Panserjeger

The story with 250 US M117 APCs, which US offered in the end of 2022, but it's turned out they need in repair, upgrade and additional arming with AGLs, so terms of delivering was shifted on 2025, at last came to finish. These APCs now arriving to Ukriane. First units, which got thm on armament became 425th separate assault battalion "Skala" ("Rock")
 

Thanks, Bill. I appreciate the resources you provided, and the context for the discharge petition. Took a moment to track down my rep (who hasn't signed) and rattled the windows a bit.

I mean these are fair points, and I am not in the "Yay us!" camp.  But frankly it is a small miracle that anything happened at all.  The West was woefully unprepared for this entire thing, and that is on us.
As for Ukraine.  Well if we are dolling out harsh but fair truths, they definitely could have been better prepared as well.  If I were living next door to Russia, I would make damned sure I had security guarantees that matter (oh wait, I do and we did).  I would also be working very hard, like Finland and Sweden just did, to make sure if I needed a quick entry into the western fold that I was ready for that.  Corruption and dithering happened inside the Ukraine government as well.
I think that no one on this side of this war was truly ready for what actually happened.  The West rallied and frankly pulled off the impossible, as did Ukraine - how quickly we forget the miracles of Mar '22.  I do not think it is fair to flush all that down the toilet now with revisionist history and hysteria.
The West continues to support Ukraine.  Billions in aid are still moving.  The US is putting on a shameful display of just how fragile its democracy is right now, and ignorant power hungry politicians are exploiting it for personal gain.  But I remain confident that 1) Ukraine will adapt.  They are leading modern warfare right now and learning incredibly fast, 2) The US and West will eventually get there - democracy does suck at times, but it is the best we have, and 3) Russian decline is occurring as a direct result of #1 and #2.  Their ability to be a threat is declining in the conventional space.
Hopefully this is a "darkest before dawn" situation and not the abyss that some insist it has become. 

I have never fully subscribed to "LOLZ Russia" or "Russia Sux".  Nor does a steady stream of one-sided war porn change that.  As to the second point: a major personal gripe on this forum is "Monster Russia!."  Undersubscribing Russia is as big a sin as oversubscribing Russia.  We have posters who need to continually take the worst case for Ukraine, and best case for Russia at every instance.  This is not healthy or useful, and as harmful as the overtly "LOLZ Russia" narratives
I gotta be honest, I am astounded on what is still holding Russia together.  As I said, I re-visited Oryx after a long absence and for tanks and AFVs, Russia has lost 3x what Ukraine had as their entire fleets at the beginning of the war.  We have continually seen signs of Russian strain: lower quality equipment showing up at the front, conscription of excess human capacity, mass migration out of Russia, buying ammo from NK (FFS).  However, one has to simply shake ones head at the level of Russian obstinance in all this.  I am not sure how they are holding their military together right now based on these losses.  Further, the shock of this war on Russia cannot be understated.  Does anyone think Putin planned for all this?  That Russian society was ready for this?  No western nation would be ready for something like this war, the shock would cripple us.  Imagine if Iraq in '03 had turned into something like this war; it would have broken the West.
So what?  Well first off, Russia clearly is not in great shape and their performance in this war compared to the advertising has fallen woefully short.  Russian resilience is high, I will give them that.  Yet we do not know where that breaking point is for them - further, they could have already crossed it...these sorts of things do not happen fast, until they do.  But...and it is a big "but", Russia does have a breaking point.  Every nation/society/human collective on earth has a breaking point.  Russia is not invincible and homogeneous.  Under enough stress it will fracture - economically, militarily and socially.  What we have is a competition of breaking points - ours, Ukraine and Russia's.  Our "breaking point" in the West (US in particular) is laughably low.  I suspect Ukraine's breaking point is further out than Russia's as of all the parties to this conflict, only Ukraine is facing direct existential crisis.  The question really is: can weak western will plus desperate Ukrainian will defeat Russian (??? metric ???) will?  One can immediately see the two major variables here.  Western will and Russian will are the two players on a Ukrainian fulcrum.  The location of that fulcrum depends on how much western support we provide to Ukraine.
I stand by my position that militarily this war has already been won; however, that does not mean it cannot still be lost.  If the West totally fails Ukraine, Russia will take ground - it, in effect, expands Russian option spaces.  Russian airpower seems intent on flexing, perhaps eyeing air superiority again.  A complete withdrawal of US support is a strategic mistake of historic proportions.  It is essentially ceding a proxy war and Ukraine could enter the annals with Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan of lost US ventures.  The rest of the West will need to step up.  If Ukraine falters, as some have insisted, then the whole conversation is moot.  If the fulcrum shatters, there is no war.  The West will write it off to "bad investment" and re-draw the lines.
The longer I watch this war, the more in awe of what the WW1 and WW2 generations went through.  We see those wars through the safe lens of history.  It is another thing entirely to be in the middle of one with the future unwritten.

My former classmate shared his photos, it turns out he serves as a crew member of the Marder infantry fighting vehicle and is undergoing training in Germany

Listening to it in the background while working at least lets me tell myself I'm getting paid to listen to it.

That bit is pretty uncontroversial; imposing a sanctions regime means that theoretically no goods or services or money goes in to the target country and nothing (again, ideally) comes out. So the US loses a market for its exports, and also loses a source of cheap or otherwise desirable imports. That's at the very least disruptive, and likely to cause at least some damage in terms of missed opportunities. For example, take the economic pain and disruption a couple of winters ago when Germany abruptly stopped importing Russian gas.
The gamble/assumption is that "your" economy can handle the disruption, and "theirs" cannot.
Now, whether that is "really" hurting the US economy ... well, I mean, it's Swanson McNear. He couldn't tell you the current weather or the time right now without putting some dishonest spin on it.
"Sure, it's sunny outside but it's going to rain this afternoon because Biden is old" or "it's just turned 11am but in only a few weeks it'll be midday - lunchtime! - when the Democrat's con of daylight savings starts! Having lunch while it's still the morning makes no sense!"

dumbest he ever heard eh?  Guess he doesn't listen to his own broadcasts.

For some reason, only the tactical or strategic reasons for this or that Russian action are always assessed, but the moral and psychological reasons are completely ignored. For example, why does Russia need to seize Avdeevka or Bakhmut. Or why Russia is so persistent in hunting for Western armored vehicles.
The capture of Avdeevka had a significant moral and psychological impact on both the Russian or Ukrainian population, and on Western citizens. The Russians received a morale boost from the fact that they were able to take an impregnable fortress that had resisted for 10 years, which indicates an improvement in their army. Ukrainians and Westerners received a decrease in morality, for the same reasons. It's the same with Western military equipment. The demonstration of even a single burning Abrams or leopards helps to reduce the faith of Western people in the invincibility of their military equipment.
But most importantly, the voices of those who are against sending Western equipment to Ukraine are sounding louder and more convincing. This is precisely the goal that the Russians are pursuing. To deprive Ukraine of Western support is the main goal of both Avdiivka and the possible capture of Robotino. Pay attention to the number of defeatist articles in the world's media after each such event. It would not be surprising if Russia sponsors such articles, increasing the moral effect of these events and further reducing Western support for Ukraine.
You have all discussed a lot here about the influence of this or that type of weapons supplied to Ukraine on the course of hostilities. ANY type of weapons supplied to Ukraine has a significant impact on the war. On the one hand, it shows Ukrainians that they are not alone in their struggle and significantly improves their morale. On the other hand, it shows the Russians that the West is not going to leave Ukraine without help in the face of the aggressor and that the end of the war is still very far away, which means they will have to continue to pay in blood and significant inconvenience for each newly captured senseless piece of land.

We have GrigB Intelligent Translation Services. During next week, the Russian Statistical Service will release a fresh report. Over the weekend, Russian opposition economist Milov will assess the campaign's strategic impact. If nothing bad happens on my end, we'll have a summary by Sunday night.

I don’t think anyone of serious power in the West wants a full Russian collapse.  The overall Western grand strategy since the end of the Cold War has been “stable status quo”.  We have spent the last 33 years pretty much working on all fronts to sustain “the system”.  We toss scarfs and hats on it but at its core is a central unchanging stability.  Why?  Because stability is good business.  The West, with the US at the centre built the scheme that “won” the Cold War and want that party to keep going because we get very rich off it.  The rest of the world makes our stuff for cheap, while also buying our other stuff.  
But pretty much from Day 1 “the others” pushed back.  First was the intra-war years, interventions and then terrorism.  Now this has upscaled to “revisionist states” and “power competition”.  Russia invaded Ukraine for several reasons but one of them definitely was to demonstrate that they are not going to be bound by western rules (Hell, Putin said exactly this in that speech back in Sep ‘22).  This puts the West in a dilemma, they can either do too little and Russia threatens the system, or they crush Russia…and it threatens the system.  So they appear to have chosen the middle path, which of course is getting hijacked by the internal movements who want to…wait for it…change the system.  MAGA, alt-right, nationalists, whatever, all disagree with “the system” even though it has made everyone richer.  The reality is that it did not make everyone equally rich so discontent is natural.  Worse, power spheres exploit this so they can get more powerful (and richer).  So Rust-Belt yokels eat this stuff up and start to dismantle “the system”, which includes democracy apparently.  The reality is Trump is a symptom, not a cause and I am not sure even they realize how dangerous this game they are playing is.
So Ukraine happens and becomes a symbol of a “war for, and against, the system.”  It isn’t about the fact that killing innocent Ukrainians is wrong - hell if morales like human life mattered we wouldn’t have Gaza.  No, Ukraine is all about “the system” and both sides appear to be waging it viewed through that lens.  Russia needs to show that they are going to play by their own rules, but not completely break themselves.  One could ask “why is Russia fighting this war by half measures?”  Do they enjoy a quagmire?  No, Putin understands what he has gotten himself into and is adopting a slow burn strategy, hoping we will get distracted and caught up in our own nonsense…and he might be right.
The rest of the West is trying to step up, but frankly we have grown awfully fat, dumb and happy on the back of the US - who now is having a bipolar fit.  In the end, we can live with a fallen Ukraine.  We can shore up the borders and lock Russia out.  We can live with a partial victory in Ukraine, do we really care about Crimea, LNR and DNR?  No, we did not in ‘14 and we don’t now.  We can’t live with a completely imploded Russia.  Those are where the real risks lie.  Too many unknowns that could really break the system.  So we wind up with a half hearted war designed to punish Russia for challenging the system but not destroy them.  Ukraine is, and I am being brutally honest here, is almost secondary to the entire conversation.  It was simply a very unfortunate country where both sides could try and prove a point.  We love Ukraine all of a sudden because they are an opportunity to show that 1) Russia was wrong to challenge the system, and 2) the system still works.  
I strongly suspect this is why this war is also so muddled in military circles.  We are watching a war to defend the system..that is demonstrating the weaknesses of our own military system at the same time.  So we put blinders on and try to pretend it isn’t happening.  Our military power has to still be relevant…otherwise how can we defend the system?
So to answer your question, “yes, the US and the West know exactly how important Ukraine really is and are fighting this war based on that calculus.”  The answer however is “somewhat important”.  We care and feel bad, but care much more about our own issues.  Putin read the short game about as wrong as one can.  He may have read the long game extremely well.  The way to beat the West is not outright confrontation, it is apathy.  2 years is forever for a culture addicted to clicks and flashing lights.  Putin’s off ramp is being able to draw a victory line somewhere of his choosing and he is shooting for that.  And we might just let him get there.
Now I would not start freaking out and worry about a second attack on Kyiv.  Something that dramatic might actually get our attention again.  No, this needs to become a boring war - I am starting to think Putin’s Tucker Carlson interview was smarter than we thought.  What better way to get Western audiences to yawn and start to change the channel than a history lesson?

Dude, take your meds or something.  You have come out swinging on a number of issues even when it was clear you were way off base.  You were going after folks on that A-50 when it was clear that you were looking at an older incident - and not the one with the posted video from the last 24-48 hours.  Now you are coming at someone else for whatever the hell this is about…gee you think Russian troops could not get their hands on Ukrainian coveralls?  Kinophile commented on how the Russian Army has brutal practices and you object…so your position is that the Russian Army does not have brutal practices?  Based what?  The sign translation?
You seem to be in a fighting mood for the sake of simply fighting.  Seriously go to a bar and get smacked around, get it out of your system and then come back.

Maybe try being more aware as a step to better understanding?  Reviewing your questions, they could be taken as confrontational and not inquisitive.  This is an imperfect communication medium, tone and non-verbal queues are missing.  You may have taken you questions as honest and genuine, well another poster saw them as something else.  You can get all hurt and offended or chalk it up to a miscommunication.

See my other post.  So Ukraine has lost?  We have definitely been around that tree a few times.  Is it right?  Well ok by what metrics has Ukraine lost?  You contradict your own position by stating that we have doomed Ukraine by not giving them enough weapons.  Ok, so if they had enough weapons they could win this war?  So winning the war is possible, except for the part where support to Ukraine has been hijacked to create a self-fulfilling prophesy - “you are going to lose this war, while I ensure you don’t get the support you need to win it.”
As to the war itself:
- Russia has failed to achieve any of its political or strategic objectives, with the lone exception of that land bridge, but until there is a ceasefire, I am not willing to call that one.
- The Russian military is a broken shell of its former self.  The damage done to its Tier 1 military is going to take a decade to rebuild under normal conditions, let alone long term sanctions.  I read a source that notes the Black Sea Fleet is not only denied but down 20%.
- Russian foreign influence has completely backfired - see Finland and Sweden in NATO.  NATO funding will be secure for a decade at least…and frankly we were half way to letting it die before this.
- Ukraine remains and independent sovereign nation.  It has distance to go but it will very likely be western facing for the next century.
- The Ukrainian military is about as battle hardened as it gets.  To the point they could make bank training us.
- Russia chances for serious operational gains remain low.  For all the reasons laid out in the last couple thousand pages.
- Russian internal stability remains highly suspect.  Hell they almost had an accidental coup last year.
You are correct, China is dining out on this and will continue to a point.  The war could end right now, Korean Peninsula style and Ukraine will have won this thing.  Of course Ukraine needs more support, as much as they can get.  I highly suggest you use your democratic rights this year to vote for the party and candidates that are trying to sustain that support, not shut it down.
Is it hard.  Damn straight.  Is Ukraine suffering, absolutely. Are they having force generation problems, very likely.  So what?  What is your answer?  Sue for peace?  Surrender?  Seriously, how on earth did the children and grandchildren of the generation that went through the Depression and WW2 come to this?  “Aw it’s too hard so we should just look away.  Stick to the easy ones so we can score political points.”  This was is not about politics are power.  It is about right and wrong.  What I find so shocking is how the USA, leader and symbol of “right”, is floundering now that history is watching.  How sentiments like yours can be so widespread.  Frankly, if this is the trajectory of your nation, China will be running the planet by 2050.
You want to Make America Great Again - start here and support a nation of people who just want to be free and democratic.  A nation that has been invaded by a brutal authoritarian regime.  Stop hand-wringing and doom saying “Ukraine has no avenues to win this war”…and do something about it!

Ok, enough banter.  Time for serious talk. You have probably noticed that you are not that popular here?  Now I am sure you are telling yourself is is because you are “too real” and enjoy flying by to shake up the “liberals and Europeans”.  But that isn’t why people don’t like you.  No, they don’t like you because you really don’t add anything to the discussion.
You see, people here do a lot of things.  Some are really good at collecting information very quickly.  Others ask really good questions and some of us try and make sense out of this whole crazy thing because we have spent decades in the war business and can contribute that experience - and I do not just mean military vets, I mean dedicated wargamers who are all historians, theorists and philosophers to some extent.
So what this thread is trying to do is understand better.  Before when I poked you to find examples of me “being wrong” about a prediction, well it was a trick question.  I rarely ever make firm predictions because frankly things are simply too dynamic.  I see trends, big ones.  Trends that are becoming unavoidably large and looming.  These trends point to the fact that we are very likely within an RMA right now.  It started back in the early 90s and has been progressing for 30 years.  The effects that information technology, miniaturization and energy density - along with dozens of others, all have on warfare is emerging with increasing speed and impact.  So when I say “unmanned systems are not a temporary thing” well you can take it or leave it but that judgement is based on about 35 years of observations on the changes within military affairs.
Your problem is that you do not come with new information.  You do not come with good questions.  You don’t even come with good analysis and arguments to back things up.  You come with opinion and positions.  And the come on this thread like an evangelist - this is not discourse, it is preaching.  You are trying to make a lab into a chapel and it just makes people angry.
But we should be about forgiveness.  So here is a fun thing we can try: what don’t you know?  What questions do you have about this war that you do not understand?  Maybe we can start there and help you understand better.  Because right now it really looks like a lot of very uninformed “well let me tell you college boy” BS.  You want to make an argument that unmanned systems are a flash in the pan? Why not go out and find some actual analysis that supports that.  We have got hundreds of pages of social media videos, professional analysis links and expertise that disagrees with you.  But do some proof of work and come back with some solid analysis and assessment and we can discuss.
If not, well there are a lot of other forums on the internet where everyone will agree with you, or really lose their minds if that is your kink.
Finally as to the point at hand…the issue is not “counter-drone gear”.  Of course counter-systems will be introduced, and the  counter-counter systems as we will see primacy shift back and forth.  The issue is that this competition will profoundly change how we wage war, it already has.  Data superiority, AI superiority, Silencing, deception, redesign of land units and formations for the first time since WW2…these are all on the table.  We cannot assume dominance based on where we were..we will need to earn that dominance and frankly accept that we won’t always have it.  This will mean hard fights and harsh calculus.  The lazy days of air supremacy are likely over as a minimum. Bilindc noted that one would need to “Deny ISR”, he is right, and I have no idea how to do that on the modern battlefield.  And trust me, if I don’t, you don’t either.  So we can discuss how that could happen or you can keep hand waving and going “aw shucks…airplanes”.  Or you can keep getting tossed onto everyone’s ignore list until Steve comes along and chases you away again.

You make it sound like the border is a binary issue, which just plays into extremist talking points:
"Biden wants millions of brown trans rapists to cross the border because he is an evil person who hates white America - trump would shut it all down" 
Vs
"The fashists want to shoot Mexicans on sight so the solution is to not come up with any solution to the border because if bad people want something we should do the opposite "
Not helpful.

Bra jobbat Sverige! 🇸🇪

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.
Let's see agent Murz opinion
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 
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).

Just for illustration - Avdiivka coke plant

The point of this war from our perspective should be not simply defeating the russians in Ukraine but to bleed them dry and make it an example of why not to get in to this kinda position in the first place.
Russians will not riot on the streets or start a civil war, the majority of the population is powerless even if they want to do something. But the russian system is not effective and don't have infinite resources. They refurbishing old vehicles but after they run dry then they not gonna be able to supply as much as the fighting force need for assaults. Ukraine should wage a defensive war and cause as much damage as possible. That's their only chance.
If Ukraine would throw the towel now the russians would be able to reorganize and than start again with a better suited army for job. This why russian propaganda machine is so keen on peace deals. They want to win time, these type of losses are not sustainable unless you're in war for your existence. Peoples of russia are don't want to die for Ukraine, this is why there is no mass mobilization but volunteers whom are usually have some major issues. Average peoples with no issue would not want to go to Ukraine just to end up with torn leg so they have to throw a grenade in to their vest.
 
So the real breaking point will came when the volunteers will dry up and the russian elite will do another round of mobilization. Probably after the election. Than that force must be bleed out. If the russians will see that they have two chances, dying in Ukraine or using the weapons to change the system than things will change.
Younger generation doesn't matter. They will not change the system that is not meant for them to change. They will be suppressed just like their parents with different methods. Fear is the key for the russian society, its fear that make them so easily controllable so i guess this is what needed to have change in their system.
What the west need to do is not to be gullible to russian psyops. We need to give means to ukraine to destroy russian forces. We need to be united on our goal to defeat russia and make a change in their system. Otherwise thing will look pretty grim in this decade and the next.

Pressure Cooker effect - it can withstand significant pressure much longer than you can normally expect but, in the end, it would catastrophically explode.

Don't judge the Western Navies based on Russian Navy incompetence.
Let's look at Russian ship Caesar Kunikov

What protection does it have against small boats? Two twin 57 mm (2.2 in) DP guns

It is old Soviet tech, and most likely it does not work properly. If it works at all.
What else does it have? Well, guys like this.

This is absurd. It's no surprise that his tin can is now submersible (or at least what remains of it).
Now, let's look at Type 45 Destroyer because it is the main escort of the White Elefants.

What does this fellow have?
Two DS30B rapid fire cannon

Two Phalanx CIWS

By the way, here Phalanx fires at surface target
Two .50 Cals

It is already impressive but here is more. 
T45 usually have at least one helicopter

The name of the helicopter is Wildcat, and it can carry up to 21 LMM missiles. 

When this boi gets into the air, the swarm attack stops.
Is that all? Nope - as soon as vodka hits the fan 30mm will get their own LMMs

This is how LMM works (different mount)
The swarm of small boats is not a new threat. Western Navies have been preparing to counter it for a long time. But RU Navy haven't since difficulties of dumb Western Navies do not apply to superior Russian Navy and do not impede my thieving activity. Now RU chickens come home to roost.
Do not be dumb and do not be corrupt is the main lesson we can get from RU Navy drone debacle. 

that was that guy from the wizard of oz right?

Sorry to interrupt the lively discussion about US politics, but I'd want to add my two cents regarding the Avdiivka situation.
Most likely, it will attempt to halt or slow down the current RU attack on the O0542 route. It is the most dangerous RU attack, with the potential to collapse the entire Avdiivka pocket rapidly. If 3rd manages to stop or slow this RU attack down, we could argue that 3rd indeed saved Avdiivka from quick collaps.
 
Most likely, Avdiivka is going to fall because the Russian gliding bombs (UMPK) have not been neutralized yet. Essentially, RU are simply leveling with UMPK UKR strong points that their meat groups encounter. The system works as follows: an RU meat group meets a UKR strong position, dies while the RU command watches it through drones and then RU command orders a bombing of the strong point into oblivion. A fresh RU meat group is then dispatched forward. So, given enough time and bodies, RU will capture the place that once was called Avdiivka. 
 
The situation is advantageous to UKR in Avdiivka. Avdiivka is the most fortified area in UKR. Even with UMPKs, the Koksohim plant and south urban areas are incredibly tough to breach, and RU losses are horrific.
The problem is there is a certain critical vulnerability that RU have found and are trying to exploit now. If they succeed, Avdiivka will fall swiftly. Much faster than it would be otherwise.
Let's discuss the overall situation and then look at my quick map.
RU failed to encircle Avdiivka via Stepove > Orlivka (north axis) and Vodyane > Tonenke (south axis). The assault via Tsarska Ohota (48.11372615890259, 37.77596770282691) toward the major urban area (that pipe infiltration) was originally successful but is now slow and painful. Finally, since the Azov Steel battle, RU want to avoid any major assaults on large plants such as Koksohim.
So, using their standard tactic of persistent pressure by meat groups along the front lines, they discovered the weak spot.

The O0542 road is the primary communication route for the Avdiivka defense sector. Assaulting via Avtobaza and Brevno is the shortest way to reach it. There are not many urban-style buildings in this village-style area. As a result, it provides sufficient concealment for assaulting RU meat groups while providing substantially less cover for UKR defenders against UMPKs.
If UKR manage to neutralize this assault they could hold Avdiivka a lot longer. So, I believe this is the reason UKR commit 3rd assault "to save Avdiivka".