Comments by "SkyRiver" (@SkyRiver1) on "NATO Military Spending Amid the Ukraine War, Explained" video.
-
IMHO the most significant weapons in the war: On the Russian side the Krasnopol and Krasnopol M guided artillery shells with a max range of about 16 miles and a hit rate on specific targets of about 80%. The Russian also have a rocket propelled guided artillery round thought to be the equal or better in range of the American rocket propelled guided Excalibur shell, but I kinda doubt it, according to Wikipedia it's range is 18 miles.
The American Excalibur is devastatingly accurate and can be used by existing M109A7 Paladin self-propelled howitzers which can send Excalibur rounds to 39.3 kilometers (24.4 miles), which ERCA an extended barrel length howitzer can now lob to 43 miles. Their is a German/South African gun that reportedly can do a little better.
The Canadians recently supplied Ukraine with both the Excalibur rounds and the Dutch gave a small number of self-propelled howitzers that can use it and now the Germans have too. It can also be used by the towed guns recently supplied by the USA and Canada, but they pale in comparison to the capabilities of the German Panzerhaubitzen 2000 that the Dutch and Germans are supplying (unfortunately in extremely limited numbers). See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_DS6UvZXPo&t=148s
The use and efficiency of these shells in an anti-artillery role by the competing Russian and recently supplied American radar controlled systems that can target and fire on artillery units within seconds of their use may be the knife edge upon which the entire war is determined, -- baring the deployment of western air power, in Ukraine.
To me the most exciting development in this field is that Norway's Nammo has unveiled a potentially revolutionary concept for an air-breathing, ramjet-powered, pseudo-missile that any standard 155mm howitzer can fire at targets more than 60 miles away. This would be a truly great time for Norway, and Nammo to supply the 155s with a shell that can reach out and touch Russian artillery with little or no exposure other than to air to ground or guide missile fire. See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vIPNElDkns&t=38s
Estimates by Rand and other think tanks estimate that Russia has already used more than 70% of their advanced guided missiles in Ukraine and they will not be able to replace them in a timely fashion. To have Russia exchange expensive guided missiles for common towed artillery with uncommon munitions, is not such a bad exchange in a scenario in which missile production is dependent upon tech they may no longer have access to.
In any event, even if Russia should win in Ukraine, and realistically there is very good chance of this, Russia is totally screwed in the long term. See here to find out why Peter Zeihan finds this to be the case in one of his many videos on the Geopop YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwPMtmuuVNw&t=176s
As he said, "A hypersonic missile without a nuclear warhead is just a very expensive way to blow up a building." Let's hope they keep up the stupidity they have been exhibiting in this area, with their "terror weapons".
67
-
5
-
2
-
1
-
1