How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[chuckdyke]

1 hour ago, Carolus said:

Their replacements will be smaller, cheaper, lighter, but more numerous.

Battlefront quoted Unmanned Ground Vehicles. Using present tanks is fighting the last war. We can hypothese what we like but compared with the past. Much more urban combined with high tech. The superpowers of WW2 don't exactly shine in the Post WW2 20th and 21st century. Smaller military 2nd rate nations defended themselves successfully. At least politically they came out on top. 

[cesmonkey]

 

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

Battlefront quoted Unmanned Ground Vehicles. Using present tanks is fighting the last war. We can hypothese what we like but compared with the past. Much more urban combined with high tech. The superpowers of WW2 don't exactly shine in the Post WW2 20th and 21st century. Smaller military 2nd rate nations defended themselves successfully. At least politically they came out on top. 

I think the best way to encapsulate the magnitude of change that is in front of us for the past few years (especially the past 2) is that:

a) maneuver warfare, as we know it, against a near peer or its proxy is dead

b) something will come about to create a new form of warfare that allows for the seizure and affordable security of terrain against a near peer or its proxy

c) that something will not likely look like the old maneuver warfare with a fresh coat of paint

The battle right now is that the TweakTheTank™ (a second trademarked swag money maker for me!) crowd envisions the next 20 years looking almost the same as the last 20, but with more bling.  The TankIsDead™ crowd may not be able to say exactly what is coming next, but are very sure that it isn't the same stuff with some new doo-dads stuck onto it.

What it boils down to is one crowd sees the evidence of the Ukraine War as requiring a fundamental change with no sacred cows.  The other side does not see the need for fundamental change and, therefore, roots its arguments based on the preconception of keeping as much of the old way as possible.

Steve

[The_Capt]

19 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I think the best way to encapsulate the magnitude of change that is in front of us for the past few years (especially the past 2) is that:

a) maneuver warfare, as we know it, against a near peer or its proxy is dead

b) something will come about to create a new form of warfare that allows for the seizure and affordable security of terrain against a near peer or its proxy

c) that something will not likely look like the old maneuver warfare with a fresh coat of paint

The battle right now is that the TweakTheTank™ (a second trademarked swag money maker for me!) crowd envisions the next 20 years looking almost the same as the last 20, but with more bling.  The TankIsDead™ crowd may not be able to say exactly what is coming next, but are very sure that it isn't the same stuff with some new doo-dads stuck onto it.

What it boils down to is one crowd sees the evidence of the Ukraine War as requiring a fundamental change with no sacred cows.  The other side does not see the need for fundamental change and, therefore, roots its arguments based on the preconception of keeping as much of the old way as possible.

Steve

I would add AirLand Battle and AirSea Battle to that list.  

CAS is looking like 50+ km back, sometimes a couple hundred kms. Air denial is a serious problem.  Even stealth won’t work once someone puts AI image recognition targeting into play - basically an artificial eyeball with enough brain. SEAD and stealth rely heavily on counter-radar.  Radar is still going to be used but it may be a supporting system to autonomous “visual” targeting systems.  That is not 30 years out…it is happening right now.

Maritime warfare is in for major impacts. Autonomous surface vehicles are here and they can carry air sub systems, and subsurface systems. I suspect Blue Water will hold out but Green and Littorals are going to be a hot mess. Sea Control may be next to impossible in some areas, which really breaks things.  And no, USN swatting Houthi UAS are not a sign we are “ok”.

Edited July 10 by The_Capt

[dan/california]

4 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I would add AirLand Battle and AirSea Battle to that list.  

CAS is looking like 50+ km back, sometimes a couple hundred kms. Air denial is a serious problem.  Even stealth won’t work once someone puts AI image recognition targeting into play - basically an artificial eyeball with enough brain. SEAD and stealth rely heavily on counter-radar.  Radar is still going to be used but it may be a supporting system to autonomous “visual” targeting systems.  That is not 30 years out…it is happening right now.

Maritime warfare is in for major impacts. Autonomous surface vehicles are here and they can carry air sub systems, and surface systems. I suspect Blue Water will hold out but Green and Littorals are going to be a hot mess. Sea Control may be next to impossible in some areas, which really breaks things.  And no, USN swatting Houthi UAS are not a sign we are “ok”.

Thermal imaging systems especially, jet engines have all the same big, hot, signature problems that AFVs do times ten, if not a hundred. Someone is is going to figure out how to find that signal. The other potential game breaker is whether AWACS and similar are survivable. We just put a SM-6 on a fighter plane. The Russians and the Chinese are certainly trying to do the same thing with an S400-S500 class SAM. Can we keep an AWACs alive when an entire squadron fires a S-400s from 250 miles out? Keep in mind that lifting that same missile to 50,000 feet and firing it from a straight and level flight profile is something an unmanned platform can almost certainly do. Send the Straight at the AWACs until they nearly out of fuel, or about to get hit, and then volley the actual missiles. Ten unmanned aircraft, and ten missies is a pretty good trade for an AWACS.

[The_Capt]

39 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Thermal imaging systems especially, jet engines have all the same big, hot, signature problems that AFVs do times ten, if not a hundred. Someone is is going to figure out how to find that signal. The other potential game breaker is whether AWACS and similar are survivable. We just put a SM-6 on a fighter plane. The Russians and the Chinese are certainly trying to do the same thing with an S400-S500 class SAM. Can we keep an AWACs alive when an entire squadron fires a S-400s from 250 miles out? Keep in mind that lifting that same missile to 50,000 feet and firing it from a straight and level flight profile is something an unmanned platform can almost certainly do. Send the Straight at the AWACs until they nearly out of fuel, or about to get hit, and then volley the actual missiles. Ten unmanned aircraft, and ten missies is a pretty good trade for an AWACS.

About the only airspace that may still operate like it used to is very high altitude.  The systems to go that high and fast are big and leave a large footprint that SEAD could try and do something about.  So B2s or whatever Tom Cruise was flying basically.  Below that it is going stay weird.

[In Maverick the airplane that could do the mission they spend the entire movie trying to solve for was ironically the one Tom Cruise blew up in the first 10 mins]

Edited July 10 by The_Capt

[keas66]

47 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Thermal imaging systems especially, jet engines have all the same big, hot, signature problems that AFVs do times ten, if not a hundred. Someone is is going to figure out how to find that signal. The other potential game breaker is whether AWACS and similar are survivable. We just put a SM-6 on a fighter plane. The Russians and the Chinese are certainly trying to do the same thing with an S400-S500 class SAM. Can we keep an AWACs alive when an entire squadron fires a S-400s from 250 miles out? Keep in mind that lifting that same missile to 50,000 feet and firing it from a straight and level flight profile is something an unmanned platform can almost certainly do. Send the Straight at the AWACs until they nearly out of fuel, or about to get hit, and then volley the actual missiles. Ten unmanned aircraft, and ten missies is a pretty good trade for an AWACS.

And what makes you think AWACS or Battlefield Sensor views are going to remain stuck at 250miles or whatever the current ranges are  ? Technology will advance in all sectors .

Edited July 10 by keas66

[dan/california]

9 minutes ago, keas66 said:

And what makes you think AWACS or Battlefield Sensor views are going to remain stuck at 250miles or whatever the current ranges are  ? Technology will advance in all sectors .

Line of sight and the curvature of the earth.

[The_Capt]

17 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Line of sight and the curvature of the earth.

Physics is a harsh mistress….

[Haiduk]

On 7/9/2024 at 5:59 PM, Kraft said:

Theres ~3 hours of guaranteed electricity per day in Kyiv, with 60-70% of the infrastructure gone at this point.

No, indeed. Our microdistrict has a shedule 8-9 hours guarantied without electricity, 6 hours guarantied with electricity and rest 9-10 hours are a "grey time", when electricity is mostly present, but in some situations this time can be used for cutting off. For today we had electricity since 9:30 without cut off. 

[Grigb]

Recently, I came upon unofficial Lessons Learned for RU tankers.The most of it was written by Captain Obvious, however there are a few Combat Mission-related sections @Battlefront.com

The document is titled Tips from seasoned tankers from the Union of Tankers of Russia. AFAIK, RU MOD does not conduct studies or analyses (or send them to combat units). So, RU Nat volunteers (like this union) try to fill the void. This is for T-72 tank (all modifications). Dated Feb 2023

Quote

In preparation for battle...

5. If you desire to additionally protect the tank with external body kits, then zinc boxes for small arms ammo are best. It is not recommended to cover [tank] with bags with sand, crushed stone, sawdust. [Otherwise], the first hit can strike the crew, tank desant, damage external devices and increase the possibility of an external tank fire...

6. In the boxes for spare parts on the tank turret, you can pour water, about one-fifth or even one-third of the box. In addition to protection, it can be useful to extingush fires and for personal hygiene;

7 Ammunition is needed in battle, but:

7.1. Remove or do not put the shells in the front fuel tank-ammo rack

7.2. Remove or do not place the shells and charges along the inner sides or along the turret ring. The tank's thinnest armor is located behind the rollers [wheels]. When struck, an explosion effect is guaranteed.

7.3. Load shells into the automatic loader by type, sequentially, one type after another (do not mix different types of shells [They appear to oppose the traditional method of mixed loading to minimize autoloader rotation time]. Using as an example, fighting in Mariupol (April-May 2022), no more than 5 shells were loaded into the conveyor, just enought to complete a specific battle task.

7.4. Shells are selected and placed in the conveyor depending on the upcoming type of battle (city, fortified area, presence of enemy tanks). Standard for T-72B1: 10 rounds of AP, 10 round of HE, 2 rounds of HEAT + one [HEAT] in the barrel. [This loadout contradicts the previous Mariupol example. From other sources, it seems this is theoretical loadout mandated by regulations. Realistic load out is closer to Mariupol example (5-10 rounds in autoloader) just enought to complete one battle task]

While performing a march or during a stop:

16. If possible, position the tank under a tree, preferably a bushy one. The best apple and cherry tree. It has been observed more than once that when an anti-tank round with fins collides with tree branches, it alters the direction of flight...

During the battle:

25. In the open field, tankers often keep the hatches open (slightly open), in the city the hatches are closed. The tank commander can inspect the area through the gap between the hatch and the turret

26. When laying a route in the city, choose the private sector [village type area] or where it is less than fifty meters (>50) from the sides of the tank to the nearest structure... Most RPG grenades do not have enough time to arm at this distance.

33. When fighting in the city, remember that:

33.1 A brick building collapses faster [then panel buildings] from gunfire

33.2. If you were fired from the Khrushchev-Brezhnev type of apartment building

Quote

but you did not determine the exact location, then it is best to hit the stairwell between the floors. [Stairwells in such buildings can be identified by panels located right above the entrance. In essence, he suggests aiming at the window of the stairwell panel located between the floors.] As a result, everything and everyone on two floors will be taken out.

33.3 A sub-caliber projectile [APFSDS] striking the end of a panel building (Brezhnev-Khrushchev type) [picture above] does extensive damage along its path, and from the front, can punch straight through the building. [encourages fire AP rounds at a target deep within the building]

Fun part

Quote

BEAT THE "LEOPARD 2A4" AS THE GRANDFATHER Beat the "TIGERS" and "PANTHERS"

1. TANK SHELLS SUCH AS 35M42 "MANGO" OR 35M59 "SVINETS", SENT DIRECTLY INTO THE SIGHTING COMPLEX, WILL BLIND THE ENEMY AND MAY EVEN HIT THE COMMANDER BEHIND THE ARMOR.
2. ATTACK THE TANK FROM ABOVE FROM A SAFE DISTANCE! THE CREW OF THE LEOPARD SNUGGLED DOWN BETWEEN THE AMMO AND THE FUEL, ADD A SPARK TO THEM.
3. IF YOU HAVE ATGM WITH A PENETRATION ABOVE 500 MM LIKE "KORNET" OR SIMILAR? HIT THE SIDES - ARMOR RESISTANCE IS ONLY 490 MM
4. IS THERE A ROOM FOR MANEUVER? GO AROUND AND USE AN ATGM WITH A 500 MM PENETRATION INTO THE REAR OF THE TANK [engine block]

DID YOU MEET THE TANK HEAD-ON? HIT THEM WITH HEAT ROUNDS OR USE ATGM!

Comment:

• Looks like RU tankers believe Mango or Svinets cannot penetrate the frontal armor of Leo 2A4 (except weak spot)
• ATGMs like Kornet are not very common. RU tankers believe even these missiles struggle to penetrate both frontal and side Leo 2A4 armor (or maybe do not cause enought damage).
• They hint that they see Leo 2A4 as a Wonder tank (Tiger/Panther) that T-72 cannot easily defeat head-on, just as T-34 could not easily defeat head-on Tiger/Panther.

[ArmouredTopHat]

13 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Recently, I came upon unofficial Lessons Learned for RU tankers.The most of it was written by Captain Obvious, however there are a few Combat Mission-related sections @Battlefront.com

The document is titled Tips from seasoned tankers from the Union of Tankers of Russia. AFAIK, RU MOD does not conduct studies or analyses (or send them to combat units). So, RU Nat volunteers (like this union) try to fill the void. This is for T-72 tank (all modifications). Dated Feb 2023

Fun part

Comment:

• Looks like RU tankers believe Mango or Svinets cannot penetrate the frontal armor of Leo 2A4 (except weak spot)
• ATGMs like Kornet are not very common. RU tankers believe even these missiles struggle to penetrate both frontal and side Leo 2A4 armor (or maybe do not cause enought damage).
• They hint that they see Leo 2A4 as a Wonder tank (Tiger/Panther) that T-72 cannot easily defeat head-on, just as T-34 could not easily defeat head-on Tiger/Panther.

This adds to the evidence that Russian dissemination of valuable combat lessons tends to be pretty sporadic, hence why the same consistent mistakes keep being made. The Russians are learning, but not applying it broadly enough for it to properly matter. IE some Russian units learn the right lessons, but the war apparatus fails to spread it around, so other units continue to make the same errors unless volunteers help them out. Second army in the world truly. 


Also hilarious how damn scared the Russians are of the Western MBTs (Probably based on the few encounters they have had, of which we have at least one video of) Also interesting comments about them trying to prevent ammo cookoffs as much as possible with ammunition restrictions. The ATGM comment also tells me that despite how dangerous they are, not even the Russians have enough to liberally cover every area of approach on the front. 

Does the source mention anything of FPVs?

Edited July 10 by ArmouredTopHat

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I would add AirLand Battle and AirSea Battle to that list.  

CAS is looking like 50+ km back, sometimes a couple hundred kms. Air denial is a serious problem.  Even stealth won’t work once someone puts AI image recognition targeting into play - basically an artificial eyeball with enough brain. SEAD and stealth rely heavily on counter-radar.  Radar is still going to be used but it may be a supporting system to autonomous “visual” targeting systems.  That is not 30 years out…it is happening right now.

Maritime warfare is in for major impacts. Autonomous surface vehicles are here and they can carry air sub systems, and subsurface systems. I suspect Blue Water will hold out but Green and Littorals are going to be a hot mess. Sea Control may be next to impossible in some areas, which really breaks things.  And no, USN swatting Houthi UAS are not a sign we are “ok”.

Absolutely.  One can put in cyber/info/PsyOps warfare in there as well, since things like AI and deep fakes are taking things in a decidedly bad direction on that front.

This is the other reason why a focus on tanks, keeping them or getting rid of them, can often miss the point.  Everything has changed, absolutely everything, by the relatively sudden introduction of undermining tech that is both cheap, mass scale, and available (to some extent) to any opposing force of any sort.

As we've said, even if someone can figure out how to keep an MBT alive that doesn't do much if all the fuel ships to keep it going are sunk, the trucks to deliver the fuel are smoking, and the planes doing "just in time" deliveries are scattered over some unlucky patch of ground.

Steve

[Haiduk]

On 7/8/2024 at 9:03 PM, ArmouredTopHat said:

Seems it was not the only medical facility hit in Kyiv today either. 

Initially I thought this was close interception and the building was hit by fragments of the missile. But on next day I've seen this video with this strike. There wasn't interception. This was deliberate strike by Kh-101/Kalibr. What they targeted there? Open subway line? But no. They targeted this area of small clinics and offices.

I've visited a doctor in the small clinic in neighbour building. I went off for 20 minutes before the strike from there. I watied city train in 1 km from there, heard air raid alarm sound (1,5 hours already passed after morning heavy strike) and since 3-4 minutes loud explosion. Before this I read Russian UAV was spotted over northern part of the city and thought this was a missile launch on UAV. But it was a strike. In this clinic "Adonis" were killed 7 people - 5 medics and 2 visitors. Probably somebody was killed or injured on the street - there are many open caffees there.  

Before I've seen this video, I thought Russian strike on Okhmadyt happened because of missile flight programm mistake with coordinates - the building of Infrstructure and Transport Ministry is in 100-150 m from the clinic and was a suitable target, espacially since the missile hit the place on clinic territory almost closest to ministry building, destroying a part of 2-storey building of toxicologic department and unique oncohematologiuacal labioratory for kids treatment, though could hit one of several main clinic buildings.

But after the video on strike on Adonis clinic and what happened on next day - I am sure this were deliberate sanctioned attacks which had to cause not only some victims, but heavily strike on public opinion. And yes - suddenly dozens of our insta-bloggers, with huge auditoiry (in hundred thousands and millions of subscribers) like on command became to post "We need a peace for any coast! We must stop this war immediately! Peace will be our true victory! Enough childen's deaths! Ukraine hasn't a chance to win this war! Our corrupted authorities led us to Paraguay war scenario to last Ukrianian!" (I bet these stupid luxury blondies even don't know where is this Paraguay and about which war they write)

Simultainously army of anonimous bots and MAGA idiots had started a message "Ukraine hit own children hospital with AA-missile and blames Russia!" 

Yes, Russians now more skilled in huge-scale information campaigmns, than in war on the ground.  

Edited July 10 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

Other missile hits in Kyiv

Tall building - I think, it just turned out on the way of missile, which had flight route through it. Despite this several appartments were destroyed, there were killed and wounded.

Old "Khrushchovka" section just collapsed to the ground after direct hit of the missile. At least seven killed here, including three children.

And most painfull look - how six Russian missiles hit military plant Artem one by one. This was already foutrh or fifth attempt, but only now such huge impact.

Total number of dead in Kyiv -34. Today 2 y.o. boy from Okmadyt clinic has died

On this background the report of Air Force command looks very... unrealistic. 

Here their statistic (and strikes were not only on Kyiv in that day - Kruvyiu Rih with 10 killeld and Pavlohrad too)

1 Kinzhal - 1 intercepted

1 Zirkon - not intercepted

4 Iskander-M - 3 intercepted

13 Kh-101 - 11 intercepted (really?)

14 Kalibr - 12 intercepted (really?)

2 Kh-22 - not intercepted (Pavlohrad?)

3 Kh-59/69 - 3 intercepted.

Also there were reports about S-400 fragments indentified in Kyiv, but this wasn't reflected in this report. Either not confirmed, or...

You can see Kyiv was hit at last with 10-11 missiles, but Air Force Command report gives us only 6 "options". Shame. 

Experts found in Kh-101, which hit Okmadyt clinic mucj more western electronic components, than in previous versions. Air Force Command explains own failure, that missiles approached on extreme low altitude, so it was hard to detect them timely. 

Russian Kh-101 fly over Caspian sea to Ukraine

 

Edited July 10 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

Here is interesting audio of radio chat between A-50 and pair of Su-34 or Su-35. It shows importance of A-50 - they rescued two own aircrafts from Patriot launches, spotting the missilies, tracking its course and directing the pilots how to make evasive maneuvers to avoid downing.

I will not tranlate all - just main things

A-50 controls flight of two Su jets. Su crews are reporting about preparing to combat work. Suddenly A-50 operator spots Patriot launches from 80 km from Su pair. He immediatelly denied combat work and ordered to pilots to make intensive evasive maneuvers. Pilots launches chaffs and start maneuvering on 25000 m of altitude with speed 4000 km/h, you can hear heavy breathing of crew, suffering tough overloads. A-50 operator continues to track missiles, transmitting the range and azimuth and warns crews that Patriot radar continues to tarck them. He commands to Su make sharp turn overs. Close to the end it was clear this all happened north of Mariupol. At last missiles exploded behind jets, but on one board explosion likely damged communication system.

So, as you cam see, Patriots are working, but... we have tough and skilled opponents.   

 

Edited July 10 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

John Kirby says that if Poland covers the sky over western Ukraine this is escalation and this is doesn't need neither for Poland, nor for Ukarine.

Donald Tusk - Poland will not shoot down Russian missiles without NATO approval.

I have no censored words. 

Edited July 10 by Haiduk

[FancyCat]

I hope you can be safe Haiduk. 

Quote

 

I held my first meeting with the new UK Prime Minister @Keir_Starmer. I thanked Prime Minister Starmer for all the UK’s military and financial assistance provided to our country. This morning, I learned about the permission to use Storm Shadow missiles against military targets in Russian territory. Today, we had the opportunity to discuss the practical implementation of this decision. I’m grateful to the UK for its unwavering support for Ukraine and our people.

 

 

[Grigb]

1 hour ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

This adds to the evidence that Russian dissemination of valuable combat lessons tends to be pretty sporadic, hence why the same consistent mistakes keep being made. The Russians are learning, but not applying it broadly enough for it to properly matter. IE some Russian units learn the right lessons, but the war apparatus fails to spread it around, so other units continue to make the same errors unless volunteers help them out. Second army in the world truly. 

I even believe that RU MOD intentionaly blocks any systematic analysis in order to keep both fighting units and the general public from discovering the overal picture and panicking. 

Even this report paints a depressing picture of T-72's prospects versus Leo 2A4. And 2A4 is not the newest Leo.

 

1 hour ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

The ATGM comment also tells me that despite how dangerous they are, not even the Russians have enough to liberally cover every area of approach on the front. 

Personally, I believe RU has considerably less ATGM launchers than expected per kilometer of frontline.

 

1 hour ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

Does the source mention anything of FPVs?

No. It appears to be based on pre-FPV experience.

 

[cesmonkey]

https://t.me/DeepStateUA/19861
 

Quote

 The enemy is trying to gain a foothold in Novoselivka First and take full control of Yevhenivka

Today is another difficult day at the site. Katsaps from the east and north are trying to enter Novoselivka Persha. The situation is also difficult on the outskirts of Yevhenivka, where the enemy carried out assaults with the aim of displacing the Defense Forces from the village and surrounding settlements. The situation near the last village is being clarified.

deepstatemap.live/#13/48.1965911/37.5230326

 

[Haiduk]

Russian TG about "Birds of Magyar" pilots (translated)

[The_Capt]

22 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Russian TG about "Birds of Magyar" pilots (translated)

Welcome the future.

Able to chase individual soldiers into a drain pipe 15kms away.  At this rate I am not sure if Infantry are still viable, let alone freakin tanks.

Edited July 10 by The_Capt

[A Canadian Cat]

On 7/9/2024 at 1:20 PM, The_Capt said:

This really smacks of keeping the boss isolated from the truth.  I am betting Putin has no idea how bad things are for the RA as reports get scrubbed and spun up the chain.  Hell, his generals might not even know.  

That is entirely possible, likely even. The letter from Orban reads like simple Russian propaganda though. If Putin knows the true situation or not the letter Orban writes is the same - Russia winning Ukraine loosing stop backing the looser. Oban is may or not be an idiot but he is just being useful to Putin. No need to ready more than that into it.

[A Canadian Cat]

On 7/7/2024 at 10:07 AM, Battlefront.com said:

citing frontline reports, from both sides, about how dangerous it is to be a drone operator these days.  IIRC it was a Russian source that said they have to remain mobile and move after each mission or they'll eat an artillery shell.

Agreed. The operators may already be doing what I would suggest: broadcast from antennas that are on nice long cords so anyone successfully following the signals will just blow up some gear. 

Heck they could even have multiple antennas and if one gets hit pull out the next one. Or better yet when you bug out just leave it and setup in another location with antenna #2. Later send someone back for antenna #1, if its still there great use it for the next new location. You can even have it pre setup in the new location. The operators are only down for their travel time.

[ArmouredTopHat]

55 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Welcome the future.

Able to chase individual soldiers into a drain pipe 15kms away.  At this rate I am not sure if Infantry are still viable, let alone freakin tanks.

We need to bear in mind that a complaint about someone's experience might not be reflective of what is happening overall. There are simply not enough FPVs to hunt every soldier on the battlefield (even if it might seem so for a squad receiving focussed attention from a skilled FPV team) . Nor is every vehicle in that 15km zone is being destroyed (though its a steady trickle)

FPVs are certainly very much out there in terms of a distinctive weapon system, but I do wonder if they are actually doing most of the killing when both sides are still throwing a lot of artillery still at one another, let alone other weapons. Artillery from what I last read still seems to be doing most of the killing. (Im not sure if glide bombs count together with that)