"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (7 Viewers)

[Admiral Beez]

In case anyone was wondering why Kazakhstan is apparently on Putin's to-do list:

Interestingly, Ural motorcycles has moved their company and production from Russia to Kazakhstan.

About — Ural Motorcycles

www.imz-ural.com

We Are Back In Canada — Ural Motorcycles

2023 certification and registration renewal finalized in Canada and we are back to shipping bikes to our northern neighbors again! First shipments of 2023 models were shipped to Canadian dealers late last month (April) and more orders planned to be shipped from arrivals en

www.imz-ural.com

Clearly a move to avoid sanctions, but also to give the company, its owners, employees and distributors a future.

Borat would be proud.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

It's a pity there isn't a F-16 equivalent to the EA-18G Growler. The Ukrainians could really use it I fear.

From last year:


ROLLING MEADOWS, Ill. – April 11, 2023– Northrop Grumman Corporation's (NYSE: NOC) AN/ALQ-257 Integrated Viper Electronic Warfare Suite (IVEWS) has completed U.S. Air Force Laboratory Intelligence Validated Emulator (LIVE) testing. The system exceeded multiple benchmarks and demonstrated the ability to counter modern radio frequency (RF) threats. This was the first time the ultra-wideband architecture in IVEWS underwent LIVE testing.

Northrop Grumman F-16 Electronic Warfare Suite Counters Modern Radio Frequency Threats During Air Force Testing

ROLLING MEADOWS, Ill. – April 11, 2023– Northrop Grumman Corporation’s (NYSE: NOC) AN/ALQ-257 Integrated Viper Electronic Warfare Suite (IVEWS) has completed U.S. Air Force Laboratory Intelligence Validated Emulator (LIVE) testing. The system...

news.northropgrumman.com

 

[Greg Boeser]

From last year:


ROLLING MEADOWS, Ill. – April 11, 2023– Northrop Grumman Corporation's (NYSE: NOC) AN/ALQ-257 Integrated Viper Electronic Warfare Suite (IVEWS) has completed U.S. Air Force Laboratory Intelligence Validated Emulator (LIVE) testing. The system exceeded multiple benchmarks and demonstrated the ability to counter modern radio frequency (RF) threats. This was the first time the ultra-wideband architecture in IVEWS underwent LIVE testing.

Northrop Grumman F-16 Electronic Warfare Suite Counters Modern Radio Frequency Threats During Air Force Testing

ROLLING MEADOWS, Ill. – April 11, 2023– Northrop Grumman Corporation’s (NYSE: NOC) AN/ALQ-257 Integrated Viper Electronic Warfare Suite (IVEWS) has completed U.S. Air Force Laboratory Intelligence Validated Emulator (LIVE) testing. The system...

news.northropgrumman.com

There is a guy in the Pentagon whose only job is to come up with these acronymns.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

There is a guy in the Pentagon whose only job is to come up with these acronymns.

They missed a trick: by calling it Viper Integrated Electronic Warfare Suite instead, they could call it the VIEWS system.

 

[Glider]

Yep and now is the time to set up the "what'll happen to Ivonov" betting pool.

Choices will be, suddenly dies from:
1) Falling up three flights of stairs and out a window.
2) A sudden heart ailment.
3) A plane crash.
4) A plane crash WHILE playing with live grenades.
5) Falling ill after drinking tea.
6) committing suicide (also stopping to reload).
7) Whole family commits suicide (involving guns, knives and hammers).
8) Accidently falling off boat and drowning.
9) Exploding statue presented in his honor.

*BONUS*
Write in an unusual demise and if correct, instant win.

Old age

 

[Admiral Beez]

Yep. We were all thinking this.

The new Ukraine aid might have won the war at a stroke, if it hadn’t been delayed

American delays have given Russia time to build an alternative to the Kerch bridges

www.telegraph.co.uk

Imagine the hundreds of thousands of Russian (and occupied) civilians on Crimea once that bridge is destroyed. How are they getting off, and being fed and watered?

 

[MiTasol]

And Churchill, who served as Chancellor of the Exchequer from 1924 until 1929 was responsible for financially starving the military throughout his tenure.

Churchill's policies aimed to balance the budget, often at the expense of military expenditures. These cuts left Britain vulnerable and ill-prepared for potential conflicts, especially as tensions were rising in Europe. As Exchequer, Churchill delayed or canceled key defense projects and modernization efforts, including reductions in personnel, equipment, and research and development, which had long-term implications for Britain's defense capabilities. To be fair, the British economy was not in good shape in the 1920s, but Churchill's tenure as Chancellor of the Exchequer saw a period of significant underinvestment in the British armed forces and yet history sees him as a military champion.

And before becoming PM he was responsible for the Narvik Royal Navy disaster in Norway

 

[Snautzer01]

be fair, the British economy was not in good shape in the 1920s, but Churchill's tenure as Chancellor of the Exchequer saw a period of significant underinvestment in the British armed forces and yet history sees him as a military champion.

You do realize that beyond the normal economy Britain was paying fast amounts of great war debts? That had to be paid regardless of said economy with intrest? It's no wonder even the empire agreed in fleet rules etc. They were kinda broke. Even worse after the stock krach.
It even more to the credit of Chamberlain rearmament was done regardless of those debt collectors.

 

[SplitRz]

The "west's failure to send aid to Ukraine" - yeah, right.

Not sure if the lefty editors at politico have been paying attention, but several European Nations have been working overtime getting munitions to Ukraine while others have been working hard to get their stored equipment on it's way.

Meanwhile, deluveries to Ukraine from the earlier U.S. aid packages are in the process of arriving.

What a sensational op-ed - these clowns should apply to Russian Times media.
They'd fit right in.

Sorry to disinter a comment from a few days back, but I found that perception interesting. (Now I've lost the link to the full article! Dang.)

From a European perspective, its seems those most in opposition to or making deliberate obstruction to the sending aid to Ukraine within the West have been right wing and populist administrations and lobbies - from Erdogan in Turkey, Orban in Hungary to a certain un-nameable American ideology that is actively promoting isolationism and which seems to be questioning both future commitment to Ukraine and even NATO itself.

Support, deference and apologia for Putin hasn't come primarily from the left. So is criticism of a lack of action and delay really 'pro Putin'? If it results in a recognition and correction of that position, its the last thing he wants, surely? Or was the op-ed proposing capitulation?

Personally, I think its one of the rare examples of those with brains (ie the ideological moderates) on either side of the political divide in broad agreement. Europe *has* historically complacently dragged its heels regarding NATO and military and financial commitments to wider European democracy and defence, whatever they are now desperately doing to ramp up their support for Ukraine. Therefore, I am absolutely delighted to hear both Sunak and Macron within a week of each other speak firmly against such apathy and to large and rapid increases in defence funding.

I just hope that actions follow words and in time to make a difference.

 

[SplitRz]

And before becoming PM he was responsible for the Narvik Royal Navy disaster in Norway

Royal navy disaster?

The whole Norway campaign was a failure (though it was something of a sideshow strategically at that time)... but was it a disaster for the RN? It essentially crippled the Kreigsmarine destroyer force for the rest of the war and was to have huge implications for them regarding Sealion and support for their capital ships.

Ist Battle of Narvik -
RN -
2 destroyers sunk
1 destroyer heavily damaged

Germans -
2 destroyers sunk
1 ammunition supply ship sunk
6 cargo ships sunk
4 destroyers damaged

2nd Battle of Narvik -
RN -
3 destroyers damaged
2 aircraft shot down
28 killed
55 wounded

Germans -
8 destroyers sunk or scuttled
1 U-boat sunk
128 killed
67 wounded

 

[SplitRz]

The "west's failure to send aid to Ukraine" - yeah, right.

Not sure if the lefty editors at politico have been paying attention, but several European Nations have been working overtime getting munitions to Ukraine while others have been working hard to get their stored equipment on it's way.

Meanwhile, deluveries to Ukraine from the earlier U.S. aid packages are in the process of arriving.

What a sensational op-ed - these clowns should apply to Russian Times media.
They'd fit right in.

Sorry to disinter a comment from a few days back, but I found that perception interesting.

From a European perspective, its seems those most in opposition to or making deliberate obstruction to the sending aid to Ukraine within the West have been right wing and populist administrations and lobbies - from Erdogan in Turkey, Orban in Hungary to a certain un-nameable American ideology that is actively promoting isolationism and which seems to be questioning both future commitment to Ukraine and even NATO itself.

Support, deference and apologia for Putin hasn't come primarily from the left. So is criticism of a lack of action really 'pro Putin'?

Personally, I think its one of the rare examples of those with brains (ie the ideological moderates) on either side of the political divide in broad agreement. Europe *has* historically complacently dragged its heels regarding NATO and military and financial commitments to wider European democracy and defence, whatever they are now desperately doing to ramp up their support for Ukraine. Therefore, I am absolutely delighted to hear both Sunak and Macron within a week of each other speak firmly against such apathy and to large and rapid increases in defence funding.

I just hope that actions follow words and in time to make a difference.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Royal navy disaster?

The whole Norway campaign was a failure (though it was something of a sideshow strategically at that time)... but was it a disaster for the RN? It essentially crippled the Kreigsmarine destroyer force for the rest of the war and was to have huge implications for them regarding Sealion and support for their capital ships.

Ist Battle of Narvik -
RN -
2 destroyers sunk
1 destroyer heavily damaged

Germans -
2 destroyers sunk
1 ammunition supply ship sunk
6 cargo ships sunk
4 destroyers damaged

2nd Battle of Narvik -
RN -
3 destroyers damaged
2 aircraft shot down
28 killed
55 wounded

Germans -
8 destroyers sunk or scuttled
1 U-boat sunk
128 killed
67 wounded

On the British side, you'd have to add the loss of Glorious, Acaster and Ardent into that tally, as well some smaller ancillary vessels. The British get a consolation prize though - the torpedoing of both Gneisenau and Scharnhorst kept them out of combat until the start of 1941.

 

[Warspite63]

Royal navy disaster?

The whole Norway campaign was a failure (though it was something of a sideshow strategically at that time)... but was it a disaster for the RN? It essentially crippled the Kreigsmarine destroyer force for the rest of the war and was to have huge implications for them regarding Sealion and support for their capital ships.

Ist Battle of Narvik -
RN -
2 destroyers sunk
1 destroyer heavily damaged

Germans -
2 destroyers sunk
1 ammunition supply ship sunk
6 cargo ships sunk
4 destroyers damaged

2nd Battle of Narvik -
RN -
3 destroyers damaged
2 aircraft shot down
28 killed
55 wounded

Germans -
8 destroyers sunk or scuttled
1 U-boat sunk
128 killed
67 wounded

Excellent summary. In total, the Norwegian Campaign cost the Kriegsmarine 1/3 of its cruisers and 1/2 of its destroyers. The RN would have enjoyed a few more disasters like that......

 

[MiTasol]

Sorry to disinter a comment from a few days back, but I found that perception interesting.

From a European perspective, its seems those most in opposition to or making deliberate obstruction to the sending aid to Ukraine within the West have been right wing and populist administrations and lobbies - from Erdogan in Turkey, Orban in Hungary to a certain un-nameable American ideology that is actively promoting isolationism and which seems to be questioning both future commitment to Ukraine and even NATO itself.

Support, deference and apologia for Putin hasn't come primarily from the left. So is criticism of a lack of action really 'pro Putin'?

Personally, I think its one of the rare examples of those with brains (ie the ideological moderates) on either side of the political divide in broad agreement. Europe *has* historically complacently dragged its heels regarding NATO and military and financial commitments to wider European democracy and defence, whatever they are now desperately doing to ramp up their support for Ukraine. Therefore, I am absolutely delighted to hear both Sunak and Macron within a week of each other speak firmly against such apathy and to large and rapid increases in defence funding.

I just hope that actions follow words and in time to make a difference.

And to that I would add that many nations in and out of NATO were willing to provide the Ukrainians with US made weapons like the F-16 but that was blocked by the US.

Likewise the Swiss prevented Swiss weapons going to Ukraine so the US was not alone but the US is directly responsible for much, maybe even the most, of the delay in Ukraine getting the weapons it needed, when they needed them.

 

[MiTasol]

Royal navy disaster?

The whole Norway campaign was a failure (though it was something of a sideshow strategically at that time)... but was it a disaster for the RN? It essentially crippled the Kreigsmarine destroyer force for the rest of the war and was to have huge implications for them regarding Sealion and support for their capital ships.

Ist Battle of Narvik -
RN -
2 destroyers sunk
1 destroyer heavily damaged

Germans -
2 destroyers sunk
1 ammunition supply ship sunk
6 cargo ships sunk
4 destroyers damaged

2nd Battle of Narvik -
RN -
3 destroyers damaged
2 aircraft shot down
28 killed
55 wounded

Germans -
8 destroyers sunk or scuttled
1 U-boat sunk
128 killed
67 wounded

I freely admit that naval history is not one of the things that interests me but multiple history books I have read have listed Churchill's actions relating to that battle as causing, among other things, the loss of (mainly) manpower (marines and soldiers) that was trapped ashore by Churchill's actions.

 

[MiTasol]

Sorry to disinter a comment from a few days back, but I found that perception interesting.

Excellent point regarding the post containing Not sure if the lefty editors at.....

I get my daily news from multiple sites in an effort to filter out some of the biases (perceptions).

Two Australian, one British, one German, three US with an occasional Canadian and Kiwi source. There was a great Kiwi source I used to go to because it had stories almost every day of things happening in Aus that were not reported here but then they started to insert neoMaori in to every story at every possible chance and I am too old and have no interest in learning that.

Back when Maria LePen was making her run for France's presidency about half the news outlets I read called her left wing and the other half called her right wing.

Perception is in the eye of the beholder.

Other perceptions -

• the P-39 was the greatest aircraft ever built - or not,
• the Japanese copied everything (I would love to find the time machine they used to copy things before other people invented them),
• etc.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Excellent summary. In total, the Norwegian Campaign cost the Kriegsmarine 1/3 of its cruisers and 1/2 of its destroyers. The RN would have enjoyed a few more disasters like that......

Not that SeaLion was ever realistic, but especially after German naval losses at Norway it was beyond the capabilities of the Kriegsmarine ... even with the Luftwaffe controlling the skies.

The Norwegian campaign was a strategic failure for the Allies, but at the operational level it was a wash -- failing to defend Norway, but rendering any invasion of England even more impractical.

 

[Admiral Beez]

On the British side, you'd have to add the loss of Glorious, Acaster and Ardent into that tally, as well some smaller ancillary vessels. The British get a consolation prize though - the torpedoing of both Gneisenau and Scharnhorst kept them out of combat until the start of 1941.

Indeed. Yes, the British lost a carrier in April 1940, but they had replacements coming, with HMS Illustrious and Formidable entering service in a few months, plus Victorious and Indomitable the following year. OTOH, Norway was a disaster for the Kriegsmarine's surface fleet, with three cruisers and ten destroyers sunk, plus Scharnhorst, Gneisenau and Lutzow seriously damaged by torpedoes and mines - Lutzow's stern was nearly blown clean off. Ten destroyers sunk must have been more than a quarter of Germany's entire destroyer fleet. Add to this the raid on Taranto a few months later in November, and 1940 is a very bad year for the Axis surface fleet.

Now, back on topic…. 2022-2024 has been a terrible time for Russia's surface fleet.

List of ship losses during the Russo-Ukrainian War - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[MiTasol]

Now, back on topic…. 2022-2024 has been a terrible time for Russia's surface fleet.

And that is great news, especially if you support the conversion of surface ships to subsurface ships.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Now, back on topic…. 2022-2024 has been a terrible time for Russia's surface fleet.

And that is great news, especially if you support the conversion of surface ships to subsurface ships.

While the Ukrainians are getting excellent results with their own missiles and drones, I wonder if there's some heavy duty anti ship missiles coming in the US or NATO aid packages. Are there any TASMs available?