Russia/Ukraine conflict

[ZachF]

The issues is less so one of electricity generation. So the longer term solution for them, like us, is heat pumps.

You do realize heat pumps run on electricity, right?

 

[iPlug]

You do realize heat pumps run on electricity, right?

Recall again the discussion here that "longer term solution" means the correct goal of heat pumps can't be achieved soon enough and that Russian NG imports will be wound down prior to that being achieved in significant part with the aggressive time table in play of German Economy Minister Habeck. Will take a few years just for heat pump deployment to remove low double digit percent NG consumption. Will take a decade of aggressive deployment of heat pumps to get close to where they need to be.

To that, even if that were not so, nuclear does poorly with daily and seasonal demand response. So yes, nuclear is indeed a red herring.

 

[rk20]

Recall again the discussion here that "longer term solution" means the correct goal of heat pumps can't be achieved soon enough and that Russian NG imports will be wound down prior to that being achieved in significant part with the aggressive time table in play of German Economy Minister Habeck. Will take a few years just for heat pump deployment to remove low double digit percent NG consumption. Will take a decade of aggressive deployment of heat pumps to get close to where they need to be.

To that, even if that were not so, nuclear does poorly with daily and seasonal demand response. So yes, nuclear is indeed a red herring.

Maybe Biden can invoke the defense production act to greatly increase the number of heat pumps manufactured.

 

[iPlug]

Maybe Biden can invoke the defense production act to greatly increase the number of heat pumps manufactured.

Governments from corners around the world should be seriously looking at this. There are strong national security and climate arguments to be made.

 

[wdolson]

Warming to my own theme, if the WW2 (or Serbian, more recently) amateur boffins were in charge, they'd be making loads of inflatable/wooden/dummy tanks, SAM traps for Russian aircraft dropping unguided bombs and spacing out to a huge degree forcing lower altitude air attacks. Having an overabundance of M113s, many uncrewed or just with a driver with no ammo is a feature, not a bug.

Single driver vehicles can be carrying food/water internally with trailers for incendiary material (fuel/ammo). Trailers probably also help with lower ground pressure over dodgy terrain. More targets than Russian airforce can hit safely, more unknown-if-crewed threats for Russian ground forces, more than Russian ammo could destroy. Many M113s with SAM crews to shoot down low altitude aircraft, especially helicopters.

I'm really minded to think of these not as "tanks" (misused term) / fighting vehicles but as updated Bren/Universal carriers, a nearly forgotten key to allied success in WW2. 113,000 (I'm surprised not more) of these were built and they were used post-WW2 as well. With a tow hook, tracked trailer M113s could be carrying infantry weapons of all kinds SAMs (low altitude), anti-tank missiles, mortars, ammo, fuel and everything. Also could tow artillery/rockets.

Universal Carrier - Wikipedia

Older relatives raved about Bren-gun carriers - it took the effort off the infantry and for operations in open terrain, I can imagine that lightly loaded M113s with trailers, corduroy roads could escape much of the worse of the mud come autumn and fulfil a similar role.

Any T72 targeting one of a group of M113s supported by drones, artillery will become a target very quickly. It's rather like in WW2 that Germans learned to avoid firing at allied spotter aircraft as risk/reward not worth it (until someone added bazookas to a spotter).

Use of Universal/Bren Carriers increased over time (from 10 to 33), a sure sign that Bren carriers worked and was wanted, it was just supply-constrained. The constraints on doing something similar NOW are largely money, will with some real, hard constraints of parts, training and essential kit such as optics.

"Universal Carriers were issued to the support companies in infantry rifle battalions for carrying support weapons (initially 10, 21 by 1941, and up to 33 per battalion by 1943). A British armoured division of 1940–41 had 109 carriers; each motor battalion had 44"

"In Motorised Infantry Battalions in BAOR (British Army of the Rhine) in the early 1950s the Universal was issued one per platoon carrying the Platoon Commander, driver, signaller and the 2-inch Mortar group Nos 1 & 2."

The Ukrainians are amateurs (in the best sense, lovers - from French? They have purpose, fire, a mission and can innovate, supported by tech-savvy people and the west), not top-down constrained. I firmly believe if you give them kit of any kind, they'll be inventive.

The other thing that elderly relatives talked about was their use of indirect / plunging machine gun fire (taught even in the 1950s, presumably used in Korea). How much better with computerisation, digital comms, remote weapon stations and heavy machine guns. A bunch of networked, computerised half inch machine guns using plunging fire must be devastating to unprotected troops such as artillery or even entrenched if no top-cover. Mounted on M113s, spread out, converging fire on point or area targets.

According to reddit (must be true then..)

"The maximum effective range for an area target (read: direct fire) for the M2 is 1,830m, but the maximum range for the weapon is 6,764m. Effective plunging fire therefore falls somewhere in between this range, generally around 3000 - 4000m."

I doubt Elon wants to become Tony Stark in his arms dealer days, but this is a bit of robotics, programming and building on existing kit. Add grad rockets, mortars etc. The driving of M113s must be done by people, and targeting can be done by people in M113, on foot, ebikes, drones, satellite/intel while the firing solutions can be computerised.

What dwarfed the bren carrier in all allied armies was the humble US built truck. Studebaker trucks were the backbone of the Russian's logistics chain from railhead to front line units. The 6X6 truck was the mainstay of US, British, and Free French armies. There were swarms of them.

The M113 is a better infantry vehicle than the BMP. It isn't designed to stand up to a tank hitting it, but it does protect well from artillery fragments. Western vehicles are less prone to catching fire when hit because they employ wet storage for ammunition.

Russian tanks have an auto loader on the main gun that holds several rounds. With this they can reduce the crew by 1, but a penetrative hit in the turret is much more likely to set off the rounds in the auto loader and then spread to the rest of the ammunition stored in the hull than western tanks which have all rounds except the one in the breach in wet storage.

Unless an M113 has an auto cannon mounted it isn't carrying much ammunition for its own use, the only explosives are what its troops are carrying.

There is no time to develop new software for any new weapons systems ideas. I've written a fair bit of embedded system software and it's more tricky and involved than writing something for Windows, iOS, Android, or MacOS.

I have a funny story about procurement of Leopard 1 by the Royal Canadian Armoured Corps. I'm not going to tell it though. I only bring it up because the story dates back to 1978. :/

The Leopard I is newer than the T-64s the Ukrainians have.

 

[Doggydogworld]

Nuclear won't solve the problem because, like us in the States, the majority NG use is seasonal and used for on site combustion/heating in the winter. The issues is less so one of electricity generation. So the longer term solution for them, like us, is heat pumps.

Figure 1: Germany’s gas consumption between January 2020 and August 2021. Source: Energy Projections’ Germany natural gas fundamentals dashboard

It's moot anyway, the reactors they shut down years ago can't realistically be restarted in time to matter. But the three they turned off a few months ago probably could, and they could extend the three they (still!!!) plan to shut down in December. That's sheer lunacy which only worsens their Russian gas dependency.

Bloomberg says that despite our so-called "crippling sanctions" Russia's revenue from oil/gas exports will rise more than 33% this year, to $321 billion. Leaders correctly say we need to cut off that revenue, but they lie about the method. When they say "stop buying Russian oil" they really mean "replace it by outbidding some poor country like India for middle eastern oil". Then they act all outraged when India replaces their lost mid-eastern barrels with Russian oil. It's hypocrisy of the first order.

Russia exports ~7.5m bpd of oil and gasoline/diesel. About 1/3rd of that goes to China, who will not stop buying. And the only way to cut off the other 5m bpd is for the west to reduce net consumption by 5m bpd. And we can only do that with a war-time rationing program.

Rationing by price will not work. First, it's simply unjust to put the burden of a political decision entirely on the poor. Second, oil demand is too inelastic -- the sky-high prices needed to slash consumption that much would benefit Russia more than hurt them. A war-time rationing program like we had in WW2 is the only option. It's probably political suicide, though, so we instead get lies along with lip service about supporting Ukraine.

 

[Sandor]

I have a funny story about procurement of Leopard 1 by the Royal Canadian Armoured Corps. I'm not going to tell it though. I only bring it up because the story dates back to 1978. :/

One can hope that the procurement for Ukraine's armor reinforcements would follow the Leopard C1 process. As far as peacetime procurements go, it was a model of success, 4 years from requirements to procurement closure. Of course, it better be faster now under wartime circumstances...

 

[wdolson]

Maybe Biden can invoke the defense production act to greatly increase the number of heat pumps manufactured.

I was surprised to find the US makes quite a high percentage of the world's heat pumps, but most of the materials to make them are imported.

It's moot anyway, the reactors they shut down years ago can't realistically be restarted in time to matter. But the three they turned off a few months ago probably could, and they could extend the three they (still!!!) plan to shut down in December. That's sheer lunacy which only worsens their Russian gas dependency.

Bloomberg says that despite our so-called "crippling sanctions" Russia's revenue from oil/gas exports will rise more than 33% this year, to $321 billion. Leaders correctly say we need to cut off that revenue, but they lie about the method. When they say "stop buying Russian oil" they really mean "replace it by outbidding some poor country like India for middle eastern oil". Then they act all outraged when India replaces their lost mid-eastern barrels with Russian oil. It's hypocrisy of the first order.

Russia exports ~7.5m bpd of oil and gasoline/diesel. About 1/3rd of that goes to China, who will not stop buying. And the only way to cut off the other 5m bpd is for the west to reduce net consumption by 5m bpd. And we can only do that with a war-time rationing program.

Rationing by price will not work. First, it's simply unjust to put the burden of a political decision entirely on the poor. Second, oil demand is too inelastic -- the sky-high prices needed to slash consumption that much would benefit Russia more than hurt them. A war-time rationing program like we had in WW2 is the only option. It's probably political suicide, though, so we instead get lies along with lip service about supporting Ukraine.

The lever the US has used to punish Russia since the 80s is not working right now. The US manipulates world oil production to drive down the price. When the war started the US started getting serious with Iran about coming to a new nuclear deal so their production could be turned back to full. The US was also looking at lifting sanctions on Venezuela. If those two countries are exporting again, the world price will drop and Russia will have trouble making money selling oil.

Rationing is not going to work politically. Macron is facing a tough run-off with Marie LePen and the US has midterms this year. Other governments aren't in the strongest position either. For example the conservatives in the UK have been wracked with scandals and Boris Johnson is on thin ice, even with his own party.



Russia's biggest oil export port is shut down because of the war. So they are not shipping out that much oil.

 

[EVNow]

Even as NATO talks about evils of Russia, US has effected yet another regime change.

That too in a region that has paid a very heavy price because of US - Russia hostilities.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1513110768266330115

 

[stopcrazypp]

Even as NATO talks about evils of Russia, US has effected yet another regime change.

That too in a region that has paid a very heavy price because of US - Russia hostilities.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1513110768266330115

This was discussed upthread, so not sure why you continually post unsubstantiated Imran propaganda.
He's played the foreign interference angle in the past (which his domestic audience is apparently not buying), and trying it again.
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/posts/6572188/

Here's the actual context of the diplomatic cable (bold emphasis mine):

It later emerged that these ‘revelations’ were in fact claims based on a routine diplomatic cable that had referenced remarks made by a US state representative on the possible outcomes of a vote of no-confidence against Mr Khan and what they could mean for Pakistan. We do know that the language and tone of the communication were such that the National Security Committee termed it “blatant interference” in Pakistan’s internal affairs and recommended sending a strong message through diplomatic channels.

Apart from that, it did not seem there was any imminent threat to Pakistan’s national security. However, going by the self-righteous fury evident in Mr Khan’s recent speeches, one would think it is no longer contestable whether a foreign conspiracy is actually in play or if he has just made a mountain out of a foreign diplomat’s poorly chosen words.

Cable confusion

There has been no other evidence presented of "interference" (while also conveniently sweeping under the rug the actual problems Pakistan is facing right now, and his failure to address them).

The vote of no confidence came because of domestic problems and followed a constitutional process that is a legitimate way to remove a prime minister from power. Instead, he tried to hold on to power by dissolving the parliament, a move that the supreme court deemed unconstitutional.
After a week of political chaos in Pakistan, more turmoil lies ahead

His own rise to power has also been questioned as largely military backed (and him losing power is also said to be because he has lost favor in the military).
Imran Khan - Wikipedia

 

[JRP3]

Even as NATO talks about evils of Russia, US has effected yet another regime change.

That too in a region that has paid a very heavy price because of US - Russia hostilities.

Exactly what does this have to do with Russia's attack on Ukraine? Other than your usual distracting "whataboutism".

 

[EVNow]

This was discussed upthread, so not sure why you continually post unsubstantiated Imran propaganda.

Exactly what does this have to do with Russia's attack on Ukraine? Other than your usual distracting "whataboutism".

Its about Imran's support for Russia and at least partly because he refused to support the Ukraine war.

And it is about hypocrisy of a lot of people on this board.

ps : The reason US can interfere so easily in other countries and depose democratically elected leaders is that Americans just don't care.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Its about Imran's support for Russia and at least partly because he refused to support the Ukraine war.

And it is about hypocrisy of a lot of people on this board.

ps : The reason US can interfere so easily in other countries and depose democratically elected leaders is that Americans just don't care.

View attachment 792629

I see you ignored the part about how this is all based on his own unsubstantiated propaganda...

You talked in previous posts about the Iraq war and how people can be misled. His claims have even less substantiation than that, and somehow we are supposed to believe there is huge conspiracy by the US to overthrow him (instead of him losing favor after the financial disaster the Pakistan government is in under him, article linked above says IMF is working on a bailout package with them)? More details on the bailout here (how funds were withheld due to him failing to do the required economic reforms):
IMF approves $1 billion loan for Pakistan, reviving bailout package | DW | 03.02.2022

As for the accusation about hypocrisy, the other commenter mentioned a term that seems to fit perfectly:
"Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about…?") is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving the argument."
Whataboutism - Wikipedia

 

[wdolson]

Its about Imran's support for Russia and at least partly because he refused to support the Ukraine war.

And it is about hypocrisy of a lot of people on this board.

ps : The reason US can interfere so easily in other countries and depose democratically elected leaders is that Americans just don't care.

View attachment 792629

While the US has interfered in the affairs of other countries, I see no evidence the US is interfering with Pakistan right now. I don't see where there is any potential leader of Pakistan who would be better for US interests than the current leadership. From an American perspective there are no great options with Pakistan.

It's an old trope of leaders who want to stay in power to accuse a power that a large chunk of the population hates that they are trying to overthrow the government.

 

[madodel]

Its about Imran's support for Russia and at least partly because he refused to support the Ukraine war.

And it is about hypocrisy of a lot of people on this board.

ps : The reason US can interfere so easily in other countries and depose democratically elected leaders is that Americans just don't care.

View attachment 792629

The US doesn't have clean hands in Iraq and a lot of places, but Pakistan? We knew full well that the Pakistani Intelligence was supporting the Taliban and were giving sanctuary to Bin Laden. Which was why we couldn't tell Pakistan what we were doing when we took out that vile SOB. Every country does what is best for themselves.

 

[Tiger]

Wonder if they could instil some infighting by pranking with Russia's foreign accounts, those which have multiple authorized users: display various (fake) withdrawals (or transfers) of huge amounts of funds from the foreign accounts and cause mistrust and infighting. For example, huge (not real) money transfers to different military and political and oligarc leaders (foreign accounts) and watch how they try to deny them. As accounts are seized, they would have no actual means to verify. Real life prisoner's dilemma.

 

[Artful Dodger]

One can hope that the procurement for Ukraine's armor reinforcements would follow the Leopard C1 process. As far as peacetime procurements go, it was a model of success, 4 years from requirements to procurement closure. Of course, it better be faster now under wartime circumstances...

Lol, I was more alluding to the fact that they are giving Ukraine some 44 57-yr-old tanks...

 

[_Redshift_]

Even as NATO talks about evils of Russia, US has effected yet another regime change.

That too in a region that has paid a very heavy price because of US - Russia hostilities.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1513110768266330115

Um, sorry bud. But you have absolutely no proof US is responsible for Imran’s loss of confidence vote. Imran lost the support of the Pak military last year itself. Please don’t fall for speculative reports out of Pakistan.

Back to the main thread.

 

[EVNow]

Um, sorry bud. But you have absolutely no proof US is responsible for Imran’s loss of confidence vote. Imran lost the support of the Pak military last year itself. Please don’t fall for speculative reports out of Pakistan.

Back to the main thread.

LOL. And you have deep inside knowledge about Pak military ?

 

[EVNow]

The US doesn't have clean hands in Iraq and a lot of places, but Pakistan? We knew full well that the Pakistani Intelligence was supporting the Taliban and were giving sanctuary to Bin Laden. Which was why we couldn't tell Pakistan what we were doing when we took out that vile SOB.

Really, you think US had nothing to do with sudden no confidence motion a month after Ukraine war ?

No wonder it’s so easy for CIA to fool us. You probably believe CIA stories about all other coups they have engineered.

Every country does what is best for themselves.

I highly doubt it. Every country does what is best for its ruling class.