Jump to content

How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?


Probus

Recommended Posts

Antenna post of Russian EW asset "Pole-21" hit with FPV drone.

Main purpose of "Pole-21" is interferences for precision ammunition, using satellite navigation. Each complex has control vehicle based on R-340 communication vehcile (on the photo) and three antenna posts. Each can cover about 25 km, operating in sector 125 degrees by azimuth and 25 degres by angle.

Комплекс радиоэлектронной борьбы Поле-21

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

 Yet West Germany never formally (as far as I know) accepted the existence of the DDR nor did it ever give  assurances to NATO that it would never, ever, under any circumstances seek to reunite with territories lost to it through war. 

I agree with you on the point, but not on the details. :)

We mutually recognized each other in 1972 (BRD & DDR).

We did not give assurances to NATO, but between 1970-73 in several contracts to the SU, Poland, DDR, the Allies & Czechoslovakia. This included special legalese to allow a possible reunification with the DDR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://kyivindependent.com/national-resistance-center-wagner-fighters-leave-belarus-due-to-low-pay/

Wagner is in a very odd place in time & space, without a clear mission, divided as it is between Africa & Ukraine.

When Prigster was running it the Donbass was the clear focus, but now? 

He does not seem to have locked in a clear new objective, it seems to be in a latent state, perhaps waiting for something else to shift in Moscow... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

The very important point being made with this analogy is that Ukraine doesn't have to sign papers stating that it no longer has any claim over the territories currently occupied by Russia in order to be a part of NATO.  This has been a presumption by many when discussing NATO membership requirements.  Yet West Germany never formally (as far as I know) accepted the existence of the DDR nor did it ever give  assurances to NATO that it would never, ever, under any circumstances seek to reunite with territories lost to it through war.  So there is a precedent for Ukraine to say "we're not at war now and we understand NATO is a defensive pact and if we restart a war with Russia that is not classified as defensive".

So far Ukraine has shown no signs of wanting to pause the conflict.  The point remains, however, that if that should change then it is technically possible for them to join NATO without having to formally renounce all claims to Ukrainian territory under Russian occupation.

Steve

I still think that this is a flawed comparison. The main difference being that NATO was already in West Germany when West Germany joined NATO. The border was already the front line of the Cold War. Had that gone hot the battlefield would have been Germany even without West Germany being in NATO. Maybe even more to the point: West Germany wasn't allowed to join NATO in order to help West Germany defend itself but to help NATO defend NATO. The Netherlands, surprisingly, were the main supporters who were very much afraid because even flooding half the country NATO thought they couldn't defend the Netherlands. An additional 10 West German divisions made them feel much safer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

https://www.threads.net/@maks_23_ua/post/CwLL5zgrJpY/?igshid=NjZiM2M3MzIxNA%3D%3D

FROM Anton Geraschenko ❗️Russian #securityservices (who want to stage a coup) suggested Putin fire #Shoigu, impose martial law and start general mobilization - Bloomberg.

The media writes that a number of Russian security service representatives are advocating a shift to more aggressive actions on the frontlines in Ukraine.

Prigozhin's main targets - defense minister Sergei Shoigu and Chief of General Staff Valery Gerasimov - remain in their posts,

 

Things remain exciting in the Kremlin apparently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dan/california said:

So much stuff blows up at once here I can't even figure out what is going on...

One of Russian mechanized counterattacks near probably Klishchivka being badly beaten off by Ukrainan artillery.

In the gloom sourrounding this offensive, one of more unexpected issues is apparent Ukrainian artillery parity/superiority. There were worries among milcommentaries here (with some good sources in Ukraine itself) their ammo stocks started to dry out locally after unsuccessfull pushes already in late June, but it seems they managed to adjust to new tempo and maintain good balance of fires from that time. Also one of PL volunteers attached permanently to one UA brigade in the north is lately surprised their guns started to "clap back" at Muscovites in their area.

This can be local and situation is not so good everywhere ofc., but certainly Russians constantly complain now about UA artillery effectivness, if not direct superiority. DPCIM's do a job here for sure, but I would be very curious to see numbers of regular shells provided; perhaps finally West is managing to catch up with expectations regarding big ammo production.

Edited by Beleg85
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dan/california said:

So much stuff blows up at once here I can't even figure out what is going on...

Another view - go to the twitter thread to see.  Poster claims 2 T-80s damaged+abandoned, 2 BMPs destroyed.

More

 

Edited by Fenris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thread with details of failed RU attacks

Quote

23.07.23 Russian army using 5 tanks tried to capture our positions near Spirne, Donetsk oblast. 

My friend shared photos of that attack and told me some details.
RUAF launched their attack using kamikadze MT-LB. Fortunately for us, it didn’t reach the goal.

...

During the attack UAF destroyed 2 Russian T-80BV and MT-LB. 3 more tanks were hit and retreated.

07.08.23 they repeated the attack.

Full thread - https://twitter.com/OSINTua/status/1693320448489013587

 

Edited by Fenris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Fenris said:

Another view - go to the twitter thread to see.  Poster claims 2 T-80s damaged+abandoned, 2 BMPs destroyed.

More

 

So my question, maybe THE question, does sending  a force five times this size give some opportunity to break thru to the objective, albeit with 40% or 50% casualties? Or does it just get a bunch more orcs barbecued, because this spot was just covered, period? I mean there were two different drones, and least a full battery of artillery raining down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is amusing, sad and aggravating all at the same time, to think there are people happy to send their own guys out to fight in this condition on the modern battlefield.  They look like they've come from the Iran/Irag war.  Are they accepting donated gear?  Edit - or are they civies doing the donating? Might explain their hand-me-down equipment.

 

Edited by Fenris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote


https://www.kyivpost.com/post/20152

“And if it does, it means at least one of the snipers made a very serious mistake,” said Volodymyr “Bond” Petrenko* during a recent interview in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv. “The last thing a sniper wants to do in this war is expose his position.”

“I would say that for every ten missions we go out on, we maybe actually take a shot once,” said Volodymyr “Atom” Harbovsky*. “We get all kinds of missions and we work with all kinds of units. Taking out an enemy soldier is pretty much never the priority… it’s more an opportunity one takes advantage of, if it is presented.” 

 

Quote

 

 

Quote


https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/urban-warfare-project/id1490714950?i=1000624869102

In this episode, John Spencer is joined by Stuart Lyle. The urban operations lead for the UK Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, he describes a series of research studies and events that led to the creation of a new type of unit called Phalanx. Optimized for the unique challenges of urban warfare, the British Army is currently experimenting with the new unit. He also explains the historical trends that influenced the form Phalanx would take and details the specific changes made to company-sized infantry units to enhance their performance on the modern urban battlefield.

 

 

 

So the the three things referenced above, and every video of trench clearing we have seen in this war have led me to a conclusion. Small arms just barely matter, and when they do matter what counts is sustainable volume of fire. The follow on to that is that is that infantry weapons should use the smallest, lightest round possible. As much carrying capacity as humanely possible should be devoted to ISR on the defensive, and short to medium range explosives on the offensive.

The sniper in the Kyiv post article makes it extremely clear that his only real goal is to see and not be seen. He only shoots at something when either he or the enemy has screwed up atrociously.  I think regular infantry operate the same way to the extent to which their mission allows it

The RUSI article reiterates in great detail the fact that thousands, tens of thousands of rounds are fired for every one that hits the enemy. The role of small arms is to cause suppression, and foreclose the option of a mass banzai charge, and pretty much any modern rifle does both just fine.

The Urban warfare podcast, and the whole thing is worth a listen, extensively details how in an urban battle engagement ranges are stupid close , well inside danger close for almost all supporting fires. The primary arbiter of success is the amount of explosives a unit can project. From 40mm grenades, to LAW/Matador/Carl Gustav class weapons. Units also desperately need integral short range drones. Again every gram of rifle ammo takes away from the stuff that matters more. 

We have all seen many videos of trench clearing, grenades are so important that when a unit runs out of them they simply stop advancing, or even retreat. 

I freely admit that this is a change of opinion on my part, and it might be less true for a  counter insurgency situation. But I think it is a primary lesson from Ukraine for the next high intensity war. The smallest possible rifle round frees up carrying capacity for things that matter more

P.S. There was long discussion about the RUSI article in 2018, many of you may remember it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some pics said to be relating to the Kerch bridge truck bomb op

Quote

The head of the SBU, Gen. Vasily Malyuk, just released a bit of extra information about the Ukrainian VBIED attack targeting the Crimean Bridge last year. 

In total, 21 tons of RDX high explosive was plastic wrapped in palletized cylinders to avoid detection.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Artkin said:

But who volunteered to drive the truck?

I suspect we won't know that for quite a while. It is worth pointing out that Ukraine has an unfortunately large population with grudges against Russia the size of a small moon. The kind of grudges you get when they kill your whole family and/or torture you mercilessly for months, maybe years. Russia seems to like to let some of these people go just to spread the word of how horrible they are. If they asked for volunteers, I doubt there was a shortage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fenris said:

This is amusing, sad and aggravating all at the same time, to think there are people happy to send their own guys out to fight in this condition on the modern battlefield.  They look like they've come from the Iran/Irag war.  Are they accepting donated gear?  Edit - or are they civies doing the donating? Might explain their hand-me-down equipment.

I've had a feeling that I've been seeing more steel helmets in videos lately.  We saw a lot of them earlier in the war when unanticipated losses outstripped the available supply of modern equipment (even firearms).  This was partially alleviated by importing stuff from Iran and likely other places.  Russian manufacturing got really cranked up, though at first all they were doing was "modernizing" the steel helmets.  Then, it appears, some combination of production increases and imports has apparently managed to keep pace with losses.

I suspect we might be seeing signs that, once again, Russia is unable to provide basic equipment for its forces.  That really isn't too surprising to me.  It also isn't surprising to me that some low level commander is too stupid to realize showing off steel helmets and a mostly empty rocket launcher isn't really a good PR move.

It would be nice to get a rough translation of that video to know what kind of nonsense was being spouted off.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...