How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[keas66]

This forum continues to dive off the deep end into "Future War 2.0"  , meanwhile I'm reading stuff on Sarcastosaurus about major problems in  both the  Ukrainian  High Command and the degrading  Ukraine ADS capabilities that Russian seems to be walking all over right now   . Anyone have any opinions on actual stuff happening right now in the Ukraine instead of these endless Tank versus Drone wars ?

[Haiduk]

Captured Russian orcs

This one orc hasn't been captured yet

 

[ArmouredTopHat]

10 minutes ago, keas66 said:

This forum continues to dive off the deep end into "Future War 2.0"  , meanwhile I'm reading stuff on Sarcastosaurus about major problems in  both the  Ukrainian  High Command and the degrading  Ukraine ADS capabilities that Russian seems to be walking all over right now   . Anyone have any opinions on actual stuff happening right now in the Ukraine instead of these endless Tank versus Drone wars ?

I did post a recent thread that shows the Russians continue to have pretty big issues as well. As it stands the Russians continue to be unable to make anything more than tactical gains at immense costs, so I think the day is not as bleak as some might think. 

Glide bombs remain one of the biggest issues that needs to be worked on, which hopefully all this patriot discussion currently ongoing might help. (Alongside greater interdiction of UAVs)

 

Edited July 12 by ArmouredTopHat

[ArmouredTopHat]

21 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I disagree.  Please re-read my analysis again.  Defensive systems can no longer be rated on a per-shot basis.  It has to be rated per-attack, with the attack potentially consisting of dozens of individual "shots".

I'll illustrate this a bit clearer using Chobham and ERA.

Since WW2 it has been known that the tank that gets off the first shot has a huge advantage.  The point of Chobham and ERA, as well as other systems, was to buy a tank a "second chance" in the event that the enemy got off the first shot.   A huge assumption was made that the MBT would identify what shot at them and respond with a one-shot-one-kill gun system.  This then removes the threat of a second attack.  Maneuver would also be an appropriate response as would calling in for support.  The CRITICAL point here is that all of this was designed to survive ONE attack.

APS works under exactly the same presumptions.

The problem with things like UAS is that even the first shot has a pretty good chance of killing no matter what the defenses are.  But even if that isn't the case, the UAS may come with friends and that means instead of having to defend against *ONE* hit, the MBT now has to be concerned about potentially 10s of hits before it is able to respond.  And then there's the other rub... respond against what, exactly?  Nothing.  There is nothing a MBT can do to counter a threat that is not within LOS.  Maneuver also means nothing because the MBT can move all it wants and the UAS will most likely find it.

Now on top of that we still have the cost disparage where an already super expensive and unsustainable platform is now slated to be even more expensive and unsustainable.  Which is an argument to drop APS even if it were more effective.

As always, this returns us to TheTankIsDead™ discussion which we should probably avoid

Steve

A fair point, I think we can leave it at that to avoid us jamming up the conversation again. xD

What did you think about the dazzler stuff? Seems a potentially very useful way to disrupt drones without using up an entire chassis or expensive munitions. 

https://eos-aus.com/news/eos-showcases-latest-innovation-for-countering-air-and-seaborne-threats/

[Haiduk]

Zakharova made a statement, that "Kiev regime prepares destruction of the dams of Kiev and Kanev reservoirs - this will become one more cynical provocation against Russia"

 

I wonder if this is not blackmail, what they could use even to breach a hole in the dam? Kh-22 in theory can reach Kyivan hydroenergy plant dam, but I doubt it can cause crirtical damage to ruin it. Kaniv dam... maybe Kinhzal? Inner explosion like in Kakhovka is impossible.  

Here is hypothetical level of water along the city if dam broken

Kyiv hydroebergy plant dam. Ity not so wide like in Kakhovka

Edited July 12 by Haiduk

[ArmouredTopHat]

1 minute ago, Haiduk said:

Zakharova made a statement, that "Kiev regime prepares destruction of the dams of Kiev and Kanev reservoirs - this will become one more cynical provocation against Russia"

 

I wonder if this is not blackmail, what they could use even to breach a hole in the dam? Kh-22 in theory can reach Kyivan hydroenergy plant dam, but I doubt it can cause crirtical damage to ruin it. Kaniv dam... maybe Kinhzal? Inner explosion like in Kakhovka is impossible.  

In hypothetical case of dam collapsing left bank and part of right bank of the city will sink  

 

The irony of Russia complaining about dam destruction is truly something. 

[kimbosbread]

10 minutes ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

What did you think about the dazzler stuff? Seems a potentially very useful way to disrupt drones without using up an entire chassis or expensive munitions. 

I’d put Dazzlers in the same bucket as directed EW: Useful, but I’m not sure if they matter much if an autonomous drone is on final approach. I’d say they are very useful against FPVs and recon drones if you can hit them from 500m away.

The big problem is detection of drones, which we’ve beaten to death already.

[Battlefront.com]

8 minutes ago, kimbosbread said:

I’d put Dazzlers in the same bucket as directed EW: Useful, but I’m not sure if they matter much if an autonomous drone is on final approach. I’d say they are very useful against FPVs and recon drones if you can hit them from 500m away.

The big problem is detection of drones, which we’ve beaten to death already.

Dazzlers against COTS unmanned systems may have some use, but the counters don't seem to be that difficult to work into a military grade one:

Countermeasures

One defense against laser dazzlers are narrowband optical filters tuned to the frequency of the laser. To counter such defense, dazzlers can employ emitters using more than one wavelength, or tunable lasers with wider range of output.^[14] Another defense is photochromic materials able to become opaque under high light energy densities. Nonlinear optics techniques are being investigated: e.g. vanadium-doped zinc telluride (V:ZnTe) can be used to form electro-optic power limiters able to selectively block the intense dazzler beam without affecting weaker light from an observed scene.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzler_(weapon)

---

More problematic is the dazzler needs to know when to set itself off.  This is normally done when laser light paints a passive sensor on the vehicle, thus triggering the dazzler.  This means to defend against anything else you have to have active sensors (radar), which is a big issue that isn't easily worked around. 

So I'd put this one in the "not likely to work in practice" category.

Steve

 

[Battlefront.com]

46 minutes ago, keas66 said:

This forum continues to dive off the deep end into "Future War 2.0"  , meanwhile I'm reading stuff on Sarcastosaurus about major problems in  both the  Ukrainian  High Command and the degrading  Ukraine ADS capabilities that Russian seems to be walking all over right now   . Anyone have any opinions on actual stuff happening right now in the Ukraine instead of these endless Tank versus Drone wars ?

We have covered this, but frankly there isn't all that much to discuss.  Ukraine is running down its air defense capabilities defeating these endless drone attacks, Russia is getting better at exploiting limitations, and the West is now (belatedly) stepping up deliveries of Patriot and other defense systems as a response.  So hopefully we will see the tide shift more favorably for Ukraine somewhat soon.

Ukraine's main challenge continues to be force regeneration.  Again, there's not much new on that front.

Russia is making incremental gains in a few axis, though at significant cost.  Russia has its own manpower and resource problems.  cesmonkey just posted a Mashovets update:

Steve

[The_Capt]

Ya, ISW is mostly reporting political strategic stuff.  The lines seem pretty static:

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-11-2024

Unless anyone else has new intel? Tank v Drones is really just a time filler. We could talk about politics…whoops probably a bad idea.  

How about dames….love them dames.

[ArmouredTopHat]

35 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

We have covered this, but frankly there isn't all that much to discuss.  Ukraine is running down its air defense capabilities defeating these endless drone attacks, Russia is getting better at exploiting limitations, and the West is now (belatedly) stepping up deliveries of Patriot and other defense systems as a response.  So hopefully we will see the tide shift more favorably for Ukraine somewhat soon.

Ukraine's main challenge continues to be force regeneration.  Again, there's not much new on that front.

Russia is making incremental gains in a few axis, though at significant cost.  Russia has its own manpower and resource problems.  cesmonkey just posted a Mashovets update:

Steve

What do you think about the notion that the Kharkiv axis push is the Russian summer offensive we were concerned about? If it is then Russian capability for offensive action has potentially already reached its high water mark and its downhill from here...

[Haiduk]

Good material for "what if" scenario....

Prime-minister of Netherland Dick Schoof told in intrview his country considered the variant of special forces incursion to MH17 crash site in 2014. Australian SOF also arrived to Netherland and trained together with Netherlandian counterparts. Despite many representatives of government were ready to take responsibility for this operation, no decision was made.

The article in Dutch.

https://nos.nl/nieuwsuur/artikel/2528617-waarom-nederland-rusland-uit-de-wind-hield-kort-na-de-ramp-met-vlucht-mh17

 

[Sojourner]

12 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

How about dames….love them dames.

Careful there, you're starting to sound like a certain orange stain on the American political scene.

[ArmouredTopHat]

There has been an upsurge from Rus propagandists about how increasingly frustrated they are with the war effort at least. I think some of them might be realising that time is not on their side. 

Edited July 12 by ArmouredTopHat

[Battlefront.com]

17 minutes ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

What do you think about the notion that the Kharkiv axis push is the Russian summer offensive we were concerned about? If it is then Russian capability for offensive action has potentially already reached its high water mark and its downhill from here...

The general assessment I've seen is:

1.  Russia's motivations for launching the attack were likely many, as is the usual way of Russian ops.

2.  The primary military goal likely was to thin Ukraine's lines in the Donbas to allow significant advances.

3.  The primary political goal was, quite obviously, designed to show the West and Ukraine that Russia as being no where close to defeat while also showing Ukraine to be at the end of the line.

4.  The primary domestic goal was to give the message to

For sure Russia did interrupt some unit reconstitution/rest and it did require Ukraine to pull some forces out of the Donbas.  However, not very much and definitely not enough to change the strategic picture.  So this is a case of technical success (i.e. getting the enemy to do what you wanted) without much tangible success (i.e. achieving stated military objectives).

The primary political goal worked only for a few days and then it went in the opposite direction when the Russian forces were ground to a pulp despite all of the Russian advantages.  So I'd call this a failure, even if defeatism got a shot in the arm (we had our incident with Zeleban at that time)

The domestic goal... I don't know.  Certainly they had all kinds of propaganda benefit from the initial assault, but the Russian public doesn't seem to keen to follow up.  So I don't think this will change much either way.

Aside from that, Russia burned up a lot of men and equipment for the above and there's no way for us to assess if it was worth it from the Russian perspective.

Steve

[dan/california]

13 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

The general assessment I've seen is:

1.  Russia's motivations for launching the attack were likely many, as is the usual way of Russian ops.

2.  The primary military goal likely was to thin Ukraine's lines in the Donbas to allow significant advances.

3.  The primary political goal was, quite obviously, designed to show the West and Ukraine that Russia as being no where close to defeat while also showing Ukraine to be at the end of the line.

4.  The primary domestic goal was to give the message to

For sure Russia did interrupt some unit reconstitution/rest and it did require Ukraine to pull some forces out of the Donbas.  However, not very much and definitely not enough to change the strategic picture.  So this is a case of technical success (i.e. getting the enemy to do what you wanted) without much tangible success (i.e. achieving stated military objectives).

The primary political goal worked only for a few days and then it went in the opposite direction when the Russian forces were ground to a pulp despite all of the Russian advantages.  So I'd call this a failure, even if defeatism got a shot in the arm (we had our incident with Zeleban at that time)

The domestic goal... I don't know.  Certainly they had all kinds of propaganda benefit from the initial assault, but the Russian public doesn't seem to keen to follow up.  So I don't think this will change much either way.

Aside from that, Russia burned up a lot of men and equipment for the above and there's no way for us to assess if it was worth it from the Russian perspective.

Steve

The other thing the Russians wanted, but did not get, was to get in 152mm range of Kharkiv. That would have allowed them to make life unlivable there far more cheaply. 

[TheVulture]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn09234xxn1o

Quote

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski has said Warsaw is considering a proposal from Kyiv to shoot down Russian missiles heading towards Polish territory while they are still in Ukrainian airspace.

The proposal was included in a joint defence agreement between the two countries signed during President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to Warsaw earlier this week.

"At this stage, this is an idea. What our agreement said is we will explore this idea,” Mr Sikorski told the American Enterprise Institute in Washington.

He said some Russian missiles fired from the St Petersburg area towards Ukrainian targets near the western city of Lviv, not far from the Polish border, traversed Belarus and entered Polish airspace for about 40 seconds before turning towards their targets in Ukraine.

 

[ArmouredTopHat]

6 minutes ago, dan/california said:

The other thing the Russians wanted, but did not get, was to get in 152mm range of Kharkiv. That would have allowed them to make life unlivable there far more cheaply. 

I honestly think that achieving this in some form was the goal, it certainly did force Ukraine to move units to prevent it as it is such an important city for them right now. We know the Russians will happily level cities if they are in artillery range. 

Edited July 12 by ArmouredTopHat

[sburke]

2 minutes ago, TheVulture said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn09234xxn1o

 

Err is he thinking they will turn around while over Ukraine and head back towards Poland or is that a translation issue in that they will shoot down those missiles during that 40 second interval?

[dan/california]

17 minutes ago, sburke said:

Err is he thinking they will turn around while over Ukraine and head back towards Poland or is that a translation issue in that they will shoot down those missiles during that 40 second interval?

Whatever they are actually saying, they seem to implying that they will basically provide air defense for the westernmost parts of Ukraine. This would obviously have the effect of freeing up a lot of Ukrainian systems for use elsewhere.

Edit: Maybe, i don't think this is a done deal.

Edited July 12 by dan/california

[Haiduk]

This night Russians tried to hit Starokostiantyniv airfield in Khmelnytskyi oblast. All five Kh-101 missiles and 11 from 19 Shakheds were shot down. The missiles were intercepted in Sumy, Cherkasy and Khmelnitskyi oblast, i.e. with support of fighter jets.

Air Force Command claimed rest 8 Shakheds were "lost" - probably these were empty drones to distract AD systems, because there are no reports about these drones hit any objects. In this time, probably it's true, because no alarming reports and footages in social media

Except probably upgraded Kh-101 missiles, Russians became to use new airstrike tactic. They take-off one or two Tu-95 from Dyagilevo airbase (closest to Ukrainian border) like usual day routine flight, but in this time launch several missiles. Two days ago in this way 4 Kh-101 were launched on Poltava. It's known some industriual object was hit with at least one missile. 

Edited July 12 by Haiduk

[cesmonkey]

Update from Oleksandr Syrskyi:
https://t.me/osirskiy/761
 

Quote

The other day, he worked in one of the training centers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, where testing (experimental tests) of various forms of integrated application of ground and air robotic and unmanned systems in real combat conditions are ongoing. This is a very important project and we have the first successes in its implementation.

One of the features of modern warfare is the active use of robotic and unmanned systems in the order of battle of a combined military unit with the sole purpose of ensuring the withdrawal of personnel from the most dangerous areas and their replacement by robots.

My highest priority is the rapid fielding of innovative ground- and air-based combat unmanned and robotic platforms in the military.

Together with the team of the #Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, we are making maximum efforts to prepare system solutions for the effective use of a wide range of robotic platforms.

Our goal is to shorten as much as possible the path taken by the technical invention (innovative idea) of scientists from the laboratory to the production workshop and further to the combat unit.

Thanks to everyone, from development engineers, manufacturers to pilot operators, for their contribution to increasing the combat effectiveness of our units.

The next step is to work out the tactics of using combat ground robotic complexes, prepare calculations and scale NRK units in combat units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, work out techniques and methods of action of unmanned systems in various types of combat.

 

Edited July 12 by cesmonkey

[Letter from Prague]

2 hours ago, keas66 said:

This forum continues to dive off the deep end into "Future War 2.0"  , meanwhile I'm reading stuff on Sarcastosaurus about major problems in  both the  Ukrainian  High Command and the degrading  Ukraine ADS capabilities that Russian seems to be walking all over right now   . Anyone have any opinions on actual stuff happening right now in the Ukraine instead of these endless Tank versus Drone wars ?

I mean realistically, Russia and Ukraine are both unlikely to collapse this year, so the war is going to be decided by who wins the next US elections. We have nigh certainty of how that's going to go, and my heart breaks for Ukraine (and Taiwan) but discussing it here again again is not really worth it.

The discussion of how tank is dead is at least interesting, even if somewhat circular.

[ArmouredTopHat]

I swear these sorts of messages are getting more common.
 

 

[danfrodo]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Ya, ISW is mostly reporting political strategic stuff.  The lines seem pretty static:

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-11-2024

Unless anyone else has new intel? Tank v Drones is really just a time filler. We could talk about politics…whoops probably a bad idea.  

How about dames….love them dames.

I have a theory that TheCapt engages so heavily on this forum because it helps him prep for many of the arguments he's likely to see in his real job.  We're like Enders Game opponents where he's actually figuring out how to win in meetings.

Politics?  I go back to my theory that we're in the Second Age of Fascism.  Only question is whether we are at start, middle or end of this age.  In the US a whole lot of the electorate is gleefully marching in that direction.  

Meanwhile, for every bit of good news for UKR there's some other less good news.  But at least the Kharkiv offensive looks to have been an epic disaster -- massive losses for not even tactically useful gains.