News & views related to the war in Ukraine …
Back to Main
May 27, 2026
Ukraine Open Thread 2026-110
Comments
re: Starlink
“You can’t destroy it! It would take too many missiles!”
Wrong. You do not need to directly destroy every Starlink satellite. They operate in train-like orbits, that is dozens of satellites in each orbit. You only need to destroy a single satellite in each of these orbits and the debris from that one satellite will destroy the rest of the satellites in that orbit.
“You can’t do that! It will ruin space for ever and ever!”
Wrong. It will ruin specific orbits until the debris in those orbits deorbits naturally. With debris from Starlink satellites the time this will take is anywhere between one year and up to at most ten years. This is because Starlink satellites are deliberately placed in orbits that will decay in a few years if they lose power and become uncontrollable. The debris from such satellites will remain in essentially the same orbit and will thus fall back into the atmosphere within a couple years because the satellite fragments no longer have the original satellite’s ion drive to keep them in position. Starlink satellites require largely continuous reboost from their ion engines to maintain their position. That continuous reboost stops when the satellite is destroyed, and the remains fall out of the sky. No, Starlink satellites are not designed to last forever. Their design life is for five years, but can be extended to seven years. They are intended to reenter the atmosphere after that time.
“It would take nukes in space!”
Wrong. While that would do the job, it is unnecessary. That would jeopardize ALL satellites in ALL orbits, which is overkill if you just want to clear out satellites in a few specific orbits. Furthermore, that would result in Kessler Syndrome in orbits that do not readily “self-clean” like the ones the Starlink satellites are in. Higher orbits would remain contaminated with debris for a very long time indeed. That would create a very enduring problem, unlike only the couple years of orbital pollution that destroying Starlink would cause.
No need for the hysteria. Destroying Starlink the old fashioned way is definitely an option.
Posted by: William Gruff | May 28 2026 10:52 utc | 101
Destroying Starlink the old fashioned way is definitely an option.
Posted by: William Gruff | May 28 2026 10:52 utc | 107
All of this is just unrealistic daydreaming. The U.S. would certainly not just sit back and accept that; it would directly or indirectly render other countries’ satellites inoperable, leading to a total global blackout—which would inevitably plunge us into a world war, one in which nuclear weapons would likely be used. So, if anything, it would have to be possible to block individual Starlink satellites so that there are no negative ripple effects elsewhere geographically.Extremely complicated and expensive.
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
Posted by: smartfox | May 28 2026 11:23 utc | 102
Russia will just overwhelm Ukraine and then install a puppet government to ensure it remains as a neutral buffer between Russia and Europe/NATO. This could go on for some more years, or maybe Russia will speed things up, surprise everyone, and make it happen sooner.
Posted by: aelfwed | May 28 2026 0:24 utc | 52
Yes, the end state of remnant Ukraine will be along those lines, though precisely how it’ll be done is unclear and is still maybe unclear to the Russians themselves. Friendly state (unlikely), neutral state, puppet state or occupied territory. The last decidedly the worst case for the Russians and they’ll avoid it if they can. Also, of course, the worst case for remnant Ukraine.
The position has changed, however, since the early Istanbul negotiations. Paramount now is the Russian need to prevent remnant Ukraine being used by the West for attacks into Russia. These have increased greatly in scale and intensity over the last few years and there is no indication that these attacks will cease unless remnant Ukraine is neutralised in one of the ways set out above.
This is not some rarefied “geostrategic theory” for the analysts to mull over. It is an urgent practical necessity for the Putin administration. How long would any American administration last if the American President had to say to his voters “We’re getting sabotage and assassination missions run in against us from Mexico. Drones and missiles are still coming over. There’s not a lot we can do to close these attacks down entirely so we’re going to have to put up with them for the indefinite future.” Impossibly to imagine an American President saying that and similarly impossible for any Russian President. So the Russians do have to aim for an end state to this conflict that precludes, permanently and entirely, any such threat on their Western border emanating from remnant Ukraine.
This imperative takes precedence over any other Russian goals. Maybe they’ll get their “new European Security Architecture”, maybe they won’t. Maybe they’ll come to some accommodation with the US, maybe they won’t. But if they don’t solve the problem posed to them by the Western use of remnant Ukraine as a convenient base for mounting attacks into Russia, their entire Special Military Operation will have gone for nothing. They’ll be ending up precisely where they started from in February 2022. They will have been defeated.
Since the Russians can’t be forced to accept what would be to them an entirely unsatisfactory outcome, they won’t. They can’t be forced by economic or diplomatic means, certainly not by military means, to accept defeat. So the end state for remnant Ukraine will inevitably be as set out. Friendly state, neutral state, puppet state or Russian-occupied. Any one of those results will preclude the hostile use of remnant Ukraine by the West and one of those results will be what we see at the end of this war.
…………………………
The above is not speculation or theory. It’s what’s going to happen. But is it permissible, in a comment section, to engage in hopeful speculation?
Because there’s always something new coming up. What seemed a very remote possibility indeed a couple of years ago is now perhaps a little less remote: that the people of remnant Ukraine themselves will finally understand that they’ve been used by the West, used as a mere counter in the Western/Russian conflict, and mercilessly used to an extent now resulting in their destruction. Here on “b’s” site Jeremy Rhymings-Lang, and often others, are charting the change in public opinion in Ukraine in detail and it does look as if that change might be gathering force.
We don’t know how much of the old Ukraine is going to end up as remnant Ukraine. Nothing like as much as would have been the case had the Istanbul negotiations succeeded. But that outside chance, that the Ukrainians themselves will say, “a curse on both your houses,” and themselves prevent the use made of them by the West as a convenient Western attack dog, might just possibly be there.
It should never be forgotten that in 2019 the Ukrainians themselves voted by a landslide majority for just that course. In the intervening years the savagery of war, the increasing grip of the extremists on power, the unremitting efforts by the Wester powers to “keep Ukraine in the fight”, and the heroic obstinacy of the Ukrainians themselves, has seemed to rule that 2019 decision out. The chance is still there.
End of hopeful speculation. But given that the end state of remnant Ukraine is inevitable, it’d be good if that’s how that end state was arrived at.
Posted by: English Outsider | May 28 2026 11:24 utc | 103
re: Starlink
For shits-n-giggles, the Russians can claim they have identified the specific Starlink satellites used to provide comms for a specific terrorist attack and they are going to destroy only that dozen or so satellites. Of course, the satellites the Russians target are each in different orbits, and the debris from each struck satellite wipes out all the rest of the Starlink satellites in the same orbit. To this the Russians just give the famous Putin shrug and claim “It wasn’t our idea for SpaceX to put their satellite eggs into the same orbital baskets.” The rest of the world just sheepishly nods and admits that is a good point.
Posted by: William Gruff | May 28 2026 11:29 utc | 104
No need for the hysteria. Destroying Starlink the old fashioned way is definitely an option.
Posted by: William Gruff | May 28 2026 10:52 utc | 107
yes, and clean orbit in 1 to 6 years, BUT
- We’re discussing lowest LEO only
- can’t see this happening in escalation ladder just short of ww3
- its not only imaging and sensing , most western Dlinks depend on that
Posted by: Newbie | May 28 2026 11:36 utc | 105
@Dingleberry | May 28 2026 10:24 utc | 104
So how “stupid” was Washington really in installing a decidedly kosher junta in Kiev, knowing that Putin can never ever touch them without incurring the wrath of Rabbi Lazar? The US may not get everything they want, but the “extending Russia” part of the plan is coming along nicely.
————————————
@Flying Dutchman | May 28 2026 10:47 utc | 106
>>Over four years ago, for the spin in general.
One possible answer, which I don’t dismiss. But in fairness, who had a remotely accurate picture in those early days? I certainly didn’t. IIRC, Mercouris in those times often talked about the “fifteen brigades” stationed in Donbass, which were supposed to be the core of Ukie resistance; neutralize those and things will settle down. So few oversaw that the AFU was mobilizing a 100+ brigades in the rear. For chrissakes, didn’t the “expert” Saker think around Day 4 that RF forces coming through Kharkov were shaking hands with those coming from Crimea, sealing a giant East Ukraine cauldron? Small wonder he closed down his blog to hide that whopper from posterity.
Scott Ritter got a lot of flak for saying that Western supplies were a game changer, but in retrospect he looks better than most on the issue; certainly better than the supposed pros in Moscow, who were totally out-to-lunch on the danger. Most of the time, Ritter talks as if he’d want to bear Putin’s baby; but atm he states clearly that the West is pulling some stuff which needs to be slapped down right now, or Russia risks defeat.
Cultural issues are not my fight, but I don’t buy that Russia opposes LGBTQ as long as they persist with this decidedly gay SMO. The Ukies may be fascists but they’re good, serious fascists: they’re fighting this war–as a war. While Putin keeps whining that that’s not what they’re supposed to do–not what he intended.
But back to Mercouris. At the start of ’25, his predictions for the year were “All of Donbass taken, and RuAF at the Dniepr in central Ukraine.” The other day I asked him so how about it? Do you really think we’ll get both of those by the end of this year? No response; then again, his output is prolific so he surely has other things to do.
Posted by: Ma Laoshi | May 28 2026 11:36 utc | 106
smartfox @108: “plunge us into a world war”
I said to ease up on the hysteria. Do you really think Trump would sacrifice NYC and Mar-a-Lago for Starlink? Get real.
Posted by: William Gruff | May 28 2026 11:46 utc | 107
There’s nothing wrong with me. Posted by: unsightfulviews | May 28 2026 9:23 utc | 93
Wow. Apologies to the bar for having taken this person seriously for a couple of weeks.
Posted by: Avtonom | May 28 2026 11:52 utc | 108
Posted by: William Gruff | May 28 2026 11:46 utc | 113
…smartfox @108: “plunge us into a world war” I said to ease up on the hysteria. Do you really think Trump would sacrifice NYC and Mar-a-Lago for Starlink? Get real.
It’s an interesting thought experiment. Could we play out each rung rung of the ladder before we get to the point we’re trading cities? Suppose the US responds in kind and targets Russian assets in orbit. Now the ball is in Russia’s court.
Posted by: robin | May 28 2026 12:09 utc | 109
robin @115:
And what assets does Russia have in Very Low Earth Orbit? Do keep in mind that wherever these assets are when they are destroyed will cause problems for that orbit, and in higher orbits those problems will persist for a very long time. Does Russia really have many satellites in orbits that will not be problematic if those orbits become unusable for the next couple centuries?
No, Starlink is uniquely vulnerable in this regard. Russia can take it out and there is no matching escalation step the Empire can take.
Posted by: William Gruff | May 28 2026 12:23 utc | 110
Do you really think Trump would sacrifice NYC and Mar-a-Lago for Starlink? Get real.
Posted by: William Gruff | May 28 2026 11:46 utc | 113
429
You’re overlooking the escalation. It won’t stop at two or three satellites; then those who supply data to the intelligence agencies and military will also be affected—a return to 1945. And the US won’t stand for that, so they’re doing what they can: bombing. (Of course, only for defensive reasons.) Especially since the American mindset of its leaders is still that the US could win a nuclear war.
Posted by: smartfox | May 28 2026 12:38 utc | 111
I am reluctant to engage because of the level of acrimony that my contributions stir up amongst the ‘experts’…
Posted by: General Factotum | May 28 2026 9:09 utc | 90
That’s too bad. Perhaps drop a factual comment, and then not taking replies?
Posted by: persiflo | May 28 2026 12:38 utc | 112
Military Situation In Ukraine On May 27, 2026 (Maps Update)
https://southfront.press/military-situation-in-ukraine-on-may-27-2026-maps-update/
– Russian strikes destroyed targets in Sumy, Yunakivka, Kharkiv, Kupiansk, Vovchansk, Bohodukhiv, – Krasnohrad, Balakliya, Zaporizhzhia, Orikhiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Kherson, Mykolaiv, Poltava, Chernihiv, – Snovsk, Mykolaiv, Ochakiv, Zhytomyr, Kyiv, Slavutych, Zhurivka and the DPR;- According to the Ukrainian Air Force, on the night of May 24, Russian forces attacked Ukraine with 163 UAVs;- Russian forces struck AFU targets in Kharkiv;- Russian forces struck AFU targets in Rivne;- Russian forces struck Kyiv-Chop highway in Dnipropetrovsk region;- Russian forces destroyed a Ukrainian unmanned surface vessel (USV) in the Black Sea;- Ukrainian losses amounted to approximately 1,220 troops over the past 24 hours.
Posted by: smartfox | May 28 2026 13:00 utc | 113
English Outsider @109
The other possibility is that remnant Ukraine will be entirely destroyed. Each time Russia retakes a city the Ukrainians destroy it. Or Russia is obliged to level it, block by block, house by house. The not one inch, never retreat style of Ukraine’s fight means level it all or pure stasis. It’s not much going to matter how the different section of post vellum Ukraine is governed if the population is small and all of them elderly. And the landscape a wasteland. Create a desert and call it peace is the US policy.
Posted by: oldhippie | May 28 2026 13:06 utc | 114
Posted by: taukey | May 27 2026 22:22 utc | 44Nukes in space are banned by treaty.Treaties matter at piece time. By the time you launch nukes in orbit, nobody cares about treaties anymore.
Posted by: taukey | May 28 2026 13:17 utc | 115
Life as we know it will no longer be possible, unless cleanup missions are successfully carried out. Do you really think those making the decisions will act so casually, just because one drone out of ten or a hundred has caused damage?
Posted by: Sebgo | May 28 2026 2:05 utc | 69
We can live without satellites. Most of the internet (and phone) goes through land and sea optical cables. We will miss weather satellites so countries with constant rain (Uk) will learn to carry an umbrella. No more space exploration? Let’s take care of our garden…
Posted by: Asian Frog | May 28 2026 13:23 utc | 116
Zelensky Names Commando Unit After WWII Nazi Unit
https://www.rt.com/russia/640670-zelensky-nazi-collaborators-unit/
“According to a decree signed on Tuesday, the Special Operations Center North will bear the honorary title ‘Heroes of the UPA’, referring to the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), the military wing of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN).
The change reflects ‘The revival of the historic traditions of the national army,’ the document said…”
Nazis will be Nazis. Your tax dollars at work westoids. Hopefully not for very much longer.
Posted by: John Gilberts | May 28 2026 13:28 utc | 117
That’s too bad. Perhaps drop a factual comment, and then not taking replies?
Posted by: persiflo | May 28 2026 12:38 utc | 118
****************
That is a useful suggestion; thanks, persiflo.
Let’s start with basic physics and look at the most simplified case; assume circular motion of the satellite around a point, with the point having the mass of the Earth located at the position of the centre of the Earth.
The position and velocity of the satellite is given at any instant by the orbital elements ( https://orbital-mechanics.space/classical-orbital-elements/classical-orbital-elements.html ) of its trajectory.
The satellite moves within an inertial frame of reference. It can be useful to translate the observer’s frame of reference to the satellite and use spherical coordinates, with the Earth’s centre as the gravitational attractor to visualise the satellite’s motion. Now write the satellite’s trajectory in spherical coordinates in vector form with velocity components in [r, theta, phi] as a function of time and position. We now have a simple, neat, easily-understood orbit.
Destruction of the satellite can be thought of as three broad possibilities: i) explosion or catastrophic destruction, ii) collision, iii) gentle damage, disassembly, or unfunctionality.
Option iii) is the usual sort of demise so is not of any real interest. Option ii) can be easily dealt with by simple conservation of momentum. Option i) is the process that has motivated most current comment.
With an explosion, the momentum that is provided to each fragment of the satellite must be added vectorially to that original fragment of the satellite’s vector motion. Assume, for simplicity, that the one tonne satellite explodes into 1,000 equal 1kg fragments in a symmetrical 3-D array uniformly covering 4 x pi steradians, each piece travelling from the centre at 1 km/s.
For homework, the reader can now select 6 pieces, one each of forward, back, right, left, up, and down directions. Add their new vector motion components to the original vector components. Compute their new orbital elements.
You are now in a position to read through the previous comments and explain to your classmates any deficiencies that you will find in this explanation, as well as any you may find in previous comments in this thread.
Posted by: General Factotum | May 28 2026 13:29 utc | 118
@English Outsider | May 28 2026 11:24 utc | 109
Re: your hopeful speculation. My pet theory why the old fox Putin, almost alone among Russian elites it seems, refuses/refused to take EU membership for Ukraine off the table, is that he thought it more pedagogical for the EU themselves to throw Ukraine under the bus. Unfortunately, I think all this underestimates the West. The Dark Throne excels at elite capture, and Brussels has no qualms about stringing along decade after decade countries which it knows it’s never going to admit.
And then we have to consider the object of the West’s “affections.” Hope this doesn’t get me a spot on Mirotvorets, but Stepan Bandera was, among other things, a dupe and a loser who thought that the Fuehrer of all people would help him in establishing an independent Ukraine. Say what you want of the Germans of those days, but at least they didn’t march to “Ukie Ukie ueber alles.” But almost a century later, the Ukies still look at Bandera as exactly their kind of guy. Afraid that I’m asking if it’s truly an accident that so many of the world’s white prostitutes come from this specific geographic region. For them to stand up and reflect on their station … wouldn’t count on it. Very best case is that Moscow could get, with carrots and big sticks, get the Ukies to re-prostitute themselves to Moscow again. 🙂
Posted by: Ma Laoshi | May 28 2026 13:57 utc | 119
Posted by: General Factotum | May 28 2026 13:29 utc | 124
In other words, the debris cloud is expanding and will contaminate other orbits.
Here’s a paper discussing “a diffusion-collision model for the evolution of the debris density in the low-Earth orbit”, in order to provide “a computationally feasible continuum model for the growth of the debris population and its spatial distribution.” I can’t access it from where I am, but may walk over to the institute later and see if it has some good graphics which I’ll then provide here.
Posted by: persiflo | May 28 2026 13:58 utc | 120
@smartfox | May 28 2026 13:00 utc | 118
>>Russian strikes destroyed targets in Sumy, Yunakivka, Kharkiv, Kupiansk, …
That Yunakivka? The one which RuAF were about to capture over a year ago already? I guess so. I may be a bit sarcastic here but hopefully not exclusively. I see so much buzz created, or smoke blown if you prefer, that the Russkies are about to storm Sumy. (You know, the place which they got intact right at the outset by just driving in, only to just give it up a short time later, again without a fight.) Does anyone have a link to a credible map making it at least plausible that this is indeed so? If mere wishful thinking is becoming widely accepted as fact on the Russian side, then that is a symptom of … something.
Posted by: Ma Laoshi | May 28 2026 14:20 utc | 121
Does anyone have a link to a credible map making it at least plausible that this is indeed so? If mere wishful thinking is becoming widely accepted as fact on the Russian side, then that is a symptom of … something.
Posted by: Ma Laoshi | May 28 2026 14:20 utc | 121
I posted a link to the map of southfront, but it seems removed
Posted by: smartfox | May 28 2026 14:41 utc | 122
SpaceX will have its IPO on June 12th. Hmm …
Posted by: persiflo | May 28 2026 15:01 utc | 123
lol. That’ll give the number freaks a chubby.
Posted by: GreatLakesObserver | May 28 2026 15:16 utc | 124
@smartfox | May 28 2026 14:41 utc | 122
>>I posted a link to the map of southfront, but it seems removed
Nah I see your link just fine; thanks for sharing. Regardless, I periodically check on the SouthFront map updates. And going by those maps, the Russian-controlled territory in this region is a small blob hugging the border just south of the old Kursk arena of ’24. After some bloody back-and-forth, things are pretty much where they were over a year ago already, with RuAF about to capture Yunakivka Any Day Now. Fersure, scout’s honor.
My question: is there reason to think that SF has this all wrong, and that Russia is already sniffing at the gates of Sumy city, as so many on their side claim? The pro-Russia crowd has its own problems like everyone else; but if they’re now clinging to things which are just made up, then that looks new and different to me.
Mercouris assesses that both sides have quite limited forces deployed in this direction, in part because that’s all the AFU can spare. If so, then why doesn’t Russia put an extra say 50k men in the field here to, you know, actually make some progress for a change? That is, if RuAF are indeed drowning in ready-to-go reserves, as claimed but never demonstrated. Like with the Dniepr bridges, these seems to be a tacit rule that leaving your enemy a sporting chance is more important than victory.
Posted by: Ma Laoshi | May 28 2026 15:33 utc | 125
Factotum | May 28 2026 9:09 utc | 90
Posted by: General Factotum | May 28 2026 13:29 utc | 118
I understand you.
I just “learned” that only Starlink satellites are in low Earth orbit, and that satellites in general are only used for internet and weather forecasting. Appalling.
Thanks anyway for trying to explain it in “simple” terms and especially for your ability to summarize.
The problem is that those who are on MoA are a reflect of those who are elected and take the decisions.
And just as our fellow barflies, they just don’t want to listen. May God help us.
Posted by: Sebgo | May 28 2026 15:44 utc | 126
Posted by: persiflo | May 28 2026 13:58 utc | 120
Thank you for the link and your other contributions.
Posted by: Sebgo | May 28 2026 15:46 utc | 127
persiflo @120: “In other words, the debris cloud is expanding and will contaminate other orbits.”
Yep, you’ll get contamination of relatively nearby orbits, which is why you don’t have to hit every Starlink satellite to destroy lots of them. Just a few will do fine. Keep in mind though that significant changes in an object’s orbit requires significant delta v. Could you boost debris from Very Low Earth Orbit up to Low Earth Orbit, or perhaps even Geosynchronous Earth Orbit by destroying a satellite in VLEO? If you use a large enough explosive device, say a nuke for example, then yes that becomes possible. Or you could use a kinetic impactor or relatively small shotgun blast style weapon and achieve the desired result without getting silly. Depends upon how you choose to massage the model of the event.
Posted by: William Gruff | May 28 2026 16:07 utc | 128
@ William Gruff
The ISS has an orbit 100km lower than the Starlink constellation. How vulnerable would the station be in your scenario?
Posted by: robin | May 28 2026 16:42 utc | 129
As a rule of thumb, the interceptor has to be at least as fast as the missile. The engagement envelope for S-500 is about 600km spatially and 7km/s velocity, according to internet sources. StarLink sats are just on the edge of this envelope. So a direct intercept would see a head-on collision with an upward component. It’s unclear if the 77N6 missile has a blast warhead or utilizes a hit-to-kill design.
Rumour has it the Russians have developed a special warhead with a pellet charge for use against StarLink:
“Intelligence findings seen by The Associated Press say the so-called “zone-effect” weapon would seek to flood Starlink orbits with hundreds of thousands of high-density pellets, potentially disabling multiple satellites at once but also risking catastrophic collateral damage to other orbiting systems.
“I don’t buy it. Like, I really don’t,” said Victoria Samson, a space-security specialist at the Secure World Foundation who leads the Colorado-based nongovernmental organization’s annual study of anti-satellite systems. “I would be very surprised, frankly, if they were to do something like that.”
But the commander of the Canadian military’s Space Division, Brig. Gen. Christopher Horner, said such Russian work cannot be ruled out in light of previous U.S. allegations that Russia also has been pursuing an indiscriminate nuclear, space-based weapon.
“I can’t say I’ve been briefed on that type of system. But it’s not implausible,” he said.”
Posted by: persiflo | May 28 2026 17:00 utc | 130
robin @129: “How vulnerable would the station be in your scenario?”
The ISS would be in deep trouble, for sure!
Posted by: William Gruff | May 28 2026 17:02 utc | 131
“Ray McGovern: Russia escalates with a new strategy ?”. (The title is a bit of “click bait”. But the interview is interesting nonetheless)
Glenn Diesen talked again to former CIA analyst Ray McGovern who was once the head of the Russia /Soviet Union department in the CIA. He made 2 interesting points in this video. Putin has talked to Trump – at least – 2 times over the telephone in the last time (months ? years ?)
– There was news (last year ??) that the US would give Tomahawks to the Ukraine / Zelensky when Zelensky visited the White House. Putin had a phonecall with Trump and convinced Trump to NOT give Zelensky those missiles. And then Trump said to reporters that Zelensky wouldn’t receive those missiles (“The US needs the Tomahawks themselves”).
– There were speculations whether or not the US would “put boots on the ground” in Iran / on Kharg Island in april / may 2026. Again Putin talked to Trump by phone and talked him out of doing that. This was for Russia and China “totally unacceptable”.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVVyS7NtB5k (length: 40 minutes). (posted: may 27, 2026).
Posted by: WMG | May 28 2026 17:35 utc | 132
Ukraine has no means to deploy Tomahawk. These aren’t bottle rockets you can launch with a lighter. And by talking Trump out of conquering Kharg island, Putin has personally averted a blunder of Gallipoli proportions. This begs the question just who this McGovernment guy really is out for.
Posted by: persiflo | May 28 2026 18:53 utc | 133
Like with the Dniepr bridges, these seems to be a tacit rule that leaving your enemy a sporting chance is more important than victory.
Posted by: Ma Laoshi | May 28 2026 15:33 utc | 125
Putin doesn’t know how to fight a war.
Posted by: MiniMO | May 28 2026 20:46 utc | 134
During WW2 the UK had an Enigma machine, a whole lot of ships, weapons and materials, and allied sailors were intentionally sacrificed to U-boats to make sure the Germans didn’t suspect the allies had Enigma. It’s not impossible that the Russians have spies or intelligence right into the top political and military command of Ukraine and/or NATO and this could explain why the they haven’t hit decision making centers or decapitated the leadership and why they are so seemingly tolerant of strikes into Russian land. Not saying it’s so, but it should be kept in mind.
The way I see it it’s simply that the Russians have a solid plan and a timeline to defeat Ukraine and stalemate NATO and they refuse to take any bait and rashly answer NATO provocations. The evidence that the Russian plan is solid it that NATO’s provocations are becoming ever more depraved, which means desperate.
Posted by: LightYearsFromHome | May 28 2026 21:34 utc | 135
SpaceX will have its IPO on June 12th. Hmm …Posted by: persiflo | May 28 2026 15:01 utc | 123 lol. That’ll give the number freaks a chubby.
Posted by: GreatLakesObserver | May 28 2026 15:16 utc | 124
************************
Patrick Boyle ( https://www.kcl.ac.uk/people/patrick-boyle ) has a comprehensive, expert take on SpaceX IPO here:
https://youtu.be/IHD8BDFYyGI
And Warren Redlich, ( https://dawnproject.com/debating-the-cultist-warren-redlich/ ) for the Mr. Musk true believers, has a take-down defense and dismantling of Patrick’s assessment of the SpaceX IPO here:
https://youtu.be/7cr41qEwSFA
It is interesting to compare the presentation of facts, the use of language, and the method of construction of arguments between Patrick and Warren.
In the end, “Just the facts, ma’am”, (Joe Friday) is all that matters; and the luxury of you being able to make your own personal decision on who may be correct. Then, make sure that you have the courage to assess your wisdom as history unfolds and you are presented with new facts. 🙂
Posted by: General Factotum | May 29 2026 0:35 utc | 136
The Nafo-affiliated hate-Putin/hate-Russia trolls and bots are in high gear now. Everywhere online, MoA, Simplicius, Martyanov, and many more. “Flooding the zone” with hatred of Russia and Putin. Always the same messages. It’s organized.
Posted by: polish pole | May 29 2026 0:40 utc | 137
Interesting EW system developed, that seems to be have been very effective against Russian Geran and cruise missiles, hence the need to use more expensive Oreshniks? It is EU Politico, so could be heavily biased, but so could a Russian source.
–)———
An article with some details about the operation of the Lima EW system, developed by Cascade Systems and used by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, has been published in the European edition of Politico.
It is noted that the system is capable of not just suppressing navigation, but also using data substitution and shifting coordinates by several kilometers.
According to the company, the production of each device costs up to 58 thousand euros, depending on the modification. The company estimates that to protect a large city, from 30 to 100 such devices are needed, which is about 5 million euros.
According to the developers, the first prototypes of “Lima” appeared in 2022 to combat Russian cruise missiles. Cascade Systems required several years of experiments and more than 2 million dollars of their own funds to overcome the skepticism of the Ukrainian government and the General Staff.
The system is used by the EW unit “Night Watch” as part of the TRO forces since February 2023. The first five systems were deployed in the vicinity of Kharkiv and Zaporizhia. On March 9, “Lima” passed its first combat test, during which, as stated, nine cruise missiles that entered the system’s zone of action and a reconnaissance UAV “Granat” were suppressed. Two months later, two more cruise missiles were knocked off course and fell several kilometers away from the target.
The system gained wider distribution in July 2024, and in October 2025 it began to be used to protect infrastructure facilities, in connection with which the company began to receive state contracts.
At the moment, the company has supplied the armed forces with more than 400 systems. The company claims that over the past 18 months, the system has allegedly suppressed 20,500 drones of the “Geran” type (and others), and dozens of ballistic and cruise missiles have been allegedly knocked off course.
In early 2025, the Russian Armed Forces began to use improved “Comet” antennas to protect against interference, which made the existing Ukrainian EW systems, including earlier versions of “Lima”, ineffective. Three months later, the company’s engineers developed a new version called Lima Quant, which, as claimed, is specifically designed to suppress “Comets”. For this, a combination of traditional signal substitution with new high-frequency signals is used.
Posted by: CrazyCanuck | May 29 2026 4:37 utc | 138
Ukraine and World Affairs: Weekly Update, 29th May 2026: May be Useful to Some: Ukraine and World Affairs: Weekly Update
Posted by: The Busker | May 29 2026 10:45 utc | 139
CrazyCanuck | May 29 2026 4:37 utc | 138
What you “report” is shameless bragging of the peddlers for “Lima” EW. They claim to have downed 20.5k Geran drones in 18 months, 1138 monthly, or ~38 per day. Do you believe that?
Posted by: aquadraht | May 29 2026 14:05 utc | 140
Missile warnings for multiple Russian cities going out. Something big is about to go down 🙁
Posted by: bored | May 29 2026 14:05 utc | 141
I see that missile warnings were out earlier the day for Tyumen, Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District, and Ural Federal District (UFD), but have been canceled, as Artjom Zoga, Plenipotentiary Representative of the President of the Russian Federation in the district announced https://dzen.ru/news/story/0125747d-f22e-5dd9-a778-f86698f7e158
No warnings or alarms for all of the RF are reported.
Posted by: aquadraht | May 29 2026 15:30 utc | 142
But looks like troll alarm over the whole bar ..
Posted by: aquadraht | May 29 2026 15:52 utc | 143
It’s just Springtime in the northern hemisphere, infestations of all kinds of weeds, pests and parasites start flourishing…
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | May 29 2026 19:49 utc | 144
General Factotum | May 28 2026 13:29 utc | 118
“The satellite moves within an inertial frame of reference.”
When I read this, my Bull_ Shiter detector says: What?
An inertial frame of reference is one that moves with a constant velocity. Velocity is a vector. Meaning that both magnitude and direction are needed to define it. For the velocity vector to be a constant, there can not be a change in the direction of the vector. The velocity vector of the frame of reference mut be along an straight path. Thus, the Galilean principle implemented by Newton in his first law of inertia: A body remains at rest, or in motion at a constant velocity (vector), unless it is acted upon by a force.
Thus, an inertial frame must have, by definition, a constant velocity (vector). When a satellite follows a curve, the direction of the velocity is changing every unit of time and, thus, the velocity vector is not constant. No object with a circular velocity can be considered an inertial frame of reference. The speed, the magnitude, can be constant, but the direction changes.
An artificial or natural satellite, orbiting the Earth is moving in a non-inertial frame of reference. It follows a free path corresponding to the gravitational field: the geodesics. That is why the Einstein’s theory of General relativity, or any other consistent one, was developed: to treat the movement of masses in a no inertial frame of reference. The mass of the Earth curve the space-time and the satellites follow the curvature. That is why the GPS System must adjust the variations in the clocks of each satellite in order to not accumulate time errors that would mean location errors on the ground. This is adjusted according the Principle of The General Relativity, that, of course, is an operational and confirmed Scientific Theory developed for the No Inertial Frames.
You can make approximations to an inertial frame of reference and consider the Earth as a lineal one, but it’s not the case because is an ideal one.
A salute, dear professor.
Posted by: Kalun | May 29 2026 22:56 utc | 145
And, to finish. The orbital elements of an artificial or natural satellite are defined by the Newton Theory because is very practical. But, with nuances. The math apparatus provided by Newton is the used one with a technique that try to account the perturbations of other masses. In order to do so, it has been elaborated math algorithms that have orders of uncertainty below hundred meters with certain conditions. That is, if we see an object that is moving in the solar system (provided that we detected it by whatever means), we can establish the path with a certainty that is a function of the number of observations. As we have most data, we run the computer models and we can determinate the uncertainties, which is the practical factor.
The military of the Countries involved in this conflict are doing the same, but with less uncertainties because the Intelligence resources know the weapons to the core.
Posted by: Kalun | May 29 2026 23:23 utc | 146
From Sal Mercoglio, the “shipping guy” on YooToob:
Why Russia is the Real Winner of the Battle for the Strait of Hormuz
Posted by: George the Zeroth | May 30 2026 1:39 utc | 147