Kraft

You asked for data you got data.
If you want to go into dreamland where 1 ZSU drone has the effectiveness of 10 russian ones and cancels out the 10 to 1 artillery shell disadvantage, go ahead.
Theres 0 evidence for that though.
 

Keep in mind a large portion of FPV are used on a single MG, AGS, or even just an empty dugout. Its a systematic way how defenses are continously degraded more than can be replenished before attacks.
 
What makes you think so? There are plenty people who count FPV attacks and russia is just a sliver behind in the number of attacks, and completely dominating with artillery.
If you arent seeing the gruesome results, its because you are not frequenting russian TG channels I assume.
In attritional casulties russia is doing better, the only reason they have more dead at the end of the day is because of the constant meatwaves that get destroyed. Were it a completely static line with both sides not attacking, russia would be way ahead in causing dead & wounded and not even close to the 3:1 ratio that is needed to maintain force parity
 

Keep in mind a large portion of FPV are used on a single MG, AGS, or even just an empty dugout. Its a systematic way how defenses are continously degraded more than can be replenished before attacks.
 
What makes you think so? There are plenty people who count FPV attacks and russia is just a sliver behind in the number of attacks, and completely dominating with artillery.
If you arent seeing the gruesome results, its because you are not frequenting russian TG channels I assume.
In attritional casulties russia is doing better, the only reason they have more dead at the end of the day is because of the constant meatwaves that get destroyed. Were it a completely static line with both sides not attacking, russia would be way ahead in causing dead & wounded and not even close to the 3:1 ratio that is needed to maintain force parity
 

Attrition in my mind is the constant cost of war, where as casulties from offensive operations are seperate. The naming here is pretty irrelevant though because as I said, the ZSU is not suffering more absolute casulties*
This is not because the average drone pilot is 10 times better or has 10 times more drones and thus somehow offsets the total lack of shells.
Its just a result that attacking in an environment where units can be reliably spotted kilometers away before they even assembled for a large scale attack, and can be killed more easily with the cheap-o FPV PGM, is near suicidal as russian meatwaves prove day in day out.
Even if they make it past no mans land, a focused drone effort wipes most of the exposed and often EW-unprotected / unentrenched survivors out before much of any momentum can be gained. 
Its the same for both sides in this way but as Ukraine is not attacking, its not subject to this exposure as much, just the daily bombing and artillery shelling
Yes, I agree with this. Beyond 2025-2026, this war will reach non sustainability for putin and keeping a stalemate will just help get there safer. But this does not refute the idea that the disparity in casualties is caused by offensive actions, which compensate for the firepower difference.
 
*although, when it comes to relative losses I think the picture depends on the weapon system. I made the case for the Avdiivka losses, where russia ended up basically at a zero change with the captured, refurbished and produced vehicles in that timeframe, while the losses to Ukraine are permanent and lowered the capabilities of the armed forces, since there is close to no heavy gear still being supplied in quantity. 

My point in the response is to the daily attrition, which has shifted in favor of russia. Ie a situation where neither side attacks
Attacking in the current environment successfully at scale is near impossible for anyone. 
That russia continues to do so evens the casulties out, whether the russian offensive capabilities outlast the defense and results in a crumbling of the front is known not even to the commanders. 

Attrition in my mind is the constant cost of war, where as casulties from offensive operations are seperate. The naming here is pretty irrelevant though because as I said, the ZSU is not suffering more absolute casulties*
This is not because the average drone pilot is 10 times better or has 10 times more drones and thus somehow offsets the total lack of shells.
Its just a result that attacking in an environment where units can be reliably spotted kilometers away before they even assembled for a large scale attack, and can be killed more easily with the cheap-o FPV PGM, is near suicidal as russian meatwaves prove day in day out.
Even if they make it past no mans land, a focused drone effort wipes most of the exposed and often EW-unprotected / unentrenched survivors out before much of any momentum can be gained. 
Its the same for both sides in this way but as Ukraine is not attacking, its not subject to this exposure as much, just the daily bombing and artillery shelling
Yes, I agree with this. Beyond 2025-2026, this war will reach non sustainability for putin and keeping a stalemate will just help get there safer. But this does not refute the idea that the disparity in casualties is caused by offensive actions, which compensate for the firepower difference.
 
*although, when it comes to relative losses I think the picture depends on the weapon system. I made the case for the Avdiivka losses, where russia ended up basically at a zero change with the captured, refurbished and produced vehicles in that timeframe, while the losses to Ukraine are permanent and lowered the capabilities of the armed forces, since there is close to no heavy gear still being supplied in quantity. 

My point in the response is to the daily attrition, which has shifted in favor of russia. Ie a situation where neither side attacks
Attacking in the current environment successfully at scale is near impossible for anyone. 
That russia continues to do so evens the casulties out, whether the russian offensive capabilities outlast the defense and results in a crumbling of the front is known not even to the commanders. 

My point in the response is to the daily attrition, which has shifted in favor of russia. Ie a situation where neither side attacks
Attacking in the current environment successfully at scale is near impossible for anyone. 
That russia continues to do so evens the casulties out, whether the russian offensive capabilities outlast the defense and results in a crumbling of the front is known not even to the commanders. 

Data before january on positions is not accurate as tracking didnt start properly then.

Napoleon spirit inside Macron? )
Reportedly Macron ordered to deploy French troops on the border with so-called Transnistria and in Odesa. This can release some UKR troops from rear areas

"We have been negotiating as we could, but nothing to discuss with them. Ukraine must win. French troops will be in Ukraine. No more red lines. I'm president of France and I decide!"
Viva la France!
PS. I can't find these speech in original, but it shares by many UKR socal media. Maybe PsyOps, but somesing really happened 
 

    

@Battlefront.com I think this is the highest quality upload of your favorite river crossing, sadly quite short and not while they attempted it, the carnage must've surpassed what any movie could ever portait.
 

I had a sorrow look through the obituaries of the International Legion.
A lot of Colombians as of late. They must be a significant portion. 
It reminded me of the volunteers who went to the Spanish Civil War, which also roused many emotions in Europe at the time.
I am in awe of these volunteers (and all other who stand shoulder to shoulder with them, whichever function they serve).

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Western resolve in opposing/appeasing putin is starting to bear its first fruits. 
 

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Western resolve in opposing/appeasing putin is starting to bear its first fruits. 
 

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle