Why Are Russian Helicopters Shooting Up at the Sky?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 มิ.ย. 2024
- History shows that there is no shortage of strange aircraft maneuvers to delivery a deadly punch (ever heard of Toss Bombing?), but how the reason over-the-shoulder maneuvers aka Low Altitude Bombing System (LABS) aka Idiot's Loop, and why Russian and Ukrainian helicopters have been shooting rockets into the sky, is #NotWhatYouThink #NWYT #long
Music:
Cloak - Christoffer Moe Ditlevsen
Lethal Secrets - Christoffer Moe Ditlevsen
The Dropout - Guy Copeland
No Stone Unturned - Brendon Moeller
Dark Water - Magnus Ludvigsson
Footage:
Shutterstock
National Archives
Select images/videos from Getty Images
US Department of Defense
Note: "The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
0:00 Intro
0:46 Airdropping a nuclear bomb is easier said than done.
1:41 The challenges of aerial bombing
2:53 How toss bombing works
3:48 Over-The-Shoulder bombing aka LABS aka Idiot's Loop
5:19 Why are Russian helicopters shooting into the sky?!
7:21 The pilots are afraid of MANPADS
8:00 Is this technique a war crime?
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA GF D3 | Summer | มาร่วมเป็นพยาน กับวินาทีแชมป์!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JCYvEsFlwx8/mqdefault.jpg)
I bet the comments below this would be worth reading!
Prove me right 😉
Ok
*proves you right*
Really?
Bet I live thus video second one to comment and like I live your videos
the waffle house has found its new host
When I flew helicopters in the US Army, we lofted rockets. There are several reasons, if you have airburst rockets you can get good dispersion, wide area coverage, and there is also a possibility of guided rockets. The US now has 2.75” guided rockets.
oh no he is pulling a war thunder
what year did you serve? would be interesting to know that Lofting was used by Apache or late AH-1 variants
@xdxrk classified? 😂
@FD&BJ they do have guided missiles but suck at using and making them, also he didn't mention the S5
@FD&BJ They have guided variants of the S-5, called the S-5Kor.
in fact, at the beginning of the war in Ukraine, a Russian helicopter pilot explained that the computer in the helicopters has information about the target, that everything is automated, so that at a certain angle it receives a sound to fire rockets.. of course he said that it is not precise, but that the goal is to hit a certain quadrant. .. it is about a large number of rockets fired that will hit the same quadrant where the enemy soldiers are.. and usually there are 2 helicopters in a pair
You can say it's something like.
1 - "You see that square on the map?"
2 - "Yes"
1 - "I want it to disappear"
Rest In War to all invaders of Sovereign State of Ukraine!
@@DiscipleRF такой страны нет и не будет. Захватчик это США и его вассалы.
@@DiscipleRF Даже сюда ботов завезли, прям как коронавирус распространяются...
It has to be somewhat precise since the rockets are fired in the same direction by the pair of helicopters and the trajectory seems to be identical.
Pilots on Russian side confirmed the targeting computers are updated for rocket "loft" and they say it is much more accurate then you would think. Pilot seemed to note high accuracy is only relevant for heavier rockets (?). Should note I had to use Google translate so I might get some of the details wrong. US heli pilot noted they've known of this heli "artillery" support tactic of the Soviets for a long time.
I believe what they meant by "high accuracy is only relevant for heavier rockets", is that they can carry much fewer heavy rockets than light ones (5 heavy rockets per pod as opposed to 32 smaller rockets per pod - not a negligible difference).
So they can afford to let the smaller rockets be less accurate, more over the place than the few heavy rockets.
Also, if you were to use those heavy rockets (which are obviously more expensive, don't forget this aspect as well), it probably means you want to destroy something bigger/more heavily armored than just a couple of soldiers on the field. So the need for higher accuracy in the case of those heavy rockets could also mean this.
C-5 are lighter and have a larger dispersion area, C-8 are heavier and have a smaller dispersion area. This was meant.
this channel is a total biased crap. still spreading the misinformation. today youtubers just post videos and comments and reactions SO fucking sad. here the guy pretend what he say as TRUE FACTS but in fact just especulation
Not sure if somebody mentioned it before as I don't have time to read all the comments, Russians have developed pretty good outomatic launch for this kind of maneuver, with newest being able to calculate with wind and weather to further enhance precision, and when you combine good calculation with accuracy by volume, it can suppress enemy, either stopping their advance or shells shocking and than push their position.
At the same time, the video shows a much destroyed multi-storey building that was mistakenly hit by ... a Ukrainian air defense missile. But the author tells us about the violation of the Geneva Convention by the Russians with their "inaccurate" weapons. Marvelous!
In any case it's still better than going inside an area with saturated Soviet/NATO manpads
@@OrtonHeadXIV and stupid people don't realize this problem Russian Pilots are facing.
I think I heard that Soviet helicopters are equipped with fire control computers that can calculate solutions for pitch up launching. I can't verify but I still think that it makes sense, considering Russians seem like they are treating rotor wings more like airborne artillery and fire support systems than as air cavalries like the western militaries do.
The system called SPV-24 "Gefest".
I dont think the mission of these rockets is to blow up something specific. Its to inflict area damage , make the enemy force lay low and allow your own troops to advance. While still keep the helicopter in a safe distance away from AA's way.
If it didnt work , it wouldnt be used.
Spray and pray always works
"If it didn't work, it wouldn't be used," is a poor truism to apply to the current state of the Russian invasion... hahaha
Sure it works as in the rockets get to the general area they want it in, but is it really effective? They might put 40 rockets down range but unless they hit something important or someone they’re kind of just inconveniencing the Ukrainians.
@@lukeorlando6088 i mean invasion plan was not bad in essence it was tried and tested mechanised run . Problem comes mainly from incredible amount of corruption like tank dash without infantry, not having enough supply trucks , especially fuel trucks , low quality equipment. Tactics were not wrong but it's like if you wanted to charge with M 16 but government gave you 1911 . Both can shoot bullet but we know what's actually better. Basically if not for all yatchs and palaces of generals . Russians would have rolled atleast eastern Ukrainian land. Hell many of troop carriers had rotting tyres which caused troops to just leave them behind. Most probably bcz some commander pocketed tyres replacement funds
@@donk5058 It's about keeping hostile forces suppressed, this can be to stop advances or allow your own troops to advance while keeping the hostiles heads down.
Actually, LOFT bombing is quite common still. The F/A-18 even has a LOFT mode I think. This is probably because (if I'm wrong tell me) SAM sites like S-400s on flat land can wipe out anything above the horizon, including HARMs. So non-stealth aircraft without Mavericks or JSOWs and such in a pinch have to fly low up to it and pop up before running away in a 180°. That's why stealth is so desirable, because it makes it harder to lock you, especially because large radars can probably see you (but not make you undetectable.).
\/ \/ \/ Bully me for mistakes here. \/ \/ \/
It is common as f*ck doing a bomb run! using dumb bombs.
Even laser guided is used, you loft it further, and then guide it till impact.
Only thing is that the choppers use rockets instead of a bomb.
don't underestimate this cause in great number, it's like artillery strike! Fast and no retaliation by manpads.
Well the S-400 is overhyped as f, and there are only a handfull of them. There are also several other ws’s that can be used other than AGM-65’s and HARMS
@@AugmentedGravity
Not at all.
They are not overrated.
Literally one of the best air defence systems in the world right now.
You are really underestimating ground based defence systems of Russia.
They even scored the longest kill against one Ukranian jet recently.
@@fly463 nah, they are overhyped.S400 really went quiet and no longer shot anything down ever since that 1 "longest kill" probably propaganda anyway
Loft bombing can be surprisingly accurate. As long as the pilot deploys the weapon at the correct Speed, Angle, Altitude and direction. They will come racing down on the desired enemy position, ammo dump, headquarters, equipment concentration or troop concentration.
And
According to reports, they have managed to do just that more often than one might think.
Considering pilots are living calculators, I wouldn't be surprised if they did hit specific targets.
@@fatcat1250 i think its like tossing a ball; once you practice a bit, you can get really, really good at it.
@@fatcat1250 or the aircraft designer could just install a dedicated calculating system to release bomb/launch rocket at the right time. Kinda like CCRP bombing
Did you three responding commentguys even watch the video? It clearly explained the part about the computer doing the timing.
@@jenkem4464
You should watch it again.
He only theorizes that they could be using a computer to help fire the rockets, since modern aircraft use computers to lift fire bombs.
It is not truly known if computers are used to loft fire rockets or to what extent they help if they are used.
The South African Air Force Mirages perfected the toss bombing techniques during the Angolan bush war in the 80’s. There were no guided weapons but plenty of SAM, both radar guided and MANPADS. This was the only way to hit enemy targets. Skim in at tree top level, toss the bombs, turn and run before the SAMs could lock onto you.
Yes, and I worked on those systems. Also met a few of the pilots who were there, including the one who came back missing the back of the aircraft, because a SAM took it out.
4:58 wow! An inverted B-47? So it wasn't just a Boeing pilot doing loops with a 707 then. That's insane!
I admit that was the most impressive partof the video for me.
That, is a normal procedure. See, when the nuke is released from the plane, they have to do that maneuver, so they can have better chances of survival.
How does flying upside down increase chances of survival?
Oh, in Germany Werner Baake, a former german night fighter ace, did the same near Ansbach with a Boeing 720, registration D-ABOP, twice.
Unluckily during the second roll the plane disintegrated and fell out off sky, killing all on board. So: from hero to idiot its a short way... 🤷🏻♂️
@@iamnormal8648 You can go away from the falling bomb quicker than in other ways. Think about when you release the bomb and fly straight forward further. The bomb will go off near the plane, because you are in the same trajectory.
But when you climb very steep and releasing the bomb, doing a half loop after and roll out the plane you are on a opposit trajectory.
Sorry for my english, it is not my mother tongue. Hope you know what I mean... 🤷🏻♂️
I saw a toss-bombing maneuver on board the USS Enterprise in 1996.
It was the last deployment of the A-6 and they were doing a demonstration
Were they firing photon torpedoes?
Were you stationed on it? I was 1980-84. Have seen the world from that ship (also later USS Nimitz)
@@davidbwa I was AIMD in Carrier Air Wing 17. I did a cruise on the Enterprise in 96 and on the Eisenhower in 98.
@@Albireo8 ? the USS enterprise is a real ship no longer in service but yeah that is where star trek got the name.
@@MichaelThompson-ux6nn I kmow - just my silly joke. Best wishes!
Back in the late 80s (as a kid) I read that the UK Sea Harriers also employed toss bombing in 1982 during the Falklands War.
yes, they found the AAA too dangerous after Nick Taylor was shot down on May 4th.
Also in the 70's and 80's the AGM-45 Shrike had a loft mode and a dive mode.
I'd say technique is to harass positions rather than damage / target specific objects.
Maybe trying to overwhelm enemy radar & AA systems Parrallel to other munitions to clutter up the airspace or give false alarms or simply to test the depth & locations of enemy AA
Can get pretty accurate with this if you have the right parameters
I'd rather assume that this technique is simply used to supress the enemy and stress them mentally because there are random explosions everywhere
A terror tactic used by both sides
@@toolbaggers suppression fire is "terror" by your logic
Its right but only for old Mi-8. In Ka-52 there is a system dedicated for such a maneuver. It calculates everything and tells the pilot when to shoot.
If your only target is a big city, this is good enough...
@@redsun9261 ka52 shakes too much, no computer can help it’s accuracy with unguided missiles
Loved seeing the A-4 loft bombing video! I used to work on A-4 avionics, which included the LABS system. With the LABS timer and an identification point, the pilot could complete the bombing run with a nuclear flash shield over the cockpit. The needles on the AJB3 "meatball" would provide the guidance on when and how to pull up. The accuracy was good enough for nukes... not sure you'd want to do it for conventional ordnance.
As my Dad often said, "almost only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and atom bombs"
Saved your ass from the amateur Sceptic 😂
I can still see that A4 today that flew over the lake in my story above. It was scary cool 😎
From an old builder of the weapons of Mass Destruction Aerospace Guy 🖖
... kids nowadays huh
@@EinfachFredhaftGaming
Yeah, figures.
My response didn't load. And I even gave it a 👍. Seems to be happening a lot on TH-cam lately from the comments I've been seeing. ANYWAY.
Took me all of 5 minutes to Google the AJB3. And that includes 4 minutes of reading other stuff about the A4.
I was just surprised how an old guy can find it Immediately. While you kids always come up with " ???? " 😂
Well, since TH-cam got me from Behind 😳, better repeat my story.
The Blue Angels flew the A4 for shows (obviously) at the Hydros over Lake Washington a thousand years ago. And I remember,.. and have a picture somewhere,.. of one flying inverted SO LOW OVER THE LAKE. It was kicking up its own Rooster Tail, as it's tail skimmed so close to the lake, you'd swear it was touching. And Maybe It Was. But it was scary cool. And I remember it to this day.
... it was a different time 😎
@@EinfachFredhaftGaming
See,.. wasn't hard.
AN/AJB - Airborne Electromechanical Bombing Equipment
AJB-1 LABS (Low Altitude Bombing System) for F-100D
AJB-1B LABS Inertial Guidance? for F-100 Super Sabre
AJB-3* Loft/Toss-Bombing Weapons Delivery for F-3, F-4A/B, A-4
AJB-4 Low Altitude Bombing System
AJB-5 LABS for F-4
AJB-7 Attitude-Reference Bombing System for F-4
AJB-8 Inertial Nav/Attack System for AV-8A
... i still got game 😏
bomb tossing is still a technique used today for lofting ordnance. Specifically, JDAMs, CBU-97/107 WCMDs, and in some cases GBU-2* family laser guided bombs if the launch aircraft isnt lasing but a buddy lase on the ground. Even walleye glide bombs can be tossed and get a decent extended range. Theoretically possible to loft a GPS guided bomb over 30 miles in certain conditions.
Lobbing bombs is built into modern targeting chip ccrp systems. It was used by the Tornados in Desert Storm to get some kind of stand off because there it was not able to use guided munitions without a ground laser until the Buccaneer arrived.
Strange use of the Tornado.
Not saying it's not possible. Just outside the use and nature of the aircraft.
Especially considering it's use of the Runway Denial Weapon. They had to get up close and personal. That's what it's designed for. And the only aircraft carrying that weapon in particular 🤗
@@My-Pal-Hal The runway JP233 denial weapons was suicidal so they stopped using it. The bomb tossing was to keep some distance between them and the AA guns. By their account It was not an easy thing to pull off and they still lost at least one airframe using this tactic.
@@Kefuddle
Yes, I know what it is. I built this stuff.
And they got rid of the Tornado at the same time the got rid of the weapons. It's an awesome aircraft.
I always found it funny how many weapons are limited in their uses on aircraft. Just like the Phoenix missiles only on F-14s.
But,.. there's always the Most Important Thing when it comes to military aircraft. 🤑 💰🤑💰🤑
I read a book about the development of the Buccaneer and early on in their life they developed toss bombing tactics for the Buccaneer due to it's low level flying abilities
I read a book about the development of the Buccaneer and early on in their life they developed toss bombing tactics for the Buccaneer due to it's low level flying abilities.
I do this tactic in DCS in my Russian Mi-24 and KA-50, it works pretty well, surprisingly. safe from SAM systems, quick, rtb and rearm... rinse repeat
I should specify. in the Ka-50 for example, you have a Navigation target point that you can set. your hud displays direction and distance. when you come within 10.5km, you angle up to 45 degrees. 10.5 in DCS was about the max effective for the S-8OFP, while 9.5 you can get accurate hits within 100m of target, firing at a 35 degree incline. im certain Russian and Ukrainian manuals have mentioned this, as Ukrainian Mi-8's have been seen doing the same. but it would obviously be easier with a system that has Satellite navigation, like KA-52, Mi-35 and Mi-28NM
Russian byas on Russian game lol
@@Filipscl cry kid.
yeah if planes already have ccrp since the 50s it'd be a sin to not give any flying weapon platform this tech or something similar
@@Filipscl thats....not how that works.. I can do the same tactic with an AH-64 and Hyrdas in DCS. the difference is the angle and ranges
@@Swampfox1966 no dude he right, we just gotta live with it now
When you see the impact of those rockets, it all starts to make sense.
Great suppression tactic.
Suppressing random forestry and crop resources perhaps ... 😃
@Alf Noakes yes, in fact, postitioning troops in an open field would be pretty stupid, actually 😃
@@alfnoakes392 _😃_
@@alfnoakes392 most trench lines is in tree lines.
More or less it's trading accuracy for range with unguided rockets. But if you're basically using proximity fused fragmentation rockets to put shrapnel over an area bigger than some sports playing field, having a shotgun type approach doesn't need too much accuracy anyways. Those are an area weapon, so a direct hit on something isn't the goal anyways.
The techinque can be pretty effective and accurate with enough practice agains soft targets like infantry, trucks ets(kamovs have datalink, so the pilot knows the range to the marked target, knows exact direction, and then its just a simple calculation that can be done by head when to toss the amunition in to the air). In addition lofting rockets like this gets pretty interesting when paired with US APKWS kit, especially with jtac around.
There is a system in Ka-52, Mi-28, Su-25 exactly for this purpose. It calculates trajectory and target position and gives the pilot indication when to shoot.
@@redsun9261 people are just antirussian and stupid.
"its not what you think" Its exactly what I thought!
I think it just help extend the range from the ballistic calculation computer so the rocket hit what you want just with longer distance
See @6:00 , video says burn time is inaccurate so impact point is unpredictable. In short, pilot can NOT hit what he wants, at least not as a point. Rather, it is an area effect weapon where artillery is not available
In essence it has more to do with uncommitted poor-morale pilots not wanting to risk their lives getting too close to the enemy (and not being too interested in whether their expended ammunition actually 'did anything'). I read in a Vietnam War based autobiography of an officer who, to save his squad from the dangerous (and pointless) long-distance ground-patrol they had been given, paid a helicopter pilot to fly him over the proposed route so that his mission report could say that the route had 'been patrolled and no enemy contact made' (with obviously not mention of the helicopter). Senior brass happy and soldiers live to go home to their loved ones.
Only if what you want to hit is a city block.
@@alfnoakes392 its actually not poor morale but rather really high saturation of manpads on Ukraine on both sides. Basically any Ukrainian unit could potentially fire manpad at a low flying helicopter. Its literally in the russian fighting doctrine that they use firing rockets while pitching up if they're unable to get closer to the target. Sure its inaccurate but you don't want to use a helicopter for one accurate mission. They use helis where they don't have artillery so its better than nothing.
@@fidoslavfidorov1512 I am sure the US air-force would also find it difficult to fly helicopters in such environment highly saturated with manpads (stinger, igla, star-trek, etc)
Excellent video!!
On the simulator games you strafe at a distance, the hud shows where it’s going to land, accounts for your angle, distance to the point as you pull the trigger.
Reck a column. Pull up diagonally if your not inline with the column. Shoot from a distance
It's funny how everyone he says: "It's not what you think", It's exactly what I was thinking ^^
we all do. and its like this every singel time. at this point it would be interesting to know what he though what we were thinking.
You always gotta love a NWYT video
I don't. Most of the time it's not clear cut information, biased as hell to the point where it's counter productive. But this one seems ok.
"Trying to shoot down Star Link?" With those tiny little rockets.... Man don't play with me like that. 😂
let me quote "FighterBomber" - famous Russian military aviation blogger
1)
the Ka-52 sighting system automatically calculates all the parameters of the combat use of unguided missiles with a pitch-up, taking into account wind, ballistic characteristics of missiles, angles, speeds, and other things, which makes it possible to lay most of the 40 S-8 missiles in a circle with a radius of 50 meters.
2)
A little more about cabling.
Unfortunately, I could not find for you either a drone operator, or an ordinary infantryman, or a military correspondent, or a tiktoker, or even a photographer to tell you about the effectiveness of this method of combat use, so listen to a combat helicopter pilot who is directly involved in these very cabrios.
Published with minimal editing.
"Good morning FB!
They periodically write about the inefficiency of firing from a roll-up. Say, by, do not fall into the sky and so on.
In a number of cases, this was the case in the early days.
Still, this type of shooting was not practiced at the training grounds during training flights and exercises. So, we looked at what it was and forgot about it. A large amount of ammunition is needed, and even when four missiles are flying, it is very difficult to assess the hit. And there are no mavics at the landfills.
We trained at half a block per attack, but at 40 NAR per takeoff. That is, we can’t plan many sorties for training, we get out of the missile limit for a shift.And in the exercises, the bosses are generally not interested if missiles just fly in from nowhere or, conversely, if a helicopter attacks a target that is beyond the horizon for them.
But in Ukraine, after three or four sorties, the pilots got their hands full and are now covering the center of the dispersion ellipse with a calculation of plus or minus 50 meters.
And after the on-board computers of helicopters were supplied with software for calculating pitch-up firing for all types of NAR, the deviation results are close to zero.
Heavy rockets fly more accurately and are less affected by wind and other external conditions in flight. I have individuals who, in one attack, use the S-13 from a nose-up, then dive again and fire the C-8 from a new nose-up at an adjacent target. And after all, they fall according to the data of the drone. It is a pity that not all helicopters can use heavy unguided rockets yet. But we are working on it.
So, ... on September 2 S-13s out of 6 launched from Mi-28s hit a building converted into a warehouse.
The explosion turned out like an atomic one, it burned for another day after that.
A direct hit from seven (!!!) kilometers by an unguided rocket is, of course, an element of luck, but there will be no luck without skill.
So with the cabling, we are doing very well. In vain they write about the low efficiency of this method. It is not inferior to use from a horizontal flight from two kilometers, because even from two kilometers you will not see a target like people in the trenches in the landing. And all the same, you will work stupidly along the coordinates, as well as from the cabling. Then what's the difference how to shoot if the results are comparable. Only taking into account the large number of MANPADS from the enemy, when firing from 2 km, we would have run out of helicopters and crews by the time this comment was written.
3)
Once again, I will explain about the work of unguided rockets helicopters and attack aircraft from a pitch-up.
This is the only way to work with cheap (and therefore massive) weapons without entering the enemy’s MANPADS operation zone, of which the enemy has thousands.
Yes, this method is only suitable for working on area targets. Big.
Well, fucking scary, Grads, TOSs, Smerchs, Tornadoes also work in areas and no one complains about their accuracy and usefulness. Though of course he's complaining. There will always be someone who will complain about something. It's an immutable law of existence.
Understand and forgive.
The principle of working with cabling is simple.
On those machines on which the sighting system is not able to read the parameters of the work of NARs from the pitch-up, a plate is drawn up in which the speeds, altitudes, pitch angles and ballistic characteristics of the NAR are written.
Then the coordinates of the target are hammered into the car and at the distance calculated from this plate to the target they fire.
Tactical aviation is still hitting with long-range guided and homing missiles and ballistic missiles. Everyone in a row. And cunning modifications of the Kh-59 and Iskanders and other ammunition unknown to the general public with nowhere documented capabilities.
They were made, as it turns out, in the dark, but it’s clear to hell they are spent very carefully, because their production cycle is relatively large, there are many goals, and tomorrow the SVO will definitely not end.
Therefore, the goals for them are chosen very carefully.
Strategists and rangers are firing cruise missiles at everything that is further away.
Scouts - reconnaissance. Fighters - exterminate. Electronic warfare aircraft and helicopters interfere. A-50, to the best of their ability, control the airspace.
Nobody sits idle.
All work.
Fighterbomber петух.
LOVE IT!!!
THANKS
Please link me the source. This is fascinating and I hope there is more to see on the link.
@@Nathan666 there is A LOT to read
@@thelasper4623 I got plenty of time. Source?
Ukrainian Air Force / Army does the same not to get into the "hot" range.
Uki air force doesn't exist
@@antoniohagopian213 sure, you keep telling yourself that buddy
If Ukraine doesn’t have an Air Force, that’s where is Russia’s?
@@antoniohagopian213 🥲😂
Dude. Ukraine doesn't have an air force. Only an army. This is why Russia is dominating only the airspace. Till u.s. Sams got there and made even that too hard.
They're just shooting off some expensive fireworks.
wait, USA said Russians are running out of EVERYTHING, how this is possible?
Its for surpressing the enemy, its a good tactic i think used by both sides
Dive bombing was super dangerous due to the presence of AA gun fire. Unless you are in World of Warships where your plane has a mechanic hanging outside the cockpit who fixes the plane when hit and the plane itself goes immune to AA fire where conducting an attack.
- "Real reason is not what you think"
- *is exactly what I think*
Helicopters are extremely vulnerable to aircraft and AA, so I guess the only non-suicidal way to get any value from them and those rockets is to do THIS - extremely mobile low accuracy artillery.
How would you use helicopters if every enemy platoon had a Stinger or two?
Thanks. I was looking for that comment. It's very inefficient, but if you have helicopters, pilots and unguided rockets that are only usable on helicopters (are they?), better use them than not I guess.
Stil the point made at the end is a good point. Maybe it's worh sparing the oil and rockets used by the helicopter. Might be of use at some point.
@@martintroisclous7350 I think Ukrainians know what they are doing. Deterrence of enemy artillery positions is very important - even if not damaged, the cannon needs to reposition when it starts getting shot, so you can scare it a bit with helos while you reposition your cannons or troops.
Been watching this channel for awhile and I am impressed with the accuracy of each video. Off the topic my dad was one of the engineers that developed the X-15 project. I believe it was in California way before I was born. I've always been into aviation technology.
except this video is far from "accurate". As you can read comments - almost anyone confirms, that this lofting firing is quite accurate.
This video is just one of attemtps to get views during current conflict. By depicting russians as "cowards, that fire blindly at enemies, but missing and hitting civilians"
I have seen one impact video of these attacks. they mostly show firing but if anyone saw the impact it might make sense to fire onto a forest areas like dibrova, Lyman or cities like bukmut where hitting anywhere can consider good fire, because it's mostly about putting pressure and giving no time to rest more than killing them. mostly these could be routine attacks for example artillery shell enemy for few hours then Su 25 duos fire rockets while artillery crew take some rest, do maintenance and resupply ammo. after them MLRS start firing for sometime then helicopters take the job. which give different units time to resupply and organise while constantly putting pressure on the enemy.
In cities (including Bakhmut, which is actually Artyomovsk), this is not possible - people are still kept in basements there. Do not use anything that can cause the collapse of high-rise buildings.
как я понимаю, информация о цели вводиться в бортовой компьютер, и он тебе говорит когда и на какой угол нужно задрать нос, а ракеты уже уходят сами при достижении нужного угла. Такой метод довольно практичный и точность довольно высока.
Думаю так и есть
It turned out to be exactly what I thought.
Still an awesome video though 👍
You're not allowed to know. You must now be locked up for knowing the confidential information.
😆
The KGB is coming for you now
@@asylumental Oh crap, I think I'll have to go into hiding now 😂
@@asylumental Someone please storm the Duma while them bois are not at home.
:D
Using helicopter as artillery may not be accurate but the idea is interesting
In future we may see more accurate drone which fly low and shots artillery to replace artillery vehicles as artillery vehicles need to relocate fast after firing to prevent counters attack on firing locations
True but using conventional heavy artillery shells and barrels is one hell of an ask for a drone. Pus ammo resupply. Ground based drones with independent motor wheels and motor wheel suspension Maybe.
Man watching a tiny A-4 drop a bomb half the size of it will never get old😂
im just wondering, how the hell do you pilot it when the bomb affects the profile balance that much
You missed the fact; the US Air Force used this exact technique during the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003 to lob conventional bombs. I know because I was on the ground calling in airstrikes on Iraqi Army units for the initial combat phase of the operation in northern Iraq. Even when providing support to US Special Operations units engaged in combat operations, the Air Force would not risk aircraft and pilots by flying over the target area because of the threat of anti-aircraft fire, even when there were no AA weapon systems in the area. Instead, when we called for air support, F-16s, F-1s, and even the last F-14s ever flown ( I couldn't believe it when they checked in with us on the radio), would program the target coordinates into GPS-guided JDAM bombs, then pull up into a step climb and lob the bomb toward the target. We never heard the aircraft unless/until they turned away and increased power while exiting the area. After the pilots announced releasing the bomb, we always asked for the "fall time", which is the time from release to impact. It was often well over 1 minute, which is a relatively long time. In my experience, the bombs frequently missed the target by a wide enough margin to be ineffective. The F-14s allocated to us for one mission missed by a very wide margin, and one bomb (I can't remember the aircraft type) struck behind my team. For numerous reasons that go beyond the use of this tactic, I was left with a very negative view of importance that the US Air Force as an organization placed on providing air support to ground forces.
we used this technique in the angolan bush war in the 80s , we used this because of sam missiles locking on if we just dropped them . speed was increased then nose up and release when prompted by bombing computer and laser range finder. F1AZ
I always assumed that if they went back to base with rockets left over they would know they didn't even try to fight
CCRP (Continually Computed Release Point) is a mode that is used by bomber fighters, with one resource, to deliver a bell-shaped military charge at a safe distance from close air defenses. This is one of the modes commonly used with GBUs to avoid entering the AAA range, just like the first fighter in your video does.
So it doesn't date from the 50s, it's still used, at least on the F-16 block 50/52...
Finally my warthunder calculation is actually useful
This technique is actually quite accurate. The pilot follows a preset flight path. The setting of the angle is done with the assistance of a computer which calculates everything real time and allows accurate rocket placement even with deviations from the flight path. The most difficult part is target designation. The computer needs to know what it is shooting that. Primarily GLONAS (Russian GPS) is used. This grants limited accuracy as GPS is relatively innacurate and slow compared to a target designator. Target designators are usually carried by recon groups and allow for very close front line fire support, which a regular mrls cannot do. This is why the helicopters and attack planes shoot out flares and turn sharply out of the way as soon as they fire a salvo. MANPADS are a real threat. Also, the practical range is about 5km max. Shots past that are rarely used unless it is a Su-25 firing at an artillery position.
During the second world wart the Germans started field testing a toss bombing sight called the TSA-2D (Tief Schleuduer Anlage). This was how the Me 262 and Fw 190 fighters were supposed to be able to bomb accurately. They were evaluated in combat (I think KG-51 with Me 262 during operation Northwind). The pilot dove onto the target lining it up in his gun sight. A buzzer would sound and a light flash to indicate a plausible release solution had been found. The pilot then pulled up and the bomb was released at the right point in the pull up. The TSA-2D would take data from the gyroscope, an variometer, accelerometer and Air speed indicator and a choice of FuG 101a radar altimeter or a barometric altimeter. During the pullout the accelerometer rather than altimeter, variometer was used. The technique was adaptable to rockets (which had a fall of as well) and finally went towards lofting the bomb.
-With a modern radar and computers these sights become very accurate.
-The USN also had a toss bombing sight for its corsairs in 1945.
-The Germans did have a computing bomb sight, the StuVi 5B with the BZA computer that was good for slide bombing attacks to about 20 degrees. it computed a continuous impact point for the bomb. A good crew could get a pair of 500kg/100kg bombs to within 10m of target consistantly. Dive would commence at 8000ft and reach 400mph with pullup complete by 5000ft. Problem was it was suitable for twin engine aircraft like Ju 88, Me 410, Do 217, Ar 234, He 177 but not singles due to the view over the nose.
I knew that one, yet still I came to hear Not What You Think explain it😁😁🥰
So like always, it's exactly as I thought.
The S-8 80mm rockets are fired from a fixed pod which means the gunner has to align the helicopters vertical axis to the impact point of the rockets using the ballistic computer. The maximum range for these 80mm rockets is around 4km but lobbing them like this can extend the range to about 6km. This is done on purpose for area effect on multiple soft targets and personnel but if they need to engage a tank, they would use the Vikhr laser guided missile which has a range of 10km.
A weird diversion in the end since this technique is used mostly in open land; I wouldn't wonder if air support is where the artillery is abscent.
Let alone the Kh-22 rockets presented simultaneously are intrinsically hella imprecise (pretty much to the point of incomparability). Not to defend the moskals but why introduce an impractical topic?
Wow Not What You Think this might be my favorite video of yours yet. You're a total inspiration and actually because of seeing your success I've decided to start making videos too! Keep grinding, your hard work clearly pays off!"
Good man
W
Glad you enjoyed it! And good luck with your videos! 😉
@@NotWhatYouThink thank you!
@@NotWhatYouThink i've been watching your channel since the very beginning, i remember some of your first shorts even
I seem to remember an AF school that called this FOBS for Fractional Orbital Bomb System. A computer would release the bomb and the AC would invert and lite the AB to get away.
Fireing over horizon is a good tactic tho. Anti air fire in straight line and if they are behind the hill, they cant shut you down if you fire the rockets into air at range and simply wait for them to fall down randomly.
Its kinda extended artilery for to risky areas.
It's definitely not the same as actual aircraft, but in VTOL vr i do this with the helicopter to get more range on the gps guided rocket boosted glide bombs.
I'd do the same in DCS with the APKWS, but their battery life is too limited (disabling their guidance after ~6.5 - 7nm) and they stabilize immediately as they come out of the tube. Delaying that would make it possible to increase the range by lofting actually. And I'd guess they have figured that out already IRL, it isn't even rocket science (pun intended).
Well anyone who went to school(atleast the basic) could understand this...
americans don't. that's why they need this video. NWYT did a great job teaching dumb normies
Atleast раздельно пишется
Rockets are not unpredictable. They use the SPV-24 via Glonass to calculations, getting the effect of an aerial artilery over the target.
I feel like we're watching The History Channel with this antiquated technology.
Old man -yells- shoots at cloud.
In WWll some British pilots didn’t want to engage in combat, so they emptied their guns in to the countryside. Maybe the Russians are also doing this?
True, but it makes a lot less sense for Ukrainian helicopter pilots to just dump their ammo.
That's possible but still, why don't they just shoot rockets somewhere nearby instead of aiming up, resulting in rockets falling who knows where and destroying who knows what
Both side are mostly likely using the maneuver for area suppression rather than precision strikes on hostile positions due to the inaccurcy of the rockets.
one of the captured Russian pilots said that they were afraid to bomb their targets near Kyiv because there were many air defense systems in the area, so they just dropped their payload before reaching the target (which resulted in civilian casualties)
@@shaipers And captured Ukrainians also say they shoot their own teammates, never trust those, you never know what is true and what they might be forced to say by the opposite side for propaganda purposes.
This reminded me of the physics puzzle:
Suppose you can throw a ball at some constant speed v off the ground. At which angle (alpha) do you need to throw the ball to maximize the distance at which the ball hits the ground.
Answer: 45 degrees, as the ball will be able to travel the distance x=v^2*sin(2*alpha)/g (g being the Earth acceleration (constant)). Maximum is attained at 2*alpha=pi/2=90degrees.
If you're already moving at some height, then the angle will change, but the idea stays the same.
If a mad dog bites you, you do not bite the dog back
8:41 have never thought I would see my city in vid like that
Мої спічуття сім'ям всіх загибших в Амсторі
I like the fact that its taken as a given than these attacks are completely inprecise and never hit the target. From the impact footage shown the precision seems to be very good. Accuracy can also be good (meaning that the tightly packed shots are delivered on the intended location) since these are most likely aimed at the target by the computer. This probably works like the cannon on fighter jets, the pilot only has to point to the right direction (which is shown on the hud) and then the computer automaticaly fires.
Russia is ofc not going to use such a strike on a location with civilians, lets say a city for multiple reasons, one of them being that the buildings provide coverage. Another reason Russia will not do that is because these are short range strikes and are delivered on the line of conduct, not deep in the enemy mainland, Russia cannot fly a KA52 5km outside Kiev to strike.
These rockets are most likely used in open fields against known enemy locations, for example enemy howitzers.
The idea that all unguided weapons are useless because there are guided ones is not true for me. In an era were major powers still operate towed artillery with no protection for the operators in a ww1 like trench battlefield, rocket strikes from helicopters can be a very big threat to anyone on the ground and you will have to hide in your trench when the strike takes place. The fact the the strike has such a small but intense duration means the enemy will have close to no time to hide.
To sum up, the burn duration can be very finely adjusted is modern manufacturing, and Russia-Ukraine both have long experience with rocket artillery.
No, people actually simulated rocket lofting in DCS:World and that could be very precise against soft targets, if you make careful calculations for trajectory, the final coverage for a 10km loft from a Ka-50, could get you a 200m x 40m kill zone at the target side. Which is not very big deviation against a big free fall bomb. If performed by modern avionics which regulates fire control and flight control at the same time you could get a more precise kill zone.
The Russians do this in order to increase the range of those Rockets And surprisingly those are very accurate I saw a video of those rockets falling. It is impossible for the soldiers to survive in the area where those rockets fell
But did you see a video of every rocket launch? Need to count the misses as well as the hits to know the accuracy.
@@zen1647 this is not really accurate method, and most important - it wasn't invented as high precizion strike. With most part of rocket types it is needed to cover certain area by lot of rockets with great dispersion from safe distance.
It is pretty accurate in meaning of hit certain area, but it must be not very accurate to increase chance to hit someone, because with this method you simply can't see enemy troops, you must rely on ground observer data. So, this is flying Grad with less poverfull ammo, but highly mobile and with great range
@@PyromaN93 Yes,this rockets like Katyusha and Grad
Complete lie. They firitng from max distance cause of lack of rocket artillery, they absolutley inncarurate cause almst imposssible to aim and and no love spotter, they fell between 100 and 700 metters, rockets didn't even designed for such artillery shooting.
@@user-nk5vu3bk3i bullshit.
The more I see of Russian weapons systems, the less impressed I am by them. Such an inaccurate technique is inefficient unless one considers the ground itself a useful target.
Russian pilot: look a Ukrainian soldier let’s shoot
10 rockets later
Ok we hit everything but the soldier it’s better than nothing
Both side are mostly likely using the maneuver for area suppression rather than precision strikes on hostile positions due to the inaccurcy of the rockets. So I doubt both sides are actually expecting to kill/destory a target.
Every nation uses unguided rockets and makeshift solutions to problems.
Yeah go get closer and get shot down, do you understand that this is much safer to do?
They have the brains and resources to come up with fairly impressive stuff. But corruption spoils it all.
Dude..... the reason why they're doing this is because, 1: they have computer assisted aim to keep the rockets on target and 2: this gives them greater range and keeps them out of the threat of MANPADS. This video could've been 30 seconds long had you taken 2mins to Google it.
F111 Aircrews were trained in and used Toss Mode bombing in Vietnam and up through the 90's when the birds were retired from service. Hate to tell you, but the technique is still used, especially if you are delivering GBU unthrusted ordinance.
I feel like you dont really have to aim a nuke...
You’d be surprised; a lot of the targets for nukes in a real nuclear war would be hardened bunkers and nuclear silos that you actually have to get very close to with a nuclear blast to put them out of action.
@@ItsBasil Cant you just send a extra-dirty nuclear bomb to irradiate everything around the bunker? The people inside wouldnt even be able to leave for a long time from risk of radiation exposure.
@@owo1744 They would conceivably have CBRN gear to protect them. The objective isn’t to irradiate the area around the bunker, the point is to destroy it so it can’t carry out its mission.
@@ItsBasil Thats true. Although for arguments sake, would CBRN equipment protect you from the radiation of being in the center of a nuclear strike?
@@owo1744 Based on a little bit of sniffing around google, if you need to go outside, CBRN gear will protect you from radioactive isotopes in the air, but any ionizing radiation will still be able to get at you. Better hope the bunker’s got some really good shielding.
Precision is easy when your target is a whole city.
cope abt it
so true! the Ukrainians have been shelling their own cities for 8+ years and don't give a crap about accuracy
I love the fact they uses a lil marker as if you are gonna find it after droping a bomb
Yay my question is finally answered 🙌
I've done that in war thunder to hit targets without being hit by AA or getting into the enemy spawn zones.
😂 war thunder…. Kids think war is a game…
@@NYlocked You can simulate real life actions in video games pretty accurately. Maybe get that non-compromising boomer ass off the internet.
@@NYlocked Warthunder is a wargame. It uses somehwat realistic physics, although not close to real sims like DCS. It still works. You should quit half assing and understand what he actually meant.
Lofting is fairly common especially for post-Soviet nations militaries. It's all thanks to the SVP-24 multi data combination ballistic computer. This computer gathers data from multiple sources including forward scouts and calculates multiple veriables including altitude, humidity, etc to give the pilot the angle at which he needs to shoot the rockets to launch a fairly accurate barrage of rockets from a long distance. Basically, the pilot doesn't need to see the target himself, the ballistic computer handles all that.
That's why you need MAWRs (Missile approach warning receivers) on your attack choppers and Attack choppers should compliment the ground Armor which in turn compliments the Infantry. But since this is a "Special Operation" That won't happen.
Yeah this is a strat I liked using in battlefield games too where you just spray and spray and hope you hit something
So you're telling us that being shot by the missle is better than loosing some flares to avoid LOOSING AN EXPENCIVE PIECE OF ARMY-ISSUE EQUIPMENT. And most of all KA choppers are glass cannons and Mi's are flying boulders
Oh lovely THEY SENT ME A MOOOOROOOON
@@sisyphusofephyra7801 ?
@@stefthorman8548 fallout reference
This manoeuvre was developed in order to be able to toss a nuclear weapon on a target without the aircraft overflying the target and so it could fly away as quickly as possible, and get as far away as possible
I remember reading the application notes from Rockwell Collins as part of a GPS project I was working on with GEC avionics And the difficult part of this manoeuvre is to calculate the exact release point in time and space so the bomb hit the target precisely
Yeah.....he said that in the video. Did you watch it?
@@ducksoff7236 no… because I worked on this stuff for real when I was an avionics engineer … In the 1980s… I do not need to have someone tell me what I worked on and know….
So you think these heli pilots lofting rockets are using tactics they trained for to conduct nuclear warfare?
@@hypercomms2001 Well your comment is redundant. We don't need you telling us information that is in the video you didn't watch because we just watched the video. Normally the way things work in the comments is. You watch the video. If there is missing or wrong information then you comment saying something was omitted or wrong. Or if you agree with the information. You say something complimentary to the person who made the video or thank them for the work they did. What normal people don't do is comment like a know it all on info that was actually given and act like you are the first one giving it. It makes you look stupid.
They're trying to shoot down the Oppressor MK2
I am convinced there’s much more to this than what it seems.
Yea, lets gloss over the fact that some kamov-s or Mi-24's from russia do this while having ATGM capable heli's that do ranged attacks. While EVERY SINGLE Ukranian helicopter that has footage is seen doing this. Russia bad amirite?
As for the question at the end. No. Just because your opponent is doing war crimes don't justify you following the same path, and I don't believe Ukraine would get the help they are getting from the world if they started doing war crimes.
They were doing them since 2014 tho. It is about containing Russia, not helping Ukraine
war crimes and supressing ukrainian minorities, arresting and torturing anyone whose opinion differs is insane is a fashion of ukraine, western media chooses to ignore it.
@@Saad-ih3ys TH-cam hid your response, man. But your point stands nonetheless, because it's true
There is a page in the operator's manual for these helicopters about indirect fire. I don't remember where I dug it up, unfortunately.
Flying helicopters in this age of sophisticated air defense systems must be terrifying.
By international law it does not justify retaliation by the same means but since Ukraine is a defending force with support of majority of western world no one will actually charge them for doing whatever they need even if it is in direct violation of international laws.
yes, Ukraine is defending *genocide* which it has been perpetrating upon its' own citizens in the Donbass for 8+ years! Ukraine is also defending 35 illegal US bioweapons labs *and* most importantly, Ukraine is defending the largest money laundering scheme in history
Hello from Germany
Hello from USA, my friend.
Hello from Bulgaria
Hello from Russia 😅
@@Max_Jacoby I have a question that might annoy you but I don’t mean anything bad
But are the things we here about tv censorship really that bad in Russia or how much do you guys hear about Ukraine???
@@Donuts_random_stuff Censorship in Russia is tough. TV was a first victim of censorship probably because Putin is an old generation. When he came to power he was in all news 24/7 like literally. You just can't watch TV longer than a 1.5 hour without seening him. Gradually he eliminated all independent news and channels so now we don't have any alternative points of view whatsoever. He was slow on censoring Internet though but he take it seriously probably around 2018. Now we don't have access to many news outlets such as BBC, DW, *Times, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, any Ukranian site and so on. He tried to block Telegram. It's a creation of our ex-citizen Pavel Durov who was a founder of VK (Russian Facebook). He was forced to sell his business and leave Russia. So it was a personal thing to Pavel and he did impossible to make Telegram works in Russia despite all of insane methods of blocking. In fact a good chunk of Russian Internet didn't work properly because of blocking Telegram but Telegram itself worked perfectly! So finally Putin gave up and chose a new tactics. He hired a lot of trolls who write in chats all day long their propaganda, give likes to each other and bullying everybody who has different opinion. I hate to admit but this new tactics works! So sinse 2020 people prefer to be silent and don't spread "wrong" ideas in Internet.
The fact is the beaten zone for free flight aerial rockets becomes more circular rather than elongated at maximum ranges thus more accurate. In addition you can fire from behind hills and trees making it safer and less likely you will be spotted and engaged by the enemy. This technique is trained to US helicopter gun ship pilots...
In my opinion, Ukraine shouldnt do it back. “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”-Friedrich Nietzsche.
If american or nato avation do the same exact thing like ukraine and russian do western Media and the people will said wow its precision 100% accurate
This war has so much propeganda, sometimes i see even more ukrainian propeganda than russian
@@kuunoooo7293 huh, sometimes?
@@kuunoooo7293 Theres a reason for that if you live in America.
@@Apollo55_ i dont live in america but i get your point
Russian bot comment
Since when america too followed geniva convention,shop shoving down buzz words
If you watch the helicopter vids, they have a tone that tells them to go to 30-35deg, and then a tone that tells them when to launch. The targeting computer knows where the target is, and calculates the fire point to hit the target. The unguided rocket is an area suppression weapon, not a point target anyways, so they are not gonna be accurate even on straight line firing. They are used on light armored vehicles and troops in the open. This is an effective method to hit the same area target from outside of MANPADS range. It is the same as MLRS, just smaller rockets, smaller warheads, so smaller area of effect.
This “It’s Not What You Think” was exactly what I thought.
that destroyed apartment block shown at the end was a result of Ukraine shooting down a precision guided weapon which then fell on the apartment block - this is the result of placing military hardware in civilian areas - aka using human shields
No, that's a result of an unwarranted aggression by Russia on a sovereign soil of Ukraine. None of that would not happen if Russia wasn't a rabid dog. And that's disregarding the fact that Russia is shelling the civilian populace as a terror tactic.
That was direct hit by KH 22
@@zinnsoldat6493
after it was 'downed' by Uke anti-air as reported by a Ukrainian MINISTER who then had to resign and is now likely 'deleted'
@@andyman8630 "Everyone understands perfectly well that there would be no Russian strike, there would be no tragedy, regardless of the specific mechanism of its occurrence.
A house in Dnipro was destroyed by a Russian Kh-22 cruise missile.
No air defense missile could come close to causing even half of this destruction."
This is from his official tg channel
@@zinnsoldat6493 Ukraine already confirmed it was shot down
With the kill ratio climbing higher than those Pilots probably thought it would, it's a Justified reason to return to base when you have no ammo
The red arrow Chinese AGM is meant to be fired at an upwards angle, and it travels up until its straight above the target and then dive bombs down
Everything before 5:20 is why an aircraft would have an actually meaningful reasons to shoot or drop their bombs at a high angle. The take-away is that Russian helicopters are doing *none* of those and instead just firing blindly and hoping to hit something, anything, no matter what it is. They are terrified (justifiably) of getting remotely near the frontlines and are just dumping their missiles indiscriminately, which is just one more war-crime.
They aren't just firing completely blind, they would have received information about hostile positions/advances and would fire their rockets to suppress these areas rather than hit a specific target while staying as far as possible from AA, AAA and MANPADs. This can also work if your troops are assaulting a position. This maneuver is being used by both side not just the Russians and with unguided munitions civilians are unfortunately at greater risk of being hit.
Not a war crime just war
@@makka4822 It is fired in the general direction of Ukrainian positions or targets but, as he said in the video, it is impossible to aim with any kind of accuracy with: 1) the helicopter actively moving around 2) the rapid pitch up maneuver and 3) an unguided rockets unpredictable trajectory. Even an MLRS truck with unguided rockets has some amount of precision to it but this is just a complete shot in the dark.
@@NinjaMan47 I am not disputing the accuracy of firing the rockets as mentioned they are unguided. The pilots of both sides can postion the helicopter in line with their target and pitch up then fire allowing for some accuracy, and these maneuvers suppress a large area due to the inaccuracy but I wouldn't call it a complete shot in the dark.
MLRS is static when they fire with the rounds having more predictable flight paths with alot of artillery now using a fire control system makes this even more precise even when using ungided munitions.
Ukraine bombed Donetsk and Lugansk with civilians and children long before the war. And none of you bothered to condemn it.
it also works like flares to confuse stinger missiles
Lofting, imprecise as hell but a great way to engage large troop concentrations in a large area without flying to close to enemy AA systems.
Basically it is high mobile MLRS.
Ukraine is justified in using the tactic because I doubt they would use the tactic in an area where collateral damage is possible, for russia they dont care if they hit a civilian structures as we all have seen with their attacks using guided munitions on civilian targets. So they wouldnt use careful consideration with unguided munitions.
Its war, you don't need to feel justified in the eyes of someone who isn't your civilian or soldier, just do what you gotta do to send your invaders packing or take territory.
Ukraine is just as unjustified as Russia!!!
They do have to be justified. It may be war but it's not total war. The last total war was WWII.
While war is best avoided, it's not always possible and where war does occur there are rules to follow. Indiscriminate attacks carry a risk of hitting civilians and attacking civilians or civilian infrastructure is a violation of those rules.
I'm fairly sure the Ukrainian forces aren't attacking Russia, they are just trying to defend and take back their own homeland. It is unlikely that there are any civilians in the areas Ukraine is attacking so if they employed this weird bombing method, it wouldn't violate those rules.
This is all assuming I've understood the classification "total war" correctly, of course.
@@Iianator retarded comment