The "work" of the Ukrainian air defense is clearly visible.
Perfectly normal result for a MANPADS without a proximity fuse fitted... cruise missiles are very small targets so direct contact impacts vs small targets is difficult... it is the reason the Russians are moving to airburst 30mm cannon shells and 57mm airburst rounds for use against small targets like missiles and drones.
So that means Ukie claims without photos can be true okay then.
Kiev and western claims have proven to be lies so many times they can be dismissed even if they come with photos...
for the 8th time, HIMARS and Smerch are designed for different roles, they are not comparable. This is just cheap deflection
The Russian equivalent to HIMARS will be Hermes, but they are not direct equivalents because Hermes has terminal guidance and will be able to hit moving targets and of course will be a fraction of the price of the US system, and wont be used to murder civilians intentionally.
Call it what you want, the system has proven itself in the field. I don't need to say anything else, so to avoid a pointless back and forth I'll leave it at that
But what has it proven... other than the west hates Ukrainian civilians on both sides?
Both fire rockets. But HIMARS has guided rounds which allows better precision as long as GPS is there. Smerch and Uragan are supposed to destroy a large zone. As long as they fire on that zone they do their job.
You are missing the point... HIMARS is not rocket artillery, it is effectively their ballistic rocket Tochka with a tiny warhead and much less range... and probably more expensive.
Unguided artillery rockets are for use against area targets... large groups of enemy troops or enemy armour for which you don't have precise locations for each individual target so you fire groups of rockets intended to land in an even spread around the point of aim each rocket warhead releasing shrapnel around its point of impact... the last thing you want is accuracy because in this case accuracy means all the rockets landing in the same place... you might as well have just fired one rocket.
As I have mentioned before HIMARS is only necessary in the US because they fucked up their attempt at Grad... they went for an expensive tracked vehicle based on a Bradley design that no other HATO country operates... so fine for the US military because they operate Bradley BMPs so they can share parts etc, but the rest of HATO that want M270s have to buy a new chassis based on the Bradley... more money for the US MIC.
Rocket artillery has good features and bad features... the good... its rate and volume of fire is enormous... you can blanket a huge area in fire and fragments in seconds giving the target little time to take cover and spreading death in high concentrations quickly. It is also good for Chem weapon delivery because it generates higher concentrations of poison quickly too. The bad side is that it is more expensive than tube artillery and needs a lot more support to keep operating...
HIMARS was needed because M270 is just too expensive for what it is and its mobility isn't that great either despite being on a tracked chassis.
The Americans tried to make a Smerch and failed.
At best they created a Tochka with its warhead spread across 12 warheads over a shorter range.
ATACMS is Iskander with less range and easy to intercept and a fraction of the warhead too.... and Ironically, on HIMARS it can only carry one ATACMS missile, so Iskander has twice as many missiles with almost double the range and about five times heavier warhead that manouvers all the way to the target to evade interception.
Russia is introducing guided rockets which will make them as good as HIMARS for pinpoint attacks.
Russia already had guided rockets for point targets but they don't get a lot of use because their rocket forces have a different role.
The new Hermes missile with a flight range of 100km and terminal homing missiles on the back of a truck with a 6 tube launcher would be a much closer equivalent to HIMARS... and will likely be a fraction of the price.
It also fires at longer ranges than krasnopol.
With the massive increases in ammo range with the Coalition I would expect new versions of Krasnopol to reach much much further...
Himars is doing its job.
Technically it is... quite a few Americans are making fortunes on this half baked weapon.
They are still struggling finding them. If they had their air force flying high above enemy rears and using their artillery radars they would be all destroyed in few days.
You mean how HATO wiped out both ISIS and the Taliban in Afghanistan in the first two weeks after they invaded?
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, just like those iraqi WMDs rumsfeld talked about.
Absence of evidence of Iraqi WMDs did not prove there were no WMDs, but equally there was no actual evidence to support they had WMDs.
In this case the Ukrainians themselves admit they are taking losses... but they are liars too... why do they keep asking for more I wonder if HIMARS is so amazingly effective at war crimes?
And just like himars and M270, not a single vilkha, olkha launcher or whatever has been confirmed destroyed. Why do you think this is? Russians, like most militaries, just suck at destroying long range mobile MLRS.
The Orcs have shown all sorts of photos including their own destroyed Tunguska vehicles they claimed were Russian vehicles. On the contrary Russian claims seem to be rather reliable, but you ignore all of that to create an argument that deflects from your favourite team getting pummelled in the field.
This is what a troll does... if a photo is posted of what you are demanding you will claim that is only one vehicle destroyed anyway... if I had such a photo I would not post it because lack or existence of photos doesn't change what you are getting paid for on this forum... do you have shares in the US MIC?
The Tornados are like HIMARS in the aspect that they are wheeled and can change modules.
Russia has no need for HIMARS because all their rocket vehicles are cheaper than HIMARs... HIMARS is supposed to be an affordable M270... that is all.
However, the Tornado uses unguided munitions its is just a wheeled rocket arty that is all. It does have some degree of satellite navigation system but its not like how HIMARS works, you clearly do not know what you are talking about. This doesn't surprise me you have an awful habit of making false statements all the time.
Tornado is an effective military weapon of war, HIMARS is a perversion created by US corruption... just look at HERMES... why is HIMARS even necessary when you could have better performance (longer range and manouvering warheads to evade enemy air defences, and terminal guidance to allow moving targets to be engaged) in much smaller missiles on a lighter cheaper truck?
Also HIMARS can use different ammos bud, no one knew it could use Tungsten shrapnel rounds like it did and there are more surprises.
Big deal... the target wont know the difference between tungsten shrapnel and steel shrapnel... the speed and velocity of shrapnel is more important that the material it is made from, tungsten shrapnel is a way for the US MIC to claim better performance and charge the US military more...
In the end you cannot back up your claim that HIMARS is worthless because the facts aren't there now your restorting to cheap deflection tactics.
It has made an American company a lot of money...
Tho it makes me wonder did the choppers and planes not have flares or any protection against missiles?
Flares don't help against ARH missiles, he most likely used R-37s and R-77s for the kills.
What does "normal Patriot" mean? The first edition was the PAC-1.
The current operational patriot is what I mean. Like the difference between the S-300P and the S-300PMU2.
Except the Patriot has not improved that much.
The PAC-1 was obsolete by the time Desert Storm started and it was PAC-2 that failed to shoot down the Scuds.
The PAC-3 was the result of that failure, with the design radically modified specifically to hit high speed ballistic threats.
PAC-3 is hit to kill. Should be able to intercept cruise missile.
Designed for ballistic threats and not designed to hit low flying targets.
RF T-80 blasts Ukrainian infantry at close range near Bakhmut
At 2:57-2:59 the front of the tank has small smoke puffs... at first I thought the tank was under fire, but the smoke grenades going off at 3:08-3:10 seem to be the grenades the tank launched that appear to land in roughly the place the tank was firing its HE shells down the road...
That's right, they're dead men walking whenever they get in the air. The ones who return in one piece must count their blessings but they only postponed the inevitable. Most of their best and most experienced are dead. They are ony forced to fly for propaganda, their actual effect is negligible.
At least the kamikazes bravely fought and died for their country against an overwhelming opponent, these urks are just sent to death to serve the Kiev regime and neo-nazi fanatics under their US masters.
Ironically these pilots are doing Kiev a real service because when they get shot down that is one less aircraft they have to scrounge for parts for and hide and fuel and arm... they likely have thousands of men dedicated to keeping these aircraft hidden yet available to fly, so taking them up into the air and having them shot down will eventually release men for the front line...
What do you think is in this photo? Oh, my God, these are non-existent guided munitions for Tornado-S systems
Of course being satellite guided they can only hit stationary targets of a known location which pretty much limits what you can use them for really...
The other rockets are vastly more useful and effective... and cheaper.
Would be interesting to figure out if 122 mm and 220 mm rockets are both guided.
The primary use of rockets is to saturate a finite area with fragments and fire... guided rockets are perhaps 1% of the rockets they would fire...
Even if an enemy armour formation is detected you would use the top attack sensor fused munitions rather than guided rockets which can't hit mobile targets reliably.
Anyway, the system outclasses HIMARS in just about every aspect. Neither are any wunderwaffe though.
The Russian and the American versions are fringe examples of what the Rocket artillery is really for.
UA is on the defensive and increasingly relies on what can best be described as macro-guerilla tactics. If they stay in one spot a minute too long, it's good night. They make good use of the shoot and scoot-tactics allowed by such a platform, that is true. But that's about it.
True, and the point Alamo and others are trying to get across is that Smerch and Uragan and Grad and all the Tornadoes are capable of the same shoot and scoot operation.
The pallet loading system on the HIMARS and M270 is cute but even that is not fast enough to allow two loads of rockets to be fired safely... even with the high speed pallet reloading capacity you fire and then you move, so essentially the fast reloading Pallet system doesn't mean much because when you move you can go to a hidden location and take as long to reload as you please... if you try to make the speed reloading system mean something you will likely get found and destroyed.
Has RUssia ever used Napalm?
They call it thermobaric...
The turning point will be if we at least capture one city back and keep pushing even if it's a small pace.
The irony is that those special soldiers appear to be wearing HATO uniforms, woodland camo, which is about right... the west is special, but I don't think Russia would do to these guys what they are doing to the nazis.
it was the nazis that executed this sort of people first and then expanded the net to include all sorts of other types...