I think they want to control the power grid; not destroy it. The shelling was probably directed at the plant’s defenders.
They had better be good shots. I would think that a stray round could really mess things up.
Yeah, I thought those were flares to thwart IR seekers. I did not know you could bail out of any helicopter.
I agree.
I do wonder if the attackers had been instructed to shoot at office buildings, not the reactors.
Is switching electricity to various areas done at the reactors, or some where else?
Yes , but they have a 20 year lead time. They should fire the person who screwed the demand forecast or headed off plan.
To which specific hoaxes and propaganda do you refer?
Canada and the US were never part of the same nation, nor did they face an invading force together on their home soil
TL;DR: I have no doubt invading American soldiers would be singing ‘Blame Canada’ as they shot the place up.
That’s the only one I know of, but I’ve never actually seen it happen. It’s similar to an airplane ejection, except the rotors (it has two stacked main rotors) are blown off along with the canopy before the seat ejects. I wonder how well the crew fared, I only saw one parachute and it’s a two seater. Still no verification that it’s actual footage from Ukraine.
I took another look at the video of the Ka-52 that was filmed up close after apparently being shot down. It has no Russian markings of any kind on it, simply a white “V” in place of the aircraft number over the nacelle. No serial number (I’m blanking on the proper name for this) on the fuselage or red star on the tail. I’m not sure of the significance of that. A bit unusual because the Russians are using a white “Z” to mark their ground vehicles to protect from friendly fire.
There are many videos of Russian ground vehicles with white Vs as well as Zs. I don’t know what the significance of the markings is – perhaps different army groups.
I haven’t seen the Vs, I’ll have to keep an eye out. It’s usually used as a quick way to identify friendly vehicles when you have combined forces that use different equipment, like the US Abrams and the UK Challenger operating in the same area.
Found this probably useless speculation:
The Russian’ special operation’ is underway in Ukraine to demilitarize the country. The Russian tanks, armoured personnel carriers, and infantry fighting vehicles in Ukraine have unique markings, particularly the signs Z, V, triangle, and a circle or O.
People have put forward various versions of the meaning of these symbols. The most prevalent version is that the letter Z stands for ‘Zelensky’, which is the last name of the Ukrainian President.
In the Russian language, Z could mean Zara’s (West), or zadacha (Task), or zavershenie (completion) zvezda (star) in the given context.
Some Russians on social media write that the letter Z is being referred to as ‘west’. Some others associate Z as a symbol of the final stage of the liberation of Donbas. Russian media focused on the explanation ‘West’ and called the military actions’ Operation Z’.
But later, other markings began emerging on the vehicles. So, the media suggested that the markings may indicate the composition of the crews and the type of military equipment. Some decided that the paint glowed in the dark so that the Russian military would not accidentally hit their own.
Or maybe they are just copying Squid Game.
There have been various experiments throughout the years to put in an ejection system in a helicopter including the US. Russia is the only country that put it in an operational helicopter. When I was in navigator/observer school I remember seeing videos of some of the experiments. Some of them had the system that blew off the rotors first. Others ejected the crew straight down which seems like a very bad idea to me.
If anyone is interested the best compilation of Ukraine combat footage is probably at FUNKER530 dot com. They do a pretty good job of analyzing the footage so old and/or misleading footage is either labeled correctly or not posted. A warning, they don’t edit graphic content if it’s present in the original footage.
Game over man! Game over!
My understanding is that that convoy–and similar ones–is not “stalled,” but is a standing point in Soviet/Russian logistics and staging configurations of 60-80 mile series of refuel/supply stops for forward operating bases in an encirclement or other massive campaign.
What is that understanding based on?
Thanks for the link, some clear videos there. (I really wish some people didn’t add music to war videos. 
) I actually saw the helo shootdown over the field earlier and wondered if it was a training video because everything is just perfect in it. The camera is set up just right, the helo is low, slow and straight. The missile hits squarely and the helo drops like a rock in a straight line. Reminded me of a target drone. Getting too skeptical in my old age.
Yeah, I think they just outran their supply lines. If it was a planned stop they wouldn’t be bunched up on a road without any cover. While they may have static Command & Control sites, I don’t think they have anything like a forward operating base anywhere. It’s pretty much a ground assault all the way, they don’t have need for bases at this point. All they need is a logistics trail and they seem to be messing that up right now.
According the the old USSR, Ukraine was a separate nation, and got it’s own seat in the UN.
Fair enough. Whole reason for “my understanding…[challengable]” and “cite?”
The whole reason I–or anyone–am in this thread is to throw up probative “understandings” and learn. This seemed like in the whole a judicial apparaisal from a non-specialist, and certainly was informative in many other things:
rotational speed of the earth’s surface?
Having the direct, “Mk2 Mod 1-eyeball” experience of receiving small-arms fire during a short stop in a short convoy, I’ll apply some logic and experience to say that yes, “fish in a barrel” is apt, and the most secure convoy is a moving convoy.
I do not understand the rationale of having all of one’s convoy on one seemingly-endless ribbon of asphalt. . . again, “fish in a barrel”. I can only think of one reason: cut off communication/movement between two areas by slicing between them with a long line of firepower. But in maneuver warfare, you don’t need a long line of steel, just enough firepower at certain bottlenecks, and observation points to cover what isn’t actively guarded.
Frankly, there’s a lot of basic, elementary-level warfighting errors the Russians seem to be making, but as mentioned upthread, all my intel is coming from po-Western sources, and I have no insight into the current methodology of the Russians.
ETA: @Leo_Bloom . . . that video is a fantastic resource, and reminds me of the historical& doctrines the Soviets Russians use.
Tripler
What looks like the “last gasp of a dictator” could be, or could not–hard to tell.