How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Grigb]

Reading Murs comments is apparent that every army needs Drone Fighters. And need them like yesterday. 

Orlan type drones behind lines can be taken out with LMM posts but to cover forces in contact that would not be possible. Handheld LMMs or Jammer guns are clumsy, unstealthy, you need to know when to "shoot" and in complex terrain small drones will be exceedingly difficult to find by ground teams.

I believe NATO needs something like this but with addition of machine gun or even smaller and cheaper LMM. 

 

Let me add - every army now needs to have additional drone-based section for AA detachments. The army which would not have it will pay dearly during the next party. 

Edited June 15, 2022 by Grigb

[Huba]

I broke through the paywall to the actual article. More interesting tidbits:

- UA has "burned through several dozen of M777s and those are being repaired". Might mean barrel replacement? Especially the first batch might have gone through 2000 rounds already.

- next group of HIMARS operators starts training now, so more are definitely coming. No info on numbers though.

- 155mm ammo producers in NATO countries are working 3 shifts now  and US is pushing RO and BG producers of 152mm to restart production. No mention of 122 tube/ rocket ammo, but it's reasonable to think they are not slacking off either. That is especially uplifting, as it means preparations for the long haul are being made, nobody expects ready stocks to be enough.

- UA has a steady 30 day stockpile of NATO ammo, and US intends to keep it that way

- Pentagon estimates that Russians lost 2600 armored vehicles indluding 1000 tanks, about 30% of whole stock, and used up 70% of PGMs.

Edited June 15, 2022 by Huba

[Taranis]

"Ukrainian soldiers fire a French Caesar cannon towards Russian troops positioned in the Donbass, June 15, 2022. ARIS MESSINIS / AFP"

[LongLeftFlank]

1.  From a pro-RU feed, separs using recoilless guns (what's the Soviet calibre of these? 76mm?) and a DP28. Dense woodlands, looks a lot like Western Europe.

2.  And yup, the Russians are using the infamous 'butterfly' mines.

3.  Kornet team.

 

Edited June 15, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[kraze]

1 hour ago, Huba said:

- UA has "burned through several dozen of M777s and those are being repaired". Might mean barrel replacement? Especially the first batch might have gone through 2000 rounds already.

Yes, the issue is that M777s are easy to use, have enough ammo but not enough experienced maintenance personnel / spare parts yet - when they inevitably have issues.

Edited June 15, 2022 by kraze

[Huba]

4 minutes ago, kraze said:

Yes, the issue is that M777s are easy to use, have enough ammo but not enough experienced maintenance personnel / material yet - when they inevitably have issues.

For comparison, D-20 barrel life is  estimated at 6000 rounds, more then triple of M777 - that's the price of high performance.

Edit: oh, and an interesting bit from the US:

 

Edited June 15, 2022 by Huba

[Taranis]

[Taranis]

20 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

1.  From a pro-RU feed, separs using recoilless guns (what's the Soviet calibre of these? 76mm?) and a DP28. Dense woodlands, looks a lot like Western Europe.

2.  And yup, the Russians are using the infamous 'butterfly' mines.

 

Looks like SPG-9 (73mm). Something similar of the BMP-1 gun

[LongLeftFlank]

7 minutes ago, Taranis said:

 

 

[Ultradave]

1 hour ago, Huba said:

I broke through the paywall to the actual article. More interesting tidbits:

- UA has "burned through several dozen of M777s and those are being repaired". Might mean barrel replacement? Especially the first batch might have gone through 2000 rounds already.

 

From the article:

"The Ukrainian artillery barrages have been so intense that several dozen of the M777 tubes have burned out and are being repaired."

Yes, exactly what that means. They are being put to good use. Every type has a maximum and then a sustained rate of fire. The sustained ROF would theoretically keep the barrels in good shape, but, if you need the fire support, you do what you gotta' do at the time.

Dave

Edited June 15, 2022 by Ultradave

[Huba]

4 minutes ago, Ultradave said:

From the article:

"The Ukrainian artillery barrages have been so intense that several dozen of the M777 tubes have burned out and are being repaired."

Yes, exactly what that means. They are being put to good use. Every type has a maximum and then a sustained rate of fire. The sustained ROF would theoretically keep the barrels in good shape, but, if you need the fire support, you do what you gotta' do at the time.

Dave

This, I assume, does not apply to rocket launchers. I wonder if at some point the M26 family will appear in Ukraine too. Guided rockets are great, but there seems to be plenty of area targets that beg for DPICM treatment, unitary warheads might be just not cost effective For example, many time we saw AFVs parked in revetments right next to one another, which should protect pretty good against unitary warheads (even air-bursting I think) , but have no impact against DPICM.

[cesmonkey]

 

[sburke]

18 hours ago, akd said:

@sburke @Kinophile

Colonel Sergey Postnov, Rosgvardia media relations officer:

 

according to this article he is the 53rd Russian Colonel to be killed thus far.  I think I am missing a few.  

Putin loses 53rd colonel in Ukraine war as Russia’s toll of commanders grows (msn.com)

 

[dan/california]

These are the highest Russian casualty figures I have seen in days. Either they are trying even more desperately to take the salient, or the various Ukrainian pushbacks are inflicting casualties as well as taking back a fair bit of territory.

[Huba]

8 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

 

HIMARS ammo!

I played with numbers for that a while ago. If Lockheed can deliver 20K/ year (I recall this as maximum if full speed production was to start), it gives you around 55/ day. Just enough for the few HIMARS and M270s that were pledged. If US were to tap into it's own reserves, there's around 50K GMLRS there, a considerable amount, but I wouldn't expect more than 1-2 hundred/ day max being available

In light of that, more than say 3 battalions of HIMARS wouldn't make sense, unless M26 rockets are part of the deal too.

[Ultradave]

1 hour ago, Huba said:

This, I assume, does not apply to rocket launchers. I wonder if at some point the M26 family will appear in Ukraine too. Guided rockets are great, but there seems to be plenty of area targets that beg for DPICM treatment, unitary warheads might be just not cost effective For example, many time we saw AFVs parked in revetments right next to one another, which should protect pretty good against unitary warheads (even air-bursting I think) , but have no impact against DPICM.

I would expect not. Reloads take a little while, so you just can't fire them as fast as pumping out 155mm shells, which can be quite fast if you don't have to change firing data.

Dave

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, dan/california said:

These are the highest Russian casualty figures I have seen in days. Either they are trying even more desperately to take the salient, or the various Ukrainian pushbacks are inflicting casualties as well as taking back a fair bit of territory.

So if 32k dead, then 4x = ~120k wounded, w say 1/2 of those not returning.  That means ~90-100k soldiers total loss.  What do y'all think of those numbers?  More or less on wounded & wounded returning?  

If it is 90k total loss that is pretty horrific, considering many of those were the better troops w replacements generally of continually lower quality & motivation & morale.  Plus 50+ colonels???  who on earth is left to run the BTGs/regiments???  

And another ~BTG of armored vehicle losses in one day (given BTG not full strength).  

[SeinfeldRules]

47 minutes ago, Huba said:

HIMARS ammo!

I played with numbers for that a while ago. If Lockheed can deliver 20K/ year (I recall this as maximum if full speed production was to start), it gives you around 55/ day. Just enough for the few HIMARS and M270s that were pledged. If US were to tap into it's own reserves, there's around 50K GMLRS there, a considerable amount, but I wouldn't expect more than 1-2 hundred/ day max being available

In light of that, more than say 3 battalions of HIMARS wouldn't make sense, unless M26 rockets are part of the deal too.

But how long will it take to step up production to that level? 20,000 represents a third of what they’ve produced over 15 years. The latest production figure I can find is an order for 9,000 GMLRS to be delivered over 2.5 years. Lockheed also has other priorities for manufacturing weapons for the US Army, so how will that effect things? It makes sense for countries in Europe to empty their stockpiles but the United States has many other interests besides Ukraine and there can be strategic implications to removing these capabilities from the military.  

[Harmon Rabb]

Is this news credible? If so is it time to sanction China?

[SeinfeldRules]

7 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

So if 32k dead, then 4x = ~120k wounded, w say 1/2 of those not returning.  That means ~90-100k soldiers total loss.  What do y'all think of those numbers?  More or less on wounded & wounded returning?  

If it is 90k total loss that is pretty horrific, considering many of those were the better troops w replacements generally of continually lower quality & motivation & morale.  Plus 50+ colonels???  who on earth is left to run the BTGs/regiments???  

And another ~BTG of armored vehicle losses in one day (given BTG not full strength).  

I have always viewed the published Ukrainian losses as absolutely ridiculous. If Russians truly have 90,000 casualties then there would be virtually no fighting forces left (not counting support units like artillery or logistics), and you then have to wonder how Ukraine is still struggling to gain momentum in places like Kherson or Kharkiv. Besides, since when has a nation EVER been able to accurately estimate an opposing nation’s casualties? It’s pretty much accepted as historical fact that governments and militaries always overestimate enemy casualty numbers. Plenty of evidence out there that one burned out vehicle doesn’t automatically equal 3+ dead soldiers and humans are hardier then is commonly believed by the public. I can buy 32,000 total casualties but certainly not 32,000 KIA. 

Edited June 15, 2022 by SeinfeldRules

[danfrodo]

3 minutes ago, Harmon Rabb said:

Is this news credible? If so is it time to sanction China?

That does seem odd.  China backing the very likely loser in this mess?  I was thinking they'd be ~neutral and just do whatever profited them most along the way w/o risk.  Why do this?  Even if Putin promised all the oil he could somehow transport, will the deal be abrogated if Putin is... abrogated?  

[Beleg85]

27 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

So if 32k dead, then 4x = ~120k wounded, w say 1/2 of those not returning.  That means ~90-100k soldiers total loss.  What do y'all think of those numbers?  More or less on wounded & wounded returning?  

I see no way they took such volume and still stand. Much of lossess especially from first weeks (you know, those Il-76's falling from the sky etc.) were probably counted 2-3 times and not confirmed. The ratio of KIA/WIA was probably lower then because Russian medical services sucked, but once front become more solid they probably improved this. The problem is with Russian mercenaries- nobody know their true numbers for sure, and since they are easier to hide they could be more numerous than people believe- and tank maybe even several thousands casualties.

Which, if compared with Ukrainian casualties of ~10 000 KIA and maybe 40-50 k WIA, would mean both armies are probably similar in this regard now.

Edited June 15, 2022 by Beleg85

[Beleg85]

27 minutes ago, SeinfeldRules said:

I can buy 32,000 total casualties but certainly not 32,000 KIA. 

We know about (likely downgraded) threshold of lossess from DPR pretty accurately, at least 2000KIA +8000WIA. LPR probably something of similar magnitude. So already 20 k. Russian army at their initial rush could probably lost much more, maybe 10-20 k. Add replacements and mercs. I think of at least 40 k of everybody is rather believable, maybe even more. But not 90 k of course. And these are also pure conjectures.

Oops sorry, double post.

Edited June 15, 2022 by Beleg85

[Chibot Mk IX]

On 6/11/2022 at 11:17 PM, LongLeftFlank said:

BUT, I will ask a fairly obvious question:

1.   If the Russian effort rides pretty much entirely on heavy artillery right now, to the tune of about 900 tubes or launchers in the key sector; and

2.  If drones are a real pain in the arse to shoot down right now, and can roam with near impunity, day and night, limited only by their time aloft.....

Where is that swarm of several thousand drones of all shapes and sizes, kamikaze and other, that will sniff out and neutralise these tubes, as well as their LOCs? 

Or does the West need China in order to manufacture anything in bulk now?

.... And along those same lines, what's happened to the Bayraktars?  They haven't all been shot down, that's definitely not the case.  And aren't there some Gray Eagles quietly floating around?  Hmm....

It’s a coincidence that we had a similar discussion on a Chinese forum last week, identical questions.

Take this with a grain of salt. Regarding TB-2 reduced showtime, here is one of the theory. After a three months high intensity operation, these birds need to stand down, repair and maintenance. I guess  Baykar won’t hesitate to send a group of field engineers to do an field maintenance, but it is possible they need to be returned back to the factory to do the maintenance work. Another theory is Russian air defense capability improved in this static warfare. they have enough time build an air defense network supported by EW and AEW assets. One vs one, I will buy a Bayraktars’s win. But in a few vs many scenarios ,TB-2 is very likely to be detected and be shot down. Lack of a RWR system not only hurt TB-2 but almost all the drone on the arms trade industry. UAV operator has very limit situation awareness besides the narrowed FOV from the camera. A few destroyed TB-2 should deter Ukraine to use these precious assets for a patrol mission. But on the other hand it is not a big setback to Ukraine side, better to save them for something big, like a surprise deep strike.

For the drone swarm and artillery tubes, we still need lots of arty tubes. No one can generate a drone swarm at this moment, Chinese companies have occupied almost all the commercial drone market, but that doesn’t mean China has the capability to mass produce commercial drone independently, dedicate military drone has more trouble on mass production. Now for the portable commercial drones, they are lack of the range to do the punch. Most of the quadcopter drones are designed with positive static stability, so even a small payload will dramatically reduced the range. In some case DJI drone carrying a hand grenade will have less range than a 82mm mortar.

The discussion leads to one of the conclusions: in the near future at tactical level, drones and Arty are in a complementary relationship not a competition relationship. Let the Drones be the eyes, focus on the recon spotting, and let Arty do the punch.

Another conclusion is, CH-4 Rainbow is a better UCAV compare to Bayraktar TB2. Guess not too many people outside GFW are going to agree on that 

[Suleyman]

Forget 90-100K casualties if Russia lost 40-50K that would be enough to completely stop them forming any meaningful offensive. It’s true they don’t have a lot of manpower in the war imagine what 100K losses would do to them. It would be a Ukrainian total victory one sided. Both sides most definitely over state the casualties they inflict, but it’s done in every war so not something new

Edited June 15, 2022 by Suleyman