Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Russia/Ukraine conflict

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
So what do you think are the chances that the Russians have let their nuclear capabilities degrade as well? Possibly totally non-functional? Suitable only to threaten with?

They have some weapons that were made in the last 10 years that probably are still functional even without maintenance, but I suspect much of their arsenal is fairly degraded at this point. Though it's not something I want to see tested in the real world.

Solid rocket boosters tend to degrade eat the missile over time. The US has a policy of pulling the ICBMs periodically and replacing the missiles. There was one in, I think Arkansas about 20 years ago that was undergoing maintenance, someone dropped a wrench in the wrong place and set off the propellant. The whole silo exploded. I don't recall if the warhead had been removed or if it landed intact some distance from the silo, but it was a mess.

The Soviets dealt with the degradation problem by removing the warheads and firing the missile off into Siberia. The Siberian wilderness is littered with the remains of ICBM rockets they got rid of this way. The Russians haven't been doing that since the USSR fell apart. A lot of their older ICBMs are probably more likely to blow up in the silo than anything else at this point.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: navguy12
1676789976942.png
 
...] "I do not think, as some people do, that we must aim for a total defeat of Russia, attacking Russia on its own soil," Mr Macron told the paper Le Journal du Dimanche. [...
Who are these people? Someone have a good source? Too be honest I've completely missed this...

Source:
 
"The United Kingdom will be the first country to provide Ukraine with longer-range weapons, [the British PM] says."

@petit_bateau what long range weapons?

I have no idea what Sunak is talking about, and regrettably there is a history of UK prime ministers saying stuff that it plain wrong.

The UK's long range weapon inventorys are of three types:
- vessel launched, with the real long-range stuff originating in submarines;
- aircraft launched;
- plus perhaps ATACMS from MLRS.

I can't conceive of a situation where UK might send ATACMS (if we actually have any yet) without the USA also doing so. The vessel launched stuff doesn't really fit the description. And the aircraft launched stuff is either things the Ukraine already has, or things that it would be unlikely to pass to Ukraine and/or which Ukraine can't actually use at the moment.

So my best guess is that Sunak is mis-speaking and really referencing US supply of GLSDB, so not from UK at all. But perhaps I'm missing something; or perhaps they are bigging up something that is not really that significant as being more than it is (e.g. Sea Skua type stuff, or old Harpoons converted for land launch, or etc).
 
"The United Kingdom will be the first country to provide Ukraine with longer-range weapons, [the British PM] says."



I have no idea what Sunak is talking about, and regrettably there is a history of UK prime ministers saying stuff that it plain wrong.

The UK's long range weapon inventorys are of three types:
- vessel launched, with the real long-range stuff originating in submarines;
- aircraft launched;
- plus perhaps ATACMS from MLRS.

I can't conceive of a situation where UK might send ATACMS (if we actually have any yet) without the USA also doing so. The vessel launched stuff doesn't really fit the description. And the aircraft launched stuff is either things the Ukraine already has, or things that it would be unlikely to pass to Ukraine and/or which Ukraine can't actually use at the moment.

So my best guess is that Sunak is mis-speaking and really referencing US supply of GLSDB, so not from UK at all. But perhaps I'm missing something; or perhaps they are bigging up something that is not really that significant as being more than it is (e.g. Sea Skua type stuff, or old Harpoons converted for land launch, or etc).

Anti-ship missiles that were intended to be launched from ships have already been adapted for ground launch. Maybe the MoD has come up with an easy modification for some old ship missiles so they can be launched as surface to surface missiles? Or he could be going on about something that isn't real. Hard to say.
 
The Iranian leader (and a delegation of business people) visited Xi this week and Xi announced a multi-day state visit to Iran soon. Strengthening ties between similar minded..
Strengthening ties, yes. Similar minded, NO! There is a long and mutually convenient between Russia and Iran, predating current regimes. Even in the Soviet era there was carefully cordial relations with Shah M Reza Pahlavi's regime. In 1973 I lived in Tehran and had among my colleagues one Russian diplomat (we shared musical interests, I supplied him with western albums he supplied me with Russian caviar and vodka although the iranian versions fo those were as good or better.).

Somehow many Westerners seem to understand alliances of convenience, despite conducting them every day themselves. The old Middle Eastern phrase remains globally: "Your enemy's enemies are your friends".

Iran, Syria, North Korea all are in this category for Russia, while China is not there, but is flirting and/or feuding with nearly every country. In some cases, such as Brazil, a positive trade balance with China gives opportunities of large proportion, hence is China's largest foreign investment flow at this moment. All the others are distinctly tactical for both Russia and China.

Ukraine is a difficult issue for most of those countries. Even now Brazil is being pressured to supply support for Ukraine, including consideration of SAAB Gripen materiel including ammunition. This last is interesting since there does not seem to be discussion elsewhere of Gripen supply to Ukraine. Without question Brazil logistics support through KC390 is being considered with the quick change to mobile hospital, tanker and freighter being major factors.
Other than in Brazilian discussions I have heard nothing nor read anything about this. Following President Lula meeting with President Biden these topics began here. Since then there allegedly ahed been numerous contacts with Ukrainian and EU people.

I have been reluctant to post this because there is no hard evidence of which I am aware. The local rumor mill, though, has been active, and this timing seems appropriate as all of Brasil is infatuated with the biggest and most flamboyant Carnival since pre-pandemic times. This would be far from the first time that momentous events were planned during Carnival distraction, when nobody notices large foreign entourages nor anything clandestine.
Checking registration numbers of non-commercial aircraft movements do give clues, and those being in Rio (GIG and SDU) rather than Brasilia (BSB) or São Paulo increases odds of ignoring them, so the normal correlations no longer imply causality.
 
Escalation risk:

If this happens, the US will likely provide the following, in short order:
1) longer range missiles (anti-ship, anti-ground precision munitions like ATACMS), in order to hit the launch platforms currently employed by Russia for their strikes
2) F-16s, and in large quantities
3) M1-A1/2 tanks, and in VERY large quantities
4) Patriot batteries, lots of them
5) Cluster bombs - because these are simply "brutal" munitions, we have held off so far, but I could see the US providing these with a lot of launchers. This would be absolutely devastating on Russian infantry

Escalation via China is still not a viable plan to win for Russia, but I guess from their perspective they see the eventual loss of this conflict and are trying everything they can to break Western resolve.
 

"F-16s, longer-range missiles could help Ukraine beat Russia, U.S. general privately tells lawmakers

By ALEXANDER WARD and PAUL MCLEARY
02/18/2023 02:58 PM EST

[...] [General] Cavoli [who serves as both the supreme allied commander for Europe and as head of U.S. European Command] told the lawmakers at the Munich Security Conference that the U.S. and its allies should send the most advanced weapons they can part with to Ukraine. That included advanced aircraft, drones and missiles with ranges over 62 miles (100 kilometers), such as the Army Tactical Missile System. [...]

A second person said Cavoli believes the West should equip Ukraine to “reach further” into Russian positions within Ukraine’s border. [My underline.] [..."


 
If this happens, the US will likely provide the following, in short order:
1) longer range missiles (anti-ship, anti-ground precision munitions like ATACMS), in order to hit the launch platforms currently employed by Russia for their strikes
2) F-16s, and in large quantities
3) M1-A1/2 tanks, and in VERY large quantities
4) Patriot batteries, lots of them
5) Cluster bombs - because these are simply "brutal" munitions, we have held off so far, but I could see the US providing these with a lot of launchers. This would be absolutely devastating on Russian infantry

Escalation via China is still not a viable plan to win for Russia, but I guess from their perspective they see the eventual loss of this conflict and are trying everything they can to break Western resolve.

The US won't export Abrams with the uranium armor and that's what is in storage. I doubt the US is going to change that policy.

There is a point where Ukraine is going to be pilot limited and training on the F-16 is going to take time. Ground crews need to be trained too, and that's a longer course than the pilot training. Even Ukraine thinks it will take 6 months minimum:
Ukraine says pilots would need six months for F-16 combat training

Ukraine probably had around 100 active fixed wing combat pilots at the start of the war. Their air force was not huge
Ukrainian Air Force - Wikipedia

They could probably scrounge some up from retirement and press people into service with related skills, but their pool of trained pilots is limited.

The US has about 1100 Patriot launchers, but only about 10,000 missiles. If Ukraine has a lot of launchers and are using them, they could deplete the stockpile pretty quickly.

The US does have a large stockpile of 155mm cluster munitions that will probably never get used again and ATACMS has been discussed at length. I think both of those could be delivered to Ukraine fairly quickly if need be. The US could also step up Bradley deliveries. Other weapons that could be delivered are US anti-entrenchment weapons. There is an array of weapons used by engineers to clear fortifications. A good stock of those would help Ukraine a lot in their coming offensives.

Increased Chinese involvement might jeopardize all Western investments in China.


That is the tightrope Beijing has been walking throughout this war. China makes a lot of money from the US and Europe. If those western countries start switching to other suppliers China's economy will be in trouble.

In Russia Putin ensured that some of the wealth from raw resource sales trickled down to the population. Enough to make them feel their lot was improving, but the bulk of the wealth was stolen.

China's CCP has a sort of pact with the people that if they stay in power, the people can have the opportunity to get wealthier. A lot more Chinese wealth flows down to the common people than in Russia. China has experienced some instability of late because the flow has slowed down due to the economy maturing. If the west quits buying Chinese goods, that tightening will get worse and it could topple the regime. They need the west to keep the plates spinning.

Economically Russia is a treasure trove of resources they need for industry, but they are a tiny customer compared to the west. Russia has a population of 145 million with a much larger poor population than most western countries. There is very little market for Chinese consumer goods in Russia compared to the US with more than twice the population or the EU with an even bigger population. Both economies have large middle classes buying lots of consumer goods.

looks like an industry in terminal decline, ready for takeover by China


If the Russians allow it. Getting their hands on the Russian aircraft industry would help China with engine technology. That's the one area where China has struggled. Chinese aircraft designs aren't bad, but they have only just started domestic production of modern engines.
 
Thought this was a good article. Here are a few salient quotes,


“There is nothing that any democratic Ukrainian government could offer, nor that the West would accept, that will convince Russia to stop its renewed mobilisation and rearmament activities. Even a negotiated ceasefire will only last until Russia feels ready to go back on the offensive. However the fighting eventually ends, Ukraine will continue to need western support to prevent a second Russian invasion six months down the line once the Russian army has had time to recover, but before Ukraine has had a chance to rebuild and arm its forces with western equipment and new training practices.”


”Russia can be beaten on the battlefield this year, and deterred from future aggression, but only if Europe stops underestimating Russian resolve; accepts that it is in a long-term military contest with an aggressive and determined enemy; and invests now in industrial capacity and support to Ukraine at the scale that the stakes demand. “

This article seems to summarize well what I’ve seen in bits and pieces from articles cited in this thread and others. It seems there is still disagreement on what weapon systems to provide Ukraine with and how to deal with things that might happen if/when Russia is pushed out of Ukraine. I would guess those scenarios are all being gamed out. There are also considerations about China’s involvement being noted in articles. Besides those things noted in the articles I saw cited elsewhere in this thread, I saw an interesting point made elsewhere that China would prefer the war to be drawn out, in order to further deplete US stockpiles and keep the US pre-occupied.

 
LIMA, Ohio (AP) — Thousands of miles from the front lines, a sprawling manufacturing plant in the small midwestern city of Lima, Ohio, is playing a critical role in the effort to arm Ukraine as it fends off the Russian invasion.
Owned by the Army and operated by General Dynamics, the plant is expected to refurbish Abrams tanks for the U.S. to send to Ukraine, and is already preparing to build an updated version of the vehicle for Poland, U.S. Army officials said Thursday as they toured the facility.
U.S. officials have declined to provide details about the Abrams that will eventually go to Ukraine, saying they have to decide whether to send refurbished older Army tanks, Marine tanks or some other version. But in most cases, the tanks would need upgrades at the Lima plant before being shipped to Ukraine’s battlefront.
The U.S. doesn't build new tanks from scratch. It has a fleet of about 2,500 Abrams, and takes older tanks, tears them down and and uses the empty hull as a starting point to build a new one. Some hulls have been refurbished multiple times.