rocketeer

Now that I stopped laughing, here's the deal buddy. Painting the letter Z on your wrecked hardware is bordering on standard procedure in Ukrainian Armed Force and National Guard. That's what they do whenever they have the time. I'm not even talking about the absolute idiots that ultimately ended up costing Ukraine (the country) ¾ of it's economy and good chunk of the territory — the so-called "Ukrainian cyber army". The reason to why LostArmour had to close the database is that the contents were simply exploited to throw in even more fakes after minor photoshopping. Or video editing for that matter. Which makes the overwhelming majority of Oryx database simply worthless, as the kills cannot be reliably attributed. But there should be reason why this genius was kicked the hell out of LostArmour, if memory serves? 😂

Enjoy your read. https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2021/12/a-monument-of-victory-bayraktar-tb2.html?m=1 As to accuracy and impartiality of his reporting, i personally advised him to seek military education when i got fed up with him declaring tanks as "destroyed" on the grounds of them getting hit by glorified petard, logging highly dubious kills on unverifiable evidence, intentionally misattributting kills to his waifu, so on, so forth, all the time, by the bucketloads. Bluntly speaking, i know a bunch of great defence tech experts whom have no military background of their own. What makes them different from Oryx is that they don't think themselves entitled to be having an opinion on something that requires, for example, 7 years worth of only formal military education to qualify for sitting in the corner when experts are talking.

Borderline off-topic or not, it seems like good idea to remind the audience that Oryx is [dis-]information laundering operation, not too dissimilar in concept from the Bellingcat. Everything it has to say just about anything should be taken with metric crap ton of salt. Besides having no integrity to speak of, these people have no idea what they're talking about, having no military education or experience. TL;DR: Judging anything by Oryx lists is only marginally less counter-productive than straight up buying into the 'analysis' they helpfully provide. Don't.

Maiden employment of the novel 🇷🇺 'Zemledeliye' remote minelayer system, Kharkov area. https://youtu.be/p0RIQm92Vqs 🇺🇦 'Buk-M1' TELAR gets hit by large-caliber guided projectile around Kiev, with spectacular results. https://youtu.be/LOhvcjHdTK8

*shrug* Your claim in and of itself is invariably¹ based in a gigantic pile of utter horsesh*t, produced by/for Ukrainian side. So yeah, it really seems like something to be taken at face value. I find the claims of Russian MoD plausible, with aforementioned caveats, because a) they match my expectations, and b) i don't any reasons not to trust myself. It's my expectations, after all. ¹ — invariably, bc there's next-to-no alternate sources of information.

Thank you! Can't say i already read everything you mentioned, but i read enough to get the general idea. I like that general idea. UPD: Chaff or decoys could be support measures or countermeasures depending on the specifics. If you want 'active stealth measures', think active camouflage and electronic warfare (masking, active cancellation, etc).

🇷🇺 MoD personnel casualty statistics: March 2: 498 KIA, 1591 WIA; March 25: 1351 KIA, 3825 WIA. The casualties among allied, non-mil and mercenary troops presumably aren't included, as per usual practice nowadays. All things considered, the figures seem uncharacteristically plausible. Ukrainian extraordinary claims, though, are anything but. Especially considering how easy it would be to back them up with extraordinary evidence if they indeed had any bearing in reality... Even if we are to assume casualty evacuation by means of teleporting stretches and invisible MEDEVACs, the capacity of medical facilities isn't infinite. As to NATO 'intelligence', the assessments of a basically "cheerleading squad" are hardly worth serious consideration by sheer plain default.

For what it's worth, i'd like to award you twenty internet points for having bothered. I mean it. That doesn't mean the final outcome is something to write home about, sadly. It's stupidly redundant a solution for the other problem. The levels of redundancy: 1) Redundant — Low Observable Principles, Stealth Aircraft andAnti-Stealth Technologies by MAJ K. Zakidis, 2LT A. Skondras, 2LT C. Tokas of Hellenic Air Force, published in the Journal of Computations & Modelling, vol.4, no.1, 2014, pages 129-165. 2) Rather Redundant — The Radar Game: Understanding Aircraft Survivability by Rebecca Grant, published by Mitchell Institute Press, 2010. 3) Stupidly Redundant — Radar Energy Warfare and the Challenges of Stealth Technology by Bahman Zohuri, published by Springer, 2020. These, of course, are isolated examples; the topic is extremely well covered in literature. Why reinvent the wheel? Moreover, why reinvent the wheel that doesn't work, as there's no shortage of the PowerPoint Warfighters who measure aircraft observability in the marbles and golf balls and other outrageous nonsense? Solution: Assume 'stealth' a condition to be tactically acquired instead of inherent property of aircraft and see what happens.

If that's something you'd have to swallow in hopes to achieve industrial independence, i suggest to either resurrect De Gaulle or give the program managers Kurchevsky's* treatment. Not that i think i know better than those it's actually supposed to concern; i just honestly don't see how else you may succeed. * — brought up on charges of criminal overpromising and underdelivering and summarily executed.