How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[sburke]

Just now, kraze said:

They just made another 1000 men join the queue in a queue to join the queue in an army enlistment queue

That might actually be longer than the line in Moscow for McDonald's... Hmm that would make a pretty funny meme.

[Baneman]

4 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Any ideas about why Russia would spend so many cruise missiles to attack that training base close to Lviv? They caused casualties, but also spent around 30 missiles.. that's a lot for what exactly? Some barracks blown up?

My take was that it was deliberately ( and somewhat successfully ) targeted at the "Western Volunteers".

I doubt it will put anyone off as they hope, though.

It also appears to speak to their targeting priorities being pretty scattershot in that they seem to hit the "hot target of the day" without it apparently advancing any military objectives.

[cyrano01]

3 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Any ideas about why Russia would spend so many cruise missiles to attack that training base close to Lviv? They caused casualties, but also spent around 30 missiles.. that's a lot for what exactly? Some barracks blown up?

Yes, I've been wondering this. Could be explained by the earlier point about weapons nearing their 'use by' date. Alternatively, if they perceive the AD environment over Ukraine as too hostile to allow overflight it may be that they see this as their only attacking option despite it not being cost-effective. Something must be done, this is something so this must be done.

Either way, without wishing to minimise the pain of the losses at the barracks, the Russians do seem to be breaking windows with guineas (to borrow a phrase derived from similarly inept British use of resources a few hundred years ago).

[Battlefront.com]

Leading theory is they struck the base to scare NATO.  Close to the border, was used by NATO to train Ukrainian forces before the war, and might be used for training foreign volunteers.

It won't have any impact on NATO decision making or the flow of arms, so yet anther act of desperation by Putin that won't go anywhere.

Steve

[Vacillator]

Just now, Baneman said:

My take was that it was deliberately ( and somewhat successfully ) targeted at the "Western Volunteers".

Or supposedly the flow of weapons into Ukraine?

[Chibot Mk IX]

6 hours ago, Kraft said:

I am no ballistics expert, could the 30mm penetrate the side of the tank in question?

at in CMBS, yes

I just saw two BTR-4 killed a T-72B3 by flank shooting 30mm apds yesterday.

And the other day I noticed that Oplot's front low hull is not safe when facing BTR-82A. My oplot suffered couple penetration and lost its engine.  

[BeondTheGrave]

4 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Absolutely.  We must always be on the lookout for "confirmation bias" and falling for disinformaiton or misinformation (not the same things).

Imo the best way to try to resist the 'confirmation bias' as well as enemy 'mirror imaging' is to try and give the Russians some logical credibility (IE, why would a commander do that. Because they probably arnt actively trying to sabotage the campaign. Why would they when passive measures have already worked so well.) And also we ought to keep in mind that the Russians may still win this thing in a short term and examine new information with that in mind. Sure you see columns of armored vehicles getting blown to hell, tanks knocked out in twos and threes, but its possible that the losses are not yet significant. I'm hearing ~6-7% casualties for the total attacking force so far, assuming even our estimates are correct? (Hint, probably not) Ukraine probably has to double or even triple that before the Russians start to become operationally combat ineffective. Inflicting major losses on even a single BTG isn't as significant because another fresh one can always take its place. And of course we dont know how many losses Ukraine is taking really either. My own reading of history has given me an impression that in modern war the defender typically takes 1:1 or slightly shy casualties as the attacker. The UA may itself be well on the way to collapse, especially in threatened areas like around Mariupol or in the East. 

That being said, tbh I dont think that this thread has really strayed too far off course. We only get a fraction of a picture, but from the picture we have now I dont think anyone is really off base. Who knows what we dont know, right? But there is a difference between anti-Russian bias and 'Russia is objectively losing.' And I agree with @The_Capt that, from a long term and strategic perspective, Russia has basically already lost this war. I conclude this based on the facts of what I'm seeing in this thread. Maybe Russia will do something to save itself last minute, a 'Miracle of the house of Putin.' But assuming not, I have a hard time seeing a real strategic offramp for them. And if that sounds like anti-Russia bias, suggest otherwise. Whats the best case for Russia at this point, backed up by evidence you've seen? 

[Bulletpoint]

21 minutes ago, Baneman said:

My take was that it was deliberately ( and somewhat successfully ) targeted at the "Western Volunteers".

I guess it could be a mostly symbolic attack against foreign volunteers.. but spending 30 cruise missiles to kill 35 fighters is not exactly good war economy.

I'm reminded of Hitler's ballistic missile projects that cost fortunes in resources but ultimately did relatively little real damage.

Edited March 14, 2022 by Bulletpoint

[kraze]

1 minute ago, sburke said:

That might actually be longer than the line in Moscow for McDonald's... Hmm that would make a pretty funny meme.

But there is

[BlackMoria]

Someone I served with and got out of the military just after I left went over to Ukraine.   I spoke with him last night.  He wasn't at location of that strike but I said it is getting pretty real over there for the volunteers.  His response.... he laughed and said he was over there to 'f*ck up Russians and he expected some foreplay from them', referring to the strike.   

[Haiduk]

18 minutes ago, John Kettler said:

Haiduk,

Have two questions for you ref UA armaments. The first concerns 60 mm mortars. Based on something I read about Polish arms deliveries to Ukraine, I saw something indicating only your SO guys had such weapons, but that the Poles had their own 60 mm mortar and were going to send lots of them to equip the whole force. Have such mortars arrived and on what scale? Ballpark is fine. The second concerns a weapon you've mentioned hardly at all, and that's Bar, which I believe was still in development in 2014 or so. What happened to it? MY recollection was that it was a heavy ATGM, a la TOW.
 

I have seen one reportage about Polish mortars, but I don't know were its could go. We have on armament three typed of 60 mm moratrs. First appeared in the end of 2016 and that was M57, bought in Bosnia-Herzegovina (licensed US M2) - and looks like guys on the video shot with such mortar. Further Ukrainian developments of two different manufacturers appeared - MP60 and M60-16 "Kamerton". But they had many design defects, especially M60-16. First of all 60 mm mortars have SOF, probably they also in air-assault troops (probably in recon companies) and in mountain-assault troops (but I don't know were). Maybe in recon battalions and comnapnies too.

What is Bar?

Edited March 14, 2022 by Haiduk

[womble]

12 minutes ago, kraze said:

For that they need Ukraine to have no AD. But about 2/3 of Ukraine is still a big no go zone for planes.

So, we know that they didn't put in the hard yards of AD reduction in the beginning, cos they "didn't think they'd need it" in the fantasy land they planned the operation in. So why haven't they been busy doing those "necessary chores" in parallel with their ground operations in the following 3 weeks? Is it because that sort of reduction requires a "surprise start" that they failed at? Or do they just lack the capability to do it? Or would it just cost them too many irreplaceable air assets?

[BeondTheGrave]

7 minutes ago, Baneman said:

It also appears to speak to their targeting priorities being pretty scattershot in that they seem to hit the "hot target of the day" without it apparently advancing any military objectives.

Was it Steve or was it Capt who was talking about centers of gravity earlier? This seems like a center of gravity attack to me. Putin needs to get the west to back off and close down shipments. But he wont be able to do that unless he attacks volunteer forces and hits the convoy's bases. IMO attacking the volunteer forces makes a lot of sense if you accept the assumption (which I personally believe Putin has) that the west is more casualty averse than adventurous and will back off rather than put their citizens at risk. Or put another way, the best way to attack NATO is to fill DW and CNN with sick dread and burning US flags which will turn popular opinion against this war. 

But it seems pretty clear that at least here in the US both the White House and Congress moved to get pretty damn committed without ever taking the temperature of the country. Like with most foreign policy crises I just dont think they care lol. No more on this for Elvis' sake.

[BeondTheGrave]

 

[John Kettler]

10 hours ago, panzermartin said:

Posted mainly for the second video. How on earth did that SU-25 return to base?

panzermartin,

Let me answer your Su-25 RTB question in a particularly unforgettable way. In the Georgia WAr, an Su-25 took a direct engine hit by a Buk and made it back to the base. The hit obliterated the engine, but an armored firewall between the two engines kept the disntegrating engine from destroying its neighbor. Compared to a Buk direct hit, a MANPADS to an engine, barring, say, a catastrophic fire or such, is exactly why the plane, a shameless lift of the Northrop Grumman YAX-9, was able to survive the hit and RTB. It's also why the plane, like the one that became the A-10, had two engines and fully redundant flight controls.

Regards,

John Kettler

[BlackMoria]

There is so many Canadian volunteers over there, they have their own brigade.  Reportedly in the Kyiv area.  Here is their arm patch.  Five Hundred and Fifty in number so far and growing daily.

[Haiduk]

28 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Any ideas about why Russia would spend so many cruise missiles to attack that training base close to Lviv? They caused casualties, but also spent around 30 missiles.. that's a lot for what exactly? Some barracks blown up?

30 launched, 8 hit

[db_zero]

Russia is offering oil and other resources at heavily discounted prices. India is said to be considering taking up Russias offer.

However as noted by many like China getting the resources to buyers may be difficult. 

There is no pipeline to move large amounts and the distances through large sections of undeveloped areas is vast. Moving oil on rails would not be ideal and via water is also a problem due to ports being iced in.

[John Kettler]

9 hours ago, Haiduk said:

John Deer brigade in action again ) Grad is cought

Georgian volunteers captured Russian BMD-4 NW from Kyiv

Not confirmed on 100%, but there is a photo as if our troops re-captured our 36D6 radar, probably Kyiv oblast too

Haiduk,

Glad they did, even if I had to go look it up.

https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/11.ancient/karte060.en.html

Thought maybe you were talking about the US supplied TPQ-36 Firefinder, a countermortar phased array radar.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Cobetco]

that seems fishy. to design, produce and ship something like that would take probably longer than the conflict has been going on. unless its a mockup. I haven't made a patch before though (only stickers) so maybe its faster? feels fishy.

6 minutes ago, BlackMoria said:

There is so many Canadian volunteers over there, they have their own brigade.  Reportedly in the Kyiv area.  Here is their arm patch.  Five Hundred and Fifty in number so far and growing daily.

 

[womble]

6 minutes ago, BeondTheGrave said:

the assumption (which I personally believe Putin has) that the west is more casualty averse than adventurous and will back off rather than put their citizens at risk.

Another example of him misreading the situation, if he does: the west isn't "putting their citizens at risk" in Ukraine. It's the citizens doing that. And the ones that aren't actually Ukrainian probably do more for morale than for numbers, realistically, given the level of mobilisation of the general population of Ukraine. Putin would struggle to understand that the "volunteers" (his quote marks) are actually volunteers, not enlisted troops executing orders from their government.

Lobblng that many missiles at such a target, unless they've really good intel on exactly which not-missile-proof shed has all the NLAWS, Javelins, Stingers and Starstreaks in it, does seem like a desperate waste.

[DesertFox]

 

 

[Bulletpoint]

12 minutes ago, BeondTheGrave said:

IMO attacking the volunteer forces makes a lot of sense if you accept the assumption (which I personally believe Putin has) that the west is more casualty averse than adventurous and will back off rather than put their citizens at risk.

Yes, but Putin should realise that there's a huge difference between Western countries losing soldiers in uniform and seeing volunteer fighters blown up.

Difference being that Western politicians are not democratically responsible as they are not giving anyone an order to go and risk their life in Ukraine.

[John Kettler]

7 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Regarding yesterday news about artillery strike on 200-vehicles column in Melitopol area. Looks like this can be true. Today was claimed that ESTIMATED losses of enemy is about 50 vehicles.

Also here SIGINT interception of Russian soldier, which calls to own familiar in Russia and tells how their column was hit by artillery. He tells other column of his unit, which was deployed and started movement from Zelenchuk village (20 km west from Melitopol) was destroyed and only 3 man left. He tells HQ of 58th Army hurries them "go, go, go, move forward faster!", but there is lack of supply and there no any recon, so they suffered from UKR artillery - so they scatetred on small groups to hide in the steppe and fields. Their senior commanders abandoned them and they don't know what to do. They also tells, 205th motor-rifle brigade, where he served recently lost about half of personnel. There is unknown what data of this interception

  

 

Haiduk,

Somehow, WOW seems grossly inadequate as a response to all this stunning news. Now, the Russians will have a textbook example to use of a fire strike.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Bulletpoint]

10 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

30 launched, 8 hit

Still 30 spent. Surely those missiles would be better used against Ukraine's air defense system? (looking at it from a Russian point of view of course. I'm only happy if they waste their missiles)

Edited March 14, 2022 by Bulletpoint