Ivan the Colorado wrote:
Neutrality wrote:So I'm reading Donetsk is being shelled again. Where is the peaceloving EU or OSCE? As soon as the NAF start shelling back we'll be reading about how they are violating the ceasefire. Maybe the NAF do need to take back Mariupol and force Kiev to the negotiation table.
Taking Mariupol back may be a major catalyst in destruction of the Ukrainian economy and maybe even the Ukrainian state (honestly it is a pretty slow reaction as of now). It will almost certainly result in the fall of the Pork regime soon afterward but they might be more encouraged to launch a full out strike against Novorossiya and maybe make a bold attempt to attack Crimea beforehand. Anyhow this would hurt Russia too right now. The Russian economy has been quickly recovering in times when Ukraine is relatively peaceful like right now. So even though people are suffering and dying, I do not see the Colorados striking that major of a blow unless the Hohols were to try something first.
Mariupol is heavily fortified and is particularly under the complete control of Azov battalion. The NAF has its forces spread thin on the front. In order to take Mariupol back, the NAF might need a push from a gentle and subtle "Eastern Wind" (hopefully with surgical airstrikes this time) to take Mariupol within a few days. Would be nice if Mariupol was put into a cauldron as well.
Well I guess you're right. However, looking at the map of Mariupol and the surroundings and if we consider the help of "Eastern Wind" for a moment, it'd be fairly easy to conduct surgical strikes from Dolzhanskaya on Ukrainian positions. Are there artillery rounds which can be trajectory-adjusted with the help of GLONASS?
yes, russia has them. but for Russia the situation does not require the use of such advanced ammunition. neither does the NAF require such systems.
just out of my curiousity, this is not the first time the suggestion was raised about using an form of guided ammunition in eastern ukraine. besides the fact of GPS/Glonass guided ammunition accuracy is far worse than advertised today's artillery units use different methods to get their accuracy. why are some of you so horny for these types of high-tech weapons?.
Mortars just need to "settle in the base-plate" and allign the center of their baseplate to an grid refference to get an good accurate round out assuming their sights are correctly collimated. mortars are relatively short range so deviation in their rounds is minimal. it makes Mortars such great short-range artillery weapons to the frontline. but with artillery fire today's world relies more on an variety of factors for accurate fire. wind direction, windspeed, humidity, temperature, air pressure, difference of height between firing unit and target, etcetera.
from personal Experience, at first in Afghanistan 2006 our PZH2000 shot way off course because of faulty software supplied by old weather charts and miscalculations. when the PZH2000 computers where calibrated with the current software it shot dead-on targets at max range without any sort of guidance in the round itself.
im aware the NAF got perhaps less advanced systems. but the obvious alternative with less acurate fire is to saturate an target area. and it should really not be an problem to NAF artillery as i judged there are several people there that know how to adjust their fire in the first or second correction. but NAF learned quick in their conflict with Kiev. they really do not need guided ammunition to get their job done.