Ukraine - Russia Conflict

Western numbers for Russian costs are ridiculous, all made up. Help yourself to actual costs in rubles and convert them yourself.

When a Su-30SM costs $20M, how on earth will a Kinzhal cost $10M?

And converting a jet to carry a new weapon isn't that expensive. We did that with MKI for Brahmos-A.
Indian costs for Russian weapons are ridiculous. They ignore your own procurement contracts. Check out the Klub missile contract.


The MKI cost India $62m each and that's an old outdated plane. The figure of $1m is not realistic in any world for a 4.3 ton missile with a nose radar.

It isn't just a conversion, it's an interceptor that's no longer capable as an interceptor. Do some research on the MiG-31K.
I heard what he said. 1.5 to 2 years for Donbas and 3 years in total for everything east of the river. Not just Zapo and Kherson, but Polatva, Sumy and Chernihiv too, and Kharkiv.
He said 6 months for Donetsk and Luhansk. As regards 3 years for everything east of the river.... :ROFLMAO:
They have opened up their countries to an upcoming proxy war in Europe.
No, they have shut it down to Russian aggression. If Russia enters those countries now, NATO will stamp them out, and their nuclear threats will be ignored because they ignored ours.
 

I seriously want NATO gifting f16 to Ukraine, and we'll trained pilots. This will solve the two decade long discussion of f16vs flanker in subcontinent. As an Indian,my heart wants flanker to obliterate f16,but my brain is telling something else.

@Rajput Lion
I doubt we'll see any direct engagements. The F-16's will be used for shooting down cruise missiles, attacking Russian positions near the front line and possibly some stand-off attacks and MALD deployment.
 
h ttps://twitter.com/raging545/status/1660182825159598080?s=20

1684659665314.png


The Armed Forces successfully hit the headquarters of the occupiers in Berdyansk. The losses of the Russians are being clarified.


1684659595021.png
 
Last edited:

I doubt we'll see any direct engagements. The F-16's will be used for shooting down cruise missiles, attacking Russian positions near the front line and possibly some stand-off attacks and MALD deployment.
If u use f16 to target Russian position, definitely Russians will send their best aircrafts in their arsenal to intercept it I will call them fools,if Ukraine fly away without engaging flanker.
 

I seriously want NATO gifting f16 to Ukraine, and we'll trained pilots. This will solve the two decade long discussion of f16vs flanker in subcontinent. As an Indian,my heart wants flanker to obliterate f16,but my brain is telling something else.

@Rajput Lion
Depends. If it's latest F-16 with AESA radar/AIM-120D then it can give trouble to any opposing force. F-16 is an example of marvellous American engineering. It is a superlative A t A fighter while being amazing at ground strikes too.


But here it's simply outclassed, especially when Ukraine will likely get old ones. Mig-21 destroyed F-16, but that didn't make it better than the Viper. Any fighter in right hands can destroy the other. That's their whole purpose of existence.
 
Attack of 3 Ukrainian infantry fighting vehicles in the Zaporozhye direction. Footage of the attack of three Ukrainian BMP-1s in the Zaporozhye direction in January of this year has been published. The positions of the Russian reconnaissance group of the army special forces and marines of the 177th regiment of the Caspian flotilla were attacked. Three Ukrainian BMP-1s came close to the Russian positions and landed troops. As a result of the ensuing battle, after one of the BMPs was damaged, the Ukrainian units retreated. The details of the battle are unknown, according to the results of the battle, there are wounded on both sides.


A short episode of an oncoming tank battle has been published, a Russian T-80BVM tank, under the command of a fighter with the call sign Altai, with a Ukrainian tank, presumably T-64. Reportedly, a Ukrainian tank leaving the forest belt was attacked by a T-80BVM tank. The video shows part of the battle, where the T-80BVM tank fires a second time at a Ukrainian tank and undermines its ammunition load.


What's interesting is the Russians do not release much videos about Ukrainian casualties, just heavy weapon losses.
 
Indian costs for Russian weapons are ridiculous. They ignore your own procurement contracts. Check out the Klub missile contract.


The MKI cost India $62m each and that's an old outdated plane. The figure of $1m is not realistic in any world for a 4.3 ton missile with a nose radar.

Russian costs in India are dependent on old costs that we signed in USD. So even though the ruble has weakened, we cannot benefit from it.

So, if we bought the MKI in 2000 was $22.5M, inflation has been applied to it over the years and what you see in the end is an inflated cost. Also, the final Indian cost includes a lot of electronics that were not part of the original contract. It's not going to Russia. It's the same with the Klub and Kaliber missiles, which were all signed before 2014, when ruble was 35 to a dollar, and we could not benefit from the collapse.

Otoh, FGFA was supposed to benefit, which is why the price dropped from $5.5B at 35 rubles to $3.7B at 65 rubles. So the ruble value actually increased, but the cost to India decreased drastically in terms of USD. Russia was supposed to get paid 193B rubles, but that got jacked up to 241 rubles, but in dollar terms India saved $1.8B. I'm sure the S-400 deals benefited from the collapse, the Chinese and Turks definitely did.

In simple terms, new order = new price in USD, old order = old price in USD + inflation.

It's because of the old prices and the limitations of our procurement rules that the Russians give a lot of value to the Indian market.

Ballistic missiles of that size tend to be cheaper than CMs like the Kaliber and Tomahawk. India's new Pralay missile, an Iskander class costs $700k, and it has 3 stages and comes wtih a MaRV. Also, India's longest range missile, Agni V, which is said to be an ICBM in disguise, costs $6M. Russian stuff is cheaper than ours after their ruble collapse.

It isn't just a conversion, it's an interceptor that's no longer capable as an interceptor. Do some research on the MiG-31K.

It doesn't matter. We have modified 40 Su-30MKIs to crry Brahmos-A and those come with flight limitations as well. Only a handful of Mig-31s have been modified to carry Kinzhal. The costs associated with it won't be a big deal.

He said 6 months for Donetsk and Luhansk. As regards 3 years for everything east of the river.... :ROFLMAO:

What crap. Read the soruces yourself.

No, they have shut it down to Russian aggression. If Russia enters those countries now, NATO will stamp them out, and their nuclear threats will be ignored because they ignored ours.

It won't be the Russians doing it, it will be the Libyans, Syrians, Sudanese and Iranians. Perhaps even the Afghans and Yemenis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion

I seriously want NATO gifting f16 to Ukraine, and we'll trained pilots. This will solve the two decade long discussion of f16vs flanker in subcontinent. As an Indian,my heart wants flanker to obliterate f16,but my brain is telling something else.

@Rajput Lion

It will only be a decent fight if those F-16s are Vs and come with AIM-120D. They need to be in numbers too, not just 4 or 6 jets, but 4-6 squadrons.

Don't expect much here. It won't set new standards, it's only meant to give Ukraine the chance to make use of a fighter jet's speed once in a while. It acts as a deterrent for protecting their own HQs.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Don't bring fantasy to serious discussions.
You claim to be an Indian yet you reject that Abhinandan's Mig-21 shot down PAF F-16? That ain't fantasy fella, but reality.

Serious discussion is that 1 on 1, no US jet can fight high-end Flankers(read Su-35S/Su-30SM2) and Su-57 Felon except F-22 and F-35. And against popular convention, I've openly said before and say it again that exchange ratio won't be lopsided in Raptor/Lightning 2's favour. Once Su-57 matures, no fighter jet in US arsenal would be able to fight it head-on except NGAD.

These are FACTS, doesn't matter how much one denies it.
 
You claim to be an Indian yet you reject that Abhinandan's Mig-21 shot down PAF F-16? That ain't fantasy fella, but reality.

Serious discussion is that 1 on 1, no US jet can fight high-end Flankers(read Su-35S/Su-30SM2) and Su-57 Felon except F-22 and F-35. And against popular convention, I've openly said before and say it again that exchange ratio won't be lopsided in Raptor/Lightning 2's favour. Once Su-57 matures, no fighter jet in US arsenal would be able to fight it head-on except NGAD.

These are FACTS, doesn't matter how much one denies it.
I don't claim an Indian,I am.
And yeas,I don't believe the narration of the government or military until and unless I see convincing evidences.applicable Not just to indian government,all government & military.
And lastly,I don't believe the narration goi in galwan & not a single inch of land lost type narration too. Because,by being an Indian,I don't need to put my logical thinking in refrigerator.
Lastly but not least,I seriously doubt your nationality,you either a Russian or Pakistani who wants india to push towards mediocre weapons.
Without accepting your fault & failure,we will not plug the the gap seen in 2019 & subsequent 2020 events.
 
If u use f16 to target Russian position, definitely Russians will send their best aircrafts in their arsenal to intercept it I will call them fools,if Ukraine fly away without engaging flanker.
They can't because of air defences though, that's why they aren't currently being used to drop cheap bombs on Ukrainian cities rather than firing expensive stand-off weapons. Both fighters will poke and prod from afar.
 
Russian costs in India are dependent on old costs that we signed in USD. So even though the ruble has weakened, we cannot benefit from it.

So, if we bought the MKI in 2000 was $22.5M, inflation has been applied to it over the years and what you see in the end is an inflated cost. Also, the final Indian cost includes a lot of electronics that were not part of the original contract. It's not going to Russia. It's the same with the Klub and Kaliber missiles, which were all signed before 2014, when ruble was 35 to a dollar, and we could not benefit from the collapse.

Otoh, FGFA was supposed to benefit, which is why the price dropped from $5.5B at 35 rubles to $3.7B at 65 rubles. So the ruble value actually increased, but the cost to India decreased drastically in terms of USD. Russia was supposed to get paid 193B rubles, but that got jacked up to 241 rubles, but in dollar terms India saved $1.8B. I'm sure the S-400 deals benefited from the collapse, the Chinese and Turks definitely did.

In simple terms, new order = new price in USD, old order = old price in USD + inflation.

It's because of the old prices and the limitations of our procurement rules that the Russians give a lot of value to the Indian market.
Blah, blah, excuses, you're wrong.
Ballistic missiles of that size tend to be cheaper than CMs like the Kaliber and Tomahawk. India's new Pralay missile, an Iskander class costs $700k, and it has 3 stages and comes wtih a MaRV. Also, India's longest range missile, Agni V, which is said to be an ICBM in disguise, costs $6M. Russian stuff is cheaper than ours after their ruble collapse.
Nope and nope. Kinzhal is roughly 3x the weight of a Kalibr for a start, so referring to them as 'missiles of that size' is wrong from the off. Russia likely buys all the materials and components for the missile and then only quotes the integration costs when buying internally. External customers pay for the integration and materials/components, explaining why it's many times more expensive. Either that, or they rip off everyone massively.

Iskander - $3m
1684675362670.png

1684675569698.png


Kinzhal - $10m
1684675444001.png

1684675518100.png

It doesn't matter. We have modified 40 Su-30MKIs to crry Brahmos-A and those come with flight limitations as well. Only a handful of Mig-31s have been modified to carry Kinzhal. The costs associated with it won't be a big deal.
Oh sure, effectively scrap an interceptor, no cost. At the end of the day, there hasn't been any explosions in Kyiv since their huge missile attack failed. And no satellite images to verify their claims, which would not be classified no matter how much fools try to claim it.
I heard the actual interview. Since December the guy has lost 110,000 people to capture a town with a peacetime population of 70,000. He's lost a city worth of people to capture a pile of rubble where a town once stood.

It won't be the Russians doing it, it will be the Libyans, Syrians, Sudanese and Iranians. Perhaps even the Afghans and Yemenis.
A lot of those groups probably hate Wagner more than the west. Russia would be foolish to start sponsoring terrorism.
 
Last edited:
Blah, blah, excuses, you're wrong.

Nope and nope. Kinzhal is roughly 3x the weight of a Kalibr for a start, so referring to them as 'missiles of that size' is wrong from the off. Russia likely buys all the materials and components for the missile and then only quotes the integration costs when buying internally. External customers pay for the integration and materials/components, explaining why it's many times more expensive. Either that, or they rip off everyone massively.

Iskander - $3m
View attachment 27835
View attachment 27838

Kinzhal - $10m
View attachment 27836
View attachment 27837

You don't know how currency works.

And yes, they rip off massively. They have sold to India at 200-400% markup, still cheaper than Western options. The Su-30MKI is effectively at 300% markup, but we are not complaining.

Guess what? Their prices haven't changed. I've already mentioned this many times years before the war even began.

A Su-30SM is 1200 million rubles, which is equal to $15M in today's exchange rate. The Su-57 costs twice that, so 2600M rubles, or $32.5M. Actual costs. The Yasen class costs 50B rubles each, that's $625M. Peanuts. I wouldn't mind getting ripped off paying 300% markup for the Yasen class.

When an SSN costs $625M, then a Kinzhal will barely even cost $1M. And no, converting the Iskander into a two-stage system won't multiply the cost by 3 times.

Oh sure, effectively scrap an interceptor, no cost. At the end of the day, there hasn't been any explosions in Kyiv since their huge missile attack failed. And no satellite images to verify their claims, which would not be classified no matter how much fools try to claim it.

So what? They have more than they need anyway.

I heard the actual interview. Since December the guy has lost 110,000 people to capture a town with a peacetime population of 70,000. He's lost a city worth of people to capture a pile of rubble where a town once stood.

Lol. Let's just say the people in the West have no idea or are simply in denial about everything.

A lot of those groups probably hate Wagner more than the west. Russia would be foolish to start sponsoring terrorism.

Many of them are allies.

Russia won't have to "sponsor" terrorism. Just like China. They will provide logistics, not the planning, decision-making or the intelligence.

"Ey, this man wanted a Javelin, I sold him a Javelin. Who knew he wanted to fire it on a bus full of people in Warsaw? He said he was gonna fight in Yemen. Once the weapon leaves my hands, it's no longer in my hands, kapice?" Yeah, good luck arguing against that.

Have you conisdered there are enough people in Europe who can make homemade bombs?

In any case, the the post-war situation will tell us of the aftereffects in Europe, if any. At least we know for certain there's gonna be a new arms race in Europe, what with the cheap cost of Russian weapons. There's one already brewing between US, China and India already.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Rajput Lion

Didn't know 80,000 soldiers will give you 100,000 dead. :ROFLMAO:

Let's do the math, shall we? The Russians entered the war with 180k troops, and amost twice more than those were casualties well before the fall offensive. So the Russians held the line with about -100,000 soldiers. Somehow the Russians managed to do it. Then came the mobilisation with 300,000 troops, Wagner brought 50000. Then Soledar I believe took out 50000, so the Russians dropped to 300k, and now 100k are apparently dead and probably 3x are wounded, so that's taken out 400k troops out of the 300k. So currently Russia is fighting with a grand total of -100k troops. Yup, makes sense.

But what I've understood is the West ensures the number of Ukrainian dead are matched with Russian dead in terms of narrative.

Something to think about, the Russians do not post their killings of Ukr soldiers, but the opposite happens in full gusto.

There is a reason why the Russians have not been broadcasting the kills they make, I wonder if you can figure that out yourself.

Maybe after the war is over.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Rajput Lion