- - - - -
- - - - -
/2019/06/sources-say-downed-uav-penetrated-deep-into-iranian-airspace/
- - - - -
https://tass.com/defense/1065905
76 Su-57 by 2028. Not few, not many.
Many Typhoons and F-22 (produced since 2003 and 2002) will be really old by 2028 already.
- - - - -
defence-blog.com/army/ukrainian-soldiers-obliterates-unique-russian-artillery-reconnaissance-complex.html
The vehicle has tracks, but the crew chooses to operate from the road, which makes determining its coordinates much easier. This is the kind of tactical stupid that's borne out of complacency. Same deal as with Frenchmen letting recce drones fly the very same route day after day during the Kosovo Air War.
- - - - -
bostonglobe.com/opinion/2019/06/30/soros-and-koch-brothers-team-end-forever-war-policy/
- - - - -
china-defense.blogspot.com/2019/06/pr-photos-of-day-smurfs-training.html
Hardly anything in these photos makes sense (to me).
The physical fitness stuff is stupid, the uniforms are stupid, the simulation of underbarrel grenade launcher weight with (not fixed) canteens is stupid, the urban combat tactics seem stupid, the way of moving with backpack over a rope is totally stupid.
I'm a bit conflicted. On the one hand there's history showing that Russians have a consistently (over centuries) poor efficiency in warfare, and Chinese the same. There's plenty indications that their tech sucks more often than not, and plenty people told me that Chinese psyche is unsuitable for innovation et cetera.
On the other hand I also reject the notion that Russians or Chinese could be stupid or systemically unimaginative as individuals. There's nothing in IQ statistics pointing at them being stupid.
Maybe there's something wrong in their culture that explains this. Something that systematically nudges the people toward poor performance.
I'm sure that no Western armed service would so consistently and stubbornly publish such stupid photos. The use of stupid blue digicamo camouflage on marines alone is too much of an embarrassment. The USN has such stupid uniforms as well, but not for land combat (though theirs are stupid and dangerous, too).
- - - - -
https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/1141659389553795072
- - - - -
Somehow they missed the message from the German Einheits-PKW of WW2 that all-wheel steering is nonsense for military vehicles.*
Maybe it's the bulletproofing (and even mine-proofing) of our times' army vehicles that drives developers towards such overly complicated, heavy, thirsty and expensive vehicles. An armoured vehicle can be sold at five to tenfold price of a comparable unarmoured vehicle, even if the difference is little more than RHA plates (the difference is not quite as extreme with up-armoured vehicles).
Just a reminder; we could still move four humans with equipment around in a 1950's design Jeep, offroad and on-road. I assure you, they could move from A to B in a timely manner.
There's no doubt a golden middle, but I tell you, JLTV and other recent monstrosities ain't at it.
related
- - - - -
romeanditaly.com/the-discovery-of-2000-year-old-gladiators-helmet-in-pompeiis-ruins/
- - - - -
I've put my warship series AAW chapter from February 2018 (equivalent of 20 book pages) into http://www.analyzemywriting.com/ and the result was devastating. The readability grading ranged from grade 12.57 (Coleman-Liau) to grade 15.81 (Gunning fog). So I looked for a second opinion and asked https://app.readable.com/ for another Flesch-Kincaid score with a text version that had headlines, lists and captions removed (analyzemywriting gave grade 12.66 for Flesch-Kincaid). The result was grade 12.0 (and Gunning-Fog grade 14). At least I had a "cliché count" of 0%.
quoted from here"For comparison, according to this source, academic papers are written at about the 12th grade level. Malcolm Gladwell writes at the 9th grade level, F. Scott Fitzgerald at the 8th grade level, Stephen King at the 6th grade level, and Ernest Hemingway at the 4th grade level. It also says that only about 1 in 8 U.S. adults can read at the 12th grade level."
I have as far as I know also issues with too much use of passive voice and presumably some other habits regarding choice of words and grammar that are suboptimal.
This compound of writing issues might explain why I keep having the impression that many people who comment seem to be oblivious to my already given arguments. They may simply not have read them.
This compound of writing issues might explain why I keep having the impression that many people who comment seem to be oblivious to my already given arguments. They may simply not have read them.
I don't even know how to write simpler British English and I don't think switching back to Simplified English would help, so don't expect any improvements on this front regardless of this new-found awareness. Sometimes there's just a problem, and no solution to be expected.
- - - - -
OpenSeaMap with maritime traffic
- - - - -
https://9gag.com/gag/axzrznb
https://www.rferl.org/a/biggest-loser-in-kazakh-presidential-election-could-be-government-reputation/29991513.html
(I did not find some NGO or OECD election observation report.)
It appears to be a rather widespread problem:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/votes-in-invisible-ink-just-vanish-in-ballot-7vkg8p2bcp3
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/how-to-rig-an-election/
https://blog.penvibe.com/elections-and-disappearing-ink-pens/
- - - - -
www.vice.com/en_us/article/8qbq5x/the-cia-spied-on-people-through-their-smart-tvs-leaked-documents-reveal
"1984" was meant as a warning, not as a guide!
- - - - -
The Balkans.
- - - - -
I suppose we should get a study to see if the results can be reproduced, and if yes we should simply ban such surveillance software, period.
Meanwhile, our German ministers of the interior seem to have a consensus that the government should be able to spy a lot more on its citizens. They want encryption vulnerable and internet companies to yield as much surveillance info as possible when asked.
This is what I wrote about when I complained about the principal-agent problem. Our politicians should lead executive branch divisions to force them on a path of pursuit of national interest. Instead, they adopt the bureaucracies' self-interest for more authority, more budget, more, more and more.
- - - - -
www.politico.com/story/2019/06/08/trump-trade-deals-mexico-china-1358155
No skill negotiator.
- - - - -
www.politico.com/story/2019/06/08/trump-trade-deals-mexico-china-1358155
No skill negotiator.
- - - - -
“We reason that increased resources and independence from others cause people to prioritise self-interest over others’ welfare and perceive greed as positive and beneficial, which in turn gives rise to increased unethical behaviour,” the researchers concluded.
That would explain a lot - and point at a solution: Let them feel their actual dependence on others.You did not build that without the effort of many others, without the infrastructure provided by government, without the rule of law and enforcement of law by the government et cetera.
- - - - -
Next Saturday: A "How to fix ..." series blog post.
And no, it's NOT about Sweden, Spain or Finland.
- - - - -
So in etwa.
S O
defence_and_freedom@gmx.de
.
*: It might make sense for large 9+ ton trucks if they are expected to use narrow river or mountain roads a lot, but AFAIK there's no such vehicle. Timber truck drivers negotiate such roads without such bells and whistles mostly by skill.
To play devils advocate on the Chinese photos - while incompetence can never be discounted (even in Western armies/organisations) I don't get the impression that these photos were ever intended to be representative of actual training.
ReplyDeleteThese look like those silly Russian spetsnaz photos where they are throwing axes while backflipping. They might actually do this training to make themselves feel elite but mostly this would be aimed at the "folks back home" who might otherwise feel their militaries are not as strong as the US/NATO. Western militaries have all the fancy gear and keep beating up 3rd world countries so they have no need to engage in such posturing.
Basically while this is more about posturing than effectiveness, posturing is valuable in itself for deterrence and domestic political stability.
The question is "why don't they come up with something cool that doesn't look incompetent?".
DeleteAs for whether there is something "wrong" in Chinese and Russian culture I think that is probably a very blunt/orientalist expression to deal with a nuanced question (especially given that China is changing very fast at the moment).
ReplyDeleteFrom a purely military perspective I would also While Western military effectiveness is very high, we tend to measure everything by our own standards and the metric of success is somewhat different in both Chinese and Russian military thinking. US warfare in particular can be narrowly focused on complete destruction on the enemies capacity to resist - this is not the only way to win a conflict and may not even be the optimal objective in the first place.
Chinese objectives are often more modest, and their means more limited. They do get a lot of "bang for their buck" though and their primary objectives of securing their borders, shipping lanes and internal affairs are achieved for a fraction of the cost of a western style military.
Well, there IS a certain culture of corruption and "pohuism", which used to permeate throughout the whole society of Russia (and probably still does). Essentially, things end up half-assed. Russians also tend to have a less complicated and more direct view of life, which could actually be considered a positive in certain circumstances. That is how you end up with some *ahem* unique things.
DeleteAs for the Su-57, it still doesn't have the power unit that was intended for it and also lacks some of the more important sophisticated features beyond stealth that 5th generation fighters bring to table. I'm just not sure if the aircraft is actually ready for prime time.
Well, the Su-57 brings some things to the table that the F-22 badly lacks; DIRCM, IRST, tail radar, wider range of air/surface munitions. I think the Su-57 approach mated to a tailless airframe would be a clear 6th gen multi-role combat aircraft. It's probably deserving a generation 5.5 rating once it gets its new engines.
Delete76 planes announced. Uh-huh, sure. That's totally going to happen.
ReplyDeleteAfter all they need something to provide air cover for those hundreds of brand new Armarta Tanks which are also totally going to be built.
Don't let prejudice reign; Russia is buying lots fo military aircraft annually.
Deletehttps://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russias-air-force-getting-lots-new-aircraft-just-not-lot-su-57s-or-stealth-40817
76 Su-57 procured over several years would be a step down from the current pace of Russian combat aircraft procurement.
https://russiamil.wordpress.com/2018/01/24/russian-air-force-procurement-plans-2/
Delete"That would explain a lot - and point at a solution: Let them feel their actual dependence on others.You did not build that without the effort of many others, without the infrastructure provided by government, without the rule of law and enforcement of law by the government et cetera."
ReplyDeleteSounds like a great idea!
But how should we do it?
A general strike?
Confiscating their property?
Exiling them on a remote island with no communication to the rest of the world?
Don't be silent when their pro-millionnaire propaganda says that millionnaires and billionnaires deserved all that money because they are oh-so smart and crafty.
DeleteThe problem may be that they live in a bobble that tells them that they are the greatest and most deserving and those poor people are all addicts, lazy, immoral, stupid.
You mean like this?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comic/million-dollar-baseball/
Something like that, except for a cultural change people need to push back on the false narrative at all opportunities.
DeleteThe egocentric achievement narrative is deeply ingrained, though.
Who built the pyramids? Pharaohs.
Except they didn't, of course.
I'm positively surprised your writing scored so highly, and though I understand this would appear to present a significant barrier to the comprehension of your ideas, I am not convinced of the usefulness of such crude formulae (they all measure the same ratios with different coefficients so can be expected to correlate). It's infact perfectly possible to write clearly using long words and sentences, indeed technical words and expressions are much more efficient at communicating the meaning.
ReplyDeleteBtw, I didn't comment on it at the time, but thought your short article on peace without deterrence very timely :) It's heartening to see that even a blog with deterrence firmly in mind will pause to take the broader (and often more applicable) context into consideration.