Once again proving that mobile armour most definitely has a place on the modern battlefield, and the importance of good armour!
Here’s to hoping these guys are still in shape to keep it up and train others. And let’s get moving on sending more of these and everything else that can protect them while they throw out the Russians!
At some point it looks like the road will become so congested that it becomes an issue in itself. I’ve heard that the Russians deploy very few recovery vehicles, so blowing up a couple more tanks on that road could actually cause a problem for them. With the (very delayed) mud season coming they can’t go off road to get around either.
That’s not even mentioning the morale hit it must be to constantly be driving through absolutely wrecked convoys like this on the way to the line.
Keep it up Ukraine! And get your ass moving on more supplies Europe!
That’s just not how they’re using drones. They have specialised drone units, as well as drone operators that are attached to ordinary infantry units. If every guy in your unit is operating a drone, you’re ridiculously vulnerable to people advancing on your position, if only because a drone, while being accurate, has a stupidly low “rate of fire”. See my other comment on suppressing an enemy.
If a couple dozen soldiers with or without armoured vehicles are advancing on your position, you need a certain rate of fire to keep them pinned down to prevent them from advancing. One drone hitting that group every 30 seconds does far less of a job in that regard than a single MG sending out bursts every two seconds. Of course, once you’ve pinned down the advancing enemy, drones are great, but you can’t get away from small arms being essential in combat situations where distances are < 400 m, which is a lot of them.
Even in WWII, most soldiers didn’t usually see the enemy they were firing at with small arms. Even if your sentiment that small arms combat is a negligible part of modern warfare was correct (which it isn’t), this comment would still be wrong.
Yes, most casualties are not caused by small arms but by artillery. That doesn’t means small arms are useless, they just fill a completely different role.
When fighting with small arms, the major goal is fire superiority, which essentially means firing more bullets in the general direction of your enemy than what they fire back. You will generally be firing at either known enemy locations (“A guy is in that building, let’s shoot at the building.”) or suspected enemy locations (“There might be a guy behind that bush”). This prevents the enemy from popping out and shooting at you so you can manoeuvre on them and use grenades or call in artillery or mortar fire. Sometimes you will hit people as well, because you are shooting at places it’s likely that they are (the guy in the building eventually gets hit if enough people shoot enough shots at the building). Very rarely will you see an exposed person that you shoot and observably hit.
I knew it was just a matter of time before we would see something like this, with pretty much everyone having though something along the lines of “why don’t they get a drone with a net to take out other drones?”. But HOLY SHIT we’re actually seeing air-to-air combat between drones now! I can only wonder how long it will be before we start seeing bomber / recon drones with escorting fighter drones being attacked by enemy fighter drones equipped specifically for that task.
The whitespace doesn’t bother me at all, but holy hell! Any time I’m trying to understand a Python program/library that’s anything above a couple thousand lines of code, I instantly feel a burning hate for dynamic typing.
I love Python for scripting- in large part because of dynamic typing. IMO it’s just not a language made for building large infrastructures.
When I see this kind of videos I honestly have a kind of hard time imagining how they’re not just punching through Russian lines left and right… I mean, I just can’t imagine anything withstanding that kind of assault short of heavy air and/or artillery support coming in. Here’s to hoping Russias artillery and air advantage deteriorate to a point where these kind of assaults can be exploited and turned in to major breaches some time soon.
I’m assuming South Korea has an impressive production capacity for 155 shells, given the nature of NK, and the kind of war they’ve been preparing for. In that case, direct support from South Korea could mean a pretty solid increase in access to 155mm, which seems to be what is determining the course of the war in Ukraine!
HEAT rounds are based on a very thin jet of molten metal melting through the armour. Making the round detonate a distance from the armour can have a huge effect on its ability to penetrate.
Is this from the breach near Veseloye, or a new one? Good work either way!
Lasers are probably going to come out of testing to be the go-to defence against drone swarms in not too long. As you say, they would do what the Gepard is doing, but even better (at least against small drones), they just need to be finished first.
Just do a quick search for “mushroom cloud”, and you’ll find that all this combined is nowhere near what a nuke would look like.
The mushroom cloud formed from a small nuke like little boy (small by modern standards) reaches up to about 8 km. that’s close to cruising altitude for an airliner. The reason the cloud from a nuke “mushrooms” in a different way than conventional munitions is that the intense heat is causing enough hot air to rise to form a literal cloud when it reaches high enough that the humidity condenses. This can even cause radiative rain shortly after the bomb has gone off.
The fireball of Little Boy is estimated to have been almost 400 m in diameter with a surface temperature approximately equal to that of the sun, and every building within about 1.6 km was instantly completely destroyed.
It is difficult to comprehend just how much more powerful even a small “tactical” nuke is than any conventional weapon. There’s a reason soldiers that were shown blast tests of them during the Cold War have told stories of breaking down crying at the sight, because they just couldn’t fathom what they were seeing.
There was no nuke blowing up here.
Awesome to see the effectiveness og the Gepard like this. It seems perfectly suited for these kinds of slow-moving low-cost targets that you really don’t to send expensive interceptors at.
Especially when the leading drone tactic seems to mostly be “send enough to saturate the air defences”, having stuff like this that can rapidly burst down a bunch of drones at low cost, using ammunition that’s quick and easy to produce, seems perfect.
That’s what major versions are for - breaking changes. Regardless, you should probably be able to fix this with some regex hackery. Something along the lines of
new_file_content = re.sub(r'(?<=\bprint)(\s+)(?!\()', '(', old_file_content)
new_file_content = re.sub(r'(print\(.*?)(\n|$)', r'\1)', new_file_content)
should do the trick.
For someone starting out, I would say that a major advantage of Python over any compiled language is that you can just create a file and start writing/running code. With C++ (which I’m also a heavy user of) you need to get over the hurdle of setting up a build system, which is simple enough when you know it, but can quickly be a high bar for an absolute beginner. That’s before you start looking at things like including/linking other libraries, which in Python is done with a simple import, but where you have to set up your build system properly to get things working in C++.
Honestly, I’m still kind of confused that the beginner course at my old university still insists on giving out a pre-written makefile and vscode config files for everyone instead of spending the first week just showing people how to actually write and compile hello world using cmake. I remember my major hurdle when leaving that course was that I knew how to write basic C++, I just had no idea how to compile and link it when I could no longer use the makefile that we were explicitly told to never touch…
it would seem crazy to sacrifice it if it wasn’t damaged
To be fair, the best kit you’ll ever get is the right kit at the right time. If what you need is a tandem warhead that can track, hit and destroy pretty much any vehicle, or punch through a bunker, at anything from a couple hundred meters to a couple kilometres, and you have a Javelin… you’re in luck! On the other hand, if what you need is a tandem warhead to destroy a static armoured target that you can’t get line-of-sight to, and you have a Javelin… You’re carrying a very expensive but useless rocket and tracking system that just happens to also contain the exact warhead you need.
Once a piece of equipment like a Javelin is in the field, it’s only real value is in whether it can help you achieve your objective. Its dollar value seizes to be of relevance. The only relevant questions are “Do I have a large enough supply of this munition to prioritise using it for that target?” and “Do I have another munition that I can and should use instead?” If the answer is “yes” to the first and “no” to the second, you use the munition in whatever way is most practical.
Wow! I think this is the first video I’ve seen of active clearing of dragons teeth, and clearing of mines using line charges. This even has the follow up of lighter vehicles following through the breach! Do you have more footage like this and/or a geolocation?
Holy shit! Was this caused by drone strikes? I can’t imagine how Russia could have this much ammunition located within range of this kind of strike, let alone how enough munitions got through the air defences to set all this off, or how the fire prevention measures are bad enough that this could be the result of a fire spreading from just a few hits.
Yes, it’s a field. Specifically, a field containing human-readable information about what is going on in adjacent fields, much like a comment. I see no issue with putting such information in a json file.
As for “you don’t comment by putting information in variables”: In Python, your objects have the __doc__ attribute, which is specifically used for this purpose.
Nah, but the Russians took massive losses at some point last year (I seem to remember) because the Ukrainians launched a bunch of mines behind an attacking column, so that when the column was beaten back, they ran straight into a newly placed mine field.
My impression is that remote mining is used for two purposes: Defensively, you can break up or slow down an advance by suddenly laying mines either in front of, in the middle of, or behind, an advancing column (the latter preventing reinforcements from arriving, or the attacking force from an orderly retreat). Offensively, you can use remote mine laying to cover the flanks of an advancing force, or prevent reinforcements from reaching a position you’re attacking.