Russia Ukraine Update Thread

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: 38181

What are you going on about? LoL

In not impeding the fool nor stopping him bumping his gums.

As to different viewpoints or angles, that would be perspective, which i am happy to entertain, don't mean i agree.

Just for reference, I have a degree in electronics and electrical Engineering and I graduated top of my class. I achieved the highest score in the history of the Engineering school. My previous professors still stalk my LinkedIn till today. So while I am confident in my cognitive ability my emotional disposition still takes offence to being labelled a ‘fool’.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

Well you sound a bit like you are stuttering now.

Im 100% sure of that.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: ADUB77

Technically they can still be intercepted.

But a swarm attack using multiple different missiles would be another kettle of fish to contend with.

Anyhoo you sink a carrier and you destroy 100s of billions of dollars worth of both man, machine and munitions.

Any nation silly enough to play that game is apt to provoke a response of the tactical nuclear sorts.

I’d be interested to hear your theory on how Hypersonic missiles can be intercepted by the US Navy or their Carrier strike groups.

Because I’ve done the calculations, but please Andy do share.

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: 38181

What are you going on about? LoL

In not impeding the fool nor stopping him bumping his gums.

As to different viewpoints or angles, that would be perspective, which i am happy to entertain, don't mean i agree.

Just for reference, I have a degree in electronics and electrical Engineering and I graduated top of my class. I achieved the highest score in the history of the Engineering school. My previous professors still stalk my LinkedIn till today. So while I am confident in my cognitive ability my emotional disposition still takes offence to being labelled a ‘fool’.

With all that education, you still don't understand how catastrophic it to a military force to lose it's ability to communicate securely?

Perhaps we have different definitions of the word 'fool'?

(Though 'fool' isn't the word I would choose)

Also, doesn't the hypersonic missile just the delivery...it too can carry a nuclear payload

a reply to: ADUB77

The kinetic destructive force unleashed on impact from hypersonic missile strike would be enough to destroy most things at that speed never mind carrying a nuclear payload.

Scary too think about Andy! I love America I've just lost faith, we've used Russia Suez rocket to get to space since forever

We just got out own rockets and they had to be developed privately too happen

Given that fact, I'm doubtful we sre ahead of Russia in missile technology

originally posted by: PatriotGames4u

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: 38181

What are you going on about? LoL

In not impeding the fool nor stopping him bumping his gums.

As to different viewpoints or angles, that would be perspective, which i am happy to entertain, don't mean i agree.

Just for reference, I have a degree in electronics and electrical Engineering and I graduated top of my class. I achieved the highest score in the history of the Engineering school. My previous professors still stalk my LinkedIn till today. So while I am confident in my cognitive ability my emotional disposition still takes offence to being labelled a ‘fool’.

With all that education, you still don't understand how catastrophic it to a military force to lose it's ability to communicate securely?

Perhaps we have different definitions of the word 'fool'?

(Though 'fool' isn't the word I would choose)

Well, that’s what Engineers do they build these communications equipment from scratch. And I mean... scratch.

I’m fully aware of their importance, but my original point was just because “one russian tank got holed” doesn’t mean all Russian tanks are subpar.

And just because a Russian convoy is operating on Chinese sourced tyres, it has no bearing on the quality of the russian made vehicle itself. Bad decision making on procurement sure...

Just has to balance out the bash anything and everything Russian rhetoric ‘round here, it’s gone overboard.

They aren’t completely incompetent. Soviet made relics have shot down US most advanced stealth Planes back in their day. They can still engineer good stuff from a technical stand point. They have the knowledge.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101


I agree that they 'can', but that doesn't change the fact that they 'did not', but started a war with the belief that they 'had'.

THAT is disastrous.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

Hitting a target moving around one mile per second is indeed a task.

Even detection of them before they are upon you would be quite the feat.

As to how, well that would be with Phalanx CIWS and SeaRAM i suppose and hope they get extremely lucky.

Considering nobody has been silly enough to attempt such an attack on a carrier it is indeed just theory.

I don't fancy there chances of stopping such an attack if that helps.

a reply to: ADUB77

Look at there tanks and APC ADUB77?

They would need to be ahead somewhere.

I tend to agree as to Russia being ahead where hypersonics are concerned.

Unless we have something up our sleeves we have yet to show off.

We could shoot them down with railguns or particle beams ""theoretically"".

a reply to: andy06shake

You seem to have quite the tank knowledge, can you remind me what kind that giant german tank from the movie "fury" with Brad Pitt was?

It took 3 mini tanks to destroy it!

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: ADUB77

Look at there tanks and APC ADUB77?

They would need to be ahead somewhere.

I tend to agree as to Russia being ahead where hypersonics are concerned.

Unless we have something up our sleeves we have yet to show off.

We could shoot them down with railguns or particle beams ""theoretically"".

No you can’t shoot them down with laser beams. The best ones have a range of 8KM to 9KM .

That gives the laser 2.8 seconds reaction time if it new exactly where it was. And thats just to start aiming at it.

Then you need time to heat up the missile and destroy it which takes a good few seconds. In short, nothing can stop it.

a reply to: ADUB77

Im not sure.

But that was a not bad flick "Fury".

Apparently the tanks used in the film a "Sherman M4A3E8" and a "Tiger 131" are in the tank museum in Bovington England if that helps.

originally posted by: ADUB77
a reply to: andy06shake

You seem to have quite the tank knowledge, can you remind me what kind that giant german tank from the movie "fury" with Brad Pitt was?

It took 3 mini tanks to destroy it!

I believe it was supposed to be a Tiger tank. But yeah, if it were used today it wouldn’t last a lick with a Sabot round from M1A2, definitely no chance with a Javelin.

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: ADUB77

Look at there tanks and APC ADUB77?

They would need to be ahead somewhere.

I tend to agree as to Russia being ahead where hypersonics are concerned.

Unless we have something up our sleeves we have yet to show off.

We could shoot them down with railguns or particle beams ""theoretically"".

No you can’t shoot them down with laser beams. The best ones have a range of 8KM to 9KM .

That gives the a mlaser 2.8 seconds reaction time if it new exactly where it was. And thats just to start aiming at it.

Then you need time to heat up the missile and destroy which takes a good few seconds. In short, nothing can stop it.

It has boost and ballistic phases where it's just as vulnerable as any other missile, then orbits the entire planet building up speed before descending, before which it's just as vulnerable as a satellite at the same speed and altitude that we demonstrated shooting down 15 years ago.

Only the terminal phase of this weapon provides any new capabilities for Russia, and we do have some experimental defenses for this phase as well.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

See the part where i say ""theoretically"". LoL

However directed energy weapons are indeed on the cards in the not to distant future, and will be used to target and take down hypersonic missiles

The United States Navy is already close to outfitting its ships with a 150 kilowatt laser that will be able to target missiles, drones and other modern threats.