Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

mwi.westpoint.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 701 posts

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#561

Post by ambicapter »

mrguyorama wrote: post #270
AlexCoventry wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Zelensky, there will be drones capable of traversing tens of thousands of kilometers within a couple of years. The US mainland is definitely at risk of drone attack in the near-medium term, IMO. > One, two, three years — drones will strike ten, twenty thousand kilometers. With reactive engines, they will be very cheap -- Zelensky https://x.com/nexta_tv/status/2042105223989035429

A drone capable of traveling tens of thousands of kilometers to its target is called a cruise missile. They are not cheap. What "reactive engine" is Zelensky talking about?

It's probably just a mistranslation, in some languages jet engines are called "reaction engines".

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#562

Post by squidbeak »

ericmay wrote: post #343
nostrademons wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the war started, it certainly looked like it. Russian soldiers were in Kyiv at one point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kyiv_(2022) It was the failure of Russian logistics and the triumph of Ukrainian logistics that beat them back.

Credit certainly that Russian logistics failed, but was it Ukrainian logistics that beat them back or was it Ukrainian logistics and heroism alongside American and British support, intelligence, and 24/7 airlifts of critical weapons and equipment that beat them back?

Russian logistics failed because of Ukrainian resistance. The NLAWs and stingers were extremely useful to Ukraine, but the more important fact is that the Ukrainian army was prepared, disciplined, and didn't melt away as Russia expected.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#563

Post by squidbeak »

ericmay wrote: post #533
troupo wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and 24/7 airlifts of critical weapons and equipment that beat them back? There were no 24/7 airlifts of criticql weapons and equipment at any point in this war. Ukraine was expected to fall quickly, and any help it needed started arriving very reluctantly, very slowly, in small batches stretched over months and years of deliveries much much later.

That’s wrong. The US and UK airlifted anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles among other things to Ukraine while telling the world Russia was about to invade (which Europeans refused to believe). You may be confusing European support and their lack of it (remember the famous time Germany just sent 45,000 old helmets?) with how the United States and United Kingdom helped. For example this was published in April 2022. So…

There were no airlifts into Ukraine, arms had to cross the border as they have since. The supplies were in small quantities up to the invasion. They were an important help to Ukraine, but you are overstating how crucial they were - as if stingers and NLAWs did the fighting, or as if Ukraine didn't have its Soviet legacy or homegrown systems like Stugna-P which had a much more decisive impact those early months.

Western support at any scale didn't arrive until later in the year.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#564

Post by troupo »

wildzzz wrote: post #412
marcus_holmes wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So far nobody has built a tank, plane, or ship that can run on batteries and while drone technology has continued to advance in many critical ways they don't bring the big bombs quite yet. Ukraine is proving that the "big bombs" are useless - fpv drones can and do take out tanks, planes and ships. They don't survive long enough to deliver the "big bombs". Russia is currently reduced to sending in unmechanised light…

Sure but neither side has a B-2 or F-35. Drones are great for blowing up a few conscripts or a parked plane but a stealth bomber carrying 80 JDAMs can level 5km^2.

As Ukraine has shown, a truckload of drones takes out any number of planes, and large chunks of the airfields where those planes are parked.

Oh, and planes need fuel. And large production plants for parts, and huge maintenance hangars.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#565

Post by troupo »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #503
troupo wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. As soon as Russia nukes someone, the war instantly ends. Because no one will ever think to retaliate.

I get the sarcasm, but besides the US that for whatever reason might retaliate with nukes, who else? And would they risk it just because?

Yup. A country that starts nuking other countries in a genocidal war of conquest will not ever be seen as a threat by any other countries and will not suffer any consequences ever.

Russia has already entered this war on the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everybody and nobody was going to bomb them.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#566

Post by troupo »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #552
n4r9 wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UK and France are possibly more likely to retaliate, given the proximity.

Retaliate for what? They wouldn't be attacked. That's the thing I don't understand: why would they try to nuke Moscow if they weren't the ones attacked? And would they risk their own demise (considering the imbalance in warheads between them and Russia)?

Yup. Because a country attacking another with nuclear weapons in its mad genocidal occupational war it started under false pretenses will definitely sit back and do nothing once it showed it can and will use nuclear weapons for any cause.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#567

Post by andrewflnr »

roenxi wrote: post #504
andrewflnr wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't a goal for starting the war, but it sure is one now.

It can't be, because if that was the goal they'd just stop attacking. The strait was open until they sneak attacked Iran. Everyone seems to be in agreement that as part of a ceasefire the strait will open. Iran has shown no particular interest in closing the strait except as a war tactic. The US clearly does not have the power to control or open the strait militarily, its been months now. They appear to be outclassed…

Iran charging tolls is not an acceptable definition of an "open" strait.

All the stuff about China's energy supply... it's not that deep. Y'all are trying to believe Trump is playing 5D chess when he's demonstrably shit at checkers.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#568

Post by colechristensen »

dctoedt wrote: post #482
colechristensen wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It triggered a cascade of some of the stupidest and costliest government decisions in history. Eh. WWI wasn't an accident, a series of unfortunate incidents, or something that just got out of hand. Countries and people WANTED the war, war was still thought about as a general benefit to the country, almost sporting. Everybody was feeling powerful with the new capabilities industrialization gave them and they wanted t…

So you agree with me — stupid decisions, catastrophic fuckups.

>stupid decisions, catastrophic fuckups

The implication here I'm disagreeing with is that the war was the unintended consequence of mistakes. Instead of mistakes leading the continent down a dark path it was intentional, just waiting for an excuse to start fighting.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#569

Post by troupo »

ericmay wrote: post #533
troupo wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and 24/7 airlifts of critical weapons and equipment that beat them back? There were no 24/7 airlifts of criticql weapons and equipment at any point in this war. Ukraine was expected to fall quickly, and any help it needed started arriving very reluctantly, very slowly, in small batches stretched over months and years of deliveries much much later.

That’s wrong. The US and UK airlifted anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles among other things to Ukraine while telling the world Russia was about to invade (which Europeans refused to believe). You may be confusing European support and their lack of it (remember the famous time Germany just sent 45,000 old helmets?) with how the United States and United Kingdom helped. For example this was published in April 2022. So…

There's a difference between "airlifted 24/7 since the beginning of the invasion" and:

- the two packages promised in March were delivered by April, all pushed via conventional transport through Poland and Romania (IIRC deliveries didn't start until at least mid-March, and by that time Ukraine was already suffering heavy losses, logistics collapses etc. )

- there's a nebulous commitment to which we know barely trickled in as US committed, then withdrew, then commited, then withdrew support, then claimed Ukraine was too stupid to use these weapons, or that it would lead to escalation, or...

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#570

Post by skolos »

pheaded_while9 wrote: post #505
helsinkiandrew wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Units can also collect e-points to purchase more equipment: > The allocation changes regularly, but as of June 2025, Business Insider reported that destroying a tank was worth eight points. A multiple launch rocket system counted for 10. Killing a regular Russian soldier earned 12 points. Wounding a drone pilot was valued at 15 and eliminating him netted 25. In the final step, the payoff, units use the points they’ve…

Gameification of war is the literal worst thing I ever heard. Lords of War, eat your heart out.

It sounds more like market based allocation than gameification.
Post reply on HN