How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Battlefront.com]

A bit disjointed, but never-the-less an example of how much it sucks to be an infantryman these days.  Video shows thermal sniper scope image of a sniper droppping quite a few Russian attackers.  What the sniper didn't get something (mortars, most likely) got the rest.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PNVmilitary_community/comments/114qx4e/this_is_how_wagners_mercenary_offensive_attempt/

And another which shows up close and personal drone footage of a platoon sized? force that got torn up in a patch of forest.  This also shows how drones can operate even in a pretty active snowstorm:

https://www.reddit.com/r/PNVmilitary_community/comments/114yrum/bakhmut_ukrainian_artillery_destroys_the/

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

UK MoD casualty estimates as cited by ISW's Feb 17 report:

Quote

The United Kingdom Ministry of Defense (UK MoD) reported that Russian forces have likely suffered up to 200,000 casualties since the start of its invasion of Ukraine.[46] The UK MoD reported on February 17 that Russian military servicemembers and paramilitary company personnel have suffered 175,000 to 200,000 causalities in Ukraine, with 40,000 to 60,000 of those killed.[47] The UK MoD reported that Wagner Group fighters have likely experienced a casualty rate of up to 50 percent and that the Russian military’s casualty rate has significantly increased since the start of partial mobilization in September 2022.[48] Western officials reported on February 2 that Russian forces sustained almost 200,000 casualties since the beginning of the invasion.[49] Many more Russian forces may have died in Ukraine than the UK MoD suggests, as independent Russian outlet Meduza recently reported that over 32,000 Wagner Group convict recruits alone are dead or missing.[50] The high Russian casualty rate, especially the high ratio of deaths to injuries, continues to have deleterious effects on the Russian military's combat effectiveness and is likely prompting Russian officials to continue crypto-mobilization efforts.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

And one last one before heading off for a nap... Ukraine apparently struck something hard in southern occupied Kherson.  Side note, look at the scars on the Russian's head.  I wonder if he received them from the earlier part of the war (one part of the scar still looks red) or if he had some sort of civilian based accident. 

This got me thinking... aren't we about due for some sort of deep strike from Ukraine?  It's been a while since they have done something that grabbed our attention for several days.  I know they don't owe us anything, but it would be nice to have something to wonder "how did they do that?!?"

I expect the answer is Ukraine is waiting for the Russian offensive to be in full motion before doing something spectacular again.

Steve

[Artkin]

25 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

 

Looks like it was a S-300/400. They seem to make those smoke trails when destroyed. 

[Aragorn2002]

Question. What do we know about the Russian weapon industry with regard to production of tanks, artillery, IFV and such? How many tanks are they able to produce each month for instance?

[MikeyD]

There reports pretty early last year that Russian tank assembly lines had hut down completely due to lack of components. More recently there was footage of them refurbishing increasingly old vehicles.

[Letter from Prague]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

This got me thinking... aren't we about due for some sort of deep strike from Ukraine?  It's been a while since they have done something that grabbed our attention for several days.  I know they don't owe us anything, but it would be nice to have something to wonder "how did they do that?!?"

I expect the answer is Ukraine is waiting for the Russian offensive to be in full motion before doing something spectacular again.

Steve

1 hour ago, Artkin said:

Looks like it was a S-300/400. They seem to make those smoke trails when destroyed. 

The Ukrainian deep strikes are usually preceded by HARM campaign and we have seen some of that lately, so it might be in the stars.

I wonder if they would take out another part of the bridge to cut supplies to Crimea again or if we'll see something bolder.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

7 hours ago, akd said:

Longer version sees even more weapons in use by this one guy:

Is it me or did the pistol grip come off his fancy yellow AK?

At around 4:01, it doesn't appear to be there any more even though moments before he was firing it and the pistol grip could be seen right in front of the camera.

 

[Pete Wenman]

Tom Cooper summarising events - not sure too many here will disagree with the premise.

Bottom line: the ‘biiiiig’ Russian offensive appears to be petering out amid massive casualties and at least two big failures. Yes, this conclusion might be premature (and yes: even I’m surprised for coming to the idea to write this)....

Unless much more details become available, I guess the reasons are what I’ve explained again and again:

a) the VSRF cannot support one ‘biiiiiiiiiig’ operation in a single sector, thus was forced to distribute less troops on three ‘primary’ sectors, and these proved insufficient to overcome the combination of Ukrainian fire-power and will;

b) because of incompatibility with the winter weather, it’s Orlan-10 UAVs are not working, and thus the Russian generals are ‘commanding blind’ (they do not know where are what of Ukrainian positions), while their artillery lacks the effectiveness necessary to breach Ukrainian frontlines and enable a serious advance;

c) the mass of mobiks is simply not trained well-enough to conduct offensive operations (especially no mechanised operations); and

d) the VSRF is lacking officers to organise, train, and lead 100,000, 150,000, 200,000 (or more) of mobiks into combat.

Atop of this, due to the lack of UAVs and other modern means of reconnaissance, and bad weather, even the GRU and FSB are experiencing growing problems with collecting intelligence. Between others, it turned out they’ve requested their moles in the German BND to obtain intel on activity of Ukrainian M142 and M270-units…

Finally, by now it’s obvious that even Gerasimov and his aides found no solution for the general degeneration of the VSRF — for which there is nobody else but Putin and the Keystone Cops in Moscow (foremost including Shoygu and Gerasimov) to blame.

https://medium.com/@x_TomCooper_x/ukraine-war-18-february-2023-dc29786a91df

P

[Ales Dvorak]

14 hours ago, Letter from Prague said:

Where I'm from, every day is Slovakia bashing day.

Still after 30 years? 

I remember this .. https://www.udiscovermusic.com/stories/frank-zappa-eastern-europe-vaclav-havel/

Edited February 18, 2023 by Ales Dvorak

[Aragorn2002]

2 hours ago, MikeyD said:

There reports pretty early last year that Russian tank assembly lines had hut down completely due to lack of components. More recently there was footage of them refurbishing increasingly old vehicles.

I see. Hard to imagine. Sounds a lot like wishful thinking to me. Surely they must have been prepared for that somehow.

[kraze]

2 hours ago, Aragorn2002 said:

I see. Hard to imagine. Sounds a lot like wishful thinking to me. Surely they must have been prepared for that somehow.

It's possible if russians didn't expect AFU to burn through 3000 of their tanks with 300 of our own.

I mean 10:1 on paper looked so easy they fully expected to win the war in 3 days.

Why would russians needed to think about this with such an advantage and a guaranteed blitzkrieg?

[chuckdyke]

 

  

[Lethaface]

15 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

Also, France seemt to give their Akeron MP (saw some discussions as to how valid this news was, but seems legit):

https://mil-in-ua.translate.goog/uk/news/frantsiya-peredala-ukrayini-ptrk-akeron/?_x_tr_sl=uk&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=pl&_x_tr_pto=wapp

The capabilities of that ATGM are interesting.

[rocketman]

31 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

The capabilities of that ATGM are interesting.

 

[Letter from Prague]

1 hour ago, Lethaface said:

The capabilities of that ATGM are interesting.

Looks like Stugna and Javelin had a baby.

Edited February 18, 2023 by Letter from Prague

[Yet]

1 hour ago, kraze said:

It's possible if russians didn't expect AFU to burn through 3000 of their tanks with 300 of our own.

I mean 10:1 on paper looked so easy they fully expected to win the war in 3 days.

Why would russians needed to think about this with such an advantage and a guaranteed blitzkrieg?

iiss comes to 2100 russian tanks lost and still 1800 operational. with additional 5000 not operational still in storage (bad shape). so revamping these doesnt sound so weird. to those RU losses they count 700 UA tanks lost. so i wonder what Krazes 10:1 comes from (except from wishfull thinking and info-war language)

oryx counts to 1700 RU lost tanks

Edited February 18, 2023 by Yet

[DesertFox]

Fast driving or low flying? Which is it?

 

 

[Yet]

14 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

Fast driving or low flying? Which is it?

 

 

heh. i saw that once when i taking a hike and an apache came silently just over the hill and the hedges at about a 1-200m distance. Crapped my pants even though i know its a training.

 

and Kraze, .. we thing 1:3 is F***** awesome, dont worry  and i think the rates are inflating by the hour now (at least untill the next UA offensive).

Edited February 18, 2023 by Yet

[DesertFox]

Rasputiza. One ruzzian tank coy stuck in mud. Were is HIMARS when you need it?

 

 

[DesertFox]

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Yet said:

iiss comes to 2100 russian tanks lost and still 1800 operational. with additional 5000 not operational still in storage (bad shape). so revamping these doesnt sound so weird. to those RU losses they count 700 UA tanks lost. so i wonder what Krazes 10:1 comes from (except from wishfull thinking and info-war language)

oryx counts to 1700 RU lost tanks

10:1 was the ratio of Russian to Ukrainian tanks at the start of the invasion.  I've seen numbers even higher than that which took into consideration various states of readiness, but I think 10:1 is as good as any.

The other confusing thing is that many of Ukraine's tank losses were captured Russian tanks.  Which means that when examining losses you have to account for Ukraine's prewar stocks magically (thanks to panicking Russians) getting larger.  Add to that the large number of tanks donated by other countries.

It's a complicated topic, but the answer for Aragorn2002 is same.  Russia went into Ukraine on a peacetime footing with almost no thought about what the future might hold for if the war went badly.  Not just tanks, everything.  Why make contingency plans if victory is so assured?

The other way to look at it is for Russia to have properly prepared for what is happening to it now it would have had to expect that the war would go horribly.  If they had expected the war to go as badly as it has, then it is probable that the invasion wouldn't have happened at all.  Russia would have done something other than a full invasion to get what it wanted.  Example... Russia correctly calculated that a war with NATO would be the end of the regime so it has never once attacked NATO, even though the Baltic states are probably as high up on Putin's wish list as Ukraine.

So, as much as I love to bash Russia for stupidity, the lack of contingency planning for the war going badly isn't one of them.  Based on the assumptions they made, it would be illogical to spend time and resources getting their economy and military ready for disaster.  The assumptions is where the stupidity comes into play big time.  And I'm being kind here

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

49 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

Rasputiza. One ruzzian tank coy stuck in mud. Were is HIMARS when you need it?

 

 

I think there is some old saying that goes like:

"the only thing worse than having your first tank in a column get stuck at the beginning of a patch of mud is to have your first tank in a column get stuck at the end of a patch of mud"

Steve

[Aragorn2002]

3 hours ago, kraze said:

It's possible if russians didn't expect AFU to burn through 3000 of their tanks with 300 of our own.

I mean 10:1 on paper looked so easy they fully expected to win the war in 3 days.

Why would russians needed to think about this with such an advantage and a guaranteed blitzkrieg?

Well, because one way or the other it would be the beginning of a Cold War and sanctions from the West.

[Artkin]

3 hours ago, kraze said:

It's possible if russians didn't expect AFU to burn through 3000 of their tanks with 300 of our own.

I mean 10:1 on paper looked so easy they fully expected to win the war in 3 days.

Why would russians needed to think about this with such an advantage and a guaranteed blitzkrieg?

Oryx lists almost 500 Ukrainian tanks and almost 1800 Russian tanks so it's possible both of these numbers are the minimum.