No. The link to the automatic grenade launcher article. It has this table: Automatic grenade launcher - Wikipedia
I missed that link. I was looking at the varients section.
Do infantry soldiers carry grenades anymore? The portable launcher is much more effective.
Different purposes. Grenade launchers are direct fire only, while regular thrown grenades can be also used for indirect attacks - over a wall, into a foxhole, through a window, etc. Plus, to use a grenade launcher you have to carry both a grenade launcher and its ammo, while to use a regular grenade, all you have to carry is a grenade.
My son had to learn to throw grenades last month at Advance Training Camp.
I can see the advantage for an infantryman to carry grenades.
It’s eerie waiting for the Russian response. Whatever they do to retaliate will probably be aimed at civilians. The Russian military’s tactics are brutal on a good day. Putin is embarrassed and pissed off now.
Ukraine’s Kursk operation is still making impressive gains. I posted a link in the other thread. Ukraine has destroyed the only three bridges available for logistics. Leaving a pocket of Russian troops cutoff and almost encircled. This could be another big development in a few days.
Here’s a lot more on grenade launcher ammo. These are very common weapons dating back to WWII.
I’m wondering if maybe the Russian concept of land and territory is fundamentally different from that of the West. Russia may not actually care if Ukraine takes 1,000 square kilometers of land in Kursk if Russia can take 2,000 square kilometers of land in Donbass. Which is quite unlike the West - the United States, for instance, would never be okay with an enemy seizing and holding a chunk of California or Arizona even if the United States managed to get an equal or greater chunk of land elsewhere.
I’d sooner believe that the Russian concept is simple: we will defeat the government of Ukraine entire. Then when their forces collapse, it won’t matter which land their former army was standing on. It’s all ours now. 100% of pre-war Russia and 100% of pre-war Ukraine. All Russian now and forever more.
Yes, it’s a semi-fantasy based concept.
But how long do you think Ukraine would last if the West is sufficiently stupid to elect trump and Le Pen and all the rest of the RW isolationist nationalist so beloved of Russian botnets and troll farms. And now suddenly NATO, the EU, and the USA all turn their back on supplying Ukraine?
The Russians expect to win. The difference between them and the e.g. US is they don’t (now) expect to win quickly and that pace doesn’t really bother the government. And the people of Russia don’t get a chance to voice their opinions, assuming they had any.
Russia is the largest country in the World (by area).
Putin’s pride is bruised but the Kursk region is rural and not a significant percentage of Russia’s territory.
I agree Russia is looking at the long game and knows the prize is Ukraine.
Yeah, Daily Fail
But the photos are real.
Any bets on how long he’ll last in the Russian army?
LOL sick bastard learned a hard lesson https://youtu.be/aG3StVmL32Y?si=k2lDQ_r6BvcGpJ8A
Thinking back to when there was that rebellion by Putin’s mercenaries (I don’t remember the guy’s name but I remember his plane exploding in mid-air shortly after he made up with Putin), is there any chance that Ukrainian forces could roll all the way to Moscow? As I recall from that brief rebellion, the rebels were going from the Ukrainian front towards Moscow and they did not encounter any significant opposition along the way. I feel like they got about halfway there in 24 hours or so but I could be totally off on this.
Yevgheny Prigozhin was the man leading the Wagner Group on that rebellion to Moscow.
Unfortunately, it’s unlikely in the extreme that Ukrainian forces could get to Moscow. That would be another 500+ kilometers and Ukraine has already been moving only relatively slowly in Kursk despite its best efforts. Any serious indication of Ukrainian thrust towards Moscow and Russia would really pull out all of the stops to thwart it, not to mention that Ukrainian supply lines would be unsustainable long before that.
Russia has not gotten to Kyiv in 2.5 years of fighting; it’s hard to see how Ukrainians could get to Moscow.
Viktor Orban is heroically standing up to the Ukrainian bullies who are picking on poor defenseless Russia. /s
Moving the discussion about last nights huge missile attack to here for discussion.
What could NATO do to shoot down some of the missiles?
I know Poland has tentatively suggested the ones crossing their territory could be targeted.
How about NATO warships intercepting missiles that cross NATO territory?
It doesn’t make sense to spend hundreds of millions in military aid when Ukraine is being blasted into the stone age.
I hope that very few of the Russian missiles cross NATO airspace, and mostly do so mistakenly. It comes pretty close to a casus belli!
What can NATO do to help Ukraine? Give them more Patriot missiles (I know, they are very expensive and in short supply – and we may need them ourselves) and let them use the Western weapons they have against Russian territory.
Ultimately the Russian airfields will have to be targeted with more than drones. Ukraine has the capability whenever NATO gives the go ahead.
It has taken Ukraine 18 months to develop their own long range missile / drone (they seem to use both words, it is some kind of hybrid). This is Palianytsia, named after a type of Ukrainian bread and a word so notoriously difficult to pronounce correctly that it was used to unmask suspected spies early in the war:
From the article:
A Ukrainian military video hinted that its range is up to 700 kilometers (430 miles) — on par with the U.S.-supplied ATACMS. It showed a map with various airfields, including Russia’s Savasleyka air base, which lies within that range, adding that the Palianytsia can reach at least 20 Russian airfields.
One of the specialists involved in the long-range missile project said it was “a completely new development, from scratch” that began about 18 months ago.
[…]
“This is not an extension of an old Soviet project,” said the specialist, speaking on condition of anonymity to safeguard the project’s secrecy. The missile has a solid-fuel booster that accelerates it, followed by a jet engine, the specialist said.
What I did not find is the load this new missile / drone can carry. And the range is a guesstimate. More information will surface in due time.
That could be a solution if Ukraine can the missiles into full production.
Ukraine should only target military installations in Russia.
Ukraine also has the Neptune, which they’ve adapted for land attack roles. If the US is concerned about US weapons being used in Russia, perhaps they could fund and/or help build Ukrainian domestic long range missiles. Might be difficult having Raytheon clandestinely stand up Neptune production, but I imagine something can be done.
Russia’s poor command & control has been its undoing in the war with Ukraine. Their military often shoot themselves in the ass. But not with Glide bombs in Kursk. 
I assume Cancian is referring to the fire support specialist in the US military? Their skills are crucial for artillery and close air support.
Link Russia Not Using Many Glide Bombs in Kursk As Could Hit Self: Expert - Business Insider