Vanir Ausf B

Ouch

They actually did try it but according to Steve it cratered the frames per second.

Russians need to play more Combat Mission. Anyone who has played Black Sea or Cold War knows that when a tank fires it can't sit there admiring the result. You gotta MOVE!

Girkin mentioned this tactic. It's straight out of WW2. "Sources noted the outstanding audacity of enemy attacks - "on armor and wheels" seizing positions, breaking into them at high speed directly on armored and other equipment, as a result of which artillery lost the ability to strike the enemy on the way to our positions." https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1567434170460160003

He meant what Russian unit has T-90M. They're rare and have mostly been seen in the Kharkiv area. The new 3rd Army Corps has some.

ninja'd, as usuall

Would be an explosive combination.

Apparently Ukraine is being very tight-lipped.

WaPo is reporting it was neither HIMARS nor Neptune. "A U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity, told The Post on Tuesday only that a U.S. weapon was not used in the attack."

Fair questions, and the interview with General Kryvonos that LLF serendipitously posted addresses those points. _____ Kryvonos: You don’t have to be afraid of the opponent, but you have to respect him and evaluate him correctly. So here again, I say that the Russians, having a great experience of wars over the past almost 30 years, quickly draw conclusions from their mistakes and promptly adjust the tactics of their forces and means. (I): I don’t ask for absolute numbers, the number of losses of Ukrainian troops. But I want to ask a theoretical question. And the public thinks that offensive losses must be many times greater than defensive losses. It seems to me from my couch that this was correct in the 12th century when they stormed a fortress. But in twenty-first-century wars, that’s not the case at all. And the fact that you describe the Russian offensive this way does not give us any reason to hope that our losses were many times less than the losses of the enemy. Kryvonos: Unfortunately, that’s true because the real advantage of domination on the field of artillery duels resulted in our losses being far greater than the Russian losses. Because one might imagine war from the old movie, when people go up to the attack and go there in chains, they are shot by machine gunners. Unfortunately, in this war, it’s a bit different. There are considerably fewer shooting contacts than artillery fire. So, at the expense of the artillery advantage, the Russians suffered fewer losses than we did. And the fact that the counter-battery was not tight enough because there were simply no shells. So we were taking more casualties than the Russians. Unfortunately, we have to recognize this fact. And it is not the fault of the military; it is the fault for not creating the state’s correct military and economic capacity in the last 30 years

Yes, good podcast. Another item that stuck out to me is that the UAF never really trained for offensive operations.

I am not going to read that whole article, but if it says that taking over Russia's eastern oil and gas reserves wouldn't greatly alleviate their reliance on middle eastern supply chains then by all means, let them have Siberia. Heck, let them take everything east of Moscow.

And yet so far the reaction from NATO has been the opposite: MORE defense spending. An energy-independent China would be bad news for Taiwan.

Western intelligence agencies guesstimate Russian KIA @ 15,000 - 25,000.

Artillery and direct fire HE has to be 150mm or larger to affect mines. I don't know if the same is true of fortifications.

Why? Ego. Putin wants to be spoken of in the same breath as Peter and Catherine. Why now? Because he's 70 years old and in poor health.

Thanks for the video. It's too bad he choose the original T-64 armor to simulate rather than the far more prevalent T-64A and B.

Is there supposed to be a video in the first post? If so it's not showing up on any device I have. Note that it was only the original T-64 that had the 80+140 upper front hull armor array. The T-64A and T-72 Ural had 80+105+20.

It's not meant to signal anything. It's all diplo-speak.

A quick follow-up on this. China has apparently declined to cap the price, at least for now. _____ China has refrained from supporting the United States’ call for a price cap on Russian oil while continuing to call for dialogue to address the “complicated issue”. Thursday’s comments by the Ministry of Commerce came after US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said she had raised the possibility of setting a cap on the price of Russian oil during a virtual meeting with Chinese Vice-Premier Liu He last week. Yellen said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal that the Chinese side had listened and was prepared to have further discussions with the US. https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3185306/russian-oil-china-shuns-us-call-cap-prices-and-urges-dialogue

Adding this to my watch list. Thanks!

Sounds like this happened a while ago.