Yes, Share the "Evidence"))

Allow me to remind you--404 does not have any of the advanced ISR and is entirely dependent on the US for this and Command, Control and Communications. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Saturday he will share evidence with the United States showing Russia is assisting Iran in targeting U.S. bases in the Middle East via satellite surveillance. "Since the beginning of July, we have recorded active Russian satellite surveillance of the Gulf states and U.S. military facilities located there," Zelenskyy said on X. "These images subsequently appear in Iran. At the same time, there is a clear correlation between Russia's satellite imagery of these sites and Iranian strikes — both before the attacks, in preparation for them, and afterward, to assess the damage inflicted." Zelenskyy's accusations of Russia helping Iran target U.S. troops are not the first. Multiple sources, including a senior U.S. official with direct knowledge, told CBS News six days into the war that Russia was providing intelligence to Iran regarding U.S. positions in the Middle East. 

Yes, Zelensky will be sharing American intel with ... Americans. That, my friends, is called chutzpah. A special kind of chutzpah, I may add. But, as you all know, America's "friends" since Korean War are not exactly an admirable bunch. 404 (highly likely from Kazakhstan, maybe Azerbaijan) hit Iranian vessel in Caspian Sea--killed a crew member. Iran promised a delivery of a good payload to some targets in 404. Meanwhile The Economist sounds alarm. 

China is gaining troubling military know-how from Russia. It is learning how to improve its drones, nuclear subs and air defence. 

No shit, geniuses, you don't even know half of it, but judging by the "expertise" of Western journos and political "science" so called "strategists" they will not be able to grasp even basic realities of the modern warfare paradigm. It is a huge celebration in Russia today--Navy Day. Vladimir Putin already congratulated those serving and connected to the Navy. 

Targeting Is Pretty Good ...

 ... for Russia's stand-off weapons. As you can see, SEAD in action. And yes, this is not SEAD they teach in NATO's military academies. Truth is, definition of air superiority as it is taught to, as an example, USAF is utterly obsolete. 

Let Me Remind You...

 ... that Soviet Navy was constantly present in Cuba through 1960s to 1980s. Visits have been regular and even one of the classes of my naval academy went on navigation cruise Kronstadt-Cienfuegos-Cartagena in 1970s. Here is one of the missile cruisers of pr. 58 leaving Cuba in 1969. 

It is absolutely normal for the US to react by tracking these ships.
  

Obviously, the class of these ships--both carriers of hypersonic missiles and extremely long range advanced stand-off weapons under present circumstances with the US unleashing a proxy war against Russia is concerning for the US. It takes 3M22 Zircon about 9 minutes to fly to, God forbid, Norfolk if launched anywhere from Bahamas area. 

But I do not take these concerns too seriously because as a former naval professional I totally understand, as do people in the US Navy, it is what is NOT demonstrated by Russia that should be concerning for them and these are Russian Navy's nuclear subs which patrol off both US shores and do it in a fully clandestine manner. Their tasks, whatever they are, are to remain invisible first and foremost. Is Russia making a public point in Cuba? Absolutely, including highly publicized exercises on simulation of missile launches to the ranges beyond 600 kilometers with "autonomous targeting", meaning that targeting is obtained purely through own sensors and helicopter, not from the external targeting such as would be targeting from Liana satellite constellation. Gorshkov's Monolit radar in passive mode can track surface targets up to 450 kilometers. So, we may only speculate how such a long range targeting could be obtained autonomously. 

It is clear that Gorshkov carries latest version of venerable Ka-27, Ka-27M. 

The "M" version of Ka-27 carries new radar and extends surface search capabilities dramatically. So, most likely, it was Ka-27M (operational range 980 kilometers) which could have provided such targeting.

This Is The Most Sappy Sentimental...

 ... piece of shit "journalism" I read in a long time. 

An expanding NATO uses its diversity as strength. Member troops know Russia is watching

It continues with:  

ABOARD THE FRENCH FRIGATE NORMANDIE (AP) — The French navy frigate, bristling with weaponry and powering through frigid Norwegian seas not so far from Russia, awoke at 7:30 a.m. sharp to what, in the circumstances, was a surreal sound. The 1967 “ Summer of Love " hippie anthem “San Francisco (Be Sure to Wear Flowers in Your Hair)" was playing over the warship's public address system. Singer Scott McKenzie's voice reverberated through the passageways starting to bustle with sailors clutching coffee mugs: “All across the nation, such a strange vibration, people in motion." It was a slice of Americana rousing one of France's most modern fighting vessels, beginning another day under Italian command, in war games involving 13 nations. And that, in a nutshell, is NATO: a multinational alliance built around the idea that its 32 countries spread across three continents could turn their diversity into strength and fight as one if the need arose.

I agree, the song is beautiful, I love it myself. But the problem with all that is in the fact that Russia doesn't care about "diversity" and she is, indeed, watching. Watching on part of Russia means Russia receiving real time intelligence, which automatically translates in tracking and targeting and no NATO ship, smallest or largest, has any means to stop a salvo of hypersonic (or even supersonic missiles such as Kh-32) missiles if Russia decides that NATO wants to start the war. Poor, poor dears. Once whatever will be left of US ISR in, God forbid, case of war and the remaining recon systems will register the take off MiG-31K and TU-22M3M, I have a suggestion for the tune to be played: 

Now, if only someone would explain to the author of this cringe-inducing BS, the graduate of the University of Leeds with B.A. in Modern Chinese Studies, that he should go back to writing about sports or for teenage magazines and avoid expressing his opinions on matters of combat readiness and targeting... of diversity. Yak...

 

P.S. History has it that Royal Navy's seamen, I believe from HMS Sir Galahad which was hit by Argentinian bombs in 1982, upon ending up in the cold waters, while grabbing to all kinds of flotation devices, many burnt and wounded, still sang "Always look at the bright side of life" from Monty Python. That's the spirit and heroism I can respect and admire. But then again--different times and that Great Britain doesn't exist anymore.

A Short Note.

I am under some COVID thingy. My whole family got it but already recovered while I, as usual, was the last man standing and I finally got that shit too. But it is not really that heavy, just overall malaise and coughing. I, actually, pray to Our Father, which art in heaven, that it is COVID, not the fvcking bronchitis, which I had about 5 years ago. That stuff is nasty, because you cannot sleep because of the non-stop exhausting cough, even with a max strength prescription drugs. Other than that, it is nothing special, just traditional mild cold/flu.  I did a morning interview with famous Russian Podcast today together with the Colonel of Central Apparatus of Russian MoD Vladimir Trukhan and our gracious host Polit Wera. Those who want to suffer from Russian language and words' play, here is the path to linguistic hell in Russian. Wera decided to do it on RuTube this time. I am coughing already there, a lot. 

While I recover, it is my second day, Larry Johnson wrote an excellent piece on timing and the timeline of SMO--a precise subject we discussed today.  

A common theme marshaled to “prove” that Russia is failing in its war with Ukraine is that Russia failed to quickly take Kiev and, in fact, was forced to retreat from Kiev. In addition, the military analysts that populate the cable news channels in the United States insist that the Russians are bogged down and not making the rapid progress they (the Russians) expected. This is nonsense. I defy anyone to show me one statement by Putin or the Russian General Staff where a specific timeline was established or identified. This is a construct of western military analysts who do not have access to Russia’s military plan and are projecting their own wishful thinking as “evidence” of a flailing Russian military. But it is not only western military analysts sounding the Debbie downer dirge. A blogger popular with many Russia watchers, Strelkov, also is pushing the narrative that Russia is bogged down in the Donbas. More about Stelkov in a moment.

Larry hits the nail here on the head regarding Girkin-Strelkov. This specimen was always out of his depth, having zero military academic background, not to speak of his absolutely risible lack of any understanding of the conflict. You would expect this from such a "colonel" who mostly spent his military life as a volunteer in low intensity conflicts primarily on NCO level positions. How he "defended" Slovyansk in 2014 everybody saw and that is why he spent three days naked in Donetsk prison, awaiting execution, and only interference from Alexandr Borodai saved his sorry ass. But then again, I am on record that I do not look kindly, albeit do not completely forbid, at references to such Girkin's enablers as "Colonel" Cassad (Boris Rizhin). Cassad is in all this primarily, for all his commendable humanitarian activity, for money, same as Podolyaka and many others, including Girkin who is still butt-hurt that every single political party in Russia, from UR to CPRF refused even to talk about his aspirations to run on ANY platform as long as it gets him to State Duma. So, he is a classical sore loser and that what defines his "activity". 

So enjoy Larry's excellent write up and look, they DO exist, after all: 

Lol, this is in Popasnaya just recently. 

As you can see yourself, Russia is done with Azov Steel and Russian forces will complete "corking" Nazis there for good. 

This is today. BTW, John "the sentimental one" Kirby today vehemently denied the rumors spread by NY sewer, aka New York Times, that the US provides "targeting against Russian top brass in Ukraine". I happen to agree with him on that and not because of a benevolent nature of Pentagon but because Russia can easily respond in kind, because Russia is the only OTHER country, apart from the US, in the world which has a very developed ISR system, from space to ground assets, and it is not that difficult to develop targeting. Neither Pentagon nor Russian MoD want this type of the war of the assassins. So, just let leave it at that.

I Am Abusing This Expression...

But again, what can I do under present circumstances, so it goes: no shit, geniuses. Get a load of this:

Boy, what a novel concept--creating a weapon which has a targeting. Wow! I am sure "intel community" in NATO was surprised, because considering the development of modern weapon systems in the West it is supposed to dominate...everything. Which it does not, not even close, that is why for them the news that Soviets/Russians were into the business of providing "targeting capabilities" since 1960s comes as a surprise. This is not to mention the fact of, obviously, not fully understanding of how targeting for anti-shipping cruise missiles is provided especially such missiles as hyper-sonic Kinzhal and Zircon. 

There is a strong empirical evidence that "intel community" was not really intelling anything since once Russians....ah, let me quote myself, because this is becoming tiresome commenting on "surprised experts" all the time:

USSR/Russia were in business of over-the-horizon targeting and shooting for a long, very long time. Since 1960s, and most important Soviet anti-shipping missiles had combat ranges in hundreds of kilometers since then. Those who read my latest book know--I concentrate on this issue--how important it is to know coordinates of a target and the rate of their obsolescence for developing a firing solution (or a flight plan, if one wishes) for a salvo of missiles. For that, in 1970s USSR created MKRC Legenda, which, for some of its shortcomings did provide good recon and targeting on which a number over-the-horizon launches were executed with excellent precision.  

Some people still cannot grasp the idea that USSR/Russia (as was disclosed by Russia's General Staff) practiced the long-to very long over-the-horizon salvos both on the platform-based (see Mineral radar, among many other things) and external targeting including based on the space assets such as modern day Liana and it really DOES NOT matter for targeting if its is 500 km or 2000. Modern targeting being an issue of datum concerns itself either with Bearing (Azimuth) and Range to target, or with Phi Lambda (geographic coordinates) of same. Period. Modern day systems provide virtually real time picture of surface and ground assets and can easily, based on the so called motion elements of the target--its course and velocity--provide initial targeting which in case of such weapon as Zirkon, at the range of salvo of about 800 kilometers, will have Tau (the delay time) of arrival to initial position of target a circle with the radius of R=Vtarget x Tau, or, if one wants to play with numbers:

1. Tau (at Mach=9) for Zircon = 4 minutes (for Kinzhal at M=11-12 will be around 3);

2. For target, say high speed carrier or DDG--30 knots, this is 30/6=5 cables per minute. 

3. Thus, the circle (pay attention--this is if we don't know target's course, if we do--the circle will become a sector) will have a radius:

         R=5 x 4=20 cables or 2 nautical miles, or roughly 4 kilometers. 

We know for sure (based on data on high selection-high ECM resistant radar seekers of such weapons as P-800 Onyx) that the minimal range of both radio and optronic seekers on either Kinzhal or Zircon is at least +-45 degrees angular coverage and range is at least 40 kilometers.  So, even if we shoot a single Zircon at the latest known position of target with Tau of 4 minutes, the range and width of coverage allow to find the target even if it has the speed of 60 and even 80 knots. In reality the width of the front will be:

                 W=R*2sin45=40 (км) *2*0,707=40*1,414=56.56 

or roughly 57 kilometers. 

So, even in this primitive scenario, for the target (the ship) to be able to escape beyond the width of the frontal coverage of Zircon (or Kinzhal) it will have to have the speed of 57 kilometers / 4 minutes = 14 + kilometers per minute or 870 kilometers per hour which also happens to be the average speed of a commercial jet such as A-320 or B-757. Obviously there are no known surface ships which are capable to do so. I doubt there ever will be, but, as you already all know in a missile exchange you launch a salvo of 2-4-6 etc. missiles whose task is to provide a leaker, or a missile which will break through air defense. 

So, you see. Once we omit here a rather complex issue of a resolution of uncertainties, sensor fusion and probabilities, as well as the issue of a Zircon's systems working properly (INS, updates, seekers, propulsion etc.) we arrive to a rather obvious conclusion that those who view targeting as a requirement to "pointing" target's position with the accuracy of 1 inch, they better update themselves on a modern missile tech, like since 1970s, when rules of missiles' launch were all about delivering missile to the range of detection by the missile's seeker (they vary from purely TV, to more complex optronics to radar to other things, wink, wink) and then... Well, some Soviet vessels and ships, such as hapless Musson (Monsoon) where my classmate lost his legs, learned it the hard way what happens when seeker captures the wrong target. Things changed dramatically since then, and what I wrote here is merely to underscore, yet again, how backward and badly educated those "experts" are if they think that receiving the targeting  and hitting the target 500 kilometers away is such a big deal. Not for Russians--they did it for decades and decades.

Read my lips: this is not a bravado, this is not an arrogance but the fact is that Soviet Navy was built around this concept--massive missile salvos at the maximum ranges which grew from 40-60 kilometers for venerable P-15 Styx to underwater start of the 600 kilometers-capable P-700 Granit and now 1000+ kilometer ranges. Russians have been at this longer than anyone else, simple as that. Good ol' MKRZ Legenda provided accurate targeting for Soviet Navy... even at the Royal Navy's assets during Falkland War. South Atlantic, guys, no less. Why they remain "surprised" dumbfounds me completely. Soviet/Russian anti-shipping missile developments has been documented extremely well and since 1990s Russians never made a secret out of it. In fact, they warned non-stop for the last three decades that hyper-sonic weapons and their enablers are in works and they are coming. Well, they came--now live with them. And don't tell anyone that you haven't been warned. 

In related news. It seems that CIA Director Burns spoke to Putin while visiting Moscow, and since the visit was requested by the American side, there is very little doubt that Burns had a message to Putin from Biden (or whoever is controlling Biden). Dems need something from Russia. They know their hold on power is tenuous now (not that GOP is much better, only marginally) and some arrangements are needed and, possibly, related to China.  

But You Can Call Me Flower If You Want To...

As you know, in the magical world of America's pundits and their Pentagon sources the unsettling feeling was percolating for quite some time now:

The shock from the initially slow, but now greatly accelerating, recognition that the United States was led on a primrose path of obsolete military technologies and operational concepts good only for fighting school kids, still resonates greatly in the circles of the America's military technology brainiacs who came up now with a new thing, which is really an old thing, but is called a new one and, because, as we all know, new names for good ol' shit are good. And, in general, we can call that any name we want. But before I proceed, let me disclose here a startling (for some) fact--image and emissions wise a large caliber self-propelled gun has about the same "footprint" as, say Iskander or Bastion missile systems. About the same size of vehicles, about the same intensity of radio-exchange and so on. Now get this.

The U.S. Army’s top modernization priority is to increase the reach and lethality of its fires, meaning artillery and tactical missiles. To say it has been making steady progress toward that goal would be an understatement; in the near future it will begin deploying weapons that far outclass their Russian and Chinese counterparts.   

OK, sounds interesting, but keep in mind that the shit is written in Forbes, known, among many other ungodly things for partaking in military wisdoms of such "experts" as comic artist with fuzzy biography as David Axe, who periodically creates bouts of a Homeric laughter among professionals. Keep also in mind the fact that this piece is written by Loren Thompson of a Lexington Institute and his biography and set of skills reads like a general set of underlying conditions which brought about a freaking fiscal, political and military mess the United States has become. Here is his "credentials" 

Mr. Thompson holds doctoral and masters degrees in government from Georgetown University and a bachelor of science degree in political science from Northeastern University.  

Make your own conclusions on how one "Ph.D." can teach simultaneously courses in "strategy, technology and media". I wonder if in his spare time he also teaches courses on appendectomy and quantum mechanics. But let's continue, Mr. Thompson discloses that: 

Two weapons in particular break the mold on what the term “fires” has traditionally connoted in Army circles. The Strategic Long-Range Cannon will combine a new gun barrel, projectile and propellant to precisely hit targets up to 1,000 nautical miles (1,150 statute miles) away. That’s greater than the distance from Berlin to Moscow.

And I was, like, sort of, hm...that is interesting--a cannon, with such a range, this is, indeed, a breakthrough, that is until I stumbled into this explanation, after failing to find it in Thompson's pseudo-military Pentagonese semantic BS, and as it turns out:

What gives the SLRC its nearly magical range? One likely solution is ramjet technology. Ramjets are air-breathing engines that use the projectile’s forward motion to shovel air into an intake and then into a combustion chamber, providing a lot of oxygen for fuel and propelling the projectile along at speeds from Mach 3 to Mach 6. Because the ramjet uses available air as fuel, it needs less stored fuel and makes for a smaller overall package. 

Ah, stupid me, I should have known better--they called a ram-jet missile launched from a barrel of a cannon a "projectile". Now, it is clear. It is yet another iteration of a disastrously stupid LRLAP for the cannons on Zumwalt-class DDGs, which were supposed to shoot not really rounds, but missiles and, of course, those "rounds" were so expensive that , well... read yourself:

The USS Zumwalt Can't Fire Its Guns Because the Ammo Is Too Expensive. 

So, what's the difference between this harebrained idea and a new strategic whatever cannon? Simple, more fuel and, hence, longer range for this new (theoretical) missile. It is a missile launched through barrel of a cannon same way as Russian tanks are capable to launch their 9M119M Refleks anti-tank missile through the tank's main gun. Obviously the ranges and targets for Refleks and SLRC, as well as targeting methods, vary greatly but both are MISSILES. Whew, now it is getting clearer. But my interest subsided greatly after reading this from Mr. "strategist" Thompson:

Who provides the targeting information? Target spotting for field artillery typically is provided by warfighting systems organic to the Army, such as scout helicopters and reconnaissance drones. But when targets potentially are a thousand miles away, a different approach will be needed. Gen. Rafferty says much of the targeting information will be provided by space-based assets. That presumably means relying on what used to be called “national technical means,” or spy satellites. Targeting information might also be provided by the F-35 fighter, which is nearly invisible to enemy radar and has extensive recon capabilities.

Yes, we all know that USAF "stealth" aircraft are absolutely invisible to everybody (/s) and they sure as hell will provide targeting, together with always reliable GPS (wink, wink), which, we all know, that if Thompson says:

Like the hypersonic missile, it will have pinpoint accuracy, thanks to GPS guidance.

it must be true and GPS will deliver a pinpoint "accuracy". Once one also considers the fact that the maximum declared speeds for these "breakthrough" weapons is up to M=6, it is worth noting that even in 1980s, during some testing of Sea Sparrow AD system, its missiles locked on artillery shells fired by 5-inch naval guns. Since then, the art of detecting, tracking and shooting down of very high-velocity objects advanced in leaps and bounds, not in the US, though, and modern AD complexes are designed to deal with M=6 missiles. This is if to believe that such a projectile will actually reach those. I have all reasons to believe that this is not the case. I have my reasons, of which I may talk later. 

So, what's the deal with this "cannon" which "shoots" at 1000 miles. I think Mr. Thompson rushes when declares this rather funny contraption a "breakthrough". For starters, he admits himself that:

The pivotal make-or-break year looks to be 2023, by which time both the hypersonic missile and long-range cannon likely will have proven themselves (tests to date have been promising)

Hence, my question, what kind of a breakthrough is this when, it needs to prove itself by the year 2023? Which, of course, as it is apparent from this typical propaganda BS written by an ignorant hack, is still not a guarantee; far from it--the whole "operational concept" comes across as a contrived bungled mess akin to a screenplay of a B-rated 1950-s sci-fi flick. It is clear that the United States is struggling with anything hyper-sonic and is still far away from fielding a complete and proven weapon system. US will get there, undeniably, but this is years away and professionals know this. Even today, when one looks at the type of weaponry Russia fields, it becomes clear that American exceptionalists (many of them being exceptionalists precisely due to their technical, historic, economic and military ignorance) are ready to go any length in their feeble propaganda trying to present either obsolete or preposterous impractical technologies by calling them anything what they are not. But it is nobody's fault, but America's, that she fvcked own missile development so badly, after convincing itself that she fields "the finest fighting force in history"(c). Even China today calls American bluff. 

Chinese general taunts US: Our success against you in Korea 70 years ago serves as a warning to you to stop escalating tensions

Russia called this bluff long time ago and that is the main reason why we will hear about those "breakthroughs" non-stop, after all, we can call them flowers if we want to...    

S-500 Is On Line.

The info that revolutionary S-500 air and missile defense complex was already in a slow rate production was circulating since the end of the last year. Now, as Izvestia (in Russian) reports, the system has completed its trials and is fully ready for full-scale production. As always, the trick is not with S-500 itself, despite rather stunning capabilities, but in integration with a vast system of Russia's ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance), from space down to ground level, and with other systems, such as S1 Pantsir designed to deal with all kinds of nasty drones, cruise missiles and JDAM-like munitions.  

As is expected, by far not all data on actual capabilities of S-500 is available, but the range of 600 kilometers against any aerodynamic targets means one not just tactical or even operational, but fully strategic ramification--it is precisely the range within which latest versions of E3 Sentry AWACS aircraft must enter to have any impact of the target acquisition  and battle management. So, you get the idea, right? As you can see, my next book (while still not 100% completed, very close, though) is getting ready for hitting shelves this Summer, and it touches partially on these issues. No NATO Air Force is capable to fight without AWACS enabler. Without it it becomes severely degraded and an easy pick for hostile Air Force and, especially, ground-based modern AD complexes such as Buk-M2, S-400 and S1 in the "ambushes". While one may argue with Irina Alksnis' (in Russian) that Russia didn't exit from arms race, she simply won it, there is very little doubt about the fact that within last 15 years Russia designed, developed and produced some of the most revolutionary weapon systems in history, and which did change warfare and rendered old operational and strategic thinking still dominating Western military-political circles simply obsolete. My new book is precisely about it, not some tactical (well, a little bit) mental masturbation, which I gladly leave to fanboys, also known as media and internet "military experts".  

Completely forgot. Take a look at the latest Borei-A pr. 955A Prince Vladimir (Knyaz Vladimir)--a dramatically different ship, in and out, than previous three. It also looks rather menacing.