of the radar cross section, new AL-41 engines putting out 17 percent more power, an Irbis-E radar with 500 percent the detection range, and strong improvements in all areas of performance ranging from electronic warfare and data links to armaments and endurance.
K-77M Missiles Carried by Su-57 Fighter
Although Russia fields newer fighters than the Su-35 which are also well optimised for air to air combat, namely the Su-30SM2 which pairs the Su-30SM’s airframe with the Su-35’s engines, and the Su-57 next generation fighter, the former has only been in service for a number of weeks while the latter is not considered fully combat ready. Thus neither are ideal for such operations. If Russia did indeed deploy Su-35s, it is likely they relied on R-77-1 active radar guided missiles with an estimated 110km engagement range which entered service from around 2015. The missiles are far from the most capable for long range engagements in Russian service, those being the K-77M and R-37M, although neither of these have been widely deployed by Su-35 units meaning reliance on the older R-77 remains likely. With Ukraine lacking any active radar guided air to air missiles whatsoever, and its ageing R-27 missiles having Soviet era electronic warfare countermeasures, the R-77-1 would likely be sufficient to comfortably secure superiority. Another possibility remains that, although it was implied otherwise, the Su-27s were shot down by Russian ground based air defence systems. No long range systems have been observed in Ukraine capable of neutralising targets near Zhytomir from current Russian positions, however, indicating that the four jets from the Ukrainian elite were likely brought down from the air.
Wood
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2013
- Messages
- 4,839
- Reaction score
- -10
- Country
- Location
4 batteries of S300 from NATO countries could also be moved to Ukraine. US seems to be negotiating with countries for that. Not sure if they can be protected from Russian anti radiation missiles this time? 
Last edited:
Patriot forever
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,375
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
I have to give the West the media victory hands down..
Put goebbels to shame, didn't even spare this forum.
Put goebbels to shame, didn't even spare this forum.
Microsoft
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2019
- Messages
- 2,533
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
lmao this can't be real. What channel is this?I have to give the West the media victory hands down..
Edit: It's fake. The original is from a protest in Austria Feb 4, 2022
sammuel
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2017
- Messages
- 3,266
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Putin nuclear " insinuations " are irresponsible madness.
When he makes them , it is not just a threat to the west but to every one this forum. I take it none of us here wishes to live in a nuclear wasteland.
~
Last edited:
Clutch
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 17,011
- Reaction score
- -3
.
Interesting...
However, I doubt China is willing to go that far to support Russia in a total economic war with the West. China has too much to lose and not much to gain by doing so.... Russia has no choice.
Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
it seems corona to meIs this a joke ? Survival ? Have you any idea how much power Russia have ?
This is not a war of survival but a war of ego !
One look at this table tells you what it is all about :
does this seem normal to you ?
~
as far as I'm aware the religion so misrepresented these day that many people think you are not allowed in Heaven unless you are a Slave
Patriot forever
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,375
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
I know
The audio dubbed over the video is real. It's symbolic of one sided western point of view coverage of this war and their claims. The edit is spot on.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
