Ukraine: Are ya winning yet.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

47 minutes ago, IFR said:

It is more problematic when soldiers are shifting the soil with tanks and such, which increases the risk of inhaling contaminants. Since the most common radioisotopes are cesium-137 and strontium-90, the committed dose is considerably more.

The Russians were digging trenches in the “Red Forest”.  Good plan? Or very bad plan?

[hauberk]

1 hour ago, IFR said:

I sometimes feel like a broken record chiming in on these points, but while the exclusion zone is noted to be one of the most highly contaminated areas in the world, that doesn't mean it's especially dangerous (although it does vary depending on the areas). Reactors 5/6 had radiation fields that would dose you at 0.3 microSieverts per hour (this is 2009 data, so it would measure even lower now). NCRP recommends a maximum whole body dose of 50 mSieverts per year. So if you camped out there 24 hours a day for the entire year, you would be dosed with 2.6 mSieverts, or 5% of the maximum permissible dose. Neoplasms have not been observed in anything less than an acute dose of 250 mSieverts.

There is a lot of uncertainty in the effects of low dose ionizing radiation, so we generally go with the most conservative model - that is, using the assumption that any amount of radiation contributes to the statistical likelihood of manifesting some health effects - which is a very controversial assumption (many health physicists believe that there is a radiation dose threshold requirement for any kind of deleterious contribution to the stochastic effects on the body). But this is the model that is in common use, and so even when there is no statistical evidence of harm mitigation, we try to achieve the lowest dose reasonably achievable.

It is more problematic when soldiers are shifting the soil with tanks and such, which increases the risk of inhaling contaminants. Since the most common radioisotopes are cesium-137 and strontium-90, the committed dose is considerably more.

My hyperbole font failed.  I was more referencing the previous entrenchments that were dug early in the invasion, which, as I recall was being said to be like exposing the troops there to the equivalent of some hundreds of chest X-rays, without considering any additional deleterious effects from inhaling and ingesting material made airborne through the digging. 

[Wouter]

On 2/10/2023 at 2:47 PM, Maithanet said:

I think that a handful of tanks have arrived, but not in any meaningful numbers, and people still need to be trained on them.  Indications are that the next Ukrainian offensive will be done with the weapons they already had / received in 2022. The big difference is that now Kyiv knows that any losses of their own T-72s or APCs can be made good with western weapons coming online in the next few months.  That allows them to be a lot more aggressive with what they have. 

Soviet era tanks have been delivered in numbers by some East-european countries, including Poland. Talking about various T-72's and a few T55 variants, here. This happened already during 2022.

[IFR]

2 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

The Russians were digging trenches in the “Red Forest”.  Good plan? Or very bad plan?

 Is there an option for excellent plan?

2 hours ago, hauberk said:

My hyperbole font failed.  I was more referencing the previous entrenchments that were dug early in the invasion, which, as I recall was being said to be like exposing the troops there to the equivalent of some hundreds of chest X-rays, without considering any additional deleterious effects from inhaling and ingesting material made airborne through the digging. 

A hundred chest x-rays would be about 2 mSievert. Not a good thing, but certainly not the most dangerous thing required of these soldiers. For the working population, the lifetime fatal cancer risk is 4.1% per Sievert, so scaling linearly 2 mSievert would introduce an increased fatal cancer lifetime risk of 0.0082% to the soldiers. One can argue that it is still an unnecessary risk to which they are subject, but I think death by other means is a far more pressing concern for them.

Nevertheless, your hyperbole is appreciated. Radiation often evokes hysteria in the public, so I often feel the need to provide some contrast, even if the exaggeration is meant humorously.

[The Anti-Targ]

9 hours ago, Maithanet said:

As always with these internal Kremlin pieces, it is hard to be sure how accurate this is.  But if this is correct, Surovikin was replaced not for battlefield failures, but for insufficient loyalty to the military establishment.  It sounds like Prigozhin and Surovikin are very much on the outs.

 

 

Kadyrov makes me think of General Jaeger from Valkyria Chronicles. Only Kadyrov almost certainly wasn't promised independence for his country when this is all over.