Jump to content

How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?


Probus

Recommended Posts

https://t.me/osirskiy/602

Quote

SYRSKY

The situation in the area of the operation of the Defense Forces of Ukraine remains difficult.

The enemy continues active offensive actions in many directions of the front line. The situation is particularly tense in the Avdiyiv and Zaporizhzhia directions, where Russian assault units are trying to break through the defenses of our troops and capture the settlements of Tonenke, Orlivka, Semenivka, Berdychi, Krasnohorivka.

Fierce fighting continues in the areas of Verbove and Robotine, over which the enemy is trying to regain control.

I started my work in the area of hostilities with the Donetsk Technical University, in the units that hold the defense in the Avdiyiv direction.

The success of any battle depends on the quality of planning and how successfully the commander's plan is implemented by his subordinates. This is primarily determined by the experience and skill of the commander and commanders, the ability to correctly assess the situation and make adequate and timely decisions.

At the level of battalion, company and platoon commanders, the main thing is to ensure the practical implementation of these decisions, to hold positions and destroy the enemy by fire of all means.

During the work, some commanders were found to have certain miscalculations in mastering the situation and assessing the enemy, which directly affected the stability of the defense in certain areas.

I took all measures to correct the situation on the spot, with the allocation of an additional resource of ammunition and material means, as well as the necessary reserves.

I would like to note the courage, resilience and heroism of the servicemen of the 3rd assault brigade and 25th separate airborne brigades. With bold and decisive actions, they defeated the enemy who broke through to the outskirts of Orlivka.

I continue to work, together to Victory!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kinophile said:

11 th!

I doubt this is real number. 

Now we have next: 

 - two confirmed Su-35 and A-50U from Russian side

- the video of falling down unknown combat aircraft near Dyakove (presumably Su-34, this is mathes with COSPAS information about eject signal from this area - Su-35 was shot down significantly west from this place)

- COSPAS ejection marks on the map allegedly from three Su-34 (including the one, mentioning above)

- bad quality of something falling down on the screen of some SAM (StarStreak?) claimed as Su-34

- just a claims of shot down jets. 

So, we have 3 100 % confirmed, 2 with high probability confirmed, 2 allegedly confirmed by COSPAS marks and rest 4 just unverified claims

 

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1763116800537997387.html

"So Russia recently released footage of the targeting of Ukrainian Cars across the border aswell as Lancet, Sahed and Tornado-S footage. I have cut it to take out the gore footage and only show the Lancet and other hits.

Here is the thread 
So lets start:

AS-90(known)
2S1 Gvozdika Damaged
Training Ground Hit
T-64BV Damaged
Group of T-72 Barely Damaged
AN/TPQ-50 Destroyed
BREM-1 ARV Destroyed
BMP-1 Damaged
T-64 Destroyed
T-64 Damaged

Bradley? Destroyed
Unknown Vehicle Destroyed
Leopard 2A6? Hit
Buk-M1/M2 Destroyed
BTR-80? Damaged?
Unknown SAM Destroyed(claimed patriot)
BMP-1 Damaged
BM-27 Uragan/Bureviy Destroyed
Msta-B Howitzer Damaged
Leopard 2A5(known) Destroyed

Destruction of a Ukrainian RM-70 Vampire MLRS

Sahed and Iskander-M strikes on Infrastructure and Targets."

Edited by The_MonkeyKing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

we have 3 100 % confirmed, 2 with high probability confirmed, 2 allegedly confirmed by COSPAS marks and rest 4 just unverified claims

Thanks for keeping us grounded.

It will be interesting to see if can get confirmation of accurate numbers.

I guess without pilots ejecting we can't rely on COSPAS and if they go into the sea no satellite proof possible.

Just maybe in months time obituaries of the pilots if they pop up on social media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is important to be skeptical of Ukrainian numbers, but I would be curious why now, specifically, these announcements are made (and from official Ukrainian accounts). 

Is it to improve morale after the continued Kab and Fab bombardment?

Curious. 

Usually Ukraine stayed somewhat conservative when it comes to "special assets" (ships, airframes) or provides footage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, cesmonkey said:

I suppose this is what Rybar was talking about here?

 

It is the incident but Rybar either has wrong info or decides to add flavor himself.

No 4 boats were destroyed. 1 came under fire, while on shore, with a loss of 6 on board.

 

 

Edited by Kraft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Carolus said:

It is important to be skeptical of Ukrainian numbers, but I would be curious why now, specifically, these announcements are made (and from official Ukrainian accounts). 

Is it to improve morale after the continued Kab and Fab bombardment?

Curious. 

Usually Ukraine stayed somewhat conservative when it comes to "special assets" (ships, airframes) or provides footage.

Usually most are 'really' confirmed by locals with smartphones anyway. As for the claims, I have lost track, but several of the claimed planes have been confirmed with satelite crash sites, locals, fighterbomber wishing eternal flight, and lost transponders, but I have no Overview how many of the claimed that is and I suspect there will be 1-2 added in.

Theres definitively an uptick in losses though, probably due to a risker employment of AA to pave the way for F-16 as others have stated.

Edited by Kraft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does someone have a good statistic of Russias missile camping? There were only a couple big strikes this winter. Not like last year with a strike every half a week. So maybe Ukraine doesn't need to have all their air defense assets around Kiev right now. That might also explain why the shoot downs only started now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

According to data obtained by the Information Resistance group at the VOT of the Kherson region, including in the Kakhovsky district, due to the low percentage of local residents who received Russian passports, the occupation administration granted permission to vote in the Russian presidential elections using a Ukrainian passport.

😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Butschi said:

Or the RuAF has increased the number of (risky) missions.

Or, more likely, both.  As I just pointed out, the Russians have long since held fixed wing aircraft from the frontlines as a matter of routine.  Sure, they strike this or that, but it's always been this or that.  It seems that various problems with using mass (artillery, infantry, and armor) they've decided they MUST put their precious aircraft at risk.  More importantly, they are risking their better aircraft.

For a few months this gamble seemed to help with Russian ground operations.  As generally happens when there's success, Russia has attempted to "scale up" dropping dumb bombs.  At some point what used to be an occasional support tactic has become the primary means of breaking up Ukrainian positions in key areas. 

It took a while for Ukraine to figure out how to counter this, but it does appear they have come up with at least a partial solution. As I pointed out a couple of days ago, these losses are not only expensive for Russia, but also effectively irreplaceable for this war. Ukraine's Airforce hinted at the way this dynamic goes... "we can keep playing this game".  For sure Russia can not if they don't change something for the better.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Carolus said:

Usually Ukraine stayed somewhat conservative when it comes to "special assets" (ships, airframes) or provides footage.

You can recall dozens Russian planes and choppers, which were "shot down" in first several months. Indeed these were either "morale boosting", or mistaken reports (target just dissapeared from radars for many reasons, but crew reported about downing), or it could be E95M aerial target jet drone, which Russia actively used during first months as false targets and our radar crews could think they lock on real aircraft or cruise missile and then to report about downing, or it could by cruise missiles. So, from there is derived "340 destroyed planes", but in real in five times less.  

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

As I pointed out a couple of days ago, these losses are not only expensive for Russia, but also effectively irreplaceable for this war.

Replaceability isn't necessarily a requirement in a war, though, right? I mean let's look at the cold war, for instance. No one had any illusions that all the equipment built up over years would last longer than a few weeks and the was no chance to produce replacements "in real-time".

So generally, irreplaceable losses can be acceptable if the gains outweigh the losses. Planes falling from the skies are very visible, Soldiers getting killed on the receiving end much less so, so we may not know the actual calculus here.

Irrespective of the possible gain, the question is if the Russians are willing to risk significantly reducing their precious air force over something that started out as a "Special Military Operation"... The comparison with the cold war is a bit flawed because, well this isn't a superpower plus NATO on the other side.

So if this is real it proves, again, that the war is important enough for Putin to risk the embarrassment of losing a substantial part of the air force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Butschi said:

Replaceability isn't necessarily a requirement in a war, though, right?

If X is important for winning the war, then losing X means you're less likely to win.  So yeah, irreconcilability matters even if we don't yet know how much

You are also missing a critical point here.  In Russia's mind the Ukraine operation is a BATTLE in a larger WAR with the West.  Putin's regime believes, to its core, that losing Ukraine means losing that larger war with the West.  So what happens if does the classic "won the battle, lost the war" outcome?

Think about it this way.  Russia has used its military capacity to achieve various goals in its continuation of the Cold War.  It's capacity is already shockingly reduced, which means its long term options for winning Cold War 2.0 are also reduced.  Aircraft are arguably the most important capability that Russia has to flex its muscles.  It is no accident that when Putin wants to ratchet up pressure he has a bunch of aircraft take to the skies to do various shows of force (buzzing US warships, getting idiotically close to NATO patrol aircraft, etc.).  Aircraft were also critical in Russia's role in saving Assad in Syria.

So ask yourself... if after this war with Ukraine is concluded, what capacity will it have to continue Cold War 2.0?  Because if it is a biplane with a pilot yelling in broken English "NATO go home!" then the losses encountered now matter.  A lot.

3 hours ago, Butschi said:

Irrespective of the possible gain, the question is if the Russians are willing to risk significantly reducing their precious air force over something that started out as a "Special Military Operation"... The comparison with the cold war is a bit flawed because, well this isn't a superpower plus NATO on the other side.

So if this is real it proves, again, that the war is important enough for Putin to risk the embarrassment of losing a substantial part of the air force.

Yes, everything about this is consistent with everything since the West first learned of the planning for this war.  Putin is going "all in" because, in his view, losing this battle means he's lost Cold War 2.0.  It doesn't matter how wrong headed this is, it is his viewpoint and he's obviously sticking to it.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

 

Would have been nice for Tucker to have mentioned that to Herr Putler when he "interviewed" him.

This is interesting, though.  The blowback from Tucker's horrible performance and the overt implications of what he did seems to be significant enough that he's willing to throw Putin under the bus to salvage his own reputation.

"Yes I was there when that guy was beating up a stranger's kid.  Yes I did nothing and even chuckled a few times.  But now that you mention it, I think the guy was a real dink".

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Episodes of clearing the village of Krasnohorivka (Avdiiv direction) from the Russians The soldiers of the 3rd company of the 1st assault battalion and the 2nd company of the 2nd assault battalion of the 3rd OShBr are working

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...