Live data from Hacker News

Russia Claims Breakthrough With ATACMS

eurasiantimes.com

51–60 of 136 posts

Re: Russia Claims Breakthrough With ATACMS

#51
This far along into the war, their personnel have already figured out how to engage ATACMS with the S-300 and S-400 (although recent losses of S-400 units to ATACMS show they aren't doing really well at it [0] ). We already know they're jamming GPS and ATACMS is still getting through with inertial guidance. Maybe some of this newfound knowledge will benefit their engineers somehow when designing new weapons, but it's not very new stuff, and their industry is not well positioned to exploit it.

[0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/06/12/ukrainian-a...

Re: Russia Claims Breakthrough With ATACMS

#52
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Article claims that ATACMS have been highly effective, but all 5 missiles launched at Crimea recently were shot down. Which is not at all in contradiction. The ATACMS could have been highly successful but not any longer. In fact, this would be exactly what you would expect if the claims in the article are true. > As usual, everything is completely unclear in this stalemate war where both sides regularly claim overw…

People bashing Russia military but asking why Russia is attacking Ukraine are not figuring out that is exactly the reason for the war. Ukraine border is too close to Moscow, it is easy to go from Ukraine to Moscow and Russia know they would fail to defend themselves from a NATO land invasion from there. Thus why they are willing to pay a very high price to ensure this won't happen.

I think also Russia doesn't want the headache of defending against a nuclear attack launched from Eastern Ukraine or the headache of worrying whether anti-ballistic missiles stationed in Eastern Ukraine might provide a decisive factor in a neutralization of Russia's ability to launch a nuclear retaliatory strike.

The US really doesn't have to think about these things because there are oceans between it and any potential adversary powerful enough to threaten it: any defense of the US would rely mostly on its navy and air force. In contrast, the most destructive wars are those fought with land forces, e.g., WW I, WW II, the Chinese Civil War and the one time (namely, the US Civil War) that a big land war was fought in North America. (The American Revolutionary War was a mild affair compared to the 4 wars I just listed because unlike the 4 wars I just listed, the homeland of one of the combatants was never in jeopardy.)

The US security establishment is privileged because it does not need to become competent at sharing a land mass (or, worse, a plain such as the European Plain shown in the link below) with nations with high military potential:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:European_plain.png

Re: Russia Claims Breakthrough With ATACMS

#53
post #39
post #2

Dang they’re only 30 years behind us now.

The US Army announced that the first PrSM batch has been delivered in December 2023. Operational testing is expected in 2024, with low-rate initial production, full-rate production, and initial capability testing expected in 2025, according to the Government Accountability Office’s 2023 Weapons Systems Annual Assessment. A total of 110 PrSMs are expected to be procured in fiscal 2024 and 190 in fiscal 2025 It's fairl…

It’s really quite reasonable. The basic capabilities of the ATACMS are not hugely changed and have been available for decades. Russia does not have an equivalent that is demonstrably deployed effectively. They’re also not the focal point of US military development.

The quality of Russian equipment being deployed right now is really bad. The limiting factor here is not “science”.

Fun bonus if you want to watch some people die:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1dv3086/north_kore...

Re: Russia Claims Breakthrough With ATACMS

#54
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It was clear from the beginning that every weapon system used in Ukraine could and probably would land on the black market, that’s why Israel didn’t provide any own weapon system fearing it would land in the hands of their enemies. This is Zed propaganda/fake news , a soldier can't put a missile in his pocket and go home and exchange it for alcohol. I think the main concern is Ukrainians that are loyal to Kremlin an…

What about tank? https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-soldier-defect-steal-tank-r... .

With earnest effort reverse engineering the secrets of that defected tank, Russian engineers and technicians will soon learn the secrets of... the T-64. Bound to come in handy.

Re: Russia Claims Breakthrough With ATACMS

#55
post #13

You'd have to be either a liar or a fool to publicly admit that you've deciphered something about your opponent's secret capabilities. The allies didn't go bragging to the Nazis every time that they broke the enigma machine.

I think this is pretty effective. These systems cost a lot to develop. If they are worthless then that money could definitely have been better spent elsewhere. There is a real sense of worry about the financial burden of Ukraine conflict amongst Ukraine's supporters

> These systems cost a lot to develop. If they are worthless then that money could definitely have been better spent elsewhere.

We're basically using Ukraine to dispose of an outdated system ("In 2007, the U.S. Army terminated the ATACMS program due to cost, ending the ability to replenish stocks"; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM-140_ATACMS) we intend to deprecate.

The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_Strike_Missile is intended to replace it and has seen its first deliveries last year.

There's little indication they're worthless, and an article breathlessly citing someone saying "This is a signal to the whole world, not just the West, that Western weapons are no match for Russian arms" is not a change to that.

Re: Russia Claims Breakthrough With ATACMS

#57
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Completely lost on whose side?

Not going to say "lost", myself, but Russia looks oddly weak. It's the country that planned the fight in advance and could stock up, yet is buying from Iran and North Korea and AFAICT its own latest tank model still hasn't even been used once. It's the country that has a large air force and is using waves of untrained infantry attacks instead of air power. It's the country with the larger population yet recruiting mercenaries abroad. It's the country that's lost control of the Black Sea against an opponent that has no navy.

Re: Russia Claims Breakthrough With ATACMS

#58
post #31

Article claims that ATACMS have been highly effective, but all 5 missiles launched at Crimea recently were shot down. As usual, everything is completely unclear in this stalemate war where both sides regularly claim overwhelming successes yet nothing has changed for 2 years.

> all 5 missiles launched at Crimea recently were shot down

So Russia finally managed to chalk up a few wins? They were losing S-300 and S-400 sites at an alarming rate... to ATACMS. That's moderately ridiculous, since S-400 is supposed to be state of the art Russian military export technology.

Re: Russia Claims Breakthrough With ATACMS

#59
post #56
post #2

Dang they’re only 30 years behind us now.

Do people in the US genuinely believe that? Makes me think of that the Germans thought of the Soviets before June of 1941.

> Do people in the US genuinely believe that?

Yes, we fairly reasonably believe that Russia's struggle to make progress against a smaller neighbor using NATO hand-me-downs is heavily indicative of how they'd do against all of NATO using B-2s, F-22s and F-35s.

Re: Russia Claims Breakthrough With ATACMS

#60
post #9

Would be interesting to know how they got a intact ATACMS. It was clear from the beginning that every weapon system used in Ukraine could and probably would land on the black market, that’s why Israel didn’t provide any own weapon system fearing it would land in the hands of their enemies.

Usually it’s just a missile that belly-flopped due to a malfunction, and was then found and studied.

It's not inconceivable that a Russian counter-battery strike could force Ukrainian troops to flee (or kill them) but leave behind some intact equipment.
Post reply on HN