Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Minusorange said:
I wonder if they attempted some fire control before making that decision, given Russian incompetence in this war I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't
Click to expand...

Well, if the example of the USS Bonhomme Richard is anything to go by, then its very possible that they could have found firefighting on a warship particularly difficult. I appreciate the Bonhomme Richard is a very different example, but it showed that if procedures weren't practised and maintenance regimes were poor, then your ability to defeat fires can be significantly reduced.
 
Minusorange said:
I wonder if they attempted some fire control before making that decision, given Russian incompetence in this war I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't
Click to expand...

Sources on Twitter were mentioning that the crew were carrying out ‘tactical flooding’ to try and save Moskva. Whether this was counter flooding (deliberately flooding the compartment on the opposite side of one already open to the sea) to prevent the ship capsizing or perhaps they were flooding magazines/VLS silos to prevent an explosion is anybody’s guess at this point. I’ve read that Moskva rolled over before sinking from a few different places as well. Who knows what the truth is.

I’m an engineer officer in the merchant navy myself, currently working aboard an LNG carrier, and throughout our sea survival training courses and during drills onboard, it’s absolutely hammered home that your best chance of survival is to stay with the ship, and abandoning it and going into the water should be an absolute last resort. It just shows how bad it must have been aboard Moskva for her Captain to order his crew into the sea in the midst of a storm, knowing how slim their odds of survival must have been. That must have looked to be a better option than staying with a ship that’s either about to capsize or explode, or possibly do both like HMS Barham did.
 
Last edited:
Of those 510 aboard how many were experienced seaman with decent training for fighting fires at sea. My guess would be not enough ( though I think russian warships are meant to be quite heavy on the officer count so they could have had a fighting chance)

Though if a Neptune missle damaged one or more of those P1000 Granite missles the ship carried I can imagine that being a bad day out for all concerned.
 
you-have-sunk-my-battle-ship-death.gif
 
Seems HSBC Global is downgrading InfoSys and other Indian IT firms - I'd expect that with the obvious issue with India going in the polar opposite direction and risk assessments increasing due to it.
 
The Funktopus said:
Sources on Twitter were mentioning that the crew were carrying out ‘tactical flooding’ to try and save Moskva. Whether this was counter flooding (deliberately flooding the compartment on the opposite side of one already open to the sea) to prevent the ship capsizing or perhaps they were flooding magazines/VLS silos to prevent an explosion is anybody’s guess at this point. I’ve read that Moskva rolled over before sinking from a few different places as well. Who knows what the truth is.

I’m an engineer officer in the merchant navy myself, currently working aboard an LNG carrier, and throughout our sea survival training courses and during drills onboard, it’s absolutely hammered home that your best chance of survival is to stay with the ship, and abandoning it and going into the water should be an absolute last resort. It just shows how bad it must have been aboard Moskva for her Captain to order his crew into the sea in the midst of a storm, knowing how slim their odds of survival must have been. That must have looked to be a better option than staying with a ship that’s either about to capsize or explode, or possibly do both like HMS Barham did.
Click to expand...

Bear in mind though it's not like the crew of these ships are abandoning into inflatable life rafts. They have solid cover lifeboats with Diesel engines, and packed full of supplies. Still not nice, but changes of survival are pretty high compared to being in a 4 man inflatable life raft just drifting about aimlessly. They can likely do 5-6knts fully loaded for over 100nm and have a range of comms equipment. Probably much safer than my previous 41 year cat.
 
Were there not claims that modern satellite surveillance systems could read a car number plate or some such (probably exaggerated) claims? Surely they can see if a bleedin' big ship is still afloat or in peril of sinking, assuming low cloud cover for a while?
 
Chris Wilson said:
Were there not claims that modern satellite surveillance systems could read a car number plate or some such (probably exaggerated) claims? Surely they can see if a bleedin' big ship is still afloat or in peril of sinking, assuming low cloud cover for a while?
Click to expand...

Its been obscured by propaganda.
 
Chris Wilson said:
Were there not claims that modern satellite surveillance systems could read a car number plate or some such (probably exaggerated) claims? Surely they can see if a bleedin' big ship is still afloat or in peril of sinking, assuming low cloud cover for a while?
Click to expand...

They can. But the number of systems that can do it are not many, and they have very narrow coverage at any given time. And they rely on good weather.
 
Twinz said:
This was the threat that was posted:

"If such cases continue, the Russian armed forces will strike decision-making centres, including in Kyiv," it added.

If they have not been trying to do that from day one, they are totally inept.
Click to expand...

That doesn't follow at all, if their intent was to take a chunk of the east and south and replace the current regime then they don't necessarily want to blow up the government buildings/presidential palace etc... with a ballistic missile.

Currently, it serves relatively little purpose too especially if they're no longer aiming to take Kyiv, if they're looking to take a chunk of the south and the east still and hold it by May the 9th then they might well want some of the current government at least to be available for negotiations.

I mean I'm not sure what you're in denial about here - you don't think Russia has ballistic missiles or cruse missiles? You don't think they could fire a ballistic missile or cruise missiles aimed at the government buildings where Boris had his photocall/recent meeting with Zelensky?
 
dowie said:
I mean I'm not sure what you're in denial about here - you don't think Russia has ballistic missiles or cruse missiles? You don't think they could fire a ballistic missile or cruise missiles aimed at the government buildings where Boris had his photocall/recent meeting with Zelensky?
Click to expand...

Sure they can, but don't forget their 60% failure rate.
 
dowie said:
That doesn't follow at all, if their intent was to take a chunk of the east and south and replace the current regime then they don't necessarily want to blow up the government buildings/presidential palace etc... with a ballistic missile.

Currently, it serves relatively little purpose too especially if they're no longer aiming to take Kyiv, if they're looking to take a chunk of the south and the east still and hold it by May the 9th then they might well want some of the current government at least to be available for negotiations.

I mean I'm not sure what you're in denial about here - you don't think Russia has ballistic missiles or cruse missiles? You don't think they could fire a ballistic missile or cruise missiles aimed at the government buildings where Boris had his photocall/recent meeting with Zelensky?
Click to expand...

I think there's a difference between "having" weapons and knowing where your enemy's"decision-making centres" are so you can target them.

They are trying to obscure the utter incompotence exposed thus far in the war by implying they have the ability to take out "decision-making centers" but they just decided not to.

Maybe you are getting caught up in semantics. If they are threatening to take out empty government buildings where officials have "made decisions" at some point...it's a meaningless threat.

If they are threatening to to take out the command and control structure, well I think the whole planet has been operating under the expectation that Russia would attempt to do this from the beginning. And are actively doing so 24/7 . (Attempting at least. It’s not something they're going to start..just now..if Ukrain makes them angry.)

I'm not "in denial" that Russia can blow up buildings. Lol
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom