Ukraine struck Russia's largest oil refinery, located in the city of Omsk, on Monday, marking what its forces say was its furthest-ever drone attack in the war.

The Omsk facility, which processes about 21 million tons of oil a year, is in Western Siberia and about 1,700 miles from Ukrainian territory — roughly the distance between Los Angeles and Houston.

top 92 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 48 points 4 months ago (33 children)

Im a little out of the loop, why are they suddenly able to do this now? What changed in their capabilities?

  • source
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] 78 points 4 months ago (15 children)

    Ukraine has developed very impressive drone technology in a very short time. It is expected that multiple nations will actually try to make deals to acquire Ukrainian drones at the current NATO summit because they are so good now. So Ukraine is no longer dependent on others to sell them drones. They‘re selling them now.

    For example, these drones can use terrain as guidance, so GPS isn’t required for navigation. This also allows them to fly at a very low altitude, avoiding Russian air defense. They’re also very resistant to jamming and have advanced autonomous capabilities, so they can “finish the job” on their own if the link to their operator is severed. Also, they’re very cheap, so it’s possible to overwhelm Russian defenses by swarming them.

    In summary, they‘ve developed incredible killing machines that are able to act autonomously, which is very good for them right now but probably not very good for humanity in the long run.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    In summary, they‘ve developed incredible killing machines that are able to act autonomously, which is very good for them right now but probably not very good for humanity in the long run.

    It's possible that this becomes the new "mutually assured destruction" we had back in the 20th. Basically, a cold war brought on by drones instead of nukes. It could mean a near-future of peace, however uneasy. I can't say that living with the looming propagandized threat of the USSR was good, but I think it was a far sight better than being in an active shooting war with them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    a cold war brought on by drones instead of nukes

    Oh great now I am worried about drones carrying dirty bombs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    I think that is a crazily optimistic take. Even if countries were to stop outright drone warfare and keep things to cyber attacks and economic warfare there would be nothing to stop them from using the tech to attack their own citizens.

    US constitution has already proven to be worth about as much as Lloyd and Harry's I.O.Us.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    The difference is nobody ever felt comfortable nuking their own civilians. I think chemical weapons are a better comparison. Autonomous drones will become illegal and unacceptable in warfare, but for riot control less lethal ones will be common and occasionally an authoritarian leader will use the military grade ones on minority groups or dissidents.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    probably not very good for humanity in the long run.

    Eh. C'est la vie. We had a good run.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    There was a Black Mirror episode featuring the Boston Dynamics "Dog" robot thing with a machine gun on it, and hunting people down, they are terrifying. It's like being hunted by a zombie tbag doesn't eat or sleep or get tired and won't stop.

    Flying drones are a whole new level of scary beyond that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 108 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    From what I read a few days ago one of the conditions for US aid under biden was that Ukraine make no strikes on russian soil. When trump pulled all the aid to Ukraine it was a huge blow, but also took the leash off.

    After that all they had in their way was developing the actual drones and techniques to make the strikes, as well as planning them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 65 points 4 months ago

    As far as I know, the condition was that US (nor NATO) weapons can't be used on attacks to Russian soil. That's one part why Ukraine has basically done a world record speedrun on native drone production. No one has (nor can) deny them from using their own weapons how they see fit.

    Removing stupid limitations on how they can hit back has helped, but that was mostly for short(ish) range missiles.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    They basically reinvented the Nazi V1 with their Flamingo, and although only small % get through, it's devastatingly accurate against refineries.

    Meanwhile, Russia uses the old Nazi strategy of launching very expensive rockets at apartments with civilians in cities, doing 0 strategic damage to Ukraine war capabilities, just like the Nazi V1 and later V2 was used and was relatively useless despite its high price.

    Oh, and Ukraine can shoot at almost all Russia's refineries and weapons factories, but Russia can't do it back because Ukrainian can always import from refineries and factories in France, Germany, etc, beyond the NATO border...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago* (9 children)

    Why are all your call backs to nazis?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Look at the v1. Then look at the flamingo. It's almost like they pulled an 80 year old drawing out of a drawer for their design! And the Russian tactic of causing panic and terror is exactly what Nazi's did with bombing London! I do it because it makes sense. This special military operation got so out of hand the world wars are almost the only historic wars worth comparing it too. Just hope he gets hanged by a mob like Mussolini or shoots himself in his bunker soon...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (4 children)

    Maybe just try mixing it up a bit, most jet powered cruse missiles end up looking like a V1 (that itself was not a new layout) for one example. You can vary your references by pointing to non nazi examples, not all the time but throw in an alternative at least some time. It is not like the nazi's even invented much, like the terror strikes to London where tried in ww1 for another example. They where kinda shit after all and its just weird to use them like a measuring stick to everything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Where I'm from, they are the measuring stick for "authoritarian state goes total war over ideology and fucks up" in a modern/mechanised way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    And that's a fine use, but to also use them in measuring Ukrainian technical development is still odd.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    I just really found the flamingo resembles it. I'm no current rocketry expert, so in my brain seeing pictures of a Flamingo referenced to something historical I do know and which I think is very widely known. There's nothing more to it than that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago*

    Its not the rocket part that makes it take that shape, its the long range turbofan jet engine that causes it to look like that. The V1 used a pulse engine but really the same issue in design. You have an engine that requires an intake (unlike most rockets) and ether you slap it on top (like the Flamingo or V1 or Tu-141) or build the body around it, causing cost increases and issues with warhead placement (like the Tomahawk)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Comparing fascist Russia with fascist Germany seems pretty par for the course.

    "If the boot fits" ~ Woody the Cowboy

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 106 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    And the greatest and second largest army of the world, didn't even notice a few foreign drones traveling 1700 miles across their land! I wonder who's gonna fall out of a window for this.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 4 months ago (11 children)

    TIL Siberia is way bigger than I expected. I knew it was big, but it looks like it’s more than half of Russian landmass. It can’t all be the climate I’m picturing, right? Like it borders Kazakhstan, so I figure at least part of it has to have hot summers

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Siberia is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to Siberia.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 4 months ago

    Siberia is actually 3/4ths of Russia's landmass. The northern parts are taiga, which are giant uninterrupted forests. The shores of the Arctic Ocean are mostly tundra. In the southern parts the taiga gives way to steppes.

    In the northern parts the climate has warm but quite short summers and long cold winters. In the southern part, where most of the population lives, they have the same climate as southern Canada/New England just less humid. The Western parts are also covered by warm winds that originate from the Middle East and hence have higher temperatures than their more Eastern areas. For reference in Novosibirsk, which is the largest city the average yearly summer temperatures reach 25 degrees Celsius but temperatures can also spike to as high as 38 degrees.

    So yeah Siberia is not all some barren tundra as most people imagine.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Though is that comparison corrected for the projection? Texas is farther south than Siberia and with the usual projection used, you can only compare the sizes of things at the same latitude. It's the same thing that makes Greenland look as big as Africa when it's closer to the size of South Africa.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    "Do you know how many time zones they have?" "Uh, yessir. Uh, four ... uh, no sir. I never really studied that up." "Eleven." "Eleven. It's not even funny." "Eleven." "Eleven. That's, that's ridiculous." "Eleven."

    https://youtu.be/QDmWYVdN8ug

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago

    Oh, It turns out that what some friends in Russia reported was true. They said they had to queue for about two hours just to buy fuel.

  • source
  • [–] 43 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    We need some research into how effective drone strikes against refineries are to stop climate change. Are they a net gain in carbon emissions, considering the cost of manufacture and the prevented emissions?

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    Gotta make it worse.

    There's the emissions from while it's on fire plus some of the chemicals in it are worse after being burned like that then in regular emissions. Or become other environmental issues on their own once released/burned.

    Then the emissions from building a new one.

    It's so much better to just shut it down because no one needs it than blow them up

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Then the emissions from building a new one.

    In Russia's case, depending on how things go, that many not apply all that much.

    If things go far enough it might lead to Ukraine striking construction sites of oil refineries. Still not great, but much less worse than an actual running refinery.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Also on the comparison of "on fire" vs used as fuel - IDK about the emissions during the refining process, but when gas or diesel is burnt as fuel in a car, there are typically several emissions control systems reducing the pollution produced

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 4 months ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    I wonder if Ukraine got the idea from Iran?

    I don’t mean that as an accusation, but… well, Iran basically has the world economy’s throat. And I know Ukraine’s drones just got the capability, but Iran had to be a fantastic reminder of how fragile an oil economy is.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Ukraine started their "long range sanctions" program years before Trump attacked Iran. It's getting more attention now because the years of consistent damage are starting to add up, but it's certainly not new. People who pay attention have always known the economic vulnerability of the oil market.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    Personally, I say California should be controlled by Australia.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    I replied to the wrong post somehow, this was supposed to be under the post of Trump saying Iceland should be under US control.

    It probably makes a bit more sense there (I also don't think California should be under Australia's control, it was just snark)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (11 children)

    I imagine a huge game of whack-a-mole between Russia and Ukraine. Russia moving air defenses trying to anticipate Ukrainian strikes, and increasingly failing.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    You can move air defenses but you can’t move the refineries, bridges and other infrastructure

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    Quick cover the refineries! Oh shit they but Moscow, redirect the defenses to cover Moscow! Oh fuck they hit Moscow, redirect the defenses to reinforce Putin's bunker! Oh blyat, they hit the refineries...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago* (8 children)

    There’s accusations that they’re mostly kept around Moscow and Putin’s compound, and stay there.

    Which is pretty stupid IMO, as I imagine killing Putin is a Pandora’s Box Ukraine does not want to open. And shelling civilians in Moscow is just cruel, and makes no tactical sense in lieu of other targets…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    You're probably right. It's never wise to make a martyr out of your enemy, and Zelensky is vastly more wise than Putin. And Trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago* (5 children)

    Well, Putin is actually a “moderate” of sorts in Russian politics. There are some scary, more nationalist and extremist, figures he keeps in line that would be happy to fill the power vacuum.

    It’s not even predicable anymore, as Putin’s already killed the most “obvious” popular ones, like Prigozhin.


    That’s what I meant.

    Maybe they could kill Putin, without him becoming a martyr. But Ukraine doesn’t know what comes after Putin.

    In a country with so many nukes, that could be a literally catastrophic gamble.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (4 children)

    That's a good point. I didn't know there were hardliners with that much power.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

    If you’re interested in further reading, ISW sometimes covers this figures in their Ukraine updates.

    You might be particularly interested in the nearly successful Wagner rebellion, where a Russian mercenary company drove a convoy to Moscow and almost made it, largely unopposed by the Russian military. Some joined him:

    https://www.understandingwar.org/research/russia-ukraine/assessing-prigozhins-wagner-group-rebellion/

    Putin was always paranoid, but this is the reason for the extra recent paranoia, FYI.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    I remember the Wagner accident and can't understand why he stopped. He could have literally had a successful coup and then just... Didn't?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    He had at max 25000 people under his personal control (and probably only a fraction of that). An actual full march on Moscow (a city of 13 million people located over 1000 km away) would have been beyond doomed unless a ton of people flipped to him very quickly including the logistics to keep them moving. Maybe it was hoped for but didn’t happen. Also, despite the potential for the Ukraine War to go in a terrible direction for Putin with this distraction from the Ukrainian offensive, at no point did Putin attempt to negotiate giving up Shoigu and Gerasimov (which Prigozhin had hoped for) and in fact he wouldn’t deign to speak to him at all. So he didn’t flip the forces he needed to win and the leverage he had for the alternate goal turned out to be useless.

    He COULD have fought anyway but that would be essentially throwing away the lives of him and his men, bringing bloody civil war to Russia to no benefit, damaging the “special military operation” they had fought in, and probably end terribly for their extended families also… not a great legacy for nationalist types. So the option to surrender and set up shop in Belarus, while not likely to end well for Prigozhin, was at least a chance rather than certain death. And much better results for the other issues.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Can you imagine being a comedian playing a president on TV then get elected actual president and then get handed one of the largest existential crises in the country's history and just acing it?

    I think we should have way more comedians in power, like I think Jon Stewart would also be an amazing leader, as would Stephen Colbert.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago*

    NICE SHOT BROS!!!

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    2 comments in c/world view that post