been seeing updates of UA forces taking the spit on the east back of Dnipro river south of Kherson. sounds like it’s a jumping point to try and take control of that east bank and control the rivermouth itself
US is linking Iranian drones to commercial shipping attacks
Russia continues to play their own style of Roulette with ZNPP
think about range, altitude and payload when crossing into enemy territory. problem lies in the technology inside them falling into russian hands and their ability to reverse engineer them in China.
Cheers mate. I was actually just reading about them. Looks like the last word on sending them rests with the Secretary of Defence.
at the bottom of that article, imagine the damage Ukraine could do with a missile range of 300km…they would put the entire Russian front in range of attack. Would really force Russia’s hand at that point.
This wouldn’t be the first time modifications have been made to US systems to get them to Ukraine. The Wall Street Journal reported in March that classified components were removed from Stinger antiaircraft missiles by simply taking out several screws. That was enough for the US to be able to ship them out.
Like the Gray Eagle, the US has also so far pushed back on requests for the long-range ATAMCS missiles, with a range of around 200 miles (300 kilometers). Ukraine is so keen to get them that they have offered a remarkable level of transparency with the US, sharing their targets, sources told CNN.
“We need ATACMS,” the Ukrainian official reiterated when asked what else, along with the Gray Eagle, is at the top of their wish list.
A $400 million US package for Ukraine announced earlier this month included another commitment of more than 1,000 unmanned Phoenix Ghost drones. Unlike the Gray Eagle, those are smaller, single-use suicide drones.
Since Russia invaded Ukraine in late March, the Biden administration has supported Ukraine with increasingly advanced weapons. Pushing, while trying not to cross, a line that they believe Russia would see as overly escalatory.
Last week, President Joe Biden reiterated his team’s concerns, telling reporters at a news conference: “I’m not looking for [Ukraine] to start bombing Russian territory.”
The thing that still gets me is this hesitancy to give Ukraine the best kit for fear that it might be considered ‘escalatory’ by Moscow. Those cunts don’t need an excuse to continue with their war crimes. They will continue regardless.
Ukraine has already showed it’s not stupid enough to launch missiles into Russia proper. Anything else is fair game , surely ?
I don’t think they will be a game changer. But they would give Ukraine some longer range strike power. However, then they need to fly deeper into Russian air defence which will mean some of them, maybe many, will be short down. A greater game changer would be long range stand off missiles for Ukraine, so that they could have strategic strike capability and strike airfields and Adminsitration and Logistics behind the front. But the US don’t want Ukraine to have that capability for some various reasons (I think the reasons are bad at this point in time, as Russia strikes very deep). But the US don’t want to see American weapons be used to shell or bomb targets inside Russia.
I imagine that the US will continue to refuse weapons that can do strategic bombing so I don’t see this happening.
Propaganda infests Russian society, so not very surprising to see this:
how could it NOT? you can operate these from Lviv with that kind of range and fly time. just the surveillance alone along the eastern front can tell Ukraine what’s going on. Satellite surveillance is only good when the weather co-operates.
It enables a few strike missions that Ukraine could not easily previously target and you can collect a bit more intel maybe, but you must deal with Russian AA. You cannot compare this drone to the introduction of HIMARS, which was artillery that outranged RU artillery. You also can’t compare it to long range stand off missiles that can hit deep, which is harder to shoot down or ATACMS.
I don’t see how this could be a Game Changer at all. It would give Ukrane a new important tool, but would likely not grieviously harm Russian forces like long range missiles would. It’s would be important, but doesn’t fit the term Game Changer for me at all.
Note also that the payload, if used in strike missions, is also only small hellfire missiles. That is not exactly a big warhead, but is designed to strike a tank or a small house/apartment. Not exactly the best weapons to target a Russian military base with.
Anyway, I don’t think it would be a game changer. ATACMS would be.
Hiroshima?
@Magnus fair enough
quite a jump, don’t you think? Also, that’s a two-way street.
you understand that the quote is from the Julia Davis link, not my own statement…
I get that, but it was an extreme case where bombing civilians directly influenced the military situation.
Actually, that has been debated. It was certainly the last act of the war but it has been suggested that the Soviet entry into the the war against Japan had a far greater impact on the thinking of the Japanese leadership. The bombings were not intended to influence Japan so much as the Soviets.
200 days … vorsprung durch technik !
The EU has just declared Russia a state sponsor of terrorism. 
Typical Germany… 
But constructing these terminals so fast have come at a cost: € 6 billions , the double of estimated normal cost, and the liquid gaz they’ll receive will be far more expensive.
Also, their ambitions to try to progressively phase out fossil energy has obviously received a big hit, but they didn’t have a choice, had they? It’s the previous government’s policy which made them so dependent on Russian gas. With hindsight, that was an enormous strategic mistake.
