Both sentences are true enough but not conclusive. Does not need to be a widely accepted offer to make a difference and does not reduce the absurd pretence of US and NATO neutrality all that much more than the existing supplies, training and volunteers.
But I’m inclined to agree that there is currently no such likelihood. Should have already been deployed to NATO frontlines with Ukraine and Belarus and started training of Ukrainians but no sign of that apart from just one Patriot battery at main supply hub in Poland (which had already been scheduled).
Unless there is a significant escalation from Putin he needs to quit.
If he quits there will be no need for more Western support.
Thinking ahead should be on the assumption that he doesn’t quit.
Artillery calculations are crazy complicated. They need to adjust for temperature, wind, rotation of the earth. I’m not sure how they are aimed in modern times, but WW1 used books inches thick.
They are extremely accurate. Probably within 20-30m is aimed well. Some guns can fire 5 rounds at different elevations and have them all land at the same time. I’m not sure how they do that, be it changing the charge size or just the elevation or both.
Tanks are probably easier to easy to drive than they are to shoot. A tank is only as good as the aim of the gunner. The driver needs to not just drive the tank, but know what to do with it when under attack. Tank crews need training in order to be effective.
Trans Caspian Transport link to Ukraine as part of the inland freight link from China to Europe was designed to avoid crossing Russian territory …
Presumably, that was a preference of China.
I don’t have relevant military background but would add following to @Benny40 and @FuriousGeorge response.
In nineteenth century artillery officers required about a year’s training and were best recruited from among civil engineers. But actual calculations now done by computer software.
More important than the calculations for firing would be the calculations for targeting. Recent announcements that US is shipping counter artillery radar to Ukraine is VERY significant. Artillery typically has to move quickly after firing a salvo because its position becomes known. But this means the salvo would need to be as short as possible since the very first shot will immediately provide coordinates to counter fire. Necessity for self-propelled artillery is adequately explained by @FuriousGeorge but see video for full details of the implications of equipment now being supplied on even self-propelled artillery:
I’m pretty sure artillery rounds are standardized by diameter (NATO 155mm) not varied by range. Adjust elevation according to distance. Precision guided munitions are MUCH more expensive than artillery shells.
I have no military background but the accuracy of artillery depends on whether you ask a gunner or an infantryman. The gunner will say that an artillery piece is a precise instrument that can accurately strike enemy targets from thousands of metres away. The infantryman will say that an artillery piece is a precise instrument that can accurately strike friendly targets from thousands of metres away.
It just seems that if you’re firing a shell 1km, 10km, 20km, that the angle of elevation for 1km would almost be straight up, so you’d rather a smaller charge.
I guess you have different artillery and not one size fits all.
That’s my guess too. Artillery units classified by different ranges (min and max) perhaps with different standard shells according to the range type even if same 155mm diameter. But I would assume there is neither an adjustment on a shell for range nor a selection of shells from the single stock from which a given type of artillery piece is being loaded while firing at targets within various distances within its type.
But I cannot claim that with any certainty. (PGMS are of course very different from standard artillery shells).
You aren’t going to use a smaller gun for a smaller range, you just change the aim of the big gun.
Accuracy for artillery depends on what you need. If you need a direct hit on a tank, you’ll need a bit of luck. If you are aiming at a column of trucks, getting kinda close will do. It’s a very big explosion with a lot of shrapnel. For trenches and dig in troops, likely going to need a lot of shells.
You can see below that the hits are pretty consistent in the area, but only a handful hit the trench.
The Artillery motto is “Ubique” which artillerymen will tell you means “Everywhere” for where they serve. Everyone else says it means “Anywhere” which relates to their accuracy.
Excellent picture but I suspect the 5 stars awarded are for the lack of prowess of Luhansk Donbas separatists artillery rather than for photographic insight into competent artillery spotting and “walking in” of salvos.
Just watched the excellent Rachel Maddow piece on MSNBC about some of the methods Putin used to gain power. Its worth a watch. I mean he blew up apartment buildings and killed lots of his own people, but what she reveals is at the same time rat cunning, but disgusting.
Who said, “the end justifies the means”?
You guessed it, a Russian commie, Sergey* Gennadiyevich Nechayev, and by now it is a time honoured tradition up Moscow way.
Possibly not the right thread but I saw some of the F-35a’s up in Williamtown last Thursday and again today. Pretty impressive. I used to think the hornets were cool but the new jets are just… wow.
