Who is actually winning in Ukraine?

[Ringo]

 

[Open Bolt]

Russia now has at least 500 Kinzhals located at its Arctic base, as mass production continues..

And if Russia uses any of them to nuke a NATO country, the United States will then nuke targets in Russia.

 

[badger2]

The Avdiivka cauldron is closing:

https://twitter.com/AZmilitary1

 

[badger2]

And if Russia uses any of them to nuke a NATO country, the United States will then nuke targets in Russia.

Kinzhals do not require nuclear.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Kinzhals do not require nuclear.

Without a nuclear warhead, it is not a very practical weapon. It costs about $100 million and a cruise missile costs only about $2 million, so most targets can be taken out with a volley of cruise missiles for much less than a single hypersonic missile. Apparently, Putin thinks a country as poor as Russia is with a third rate army should spend as much as possible to take out every target.

 

[para bellum]

Without a nuclear warhead, it is not a very practical weapon. It costs about $100 million and a cruise missile costs only about $2 million

Khinzal is just an air launched SRBM (Iskander).

Estimates for a brigade of Iskander-M is $200-$300 Mn. That's 12 launchers, 48 missiles, and support vehicles/loaders.

Unit cost on the missile is probably in the $1 to $1.5 Mn per copy.

 

[Toro]

 

[Toro]

 

[para bellum]

Thread about the failed crossing from a retired Gen.

 

[Flopper]

Maybe you ought to write a comic book?

It seems likely, there will be a negotiated settlement once Russia has complete control of the Eastern Ukraine. It is hard to imagine Russia being successful in the west with supplies pouring in through Poland plus it would be all too easy to make a mistake that would end in a NATO Russian war.

 

[Open Bolt]

Kinzhals do not require nuclear.

If Russia conventionally attacks a NATO target, the American retaliation will be conventional in nature as well.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Khinzal is just an air launched SRBM (Iskander).

Estimates for a brigade of Iskander-M is $200-$300 Mn. That's 12 launchers, 48 missiles, and support vehicles/loaders.

Unit cost on the missile is probably in the $1 to $1.5 Mn per copy.

Not that is not even close to being true. Even a cruise missile costs more than that.

 

[Flopper]

If Russia conventionally attacks a NATO target, the American retaliation will be conventional in nature as well.

That is most likely true. However, the history of war has been that of escalation to either vanquish the enemy or gain such an advantage that the enemy will either surrender or be willing to negotiate peace. And to do that each side must increase hostilities. As long as the two sides are evenly matched, nuclear weapons will stay in the closet but what if America technology proves too much for the Russia army and America air power is hitting Russia cities 5 times as often as Russians are hitting US cities. Would the Russian military stand by and watch their cities being destroyed or would they attach nuclear war heads to their missiles. I think the answer is obvious just as Hitler or the Japanese military would have done in WWII if they had the option. Nuclear stalemates are based on the belief that cooler heads will prevail and reason will rule over bloodlust. However, when the bombs start falling and all that we know and love is going up in flames, cool heads and reason will cease to exist.

 

[badger2]

Without a nuclear warhead, it is not a very practical weapon. It costs about $100 million and a cruise missile costs only about $2 million, so most targets can be taken out with a volley of cruise missiles for much less than a single hypersonic missile. Apparently, Putin thinks a country as poor as Russia is with a third rate army should spend as much as possible to take out every target.

No, it was a very practical weapon when used strategically (as[italics]) the black Pentagon puppet, Austin, perched its ass in Sofia. When the Kinzhal struck Ivano-Frankivsk and took out the ($)weapons storage depot, it was well worth the symbology, physical destruction, and exquisite timing of the hit: Ivano-Frankivsk was a sister city to the Pentagon. Western media is not bright enough nor powerful enough to find out what was in the marionette's conversation with Shoigu.

 

[badger2]

Though not a single USMB prisoner can credibly tally the $ loss of equipment at Ivano_Frankivsk from a single Kinzhal strike, or the value of Kinzhals to the Pentagon, missiles that cannot be stopped.

 

[para bellum]

Not that is not even close to being true. Even a cruise missile costs more than that.

Armenia got 4 launchers, reloaders, and command vehicle plus 25 missiles as part of a $200 Mn aid package from Russia. Also in that package was 400x Igla-S, 200x Verba SAM, 6x BM-92 Smerch MRLS, and possibly more- that's just what's in the SIPRI database.

The Iskander battery was estimated to be $70-$100 Mn. Russia doesn't publish price lists.

The fact remains, it's a short-range ballistic missile- it's not at all exotic, and comparisons to Tomahawks are like comparing a cabin cruiser to a ski boat.

They also have a "spotty" reputation, both in development and service.

That Aerospace Research center that burned down in Moscow a few weeks back was where the Iskander and Kalibr were developed.

Why calling Russia's Kinzhal a 'hypersonic missile' is a stretch

On Saturday, Russia's Ministry of Defence announced the first operational use of the nation's new Kh-47M2 Kinzhal hypersonic missile in a strike against a

www.sandboxx.us

 

[badger2]

Scott Ritter and Neopolitano video @ 7h:

https://twitter.com/AZmilitary1

 

[toomuchtime_]

No, it was a very practical weapon when used strategically (as[italics]) the black Pentagon puppet, Austin, perched its ass in Sofia. When the Kinzhal struck Ivano-Frankivsk and took out the ($)weapons storage depot, it was well worth the symbology, physical destruction, and exquisite timing of the hit: Ivano-Frankivsk was a sister city to the Pentagon. Western media is not bright enough nor powerful enough to find out what was in the marionette's conversation with Shoigu.

Silly stuff. The weapons will continue to flow into Ukraine and Russia's military factories will continue to close down, its economy will continue to contract and inflation, now 18%, will go to 50% over the next several months. Every day of war costs Russia 20 billion euros, over 1.5 trillion so far and it will cost Russia over 7 trillion euros a year. Every day this war goes on the Russian economy and Russian military grows weaker.

 

[skye]

Scott Ritter and Neopolitano video @ 7h:

https://twitter.com/AZmilitary1

Scott Ritter got it!

thanks for that.

 

[Ringo]

Not that is not even close to being true. Even a cruise missile costs more than that.

Everything that the Pentagon buys is ten times more expensive. That's the whole point. Military-industrial complex. It's much more profitable than drug trafficking. Besides, it is safe and honorable.