Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Floofyboy t1_iuhmm98 wrote

This is one of my potential fears, a missile hitting NATO by accident... Russian soldiers aren't all the brightest.

239

piskoargs t1_iuhmzar wrote

> Russian soldiers aren't all the brightest.

Its not just the soldiers, even their precision guided munitions has shit accuracy rate

129

thejml2000 t1_iuhnsb2 wrote

This reminds me of the Precision vs Accuracy definition.

A rocket is precise if it can hit the same spot over and over. It’s accurate if it can hit close to the target over and over (think shotgun). You kinda need both.

33

axonxorz t1_iuigocv wrote

The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or a deviation.

34

Randomthought5678 t1_iuk8i5z wrote

Copy pasta: Accuracy is how close a value is to its true value. An example is how close an arrow gets to the bull's-eye center. Precision is how repeatable a measurement is. An example is how close a second arrow is to the first one (regardless of whether either is near the mark).

2

frizzykid t1_iuhov7l wrote

Russia/nato have accidentally shot at each other before and even shot down planes but under murky enough waters no one feels like there is any significant need to retaliate. If a rocket hit the center of Berlin and it caused a mass casualty crisis, I'd be worried. But a malfunctioning rocket hitting a tree in the middle of some woods which is the far more likely outcome is not a big enough deal that nato would start considering article v

59

ThrowAway_PFC220919 t1_iuhpzjx wrote

I would tend to agree. A missile hitting a random forest 150kms from the nearest city is not likely to be cause for a full-blown conventional strike on Russia. Especially where the missile was shot down by UA forces. However, (and I'll note Moldova is not a NATO member), striking assets near the border of Ukraine, where the neighbouring country also has important asset is a recipe for disaster.

Moldova has a damn about 10km from where the Russian missile was shot down.

28

DeliciousTruck t1_iui1knl wrote

There is and shouldn't be a leeway on where an explosive hits. An attack is an attack and if you brush it off as only an accident you are not only showing weakness but also giving russians room to actually hit infrastructure under the guise of some bullshit and just claim it was an accident.

France and the UK already tried an appeasment policy against Germany right before the second world war, hoping to avoid another war.

I'm against any war but there has to be a clear line with zero leeway.

−22

Skaindire t1_iuiapvb wrote

Right you are, but these fuckwits threatened to use nukes, their collateral damage is a lot higher than a few cubic meters of wood.

8

Top_Environment9897 t1_iuielx1 wrote

NATO is not controlled by a machine, but by a group of people. Most of them aren't going to war just because of an accidental missile.

9

Extension_Bat_4945 t1_iuhz1wb wrote

They already did on July 17, 2014. Nothing happened afterwards so don’t worry.

1