[Goose]

Interesting that the senate is proposing money for ATACMS while Army did not request it. Hopefully bipartisan push to send it to Ukraine will happen.



Ukraine used a drone to attack Sevastopol, a first in the war, and on their Navy day. 



https://twitter.com/christogrozev/status...VWSLCr1MGA

It appears that it wasn't "Ukraine" in an organized sense but rather some resident of Sevastopol with Ukrainian sympathies who made his own drone and used it. In a way, that is even worse for the Russians, as it shows they are not in as complete control of Crimea as they originally thought.Having an effective "fifth column" is undoubtedly something the Russians weren't expecting.

If Russia can't defend one of their most important military facilities from a slow drone strike, imagine the devastation a few ATACMS missiles traveling close to Mach 3 could wreak.

Indeed! A headquarters of this type is a perfect target. There are also many military warehouses and POL storage facilities in Crimea that one ATACMS each could make go boom big time. Too bad they aren't already in country even if they are not authorized to use them as of yet (I am being optimistic). It is just a crime to waste all these opportunities. ATACMS don't have a very big warhead, "only" 500 lbs, but that is plenty to do the job, especially coming downhill at  Mach 3.

These weapons would render any significant concentration of material and troops at risk throughout all the occupied territories. In and of itself they are not "war winners", but they certainly will make Russia's tactical situation much more difficult, decrease Russian logistics capability, and make large scale movements of ANYTHING costly. A lot to like.

The bad news is that ATACMS is a bit of a stepchild in the Army right now. The precision strike missile (PrSM) is supposed to replace it and the Army was not keen on buying a bunch of the "old" ATACMS. The Senate may just be doing a correction, or it could be that the Army knew that there was an "earmark" coming to save them and did not ask for the money in their budget.

It also seems nobody in Washington is really concerned that Ukraine is going to run us out of "regular" GMLRS missiles. IMHO it would be wise to ramp up production "just in case". We need to replace what was already committed and prepare for a larger inventory of HIMARS/M270s in Ukraine. More launchers won't necessarily increase rocket usage much, but it will greatly increase the probability of one being in range of targets as they emerge. 16 just isn't enough for a country the size of Ukraine.

[Goose]

Interesting that the senate is proposing money for ATACMS while Army did not request it. Hopefully bipartisan push to send it to Ukraine will happen.



Ukraine used a drone to attack Sevastopol, a first in the war, and on their Navy day. 



https://twitter.com/christogrozev/status...VWSLCr1MGA

It appears that it wasn't "Ukraine" in an organized sense but rather some resident of Sevastopol with Ukrainian sympathies who made his own drone and used it. In a way, that is even worse for the Russians, as it shows they are not in as complete control of Crimea as they originally thought.Having an effective "fifth column" is undoubtedly something the Russians weren't expecting.

If Russia can't defend one of their most important military facilities from a slow drone strike, imagine the devastation a few ATACMS missiles traveling close to Mach 3 could wreak.

Indeed! A headquarters of this type is a perfect target. There are also many military warehouses and POL storage facilities in Crimea that one ATACMS each could make go boom big time. Too bad they aren't already in country even if they are not authorized to use them as of yet (I am being optimistic). It is just a crime to waste all these opportunities. ATACMS don't have a very big warhead, "only" 500 lbs, but that is plenty to do the job, especially coming downhill at  Mach 3.

These weapons would render any significant concentration of material and troops at risk throughout all the occupied territories. In and of itself they are not "war winners", but they certainly will make Russia's tactical situation much more difficult, decrease Russian logistics capability, and make large scale movements of ANYTHING costly. A lot to like.

The bad news is that ATACMS is a bit of a stepchild in the Army right now. The precision strike missile (PrSM) is supposed to replace it and the Army was not keen on buying a bunch of the "old" ATACMS. The Senate may just be doing a correction, or it could be that the Army knew that there was an "earmark" coming to save them and did not ask for the money in their budget.

It also seems nobody in Washington is really concerned that Ukraine is going to run us out of "regular" GMLRS missiles. IMHO it would be wise to ramp up production "just in case". We need to replace what was already committed and prepare for a larger inventory of HIMARS/M270s in Ukraine. More launchers won't necessarily increase rocket usage much, but it will greatly increase the probability of one being in range of targets as they emerge. 16 just isn't enough for a country the size of Ukraine.