How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Haiduk]

Saratov and Orsk both are the same Alligator class (pr. 1171). Maybe misidentification. But if two burned thats good. 

Edited March 24, 2022 by Haiduk

[Probus]

5 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Saratov and Orsk both are the same Alligator class (pr. 1171). Maybe misidentification. But if two burned thats good. 

Are you trying to tell me that those are landing ship(s) that are on fire?  No way?  Did they get hit, or was it an accident?  That's pretty huge news!

[DesertFox]

Older than the guy who will receive it...

 

 

[Haiduk]

3 minutes ago, Probus said:

Are you trying to tell me that those are landing ship(s) that are on fire?  No way?  Did they get hit, or was it an accident?  That's pretty huge news!

See above. Tochka-U strike. 

Here is probably first moment after strike. Two landing ships side by side

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

This is untrue especially so for modern APS equipped tanks. For example M1A2 sepv3 trophy

It can be argued that operating older tanks against top of the line AT weapon system equipped enemy might be called obsolete. And even this can be mitigated with appropriate tactical usage.

I think it will go further than that.  In this case I'm not predicting the "demise" of MBTs because of their vulnerability, but also because of their production and lifetime costs, deployment limitations, manpower requirements (logistics in particular), fuel usage, and a bunch of other things combined with vulnerability.

We're seeing the same thing with helicopters and, presumably at some point, fixed wing aircraft for exactly the same reasons.

Militaries are in need of capabilities to find, fix, and kill stuff.  Right?  Change is hard so at any transition point there's reluctance to fully embrace new concepts because they inherently threaten the old ones.  And of course, nobody wants to call it wrong and find that they've screwed up.  Wars tend to accelerate change because they help clarify, with hard data,  what works and what doesn't.

Look at this war.  Does ANYBODY here think that old school legacy Soviet armor (even with ERA) has much value on the battlefield of tomorrow?  I don't think so.  But earlier February and before there certainly were a lot of experts with their heads in the sand about the risks to those systems posed by things like NLAW and drones.

With this in mind, picture yourself in a CMBS Quick Battle purchasing decision.  You have a choice of purchasing 5 smaller, nimbler, more survivable, more maneuverable, more stealthy, and generally just as capable UGVs as a single full on sexy equipped MBT.  What would you pick for your force?  And what other things would you buy (UGV choice) or give up buying (MBT) with the balance of points?

Now, let's make it a bit more interesting.  Let's create a scenario where you are a force that has been caught off guard.  The enemy has a full spectrum force (of even crappy MBTs let's say) and you are a force being rushed into combat (offensive or defensive, doesn't matter).  You have a choice of purchasing only a light to maybe medium force (no MBTs) or one that has lots of UGVs.  Which option would you rather have available to you?

It goes on and on from here, but I think you get my point.  As the purchase and support price tags continue to increase in order to combat the lethality of less expensive systems, at some point people are going to wonder if it's all worth it.  The big nations will probably slowly transition, the smaller nations will embrace it faster.  It's inevitable for economic reasons alone.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

So apparently the Russian Navy bunches up its stuff in vulnerable areas just like the Army and Air Force?  Well, gotta give the Russians some points for consistency!

BTW, I think we can now safely and totally rule out an amphib operation against Odessa

Steve

[John Kettler]

Here's what sank that Ropucha and apparently caused the warhouse to blow up, too.

https://dir.md/9n123k-cluster-munition-and-9n24-submunitions-in-syria/?host=armamentresearch.com

The 9N123K warhead is designed to function at an altitude of 2250 m, using a low explosive burster charge scattering 50 9N24 HE-FRAG submunitions over the target area. 9N24 submunitions feature partially pre-fragmented (ring) fragmentation, and are fitted with the 9E237 impact fuze which is armed as the submunitions are expelled from the warhead. The fuze is designed to function on impact with the ground or other obstacles, at any angle from 25 to 90 degrees. This fuze also features a self-destruct function, which should ensure the submunition explodes 32-60 seconds after it is deployed from the cargo warhead.

9N24 Technical Specifications
Total weight: 7.45 kg
Explosive weight: 1.45 kg
Approximate number of fragments: 316
Average fragment weight: 7 g

For comparison, here is the original warhead for Grad.

http://characterisationexplosiveweapons.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Annex-A.pdf

9M22 Rocket

The 9M22 is a fin-stabilised rocket with a steel high explosive fragmentation (HE-FRAG) warhead. The 9N51 warhead contains 6.4 kg of TGAF-5 explosive composition, and generates some 3,920 pre-fragmented fragments. The warhead is manufactured with internal scoring designed to fragment into 1,640 fragments, each weighing 2.4 g. The warhead is double-skinned, with the outer skin only lightly scored, in order to avoid damaging its structural integrity during launch. The outer skin is designed to produce an additional 2,280 fragments, each weighing 2.9 g. The rocket motor contains 20.5 kg of a double-base solid propellant.

Calibre	122 mm
Weight	66 kg
Warhead weight	18.4 kg
Length	2870 mm
Number of fragments: - pre-fragmented (2.4 g) - partially pre-fragmented (approx. 2.9 g)	1640 2280

And here is a later version, shortly before the warheads became detachable para frags. The document details a number of other warheads, but was trying to compare like to like, and even the one below is of roughly the same period as the 9N24. The problem is that some of the later Grad warheads not only are para frag but fitted with proximity fuzes, which the 9N24 doesn't have. 
 

9M28F Rocket

The 9M28F is an interim rocket introduced in the 1970s. It has a more powerful rocket motor, and features a more efficient HE-FRAG warhead with pre-formed fragments, designated the 9N55. The 9M28F has a total length of 2,270 mm, and weighs 56.5 kg. The 9N55 warhead contains 5.9 kg of A-IX-2 explosive fill. Its maximum range is some 15 km.

Calibre	122 mm
Weight	56.5 kg
Weight of the warhead	21 kg
Length	2270 mm
Number of fragments: - pre-formed (5.5 g) - partially pre-fragmented (3.0 g)	1000 2440
Range of fire	up to 15 km

Regards,

John Kettler

[Haiduk]

UKR MLRS strike of the forest north of Kyiv, where Russians hide. Bright dots are probably bonfires near which Russian soldiers are warming themselves

 

 

 

[Haiduk]

4 minutes ago, John Kettler said:

Here's what sank that Ropucha and apparently caused the warhouse to blow up, too.

Alligator. Pr. 1171

[TheVulture]

8 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Here is probably first moment after strike. Two landing ships side by side

The Ropucha class ship on the outside is later seen getting the hell out of there in one of the videos on the previous page, but the Alligator didn't go anywhere.

[The_MonkeyKing]

https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/tm2s82/russian_landing_ship_orsk_destroyed_at_port/

 

excellent drone video of the aftermath. One Alligator-class total loss, two Ropucha-class retreating, both on fire, one significantly.

[Tank Hunter]

6 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

So apparently the Russian Navy bunches up its stuff in vulnerable areas just like the Army and Air Force?  Well, gotta give the Russians some points for consistency!

BTW, I think we can now safely and totally rule out an amphib operation against Odessa

Steve

This is just astonishing. It's so remarkable that it is borderline unbelievable. How is it possible that there is so much incompetence within the Russian forces? I can't recall a modern war where one side was so incompetent given the resources they had at their hands.

Now a lot of European countries are rushing to increase defense budgets but I can't help to ask what for? Russian threat? Really? After this war it will take them 30 years just to get back to pre-war state within the armed forces and how scary is that? The only thing they have are the strategic nuclear forces.

[TheVulture]

8 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/tm2s82/russian_landing_ship_orsk_destroyed_at_port/

excellent drone video of the aftermath. One Alligator-class total loss, two Ropucha-class retreating, both on fire, one significantly.

That's a really good quality video, and yeah, there's no doubt that that Alligator is history.

[Haiduk]

One more Stugna-P launch 

 

[Probus]

5 minutes ago, TheVulture said:

That's a really good quality video, and yeah, there's no doubt that that Alligator is history.

Yeah, that's one dead, 2 damaged amphibious transports.  I think Russia only had 6 amphibious transports in the Black Sea.  What got them?  

[The_MonkeyKing]

25 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I think it will go further than that.  In this case I'm not predicting the "demise" of MBTs because of their vulnerability, but also because of their production and lifetime costs, deployment limitations, manpower requirements (logistics in particular), fuel usage, and a bunch of other things combined with vulnerability.

We're seeing the same thing with helicopters and, presumably at some point, fixed wing aircraft for exactly the same reasons.

Militaries are in need of capabilities to find, fix, and kill stuff.  Right?  Change is hard so at any transition point there's reluctance to fully embrace new concepts because they inherently threaten the old ones.  And of course, nobody wants to call it wrong and find that they've screwed up.  Wars tend to accelerate change because they help clarify, with hard data,  what works and what doesn't.

Look at this war.  Does ANYBODY here think that old school legacy Soviet armor (even with ERA) has much value on the battlefield of tomorrow?  I don't think so.  But earlier February and before there certainly were a lot of experts with their heads in the sand about the risks to those systems posed by things like NLAW and drones.

With this in mind, picture yourself in a CMBS Quick Battle purchasing decision.  You have a choice of purchasing 5 smaller, nimbler, more survivable, more maneuverable, more stealthy, and generally just as capable UGVs as a single full on sexy equipped MBT.  What would you pick for your force?  And what other things would you buy (UGV choice) or give up buying (MBT) with the balance of points?

Now, let's make it a bit more interesting.  Let's create a scenario where you are a force that has been caught off guard.  The enemy has a full spectrum force (of even crappy MBTs let's say) and you are a force being rushed into combat (offensive or defensive, doesn't matter).  You have a choice of purchasing only a light to maybe medium force (no MBTs) or one that has lots of UGVs.  Which option would you rather have available to you?

It goes on and on from here, but I think you get my point.  As the purchase and support price tags continue to increase in order to combat the lethality of less expensive systems, at some point people are going to wonder if it's all worth it.  The big nations will probably slowly transition, the smaller nations will embrace it faster.  It's inevitable for economic reasons alone.

Steve

Great points. Especially that armored/mechanized armies might start to move towards "great power weapon" status like battleships ext. in the past. And maybe great power will give them up in time as well.

[John Kettler]

deleted

Edited March 24, 2022 by John Kettler

[Haiduk]

Next lt.colonel, Ruslan Gashiyatullin, but only motor-rifle battalion commander. Odd.

According to Russian media, he lived in Dagestan, so probably he is from 136th Guard motor-rifle brigade of 58th CAA.

 

 

Edited March 24, 2022 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

14 minutes ago, John Kettler said:

Ref my use of Ropucha, saw two different tweets and locked up on wrong one. Please disregard info provided on Ropucha. Should've been Polnocny!

https://findatwiki.com/Polnocny-class_landing_ship

Nope. Pr. 1171 Alligator   There are no Polnochny calss landing ships in Russian Navy service now

[The_MonkeyKing]

video of the first explosion at the dock:

 

[Der Zeitgeist]

I think this is the best video of the Berdyansk explosions so far. Also shows the two Ropuchas hauling ass, one of them slightly on fire, too.

 

[Haiduk]

Turret space launch. UKR Leleka-100 UAV is filming

 

[John Kettler]

12 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Nope. Pr. 1171 Alligator   There are no Polnochny calss landing ships in Russian Navy service now

Haiduk,

Thanks! At least I was able to remove my incorrect post. Here's the right ship class info and pic.

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Alligator-class_landing_ship



Regards,

John Kettler

[DesertFox]

29 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Turret space launch. UKR Leleka-100 UAV is filming

 

Great vid. I always thought there is a time delay until the ammo cooks off. Apparently that is not always the case. Any idea what hit him? Stugna-P, NLAW, Javelin?

2nd vid in that thread shows another angle filmed by another drone. Worth watching.

Edited March 24, 2022 by DesertFox

[The_Capt]

7 hours ago, Kinophile said:

Javelin is at least 4km, no? Even up to 5km?

Yes, 4.75 km from a vehicle mount.  Error in my post, Switchblades 600 has an 80 km range (not mi).