Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "The Battle for Kherson is a 'Systematic Grinding'" video.

  1. These are the tails from rockets with cluster submunitions. From the uneven spacing of the tail fin hinges, they're most likely from the Uragan 9M27K series. When the cluster warhead releases the payload, the tail section piledrives into the ground. That's why in the early days we saw a lot of CCTV and dashcam footage of tail fins sticking themselves into the ground, sometimes reported as duds. And it's the small bomblets that explode, so if an area has been cleared of UXO the tail section is safe. However, some of the craters may have been dug with entrenching tools and the tail section planted. I don't know enough about types of soil. If they tried to fake a Ukrainian attack and pointed the tails at their own territory then we're really dealing with "special" people here. The craters in the city of Energodar of Ukraine were captured on video and those are real and point to Russian controlled territory.
    10
  2. Lend-Lease hasn't even kicked in yet.
    5
  3. 9:25 finally... what air defense is doing.
    3
  4. HIMARS is that accurate. I think Excalibur 155mm shells for tube artillery is that accurate too.
    2
  5.  @Normalguy1690  No. Mobilization would give them more cannon fodder, but do they have enough weapons and uniforms? Can they feed those soldiers? Increasing the size of the army increases the resources it burns.
    2
  6. It's a really sad story because when the pictures came out, it was the Russians who called her a crisis actor due to her IG page. The Russians directed very foul attacks at her.
    2
  7. These rocket tails are missing the tip - they're tail sections from a cluster warhead that separated in flight.
    1
  8.  @metaleuman  There's footage of the tails sticking in the ground - /watch?v=CtgTM5kmPsY example footage of tail sections piledriving into the ground
    1
  9.  @harmless6813  Yeah, and we've seen that what's published "on paper" is purposefully nerfed to not demonstrate the true abilities. In the Antonovsky bridge the Ukrainians used GMLRS volleys where a rocket punched a hole in the top surface of the road, the second rocket flew into the hole and exploded inside the box girder to blast the bottom surface too. If hits can be stacked on top of each other like that, you know they had like a 80-90% chance of landing within a meter sized hole. Same as the rockets having 70km range, like a week after the HIMARS strikes began, they launched a strike with an estimated 85km range. The published range "on paper" is the original contract requirement, the real range has been improved over years of testing and development.
    1
  10. There's no sites. It's a truck. It can go anywhere.
    1
  11. Yes but but sling loading is inherently more dangerous and complex. When doing back and forth trips to resupply the rigging system and the more careful flying would cause delays.
    1