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

Status
Not open for further replies.
4Qman said:
The way they blaim the central bank and no word of Putin. They are schooling their viewers to believe the hands of others are at fault.

Its hard to watch lies and deceit on this scale. It goes against everything we know as a democracy.
Click to expand...
It was never confirmed who done it but last year Solovyev (who you can see in this clip) appeared with all bruises on his face and it was speculated he said something that upset Putin and his cronies. So unless you likes having his faced used as a potato masher he's unlikely to step out of line again.
 
bingham67 said:
So what implodes quicker Russian banks or Russia on the battlefield?
Click to expand...
It's far from over, so celebrating now is a tad premature.

Everything is still on the table, as far as I can tell, from a complete Ukrainian collapse at one end to a Russian collapse at the other.

Not sure how anyone can possibly foresee the outcome right now.
 
Rroff said:
I don't know much about the TAURUS but it is slightly slower in most cases and turbofans tend to be poor for stealth - I'd imagine the Storm Shadow is moderately to significantly better able to evade air defences.
Click to expand...
It's always been a funny comparison as the two missiles were designed for very similar purposes, around the same time, to be fired mainly from Tornados, except the Eurofighter guys and the non-Eurofighter guys split up and made mixed teams for missile development xD

Like has been mentioned, the main advantage of the TAURUS is it's longer range, however that advantage isn't so much the fact they can fire at targets further away, but more so that they can be fired from further away which makes the Su-24 less vulnerable.
 
Last edited:
ubersonic said:
It's always been a funny comparison as the missiles designed for very similar purposes, around the same time, to be fired mainly from Tornados, except the Eurofighter guys and the non-Eurofighter guys split up and made mixed teams for missile development xD

Like has been mentioned, the main advantage of the TAURUS is it's longer range, however that advantage isn't so much the fact they can fire at targets further away, but more so that they can be fired from further away which makes the Su-24 less vulnerable.
Click to expand...

Yeah with the 700km range Ukraine can fire them from SU-24's flying in Kyiv and hit targets anywhere in Ukraine

Or if this missiles can sea skim, they could be launched from around Odessa and then fly into the Black Sea, make a big u-turn and hit Sevestapol from the sea in the Russian side where they don't expect it
 
Last edited:
ubersonic said:
It's always been a funny comparison as the two missiles were designed for very similar purposes, around the same time, to be fired mainly from Tornados, except the Eurofighter guys and the non-Eurofighter guys split up and made mixed teams for missile development xD

Like has been mentioned, the main advantage of the TAURUS is it's longer range, however that advantage isn't so much the fact they can fire at targets further away, but more so that they can be fired from further away which makes the Su-24 less vulnerable.
Click to expand...

Be interesting to see if the unused electronics capabilities of the missile get used - it was designed, but from what I can see not manufactured, to be able to utilise powerful jamming and disruption systems, instead of the normal explosive payload, where sacrificially ones could temporarily knock out sensors and communications, and also potentially carry decoy systems, to clear the way for the missiles with explosive warheads coming in behind.
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
Be interesting to see if the unused electronics capabilities of the missile get used - it was designed, but from what I can see not manufactured, to be able to utilise powerful jamming and disruption systems, instead of the normal explosive payload, where sacrificially ones could temporarily knock out sensors and communications, and also potentially carry decoy systems, to clear the way for the missiles with explosive warheads coming in behind.
Click to expand...
That could be very nasty to be on the receiving end of, as the "decoys" could potentially totally throw off the defences at what would normally be their best time to take the missiles down.

If that was the case then even just sending a relatively low ratio of decoys could massively improve the chance of a successful hit, meaning you need fewer missile bodies to get a kill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom