Kyiv: Kakhovka dam blown up on Putin’s order.

Media in Australia is reporting that the Australian and US Governments are currently in discussion about a proposal to 'sell' 41 F-18A fighters currently held in storage by the RAAF to Ukraine. The planes are reportedly in a 'good condition' but no statement has been made about how many are flyable and whether or not some would have to be used for spare parts or, failing that the US would provide any needed spares. The key issue is apparently legal i.e. getting contracts signed as well as obtaining White House approval for the transfer because there is US propitiatory technology integrated into the aircraft. Ukraine has already stated that it is prepared to guarantee the F-18s will only be flown over Ukrainian air space and not Russian controlled airspace in order to prevent key components being captured by the Russians. If approved by the US the transfers could commence fairly quickly, well a least more quickly than the pending F-16 deal.

 

Good multirole aircraft. Will be interesting to see if any other operators are prepared to add to those numbers or at least stump up parts, training etc. The US must have a LOT of these lying about.

 

Wait... is it 'occupied territory' or is it 'in the offensive'? It can't really be both. If the Ukrainians are using it to attack, then its not really 'occupied' and its likely that fighting is taking place at the bridge they're using for their 'offensive'.

I think you're getting ahead of yourself (and possibly the 'offensive') here.

I've no doubt theres civilians being killed. ...by both sides. Thats part of what makes war so awful.

The Russians have a vested interest in aid and protection for the seperatsist regions... lest they no longer seek to seperate from Ukraine. THAT would render the entire operation moot, and why its extremely unlikely Russia blew up (what it considers) its own dam.

 

You don't understand that the Ukrainians might have used a bridge in occupied territory to advance further? Both sides have been blowing up bridges since this began for just that reason. The defenders regularly blow up bridges in territory they control when they fear they will lose that territory.

You're not even trying.

 

If they did use the bridge, they would've had to take it from the enemy. That means combat. That means (very likely) collateral damage to the bridge ...as I said in my first post.

 

That makes no sense. Either the Ukrainians secure the area before using the bridge or the Russians blow it up ahead of time to keep them from using it. Obviously they would not use it as a crossing while it might be fired on, and thanks to long-range artillery and other systems, they would not have had to do that.

 

The Russians Go Scorched Earth: Destroying a Critical Dam For Crimea || Peter Zeihan

 

Parts may still be an issue. The US contractor the RAAF has an MOU with was proposing to ship the planes back to the US so they could be broken up and used as parts for US F-18s. That probably just makes economic sense or it might reflect some kind of shortage in the US. Perhaps someone we both know could enlighten us! But that said yes, you'd think spare parts wouldn't be an issue given the number of newer F-18s the US has in service.

 

You're talking about a textbook 'infiltrate and secure' operation going off without a hitch. Those mostly exist in the movies. In real warfare, no plan survives contact with the enemy. Strategic targets are taken under fire.

 

The Hornet is the F/A-18, not F-18. Anyway, that would be an interesting option as well. Anything that could more advanced targeting and weapons than the aging MiG-29 would be a great option.

I think the A-10 Warthog remains a great option also. It's a tough aircraft that could do a lot of damage to Russian ground forces, assuming Ukraine can secure the skies around it from Russian AA systems.

 

And bridges are blown up when retreating to slow the advance of the enemy, which is what Russia just did, in addition to making the ground up- and downstream unusable due to water and mud for at least a month to come, and ****ing up a significant portion of Ukraine's agricultural capacity (the reservoir fed irrigation channels throughout the region). It's scorched earth.

 

Plus the number of older ones it can strip. I'd be curious to know how many there are in the US or elsewhere that are or soon will be surplus to requirements. They are extremely capable aircraft and especially useful as genuine multirole ones.

Ultimately Ukraine will need to move to more modern planes, but for the moment (whenever they arrive) these will do.

 

Its scorched earth regardless which side did it. Which is why its more likely that it was the result of battle damage. The bridge was important to both Ukraine and Russia, AND it was a strategic liability to both Ukraine and Russia. You think it was 'obviously the bad guys'... did you notice the poster who quoted the article about the dam having been slowly losing its integrity over several days and there not being a set time or event that it actually started?

That kinda **** happens when two armies are lobbing artillery and rockets at eachother, and probing eachother with mechanized weaponry looking for weak spots.

But go ahead and keep speculating... or regurgitating the propaganda you're sposed to believe. Clearly I can't stop you.

 

I'm not "regurgitating propaganda" because I disagree with your opinions. I do think that Russia chose to blow it for the reasons I have already stated. And yes, they are bad guys. In case you have forgotten, they invaded Ukraine, not vice versa, and they have no qualms about killing Ukrainians or even their own people to achieve strategic objectives.

I do agree that there is a possibility that it was some kind of accident. The only possibility I find exceedingly unlikely is that it was done intentionally by Ukraine, again for the reasons given.

 

Where are the orcs protecting the separatist regions?

They don't seek separation from Ukraine?

The orcs blew up their own dam.

Is English comprehension an issue for you?

 

Apparently the Marines till fly older F-18s and plan to up until about 2030.

 

The dam could be damaged from the shells from Ukranian side as well. Do you have a proof it has been blown up by Russians?

 

Zoomic, any proof here for your statement?

 

The flooded terrotories were the ones that were kept by Russians. The Ukranian kept the territory that is on the high bank of the river. I see no advantage in flooding the fortifications that Russians made on thier side of the river. If they wanted to do it, they would have already done it by now.

 

What is rediculous is that people here make specific conclusions without substantiating them. So far no proof for either side, only speculations.

 

Damaged? maybe, collapsed? Not at all. That dam is very big and very strong. Dropping a few artillery shells or even stuff like HIMARS wouldn't be enough to breach it. That had to be dome with explosives placed inside the dam. Russia was the one with access to the inside of the dam.

I imagine that over the next days & weeks the Russian propaganda machine will offer 'proof' of Ukraine shelling the dam, hitting it with missiles and setting explosives. We all saw this before withe the shoting down of the Malaysian airliner, despite the existence from the start of recordings of the people who shot it down saying the yshot it down.

 

The advantage is that during the period when a Ukrainian offensive is most likely the river will be impassable, Ukraine will be distracted on that part of the front dealing with flooding and the ground will be waterlogged for some time after the water goes down. The flood will also was away roads in some areas & leave a huge amount of debris that might get in the way of any force planning to cross the river. Fortifications can be rebuilt later.

That is why now is the time to do it. Of course, Russian stupidity can't be ruled out - this war has been a near endless display of that. Similarly Russia just wanting to wreck part of Ukraine is a possibility - it has been doing that week after week for over a year.

 

This is not a courtroom, nor are all facts ever determined, in one. In this forum, we even put forth opinions about future events, which of course cannot be factually known, in advance. So this is a place for the application of logic and common sense, to often incomplete sets of facts. Sometimes this renders the opinions meaningless, but other times, educated guesses can be quite sensible, and turn out to be correct. The arguments are linked to the moments in time, when they are being made. If you prefer not to speak of anything, before it has been ascertained with complete certainty, my only question to you would be, "what are you doing in a debate forum?"

 

That seems awfully close to "we have no direct confirmation of who did it, or if it was intentional at all".

Do we have anything more specific than Russia being the bad guys? As shown by the Polish missile strike accident, that reasoning is not sufficient, especially in the fog of war. I am forced to refrain from judgment until the facts are clearer than they currently are.

 

Yes, of course, Ukrainians are interested to blow up their own HES and cut of water supply not only to Crmeria, but also various cities in Southern Ukraine in the process drawing their own people. Logic was never a strong side of Russian fascists.