About thirty years ago I worked on a laser reflection, Rayleigh scattering sensor to detect helicopters flying in enfilade. When they are down low, they kick up dust into the air above them. That dust induces Rayleigh scattering when scanned by a laser.
@@sepulz and at some point they looked like flies, falling down everywhere form Ukrainian skyes. Guess Half of KA-52 fleet is gone. So I would prefer a useful chopper with a real crew rather than that looks like a plane but keeps falling down from the skies
The Ka-52M can use the LMUR missile it's probably not as common as the vikhr but the LMUR has been used in the conflict and the Ka-52 played a substantial role in holding back the Ukrainian counter offensive imo it's not just nuisance attacks both side are using the lofting method as well they wouldn't if it didn't make some difference
The only real effective use of the helicopters post opening attacks were during the Ukrainian summer counter offensive. The Ka-52 acted as QRF to halt an armored assault not dissimilar to NATO's doctrine. However, outside of that specific instance; they haven't been anything more than nuisance attacks. They are used because any asset that you keep grounded is wasted firepower. The only reason to keep them grounded is to avoid an even costlier shoot down of them. It is why they are used in indirect fire rocket barrages. It reduces risk of being shot down while squeezing some worth out of them. But that's far from their maximum potential and their intended doctrinal use. The worst thing they can do with them is keeping it grounded but it doesn't make their current employment optimal. They are just a much more expensive low capacity MLRS at this point and their overall impact is minimal as a result.
@@Nero-Caesar let me get this out first LMUR is a fire and forget missile, the heli aims at where the intended target is and the missile guides itself there (like IR AAMs for planes) Vikhr is a laser beam-riding, which is simply the missile trying to stay within the laser the heli is aiming at the enemy target LMUR is quite the large missile with at least 20kg tnt warhead while vikhrs stand around 5.6kg tnt and being tandem so instead of the heli staying exposed, while firing the vikhr, to a UAV team that is hiding in a house and scouting the area they just fire a lmur, wipe the building and fly back
*And this is how I break my self-imposed chaos magic voodoo machine boycott* 00:54 looks like I can introduce you to the basics of Russian chopper air support but fail miserably at the basics of font spacing...
It happens to some later text too (MACLOS), maybe you are working in a different aspect ratio to the final export? (edit: nvm, the game footage would look cropped if that was the case)
I own the T.16000 and in my opinion, is 2 buttons away from being the BEST HOTAS. It misses a Pinky and an extra hat. But It is cheap, can come with rudder pedals, durable, and works with every module in DCS with creative mapping, and other sims. 100% recommend for a begginer
When you try out stuff from Virpil, Winwing, or even VKB. You will very quickly realize that the T.16000 is entry level for a reason and adding a couple of extra controls won't change that significantly. Don't get me wrong. It is a solid entry level HOTAS and it is priced at a level that makes it accessible. That said. There is more to the quality of a HOTAS than just the amount of controls.
@@startrekmike Yep, I bought It because It was my first "real HOTAS". It was cheap with the whole set, and easy to store for space when not in use. And extremely durable and easy to mantain. However, as you say, I'll be checking one of those VIRPIL when I can afford one.
Also for me at least I can’t really use a better hotas as they are larger and the t16000 is pretty much the largest and best hotas that will fit my setup, and I’m fine with it
Soviet (as it was then) doctrine, as we were briefed and planned/trained against, tightly integrated fixed and rotary wing aviation in support of ground forces. It was always a challenge for us as NATO defenders. Mi-24 can also carry a squad as well so it can suppress, assault and lodge a force (say a FO or ATGM team) with one platform.
I played some Wargame: European Escalation, where I learned that you can never send helicopters into enemy territory because every building or clump of trees is a potential MANPADS site. Is this true in real-life as well?
Yes, thats why the most succesfull Russian employing Attack Helicopter is when Ukrainian Armor storm the Russian line so, the Helicopter was very succesfull when Ambushing - but not on Attacking Ukraine has lots of Manpads and Shorads, but Russian Vikr Missile outrange them all. They launch basicly in Friendly arispace, and Manpads or Shorads basicly cant see them as they hidden in treeline. Those Helicopter is launching Missile from 6km away, from opposing side Armor perspective - they barely a dot Ukraine only claimed 1 kill, and 1 damaged after like a week of Offensive - they seems preaty hard to kill with ground based system when used in Deffensive The safe Aplication of Helicopter in Very contested Airspace, seems like Russian did - which is lofting Rockets
Yes, even without MANPADS, the US suffered quite a few losses to just small arms fire flying over urban areas during the invasion part of 2003 Iraq war. Helicopters are extremely vulnerable to ground fire. Their best survival is concealment and mobility. NATO doctrine uses them as "aerial tank destroyers" using mobility and firepower to respond to enemy armored assault. This was attack helicopter's purpose during the cold war due to the horde of Soviet tanks. More recently, the only real successful Russian employment of their attack helicopters was during the Ukrainian 2023 summer counter offensive where the Russians employed Ka-52s much like how NATO employ theirs which indicate which doctrine plays out better. US also uses helicopters as a screening force though which gives it a slightly more offensive nature. But that's just mainly reconnaissance and destroying/disrupting enemy reconnaissance. In this role, they just mainly protect the main force from sudden attacks; the attack helicopters can utilize its superior mobility to disengage when things get tough. Unlike in a Soviet style mass air assault, the air cavalry isn't committed to the fight and is there to disrupt and delay. This minimizes losses associated with air assault missions. The most successful use of helicopters in the air assault tactics were probably Rhodesian bush war and to a lesser extent during the Vietnam war; but the latter suffered plenty of losses doing so. This should indicate in a conventional conflict; aggressive deep penetrating air assault tactics just don't really work. Against counterinsurgency, it is much more viable. See invasion vs post-invasion Iraq.
At the beginning of this war, it was because the west sent tens of thousands of MANPADS into Ukraine. There are videos from the opening weeks of this war with Russian helicopters dodging four or five at a time. Russia adapted their tactics and responded by shelling these areas heavily …. resulting in far far fewer just mounted rocket teams willing to hide in the woods
First of all - awesome video as always! Secondly - you're the only person in the world literally (TV ads included) that makes ads interesting and fun. Ok...it's sponsored content, not ads, but you know what I mean :)
Open photo of cockpit of south african SuperHind from two decades ago, then open cockpit photo of Mi-35M. Why is a foreign mod kit from a small country capable of fully switching the helicopter to digital avionics, but "original" designers just slap two monitors and call it a day?
I mean, fully digital avionics is not here nor there, the MFDs on the Mi-35M are I believe fully capable of displaying everything the analog dials can and if the pilot so chooses to he can fully rely on the screens with the analog dials being a backup... Personally, I don't think making 3 panels with one always switched to the instrument panel is much if at all superior to having 2 panels with analog dials, you pretty much have 2 digital screens usable for whatever on both. Though I will have to admit that it's quite hard to find proper pictures of all of the different superhind cockpit layouts in use
Those are redundancy analog instruments for a case where digital displays fail. They suppose to be used as backup instruments only. It was considered for a long time that it is a good idea to have analog backup instruments available. Just look at cockpits of modernized F-16 and F-18. However, lately everyone is moving to a full digital setup.
@@qewqeqeqwew3977 digital avionics is a whole suit which includes things like fly-by-wire capability. Not just 2 monitors ie the whole context of the difference you've missed. Is it absent for the "redundancy"? Why do Mi-28NM and Ka-52M abandon such a safety feature then? Удачи в поиске инфы по ЭДСУ даже на Ми-24ВН/Ми-35М2 потому, что его там просто нет.
CHRIS!... loved this video. I was in the Canadian air defense artillery, deployed in Germany during the cold war. I really enjoy your up-to-date content. I find it fascinating how Russia never retires old platforms like the Mil mi-4; augmenting them with Hokum/Havok. During the cold war, they did that with everything; give the older stuff to satellite Warsaw pact countries. Keep it up.
I'm the proud owner of a Thrustmaster T1600M myself and I can attest that for as cheap as it is, you definitely will get your moneys worth. After 2 years and some bad treatment on my part (there's a layer of dust on the greasy part, just to give you an idea) it still works like a charm. The only downside is that it's kind of a pain to keep it firmly in place on your gaming surface as it's very light, so I usually put some Blu-tack on the base. Great sponsor !
The Ka-52m is currently the most effective helicopter in the conflict in Ukraine, especially after receiving the LMUR missile, with a first-person view and the ability to hit targets at a distance of up to 14.5 kilometers, which allows not only to destroy heavy equipment, but also to launch a missile through in the window of a house where enemy units can hide
The issue with DCS is the ridiculous ground vehicle ai. As cool as the helicopters are, the ground ai makes them basically impossible to use in any situation involving any difficulty
Nice video, loved it. Nice run-down of the basic concepts at work, great visualisations, very understandable, even for the novice. One small point of criticism though: could you tune down the music at the section transitions? It's a bit loud, especially in contrast to your pleasantly relaxed narration.
Great video. The cost benefit of an attack helicopter is reduced in the static war with dug in oppenents and established defenses. However, their effictiveness in combination with layered defense was clearly shown in 2023, being able to deploy as rapid reaction to large armored assaults. At least for the KA-52s that could operate at night and at longer ranges with a better sensor suite and weapons. Although this still depended on them being able to forward deploy, which then made them vunerable to ATACMS as bases and FARPs that attack helicopters can take off from are difficult to conceal for long times. In terms of smaller static conflict, FPV drones are doing the bulk of the anti-tank work. Where there is more time to get drone teams into position, and of course the difference in cost is staggering.
@NickB-pc4fu a large amount of ATGMs require designation thoughout. Yes there are active radar guided hellfires and IR spike-ER or PARS-3LR, but they are not used as often, because it's more difficult to be precise with them on tight moving convoys or partially obscured targets, which is why even in apache loadouts in Iraq they usually had 1 radar guided hellffire for every 3 laser guided ones in the initial invasion and then switched to all laser guided after. Also as the range of firing the vikhr missile of the Ka-52 can be well outside of the audio range and practical visual range of ground targets being attacked and easily outside of the range of manpads when used defensively behind your own forces, fire and forget isn't really that nesscessary. They also don't need to hover, they can move forward at decent speed, and have small amounts of lateral movement, which we have seen in footage of attacks using vikhr from the flir footage showing the course and speed of the helicopter while the missile is launched and in flight.
@TheDrAstrov It was pretty clear I was talking about using the ATACAMS to attack the Ka-52s at their forward airfield. I recommend you stick to the peanut gallery.
Chis is fantastic for historic aircraft and for technical information but I think he is mislead sometimes by our side's propaganda on the war in Ukraine. NATO governments seem to be using more disinformation than they did during the Cold War. Not to the same extent as Pravda did during the Cold War but it is hard to find out what is actually going on. One of the most important bits on information we have about the war is from the classified Pentagon documents leaked by that US airman who just got a very long prison sentence. They state that Russia is killing seven Ukrainian soldiers for every soldier they lose. This was classified information for briefing US leaders and is probably more accurate than the narrative they are putting out in public. Also, if the Russians were missing all the time, the Ukrainians would not be constantly screaming for more equipment from us. The Russians have clearly made a lot of mistakes but it would be wrong to underestimate them. Our tanks have proven just as vulnerable to modern weapons as Russian tanks and they have a lot more tanks than we do. One should never underestimate an enemy.
All chris is at this point is a propaganda mouthpiece with ZERO thinking skills beyond technical specs. He should have stuck to old stuff where he doesn't have the parrot goverment lies or be fined/arrested by german police. So much freedom right? HAHAHA
4:14 preparatory (Dodootovka), close support (Dodderzhka), accompaniment (sooprovoxhdenit)... And now in REAL Russian: preparatory (Podgotovka Подготовка), close support (Podderzhka Поддержка), accompaniment (Soprovojdenie Сопровождение). It's just a trop. In EVERY American movie about Russia they butcher our Russian spelling and pronunsiation while we easily learn your English. We beleave it's a sign of an utmost hubris - to not know and to not want to know any other language.
Is the Mi-24 still the main assault chopper for the Russian army? I feel like we have very little footage of Russian Hinds in action I feel like the majority are Mi-28 transports/rocket standoff or KA-52s for anti tank role. They were massively successful with Ka-52s during the Ukrainian counter offensive and argument can be made that the Ka-52s taking out columns from 14km away was a big reason Ukraine stopped using armored thrusts to break through and switched to infantry assaults on positions. But it makes sense i guess for the Hind to be the main assault chopper still since it can carry a squad and is a formidable fire platform
One more thing to complicate the analysis is that the manpower required to operate a flak was very different to that required to fly aircraft. On the other hand, the number of Luftwaffe aircraft against the bombers was the reason the Allies had to sacrifice resources to escort fighters in Europe at all instead of building even more bombers. There were also occasions when the Flak and Interceptors contributed to each other's effectiveness, e.g. at night. It's really a complicated picture even in hindsight.
Vikhr and other beam riders are not capable of designation handoff as it rides within shooters laser beam meaning he has to keep the target in his sights from launch to impact. It is effectively form of SACLOS guidance. Laser-homing weapons are capable of designation handoff due to them tracking laser reflected off the target itself like said Hellfire. And no russia has no "analog" ATGM, instead jumping straight to radio link equiped TV guidance like found in ie Spike NLOS but it is still VERY limited in numbers.
We don't know for sure. But what we do know is that there're not that many targets for helis in the first place. Anyway, according to the published materials, there had been 12 cases of LMUR launches since the beginning of the year... Which isn't a lot. But that's more than 6 vikhr launches which occured at the same period
Nah lmur has been used extensively and is extremely good. Though vikhr is saclos guided it is pretty fast and the specific form of semiautomatic or automatic guidance (as it can do both) allow it to hit targets out to 12 klicks.
The Tactics are a kin to the Technology..from the 1990's. The missile is launched and they have to hold position until the "Target" is hit. Where as the "hellfire" is guided by others from way above (Top Drop) and the Apache just goes back to roam for another target...
Not sure how comforting that is anyone on the receiving end, the hellfire is absolutely a better weapon but sadly the best tool for the job is the one in your hand. Something like a 9A1472 Vikhr-1 costs around 20,000 usd for Russia to make and is basically immune to sanctions, it will still royally mess up anything it hits including a MBT at 12km and according to some sources there are variants that can be handed off to targeting drones/infantry observers. Even the hellfire's strength as a top down has some drawbacks ignoring the fact neither side has them in significant quantities and that they cost over 5x what a tv guided rocket does, neither Russia or Ukraine has the luxury of flying high and looking for targets. Chances are a target is being spotted by a very nervous man on his belly and the firing platform is zipping up, poking its head up, launching and holding for 6-12 seconds then running home. It's not going to win the war but its clearly miserable dealing with the reality anything less than 12km from serious short reaction AA is vulnerable to such an inexpensive and plentiful weapon.
Hi @MilitaryAviationHistory do you believe that pure attack helicopters have a future beyond 2050? It seems like that function is better suited to attack drones (which could be remotely operated or independent). The costs associated with the platforms simply outweigh the benefits. While I love attack helicopters, especially the Mi-24 and Ka-52 families as they look menacing, I think their days may be numbered. They have always been vulnerable. What do you believe will happen to attack helicopters in the next 20-30 years?
The US Army seems to think that manned helicopters are going to increasingly transition into battle managers for large swarms of low-altitude drones, though still with the capability of executing closer-range attacks on their own if enemy air defences could be sufficiently degraded.
All manned aircraft will be relegated to C&C roles eventually, attack helicopters are no different. What we might eventually see is helicopters commanding rotor wing drones to attack from a distance (as having a clear LOS being in the air does allow you a better possibility of unjammable drone control systems like laser data transmission or something similar being used)
Depends on the force structure you want to have. I think we may very well see the return of light helicopters (e.g. think modern Bo 105 equivalent) since for various countries the attack helicopter has proven an expensive and seemingly misplaced expense.
@@MilitaryAviationHistory Thanks so much for your answer. Staying on topic and perhaps being a little greedy for knowledge can you do an episode on the use of attack helos in the Iran-Iraq war and the helicopter dogfights that sources say took place. There is very little information on this tragic conflict and will benefit us all.
personally wouldnt recomend the warthog to anyone since its very overpriced while having outdated desing and manufacturing defects with its ball socket joint causing it to be not smooth but the t16000m and all its add ons are very much worth it
In strength in depth the KA 52 showed by its use to be a rapid response to Ukraine attempts to overwhelm and beat entrenched positions, quickly nullifying firepower advantages and blunting any momentum in Ukraine s offensive. So while the use of manpad SAM systems reduces the offensive uses , the Russians have not been as wasteful with their airforce , as their ground forces, even though they have suffered especially on ground attacks by the longer range HIMARS. The air war balance still favors the Russians and the attrition rates hold the odds still vastly in their favor. With each drone evolution and countermeasure the more vulnerable these very high cost machines become, yet until nullified Russia has a strength in depth force multiplier capable of countering any offensive at speed.
Ok its been awhile but I want to point out the ah64 style attack isn't really something the Russians really seem to have do much. Ah64 hide behind tree pop up shoot. The Russians tend to run stop shoot run I remember they tend to go fast and don't really hide nearly as much or as well as nato types. I was told the hind in particular and it looks like the ka52 were ment to be more like a ww 2 attacker run in shoot and keep going as opposed to the nato pop up and down technique.
He should have talked about the newer helis like mi-35m, mi-28N/NM , ka-50 , ka-52 each one of them is far more advanced and the vihkir missile is a truly beast , it can outperform any NATO ATGM.
I am surprised that the AW249 has the sight on the nose and not abive the cabin like the Tiger. There must be a reason if the Tiger is the only one to have the sensors there.
I understand your focus is from the helicopter POV, but the ground units in DCS had poor use of terrain, didn't pop smoke etc. With respect to the Ukrainian examples, the downside of her massively abbreviated training is that they tend to not operate the vehicles "properly".
I'm shocked. It's not a 24min long series of lies about 'unprovoked' or ignoring their efficacy. Though, the Izdeliye 305 might've been worth mentioning.
Video was good until the borked conclusion : Even used sparsely, helicopter in an area of operation represent an area interdiction asset that force to deploy AA assets and prevent ground maneuver warfare. Indeed thios would be more efficient with a flock or helicoper operating in pairs but nonetheless, this is not something that can be ignored by commanders.
No, I believe most cavalry units were just unceremoniously disbanded even before helicopters entered widespread use. However, helicopters do allow a similar, if more advanced, strategic mobility. By WW2 the USSR still had a lot of cavalry units comparatively speaking, but they were being phased out in favour of motorised and mechanised formations instead. Mounted infantry essentially used horses as a means to get somewhere faster than marching and then dismount before entering combat, while helicopters generally were more intended to deliver troops to places inaccessible by land travel
No. In the ussr and Russia today there's a large amount of airborne (VDV) troops that are somewhat similar to us marines. They are essentially an elite infantry units. The best conscripts serve there, the best professional soliders are offered to join vdv, they have the most training time in peace time, e.t.c. These troops were commonly used as a heliborn assault troops
I think the Hind is still using tubes- reason warm up takes so long for the weapons systems - and the gyros are so sensitive to movement. IDK if the Russians have modernized it but it's pretty old tec. The Hind’s weight and size ( due to troop carrying capabilities) makes it a pretty vulnerable on the modern battlefield. It's an outdated weapons platform the AH64 makes it look like a pig. GREAT breakdown as always!!!!
KA52 is a game changer. They stopped the Nato armies attacks for 5 months during the ukrainan summer offensive. Ukraine took 1 small village in an entire year of operations with full support from 40+ countries. Ka52 can easy knock out abrams and bradleys. Just look at bradley square where they killed 25+ tanks in an hour at robotny.
As gamers the thing we used to say in the 1980's when we saw a picture of a fully loaded Apache there is 16 dead Soviet tanks. Soviet tank battalion = 2 Apaches. Good thing we never had to find out if that was true but it could be a challenge to do depending on the complexity level of the game and depicted terrain.
And as their pods seems really look like dcs, that vickers msl is good when stable platform, like su-25, but from helo ... not so sure. little bit of "glunky" to (for me atleast in sim) to get that Launch auth. Locking is easy, but hey that is just dcs and just me..
@assauItgroup I mean, you literally have the SS lightningbolts on your profile and your Avatar has the Wolfsangel on it. Just a Nzi Ukrainian trying to enforce the "State language".
As for as detecting the helicopters acoustic signature one might be able to do that at long ranges by employing a acoustic parabolic dish. e.g. Google What is a Parabolic Mic and How Does It Work? Note if one doubles the radius of the dish one should get twice the range assuming that sound intensity falls of at 1/Range ^2 and the gain of the dish goes up with Radius^2. And if one uses clear acrylic for the dish plus some camo netting it might be hard to spot. A three foot dish one could mount in a cargo e-bike and a six foot on on a Humvee or small truck. They could pick up the sounds from UAVs as well, especially quad copters. Also a tree line is not going to block much of the sound from a helo hiding behind it. And if one uses two of these (say a mile apart) to triangulate then one can call artillery fire on the helos which might not hit them but will certainly get their attention and perhaps make them fly a bit higher thus making them easier to spot optically... or even better launch a loitering munition that can target helos.
There are certainly easier ways to do it, especially with well-understood and common tech. You need to add in wind speed, weather and temperature, not to mention the precise distance between your arrays. Germans have thought of using acoustic proximity fuses in WW2, but while sonar works well underwater, it doesn't rain in the sea, and it is a dense and uniform medium. Even naval sonar arrays cease to work when loud sounds like depth charges start blasting, which happens constantly in the Ukraine because russian artillery is everywhere. On a rainy day in an Ukrainian autumn, the sounds drown out everything even without explosions all around. Trees and terrain also shield out and alter noise. You also need specialist software to decipher a helicopter from anything else that makes noise, that is far beyond the capability of normal countries, so unless US congress is willing to undertake a goose chase, it probably can't happen at all. It is also easy to spoof by having drones carry loudspeakers to play helicopter noises, or just by fighting so that machine gun noises interfere with the sonar arrays. In the summer, bugs also make so much noise, it is difficult to decipher anything at all. It would be easier to have a drone carry IR equipment or a modified artillery radar up high, or rely on a network of them to be watchmen.
OK, I did a bit more research on this idea and here might be another piece to solving this puzzle of how to deal with Russian Helos firing AT missiles. Google Introducing DJI FlyCart 30 | DJI Delivery This has a payload of 60lbs and thus should be able to carry a stinger missile. with a 10 mile range. and a speed of 40 mph It can also suspend it load from a cable so one might employ several of these as spotters and shooters where the spotter can carry a acoustic camera suspended below the UAV to isolate it from the sound of the UAV and it can hover to reduce wind noise on the mikes. e.g. Google Acoustic cameras can SEE sound FOTRIC TD3-LD Acoustic Camera: Unlock Efficiency in Your Anomaly Detection! So the UAV the Spotter UAVs could be much closer than the ground based acoustic sensors and thus require far less gain (though one does get some processor gain from the acoustic cameras bytheir ability to isolate sound by direction and two of these could triangulate to get range to the helo as well and then pass those coordinates to the shooter. Also, this would be an offensive weapon to support a ground attack and thus could be orchestrated. These acoustic cameras have a 200 hz frame rate and thus can act as high speed cameras and so they should be able to ID a helo from its sound signature. and count the rotor blade RPM with fairly good accuracy. Yes, the helo could break off and outrun the shooter UAV but then it is not a threat to the ground forces they are protecting.
Here is another good video and shows how one can combine the acoustic camera with a thermal one to get multispectral imaging in an off the shelf hand held devise. Google The FLIR Si124 | Industrial Acoustic Imaging Camera FLIR Si124 - Acoustic camera And here are some other applications of acoustic cameras Google Demo: Acoustic Camera - Face Recognition Acoustic Camera Example And for the technical geek Google Acoustic Camera - Explanations Acoustic Imaging - Aeroacoustics | Online Program (Sample Video Lecture)
mmm, they use basically their helicopters like they did use the IL-2 in ww2, in a long straight and shallow dive approach, like a su-25'd do but 4 times slower, wich is suicidal from the start even for the su25. The worst part is that they still throwing their choppers in the battlefield like crap through a fan although ka-52 and mi-28 are good helicopters, completely designed and equipped to be fought properly....
what happens to all the money everyone is giving ukraine if they lose the war? what happens to all the technology Russia wins on the battlefield such as abandoned vehicles with computers in them?
nato would be better off going lighter tanks that are faster and cheaper, like in early cold war, aps and era will protect against light AT weapons@@ВячеславФролов-д7я
Sounds like a reason to give even more to Ukraine, to help them win. Because no new information would be gained from this and under your theory the best solution is for Ukraine to win so it doesn't fall into Russian hands. As for the first, win or lose that money is spent. Not a real factor. In reality, Russians have already examined all this stuff, since some of the US allies that have this equipment are kind of iffy.
@@recoil53what ''theory'' did i propose? i thought i asked a couple questions. sorry your side is losing. CNN will have more instructions shortly hang in there buddy
@@Zona-w9i It is YOUR proposition that if Ukraine loses, Russia gets their hand on US technology (that they've probably already seen). So it logically means the best security for that technology is to support Ukraine. You really can't get the stuff back. It doesn't take "sides" to follow basic logic.
