Grigb
-
Posts
2,105 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
62
Posts posted by Grigb
-
-
52 minutes ago, danfrodo said:
I'm wondering how much speed matters if no matter what the vehicle is still slower than the drone? What I am asking is how fast are the drones, once loaded w ordnance? And how long can the drone follow (range at high speed)? Vehicle moving fast might have to make turns & such that slow it down while the drone just keeps cruising along..... Maybe vehicle can get into trees but drones just circle around and attack at 2m above ground.
So can any IFV go fast enough? Maybe some lighter vehicles can be fast enough?
- From my limited observation 60-100 kmh helps to decrease the chance of hit
- There are unverified RU claims that with 100-120 kmh you can drive away from FPV
- The second video shows Avenger escaping from Lancet
- Keep in mind that piloting FPV is not easy - you need to compensate for example for the wind etc. Even tanks can benefit from speed, but I mostly see wheeled vehicles escaping attack. Here is quadracycle at full speed escapes the attack and we also can compare it with successful attack.
- RU claims that the current typical suicide FPV that operates at frontline has just 25 minutes (at longer range UKR use different noticeably slower drones).
- It does not mean that speed is 100% protection, but it does mean that speed helps.
-
Back to war assessment.
Let's have a look at battle damage of RDK M113 from Avdiivka. The M113 got hit by 1-2 RU FPV drones.
- 00:50-00:56 damage to fuel tank from fragments
- 01:00-01:10 damage to engine compartment from fragments
- 01:10-01:20 damage to heater from fragments
- There are a lot of floor shots to show blood from the wounded they were transporting
- 01:20 other vehicle (again damage from fragments)
- M113 was able to return to base
Interesting, but the damage comes from fragments, not HEAT. It's possible that HEAT warheads aren't often used at that location or that the FPV drone trajectory isn't always optimal for HEAT, or it missed due to pure luck.
Conclusion
FPV damage is primarily caused by fragmentation and HEAT from 40mm grenades and RPG-7 type-rounds (in hindsight it is kind of obvious). The damage is moderate and may be considerably reduced by standard methods such as bar and ERA armor, as well as spall liners.
The most significant distinction between FPV and conventional rounds is that FPV may hit anywhere on the vehicle, whereas current militaries are primarily concerned with up armoring vehicles against standard Grenade and RPG trajectories.
Reasons for extreme effectiveness of UKR drones
If we look at RU AFVs there are three distinct groups:
- Highly flammable tanks and BMPs
- Low flammability yet weakly armored MT-LB
- Completely unarmored wheeled vehicles
The exceptional success of UKR drones is due to the inherent vulnerability of RU vehicles and the RU's virtually total lack of a mass uparmouring program.
QuoteA small electronic warfare device. There is no RU mass small EW gadget to counter [UKR] FPV! [Sarcasm]
Do you know that the warheads of the UKR FPVs are the typical "carrots" [grenades] from the RPG-7, against which regular ERA protection on tanks, as well as correctly positioned and built Bar armor on BMP/MTLB and in vulnerable areas of tanks where an ERA cannot be installed, is effective?
So. Do we have tanks with empty ERA again? Like in Grozny? Like at Sanzharovska? Like at the beginning of SMO on many vehicles? LIKE EVERYWHERE [even now]? Let's kill all the ****ing tanks and tankers? [Sarcasm]
The problem is not the lack of small EW device. There is another, sorry, problem. Which runs a little deeper.
Other reason for FPV effectiveness
Unlike in low-intensity combat, once a vehicle is disabled, it is effectively gone due to arty fire. So, FPV drones just need to disable the vehicle, not to inflict major damage.
And the FPV drone does not even need to disable the vehicle; instead, it may damage the sights, external electronics, and unmanned turret. In low-intensity conflict, such damage is not critical; in this war, it is effective mission kill because there are many other weapons systems around.
What is the point of your top-of-the-line unmanned turret if drone with the cost of 400 bucks can destroy it quickly.
New paradigm of AFV up armoring
Apart from other things (APS, AD, Drone EW) we need to change the paradigm of uparmouring.
- As much of the vehicle's surface as feasible should be armored to survive a 40mm grenade
- Engine must be protected even better than other compartments (withstand RPG-7)
- External components, such as electronics, turrets, and weapons, should be resistant against 40mm grenades or have the ability to be moved inside the vehicle quickly.
- Spall liners is a must. Crew members may benefit from a full-body flak suit. Previously, there was a possibility of receiving few RPG strikes during missions. Now you may be struck by dozens of FPVs. Each of them may do small damage, but fragments could eventually strike, for example, the driver leg, making the vehicle temporally immobilized and vulnerable to arty fire.
Wheeled light vehicles
Let's look at RU recommendation for wheeled and unarmored vehicles
Quote5. Move as quickly as possible driving the vehicle near the frontline. Engineering services should take steps to guarantee that vehicles can travel at top speeds. Patch up road holes. Cover them with crushed stone.
So, the speed of the vehicle increases survivability. That means steps must be taken to ensure that logistics and unarmored wheeled vehicles can travel at the highest possible speed. Roads need to be improved and fixed. Drivers need to be trained. Vehicles need to have better accident protection (due to obvious decrease of safety).
-
1 hour ago, Butschi said:
That is not semantics. It makes all the difference in the world to make that choice deliberately or be forced to.
This is exactly playing with semantics. It is up to Putin to decide to start WW3. You do not have any choice whatsoever.
-
5 minutes ago, Butschi said:
Credible source, in the sense of solid evidence, that it was the Russians. The fact that one pipeline was not blown up can have all sorts of reasons and is not evidence of Russian sabotage.
18 minutes ago, Ales Dvorak said:Credible source for Russia did it. You probably remember that mantra...
First of all, it does not work like this. We are not in the court room, and we are not in the court procedure. We are making assessments based on available information
Second, we have two solid facts - the most important for Putin pipe was not blowen. And the same pipe is actually in fully working condition.
So, let me be clear - I do have solid facts for my assessment while you both do not. All you have is your opinion that these two facts are not enough for you to make your own assessment. Fair enought.
Now, given your opinion (that you need something more credible) please provide me with screenshots when you ask the same thing from RU public (for example screenshots of you asking RU public to provide credible source for Putin statement that US did it).
If you fail to provide them then I am forced to make an assessment that opinion is not based on your fair judgment but on your personal pro-RU bias.
-
Just now, Ales Dvorak said:
Any credible source?
Credible source for what? That the pipe from Putin's pet project was not blown up? That was in all news articles. That the same pipe is in working condition and ready to be used quickly? I gave the source.
-
26 minutes ago, Ales Dvorak said:
And?
It was obviously RU operation. They blew up old pipes leaving new one undamaged and ready to work to force Germans to switch to the new pipe.
-
48 minutes ago, Butschi said:
Your refreshingly belligerent way of communicating never fails to amaze me.
For your education: It was part of a quote. The full one goes like this, I think:
Your refreshingly pseudointellectual high horse way of communicating never fails to amaze me.
For your education: it does not make it better or smarter becasue there are a lot of things that directly affect you but do not care about you making any choice. RU buttstock, bullet or nuke do not care about you or your choice or anything about you.
-
49 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
I find it interesting, and quite amusing, that Murz is freaking out about the losses for this one battle without putting it into the context of the entire war. Or at a minimum Bakhmut, which likely had losses 2x as high. He's obviously not stupid nor ignorant of the costs of this war, he's obviously upset about them, yet... he's not making fairly obvious points. Is he afraid that connecting too many dots might get him a cell next to Girkin?
Steve
It looks like some time ago he had a friendly talk with the same folks with whom Girkin spoke before moving to the jail. He has recently been avoiding writing negative posts regarding RU MOD. So, he is definitely conscious of the danger. But Avdiivka's victory seems to have pushed him out of allowed boundaries (but not too far yet).
-
Quote
You posted my words that "soon mobiks will be ordered into battle with shovel handles [only] ." In the soldier's appeal, which the military prosecutor's office did NOT ACCEPT in January of this year (although they did not have a right to reject it), it says among other things:
"Since 01/19/2023, from the moment of arrival in the SMO zone, to the present day, our battalion has not had a single AGS or mortar to carry out effective offensive actions."
In principle, half of the road to shovel handles has been passed. Don't you think so? The [RU] infantry does not even have the minimum that it was supposed to have during the years of the Great Patriotic War - [It does not have TOE complement of 82mm] mortars.
Military production - Russia is winning that part.
-
1 minute ago, Butschi said:
There is always a choice.
In your head yes. But this idea will leave your head as soon as RU soldier hits you in the head with buttstock on your way to the torture or execution chamber.
-
6 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:
My explanation would be Ukrainians kept light forces in Avdiivka simply cause of potent fortifications that multiplied their value- there was no need to put more mechanized units in forming cauldron. There were some tank reinforcements stationed near by from strategic reserve, btw. but they decided to use 3rd Brigade on mostly light vehicles to secure corridor. Makes sense.
The thing is Lastochkino was not inside of the cauldron. Still no Bradley or Abrams came to counter attack RU push over open field toward Lastockino. But we do know that Bradleys operate even inside village type areas (T-90 incident). UKR command made conscious decision not to involve mech units even when it was military sensible.
Mech counterattack at that precise moment would undoubtedly stabilize the entire situation and most likely prolonged Avdiivka defense. Either UKR command is stupid, or they were concerned with something else.
-
Quote
According to the Russian Federation Chamber of Commerce and Industry, new vehicle brands are likely to enter the Russian market, particularly from Iran and India. African manufacturers are also expressing interest. Nevertheless, China remains the dominant player thus far, according to Izvestia.
Nesmyan (RU civilian Girkin) comment
QuoteWho would have guessed five or seven years ago that Russia would be forced to open its market to African automobiles, not as exotics, but out of pure need. However, after the Chinese Moskvich [previously famous RU car brand now apparently manufactured in China], there is nothing to be astonished about.
War is going according to the plan. Western sanctions do not work.
-
In other news - Whoever blew Nost Stream up very conveniently (for RU) left one pipeline undamaged and ready to work.
QuoteMOSCOW, February 18. /TASS/. Russian President Vladimir Putin belives that it is possible to launch the surviving branch of the Nord Stream gas pipeline in a week...
-
33 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
I would not give Russia that much credit. They likely blew an entire Div on this fight. Militarily it really makes little sense and there was a near zero chance of big encirclement, they would have know this months ago. This whole thing smells political. Poppa P needed a “big win” before the election in March so he can point to their “righteous cause and inevitable victory” so he pressured the GOs to continue this little sideshow. And hell we are all talking about it, complete with people freaking out that this is “the end”, so likely playing on western nerves as well. So here we are (again) until the next “critical” town along the frontline emerges and we can spend 4-5 months watching it being taken in slow motion. Then the UA will do a c-offensive at some point and take back another small town but that won’t be the drive to Paris so the same people will come out and cry “futility!” In the end the front will not really move and net exchanges of territory will be close to 0%. Attrition of both sides will continue and will until this thing freezes, or something breaks.
Meanwhile UKR colleague of Mashovets reports that RU become active along the whole front and are not planning to make operational pause after capture of Avdiivka.
QuoteTaking advantage of this weakness [UKR arty lack of shells] and the total dominance of tactical aviation, which uses Guided bombs without restriction, the RU command probes and make pushes through almost the entire front line.
Instead of an operational pause, which logically should have occurred after the capture of Avdiivka to restore losses, the RU command chose the path to squeeze the maximum out of its units while it was possible.
It certainly looks like The main battle started just now.
-
31 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:
Usually they start to fall when somebody in AFU command takes risk of bringing Western AA launcher closer to frontlines for a few hours/days. It is Russian roulette on Ukrainian side too, though; I think in final days of Bakhmut battle Russians also started loosing planes out of a sudden, so perhaps it's tactics to scare off further advances or muscovite pilots simply overestimating their red margin of error. Perhaps Avdiivka bulge was too risky to put such priceless platform there, and now frontline flattened a little (on other side, ground given up in Avdiivka seems too small to make significant distance).
I think Avdiivka itself was not very important to UKR.
I feel we got too fixated on Avdiivka. I believe the intent of the RU command was a significantly more ambitious, which explains the UKR command's unwillingness to commit large forces to the defense of Avdiivka. RU generals are fond of ambitious encircling operations. What if RU intended to attract UKR reserves to the defense of Avdiivka, smash them there, rupture UKR defenses, and simultaneously attack from Avdiivka, Zaporojye, and possibly Bakmut (according to UKR reports, RU has begun to push there as well) to encircle and destroy a significant portion of AFU formations?
It explains:
- Why RU kept significant mech force not far from Avdiivka
- Why UKR command committed so few lightly armed forces to the defense
- Why Abrams and Bradly equipped units did not counter-attacked RU units when they started to advance toward Lastochkino
- Why Patriot arrived only now
- Recent UKR reports from Rabotny that RU are preparing something big
Adviivka's battle was most likely a prelude. The main battle started just now.
-
A bit of Murz hysterics (he was talking to close friend)
Quote(old friend's name), copters are guys' lives. The Ministry of Defense is decreasing purchases. Putin is being lied to that [RU MOD] have everything. People are dying. Constantly. Massively. UKR [drones] are in the air. Everywhere and always.
Avdiivka - 16,000 of our 200 [dead]. Sixteen ****ing thousand. [that's RU losses in] Afghanistan in ten years. Four months of terrible ****ing meat [assaults] with columns of burnt vehicles.
You don't see this on TV, because Gusinsky [Eyltsin era RU media magnate] is in Spain, NTV [previously opposition TV channel owned by Gusinsky] does not exists any more, Tanya Masyuk (here I ****ed up, she's Lena) [infamous opposition reporter] can't interview the UAV operator of the AFU, who just killed another Russian soldier with a [cheap] copter just for 40,000 rubles [423 USD], who is glad he did it and will do it again now. [Murz basically argues that Ru Nats back home are unable to comprehend harsh reality because there is no longer opposition television to present them the inconvenient truth from the perspective of the RU enemy.]
The Russian celebration of Avdiivka's capture is in full swing.
-
1 hour ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:
Do you refer to any existing APS or write in an abstract way (that it would be good if someone developed an APS with such capability in the future?)? Also, does the Ukraine actually use any APS now?
We know that RU is working to upgrade Arena-M to combat drones and loitering munitions. However, they reportedly encountered a problem with the [slow] speed of the drones (whatever that means). We know Arena filters out objects with slow speeds. It appears that after they stopped doing that (to include drones), Arena got overwhelmed with objects to process, and given the RU difficulties with electronics, they were unable to overcome it quickly.
Also, AFAIR a Russian-speaking Israeli military historian recently mentioned that Rafael was looking for ways to tweak their APS to combat drones.
I have not seen any info regarding UKR APS. Like at all. Probably they are developing something, but it is far from production.
-
6 minutes ago, poesel said:
As I understand it, the Russians need: airplanes to drop glide bombs, artillery, (any) IFVs, (any) tanks & lots of men for their 'successes' on the battlefield.
Which of those will run out first?
Airplanes. RU demonstrated extreme sensitivity to airplane losses.
6 minutes ago, poesel said:I thought that would be artillery, as that was heavily targeted by Ukraine for a while. The hope was that Russia would run out of tubes. But that didn't happen, no?
They pulled WW2 howitzers out of storage. RU mil reporter Saponkov reported on Feb 3
QuoteAn old weapons.
In the shadow of the lack of artillery (which forced the D-1 howitzers from 1943 to be put back into operation), and the "shell famine", there is one more issue - the problems that the army is experiencing in equipping the infantry.
In the photo and video:- A fresh photo from Glockmeister [RU Nat weapons expert] showing with what he teaches his studens - RP-46, in his case, made in 1946.
- A photo of an RPD machine gun from the Deadheads [TG] channel, in the hands of a fighter training to be a machine gunner.
- A video with the fighters of the 57th MSBR published recently. The fighters have a Mosin rifle, and 7.62mm caliber AK, instead of 5.45 AK-74/74M.
- The last video is from a year ago, where a fighter shows his DShK (12.7mm) machine gun made in 1944.
Also, UKR claim that RU are replacing losses with mostly towed guns (not necessarily with D-1s) slowly downgrading to WW2 level.
6 minutes ago, poesel said:The types of IFVs or tanks used seems to be irrelevant.
- The infantry is best transported by up armored APC. Even MRAP is ok as it can get in out quickly
- Close support is best provided by AFV with automatic weapon. The best is Bradley with two men crew. MRAP with 50 cal will do the job
- Tank (preferably with HESH rounds) provides long range (2-3 km) fire support against hardened targets (concreted bunkers) using drones for adjustment
The assault technique is as follows
- FPV drones take out crew manned weapons (ATGMs, HMGs etc) around objective
- 155mms pound the objective
- Tank demolishes bunkers and other hardened targets
- APCs with Bardleys arrive at objective and clear out remains of the enemy
6 minutes ago, poesel said:The difference in duration on the battlefield (between old & new types) seems to be negligible.
The biggest difference is APS with ability to counter drones. No APS, no difference. Well, crew survivability of modern AFVs increases overal AFV formation morale and aggressiveness.
-
Few reports about real effectives of RU drones
QuoteI cannot share the optimism of those who report on our superiority in FPV drones. On the front line, [fighters] will definitely disagree with these experts. If we analyze the objective control from [enemy] side, it becomes obvious that FPV drones are becoming the main striking weapon of Ukrainians.
Within a radius of 20 km from the line of contact, Ukrainian drones can destroy any equipment, including tanks with dynamic protection. A real revolution has taken place before our eyes, the scale of which we have not yet realized.
QuoteActually, what is the current situation. The enemy [army] is saturated with drones. At the same time, the enemy is very flexible in tactics, all the time improves the work of electronic warfare, improves the drones and [drone] repeaters . Different teams, enthusiasts, and volunteers work for AFU, and they are all very clearly motivated to achieve results...
[And] What we have. For a long time we had a shortage of kamikaze drones. Teams of enthusiasts worked [hard]. Then, they decided to scale up the production of one of the [successful] models. And the troubles began. It turned out that mass production is not always good. Becasue the manufacturer makes the same model without making adjustments, not taking into account that the specifics of drone warfare change every month, or even more often, not taking into account that enemy electronic warfare can quickly adapt to disable drones at a certain frequency, then sooner or later problems will begin. And this is already happening. The mass production is good. But the drone production, I stress it again, implies constant work to improve the model. Otherwise, following happens. Let our field commander spealk:
"As a person who works every day with the FPV group, I will say that drones ........ are managed to fly a little further than our [forward] trenches. We made a bunch of antennas on the same frequency, but the Ukrainians learned how to jam them perfectly.
And theoretically, out of 10 flights, 2 drones reach the target. Now we are trying to find antennas with a different frequency, but this requres time, becasue they are supplied from China. But we need them right now. Such is the reality.
In terms of the number of drones, Ukrainians and we have about the same [number], but unfortunately, they screw us with better quality.
RU greatly exaggerates the success of its FPV drone program.
-
7 hours ago, panzermartin said:
Can we find accurate reliable numbers anymore? I doubt.
So, how did you get to the conclusion that UKR are incurring big losses?
7 hours ago, panzermartin said:This could be true in earlier stages but since the summer offensive Ukrainians are losing a lot too.
And you came to that conclusion how? You just admitted you do not have any data to support your conclusions.
7 hours ago, panzermartin said:Gliding bombs, drones etc have inflicted big damage to their forces,
Let's be frank, you have no idea what damage these things inflicted on UKR.
We already saw that the biggest RU effort in using gliding bombs, drones etc at Avdiivka resulted in at most 2:1 losses in favor of UKR. RU forums where you get your information wildly exaggerate the effectives of RU weapons.
7 hours ago, panzermartin said:which repeatedly are being cut off in big cauldrons and get hammered until very last minute withdrawal.
Neither Bakhmut nor Avdiivka resulted in cauldron. And in the UKR forces did not got hammered until very last minute withdrawal.
QuoteUKR, retreating from line to line, calmly used the complete defensive capabilities of the [Bakhmut urban] agglomeration. They were not destroyed, and they were not defeated on the level of capturing or destroying even a [just] brigade headquarters. The remains of the city were taken from them, while [we] suffered significant losses among experienced [RU] fighters...
The result of the "defeat of AFU in Bakhmut," I repeat and highlight this: is the disintegration of the "most combat-ready army corps" of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation as an effective military force, a built and functioning hierarchical management structure, and the destruction of the very concept of such work with military tasks. This is a far greater loss in the long term than any losses sustained by the same corps on the battlefield during the assaults.
Previously posted Murz quote about Avdiivka
QuoteSyrsky skillfully pulled out of the "cauldron" at Avdiivka (which was taken with significant difficulty and wasting a lot of time), even the small part of Ukrainian troops that could still be "smashed" there...
And the enemy, having conducted a defensive battle and suffered, in the best-case scenario for us, unrecoverable casualties of 5-7 thousand within the same period (this is my rough estimate and not known data), says "Goodbye!" and retreats to new, previously prepared positions.You basically have no idea what's going on in reality.
7 hours ago, panzermartin said:Another hint is that we don't see any mass mobilization from Russia this time
Or you simply do not know what is going on. Military wise, RU was intended to call a second wave in the summer/early fall. Putin is personally delaying it (the RU MOD expected Putin to issue an order by the end of the summer or early fall). Which is understandable considering the potential consequences.
7 hours ago, panzermartin said:yet Ukraine seems rather eager to gather personnel even asking/forcing people to return from abroad.
Oh, FFS - because unlike RU UKR army tries to take care of UKR military personnel by organizing regular rotations. UKR army need manpower to rotate previously mobilized troops. RU army told to mobilized - F*ck you.
7 hours ago, panzermartin said:Lastly, they keep losing ground every day.
Try not to use RU propaganda talking points on me. It is stupid.
During North Africa campaign British Army lost vast amount of territory twice (pink is map of Ukraine).
In war you fight your enemy and not just trying to capture as much land as you can.
So, in reality, every day UKR are inflicting disproportional casualties on RU in exchange for a little bit of land which is war winning strategy. RU strategy of suffering disproportional casualties for a little bit of land is not a war winning strategy.
7 hours ago, panzermartin said:Even the little gains of summer offensive in Zaporizhia front.
In war you fight your enemy and not just trying to capture as much land as you can.
Have a look at UKR reports on RU non manpower losses (yes, my paint skills are not high but you can clearly see the relevant dates)
RU trucks
RU special vehicles
RU tanks
All graphs show that before the UKR offensive, RU successfully reduced vehicle losses. This would certainly allow RU to win the war of attrition. However, as you can clearly see - as soon as UKR offensive started the trend was reversed.
The main gain for Ukraine during its summer offensive was not land, but rather an effective reaction on Russia's defensive strategy with a complete reversal of the attrition trend.
7 hours ago, panzermartin said:There are also no signs of any new Ukrainian offensive plan, unless it's being prepared in complete darkness for maximum surprise. But it's very unlikely.
You have no idea what you are talking about. If you look at the graphs above, you will notice that the attritional trend did not reverse back after UKR stopped their offensive. RU rejected the previous effective defensive strategy in favor of the offensive strategy keeping attritional trend exactly as UKR like.
So, two things. First, UKR does not need to go on the offensive since the RU attrition trend is precisely where UKR wants it to be. Second, the UKR offensive was substantially more effective than most people realize - it terrified RU so much that they abandoned their originally successful defensive strategy in favor of an offensive approach that would be fatal for them for them in the long run (but would allow them to keep UKR on the defensive in the short term).
-
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:
Well, examiming some parts:
Attrition: Russia is winning that part, those of us that has read about the Great Patriatic War, this comes as no surprise.
RU is not winning this part. You read BS about Great Patriotic War.
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:War production: Russia is winning that part, 30 % of the Russian economy is now war economy, western sanctions has not destroyed the russian economy.
RU has no war economy. Western sanctions inflicted critical damage on RU economy ensuring slow death of RU state as we know it.
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:Morale: Ukranian morale is not as good as it was at the start of the war. Fatique is a problem,
You do know that RU morale is so low that Putin is afraid to call mobilization, don't you?
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:6 of 7 russian drones now hit their targets, that used to be 1 out of 7 drones.
What drones are you talking about? RU Nat fighter from Avdiivka reported on February 9
QuoteAt the moment, there is not a single available UAV repair unit in Donetsk, and there is not a single centralized supply source for FPV drones.
The keys to Avdiivka, and to Victory in principle, are in the air, dear friends. Let's think about how to solve the problem. Our enemy [UKR] has no such problems.
The phrase of the season is [RU] "Drone famine". And yes, do you think this is an accident or [somebody] stupidity?...
Do you talk about Shaheds? Last time I checked, 40 out of 45 were taken down.
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:Ammunition: Russia is winning that part with their war production,
RU military production reached it's peak at the end of December. It cannot increase anymore due to lack of western heavy machinery.
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:western applause in Munich does not making any 155 mm shells
UKR NATO 155mm arty needs less shells as it is more effective than RU arty
QuoteThe qualitative superiority of NATO weaponry is evident...the former chief of the [RU] General Staff summarizes: CMO revealed a considerable laging behind of our artillery and missile systems, which require prioritized fundamental rearmament in the coming years.
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:if Trump wins the election US contribution will almost disappear
Last time Trump was president he b*tcslapped RU so hard that I laughed whole week reading RU Nat hysterics.
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:the EU countries really has to step up but how long will that take ?
Interesting question. Given that it took RU several months of relentless meat assaults to move front just couple km west and given that there are 560 km to Kiev, RU can be expected to threaten Kiev in 233 years. EU shells will arrive long before that.
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:Combat: the russian army is learning from their mistakes
Nope, Agent Murz reports how RU learns lessons IRL
QuoteHowever, dear Eugene, this is far from the worst of it. It would not be so bad if, as a result of the [Avdiivka battle] and Maryinka [battle], a major criminal case [against current RU commanders] would be opened. The most ****ed-up thing in this story, the most ****ed-up sign of future new ****-ups, is that a solder (from the almost completely destroyed regiment 1487), was denied acceptance of his prosecution application (when he brough the application to the St. Petersburg military prosecutor's office) and was clearly explained that those he wishes to prosecute [for incompetence] have already been designated as heroes [heroes could not be prosecuted becasue bosses who designated them heroes cannot make mistakes].
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:just as they did in 1941-42-43-44.
Except from infamous Tolkonuk letter to Stalin about how Red Army generals learned lessons of war by the winter 43-44
QuoteI am addressing you [comrade Stalin] solely because I was convinced [both] directly on the battlefield and working long time in the army apparatus that some of our leading generals of the Western Front and the 33rd army (on whom literally everything depends in the preparation and conduct of operation) cannot or do not want to understand that You cannot expect success from an unprepared operation, that the operation should be taken quite seriously, That a reasonable assessment of the necessary forces and weapons is required here, which can be spent without any benefit and might not be restored for a long time, A lost battle greatly reduces the army's strength for a long time, that just a wish to beat the enemy, cannot defeat Germans. They [RU generals] cannot understand that we are not rich enough to waste our troops and material resources on small things and not to think about the possible grave consequences.
Finally, some of our commanding comrades cannot understand that the training of troops, that is, the real fighters of the battle, is one of the main and basic prerequisites for success and that the ability to prepare subordinate troops for the upcoming battle is one of the most important qualities of a commander.
In addition, it should be noted that behind the back of our big artillery chiefs, there are many blatant disgraces in the combat use of artillery. They are covered by the unfounded authority of these chiefs and the rightly deserved glory of our artillery as a whole.
Remove reference to Germans and it reads like description of Avdiivka battle.
1 hour ago, Lille Fiskerby said:I dont like it but there it is.
I dont like RU propagand but there it is.
-
-
5 hours ago, JonS said:
Given the vastly different population sizes, UKR has to *average* better than 5:1 loss ratios to avoid falling behind.
This is a gross miscalculation since other crucial aspects, such as RU political and economic issues, are excluded.
The so-called "partial mobilization" had severe political and economic implications. Russian government managed to temporally stabilize the situation by pledging that there would be no more mobilization. Any more mobilization efforts would be equivalent to playing Russian roulette. It could work for a while, but eventually it will inevitably blow your face off. Or it might blow your face right away.
Simply put, the Russian government has a considerably smaller pool of people it can mobilize than Western experts believe.
-
5 hours ago, panzermartin said:
OK just saw these numbers. Yes RU are losing a lot but still seems within the 1:3 defender /attacker ratio, is this correct?
Simple assertions like "1:3 losses are acceptable for attacker" are BS. We must first examine other aspects. However, the figures are sufficient to demonstrate that assertions regarding massive UKR losses are the delusions of naive people deceived by RU propaganda.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by Grigb
However, we do have instances of wheeled vehicle escapes using high speed and good roads.
[EDIT] A 200-300 kilometers in dive sounds nice until you see the Avenger driving away (top speed 89km/h). 100+ kmh also sounds good until you watch a quadcopter hitting ground behind pickup truck driving right on the battlefield.