The_MonkeyKing
-
Posts
1,765 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by The_MonkeyKing
-
-
Norway checks out in its support. If everyone would do as they...
Only 12 but depending on counting it is 25-40% of their total fleet
-
Dmitri Alperovitch talks to David Bramlette, a former U.S. Ranger and Green Beret combat veteran, who has recently returned from fighting with the Ukrainian Foreign Legion in the Kharkiv, Donetsk, and Luhansk oblasts for 10 months. David shares his experiences of the war, why he went over to risk his life for a foreign country, his impressions of the Russian and Ukrainian forces, and what happens when Americans get wounded in Ukraine.
-
18 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:
Not sure if this was posted before, but Ukraine needs more ammo:
“What is of ultimate urgency is . . . the ammunition and the artillery that we need immediately to make sure that we can operate with the new military equipment we received,” Stefanishyna said in an interview with the Financial Times. “We do not have this amount of ammunition that we need.”
Ukraine is estimated to be firing more than 5,000 artillery rounds every day — equal to a smaller European country’s orders in an entire year in peacetime.
https://www.ft.com/content/817b7e61-9f09-494c-8f96-934810033b62
Also...
I wonder what it would take for UKR to say they have enough ammo.
-
given:
lost:
Seems M777 is being lost in quite the numbers. Actually, it is the most destroyed UKR towed artillery piece. Nearly 4x more losses than the second place holder.
interesting indeed. I guess we can only speculate on why this is so. Might be the most used one so the most losses, towed is vulnerable, lazy repositioning, high priority target...
-
1 hour ago, The_Capt said:
If those are KIA, it will be 3-4x injured - so say about 3200 cas per day. Well the whole “Russians don’t lose wars of attrition” theory is going to be tested at those rates.
Yeah, just leaves me wondering what kind of loss ratio Ukraine is managing to pull off here. Even 1:3 is still horrible casualty amounts.
-
7 minutes ago, kevinkin said:
Things are heating up; BBC cites friendly data:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64616099
The UK's MoD pointed out the recent increase (RA) could be due to "a range of factors, including lack of trained personnel, coordination, and resources across the front".
Ukraine "also continues to suffer a high attrition rate", the UK said.
Here is the first official overtime view of RUS personal casualties. (that I have seen)
-
good info on Ground Launch Small Diameter Bomb
-
2 minutes ago, Haiduk said:
No, there were many such videos. Also about week ago was a video how BMP-3 of 155th brigade move near Vuhledar, using white smoke screen from built-in engine smoke generator
Yes, I have seen lots of smoke generators but zero "pop smoke" smoke launchers.
There was one about a month ago but I was not 100% at that time.
Many analysts have also pointed this out
-
The first documented use of tank smoke launcher?
Now that I think about it these are even more critical for soviet origin tanks that have to make a 180-turn to bug out.
-
1 hour ago, Haiduk said:
Here is the same situation. UKR soldiers of 54th mech.brigade (battalion K-2, former aerial recon group) assaults enemy platoon strongpoint "Barracuda" somewhere between Soledar and Siversk. Aerial recon spotted that Russians have in these trenches from 10 to 30 men, but to reach them, our troops have to overcome 300-400 m of open terrain. So, probably attack was launched, when Russians had minimal number of troops on position. Tactic - fast and bold advance of assault groups on BMP as close to positions as possible under cover the tank, then - direct assault.
Judging on video Russians had about dozen soldiers, UKR group has BMP with two squads and two tanks (one of them likely was in reserve if Russians take out attacking tank). In CM likely oppose side should have RPG-7 and additionally SPG-9 or some ATGM... But in real world Russians maybe had at least RPG, but they couldn't use it because were supressed with tank fire - almost point-blank. During the battle position was taken, several Russians were kileld, other, probably fled. UKR had one WIA.
Video of assault (official K-2 Youtube has 18+restrictions, so I post the same video from NecroMancer's Youtube):
That was some video!
Gives a uniquely detailed overview of a successful platoon assault on a Russian squad's position. Never seen anything quite like this one in combat footage history.
-
https://corporalfrisk.com/2023/02/11/leopard-1a5-see-first-shoot-first-and-then-what/
The Leo1A5 article we have been waiting for! Some top picking here:
"Another key aspect here is that when discussing tank guns, ammunition is often forgotten. There are huge differences between the capabilities of individual tank rounds also when fired from the same gun."
"For the Leopard 1 in particular, the best widely used round for the Leopard 1A5 is the DM63, a German license-produced version of the Israeli M426. You might/probably/perhaps/will bag a T-72B with it, but I wouldn’t want to be the one to try."
"Expert: 105mm DM63 is roughly the same capability as 120mm DM33, which was the main ammo for Leopard 2A4 at that time. So adequate to T-72/T-80's. Let's face it, Kontakt-5 ERA effect on APFSDS-T is controversial."
"Of course, the Israeli connection might be an issue. Or then not. There are unconfirmed (and I stress that word) reports the Slovenian delivery of the M-55S included the DM63 (it seems likely Israel had to sign off on the M-55S in either case considering Elbit’s role in the upgrade, giving some credibility to the rumors)."
"If you could get the Israelis onboard, you might also be able to low-key buy an even nicer piece of kit – Elbit’s M428 Sword. In either case, the M-55S has brought the L7 to the Ukrainian battlefield already, meaning that at least on a smaller scale someone has been studying the options for supplying the gun with ammunition."
"Ukraine has had to settle for Cold War-relics as ammunition due to lack of modern rounds. As such, a modern 105 mm round you have has better performance than a modern 125 mm round you don’t."
"However, everything is not terrible with the Leopard 1. Key among the nice features are the sensors. The Leopard 1A5 is an upgrade to the baseline Leopard 1 based around the EMES-15 sights and fire control system developed for the Leopard 2 (the 1A5-version being designated the EMES-18) which are top-notch compared to almost every tank rolling around in Ukraine at the moment. "
"ex-German 1A5 and ex-Danish 1A5DK which are even further upgraded (described as “except for the gun, much better than the [Leopard 2]A4“)."
"In modern tank combat, seeing the enemy first and hitting with the first round are a big plus (you will still have to get through the enemy armor, but it’s a start), so the value of these features shouldn’t be underestimated."
"Sure, you probably would prefer to have the armor and 120 mm gun, but better mobility is at least something."
"most importantly, the 1A5 are available in nice numbers."
-
10 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:
yeah, yesterday's photo confirmed loss data ratio was 69:4
Yesterday's ratio was 34 : 5
RUS
vs.
UKR
These two Twitter threads have this daily loss data going back to the start of the war.
-
5 minutes ago, Zeleban said:
Losses are clearly not 1:1
yeah, yesterday's photo confirmed loss data ratio was 69:4
-
3 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:
This is a Ukraine thread
-
starting to see the effect of this week's offensives in the Oryx data as well:
https://github.com/leedrake5/Russia-Ukraine
-
- Current RUS Donbass offensives also starting to be done with "class-A" units with bad results
- Seems the RUS "class-A" quality has reduced with losses and new recruits
- Current offensives are very different from the past months. Mechanised assaults.
- These operations seems to be the start of this awaited RUS offensive
- This "awaited RUS offensive" is going to look very underwhelming. Also the early signs point to this.
- One likely goal for these attacks is Izium. The need it to advance to Dombas deeper than Bakhmut. Unlikely to succeed
- Very sceptical of new fronts opening. Attack from belarus would take many times the current forces and months of buildup like we saw a year ago
- UKR is clearly preserving its highest quality forces. Line is now been held by territorials, legion and national guard
- Very hard to tell where the UKR forces are located. Brigades often send single battalion tactical groups all over the place.
- RUS also seems to have been preserving its highest quality forces
- UKR seems to have a plan of setting up new 3 corp level formations. Western armored equipment is part of this plan.
- RUS minimal wargoal is Dombas but it is also the hardest nut to crack. Unlikely to succeed.
- Best case RUS can hope for is to keep the current lines(take some, lose some) somewhat and exhaust both sides.
- The current tank discussions going to wrong direction. This new equipment is not going to be in time for the next offensives but is going to give critical future security for UKR. They can afford to take losses now. Even the most perfect major offensive is going to cause losses of armored vehicles in the hundreds.
- Mike doesn't believe in the NATO equipment wunderwaffe. What UKR need is equipment to equip their new brigades, not so critical is it modernized T-72 or leopard 2A4. Especially the tank debate is over valued. Biggest need is for IFV and APC. Also the greatest technological leap is in western IFV not MBTs.
- UKR needs artillery ammo, air defense, precision fires, long range precision fires and armored vehicles. In that sort of priority.
- RUS was very unlucky with the mild winter. Energy war and the UKR strike campaign
- RUS seems to have run out of missile stockpiles and is now firing at the rate of production. This means maybe one wave per month.
- Western jets are just a matter of time. No matter what UKR is going have to switch to western airframes.
At the end discussion about cluster ammo, escalation and nuclear escalation
Mike Kofman and Ryan Evans cover a lot of ground in this episode about the war in Ukraine: Russian goals in the Donbass, the coming Russian counter-offensive, the state of Russian and Ukrainian forces, tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, cluster and sensor-fuzed munitions, fourth-generation fighter aircraft, a warm winter, nuclear risk, and more. If you are interested in what's happening in and around Ukraine, this is another must-listen episode.
-
7 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:
and even more Leo1 from Germany (adding to the original 88 number so 187 in total from Germany):
Rheinmetall will transfer 88 vehicles, and another 99 will come from FFGAdd to this 20 from Denmark and 40ish from Belgium company total gets close to 250. There are even more available in the western countries.
in CMSF in very scientific experiments
Leo1A5 vs T90 seem to be on bar with each other.
Both one-shot each others most of the time. T-90 has better survivability gets less shots off because worse spotting. Balances out.
Also even more M113 incoming from the Spain and UK.
lol, they just keep coming. Add +100 to that number
and yes, the Danish and Netherland Leo1 is just in addition to their Leo2
-
On 2/3/2023 at 12:48 PM, The_MonkeyKing said:
Seems like my Leo1 + M113 timeline is coming true. Thankfully these will be supplemented with Bradley/CV90/marder1 and Leo2/Chal2/Abrams.
and even more Leo1 from Germany (adding to the original 88 number so 187 in total from Germany):
Rheinmetall will transfer 88 vehicles, and another 99 will come from FFGAdd to this 20 from Denmark and 40ish from Belgium company total gets close to 250. There are even more available in the western countries.
in CMSF in very scientific experiments
Leo1A5 vs T90 seem to be on bar with each other.
Both one-shot each others most of the time. T-90 has better survivability gets less shots off because worse spotting. Balances out.
Also even more M113 incoming from the Spain and UK.
-
9 minutes ago, Butschi said:
By 'own turf' I was referring to homeland or what is considered as such, not colonies.
Depending on who you ask absolutely majority of Russian current recognized territories are colonized.
As I said this is a blind spot to us westerners who have mostly only colonized overseas and now are blind to other types of colonization.
-
52 minutes ago, Butschi said:
As to nuclear powers having lost without triggering WW3, how often has a nuclear power lost on (what they consider) their own turf?
For example any colonial war Britain or France has lost sense becoming a nuclear power.
All the wars modern Russia has been fighting have been colonial wars. Russia just a land power so it doesn't colonize overseas. This is what the west is very blind towards.
-
32 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:
I think Perun is highly intelligent and generally knows what he's talking about, but in my opinion, he didn't really think things through when it comes to escalation. Maybe exactly because Perun is such a rational and analytical guy, he tends to see the world exclusively through the lens of facts and logic.
He's basically arguing that Russia can't escalate because the only thing they haven't yet done is to use nuclear weapons. And since that would be crazy, Perun concludes that they won't do that.
But the real risk of escalation is not that Putin will wake up tomorrow and say "Ok, they are sending tanks now? Nuke Berlin".
The escalation risk is that providing enough weapons to Ukraine will eventually make it possible for Ukraine to decisively push Russia out of all occupied territories, including Crimea, and that this complete and undeniable humiliation of Russia and Putin personally might cause an irrational response and/or cause the Russian state to fracture with unpredictable consequences.
In theory and in practice, nuclear states can and have lost wars without triggering WW3. But at the end of the day, a lot of this hinges not on game theory, but on the psychology of Putin and his inner circle.
There is very little that can be done to accommodate the psychology of Putin and his inner circle. That is a pandora's box that I would prefer to keep closed. Also very bad precedent case to set. Examples and counterexamples are so easy to make, one can justify anything by appealing to Putin's personal irrational responses. One says do nothing not to anger him and another one says to show dominance and go all-in, the third says something about creating personal relationship.
West is afraid of the unknown and changing the status quo that has been so very beneficial to them. Leading european states were very afraid and hesitant against dividing Yugoslavia, and also Soviet union.
He also didn't mention one of my favorite overlooked escalation risks, what would happen if UKR starts to lose the conventional war?
The risk of direct military intervention(s) rises dramatically. All sorts of very hasty, unilateral and risky moves would be made by the western countries.
-
very good "episode":
and today I learned pallet dropped cruise missiles are a thing: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/special-ops-c-130-tests-pallet-dropped-cruise-missiles-in-the-arctic
-
I have nothing productive to add but I love this announcement.
I would prefer to see some more soviet A-category actions with the soviets. Last time we got to see the overmatched B-cat equipment in little too much detail with the soviet campaign.
-
Why we have balloon news in this thread? This is Ukraine war thread
Leo1A5 vs T90 seem to be on bar with each other.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by The_MonkeyKing
"Boris Pistorius said progress made by other countries in sending German-made Leopard tanks had “not been exactly breathtaking, to put it mildly”.
Berlin also announced last month that it would let allies re-export German-made tanks to Ukraine, and said it wanted to team up with its allies to create two tank battalions of Leopard 2s, equating to about 90 tanks.
But so far, apart from Germany only Poland has given the green light for substantial deliveries. Late last month, Canada announced it would send four Leopard 2 tanks and Norway said on Tuesday it was also providing eight.
Pistorius said Portugal had agreed to send three Leopard 2A6s — a commitment he described as an “appropriate contribution” for a relatively small country. But there were currently “no talks underway” on sending more A6s, he added.
He also said Poland would supply Leopard 2A4s but expressed doubt about their “condition and whether they are operational”. He said Canada had already delivered tanks to Poland together with their instructors and Warsaw was waiting for the tanks from Norway.
He added that Poland was also in “advanced talks” with Spain. Nato officials told the Financial Times that Berlin was waiting for a coalition of Leopard 2 donors to be formed before sending its own contingent, adding that the plan was to send the two battalions in one delivery."
EDIT: But I think Germany is bitching. They send about 3% of their fleet. If everyone does that we get nowhere. Portugal 10% and Norway 25-40% is the way to go. Poland is also 4% but they have already sent hundreds of T-72s and more are on the way so Poland doesn't count here.