How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Battlefront.com]

36 minutes ago, dan/california said:

 

I thought it looked more like a TOS-1, or the reload vehicle for same. Both the TOS-1 and the heavy mortars seem to be very high priority targets for the entire Ukrainian military.

Nah, definitely a SPG.  What you saw from the drone was a turtle cage that made it look square.  The Russian footage clearly shows it was a turreted SPG.  You can see the remains of the gun sitting inside the turret ring.  I'll take their word for it that it's a 2S9 Nona-S since that's what it looks to be, but I'm not good with the finer details of these vehicles,.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, MikeyD said:

On the topic of M113, Bradley, and expanding production lets remember the Bradley-based M113 replacement the... (let me double-check the name) M1283 AMPV. Army plans for 3,000 vehicles over the next 20 years. I don't think I can say the design has been streamlined for most efficient production but at lest its not Bradley.

Thanks for posting this!  Although it wasn't intended to serve the function of battlefield taxi, it certainly could.  And at roughly $1m each, they are a LOT less expensive than a Bradley.   Which underscores my point that offering top protection for infantry can be achieved far less expensively if the expensive weapons systems are dropped.

Steve

[ArmouredTopHat]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Thanks for posting this!  Although it wasn't intended to serve the function of battlefield taxi, it certainly could.  And at roughly $1m each, they are a LOT less expensive than a Bradley.   Which underscores my point that offering top protection for infantry can be achieved far less expensively if the expensive weapons systems are dropped.

Steve

To be clear, I never refuted that point. I was trying to say you really need both!

M1283s are literally meant to replace M113s in the APC role (which has long been overdue due to the protection on M113 being pretty much rated for shrapnel only without add on kits) I imagine that cheaper cost is due primarily due to the fact  the US wants to replace their whole fleet of M113s. Reminds me to look up how good the specs are for the new platform. 

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

To be clear, I never refuted that point. I was trying to say you really need both!

Yup, and I will keep saying that's not correct.  The need is for protecting infantry and providing support.  There are better, more flexible, and vastly more cost effective ways of providing support.  Not so much for providing protection.

1 hour ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

M1283s are literally meant to replace M113s in the APC role (which has long been overdue due to the protection on M113 being pretty much rated for shrapnel only without add on kits) I imagine that cheaper cost is due primarily due to the fact  the US wants to replace their whole fleet of M113s. Reminds me to look up how good the specs are for the new platform. 

It's cheaper because it doesn't have a large turret with a big cannon, tons of super expensive subsystems, and TOW launchers. 

Steve

[Vanir Ausf B]

A report on how the 155mm shell shortage came about and continuing difficulties.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/ukraine-crisis-artillery/

_____

In a forest in western Poland, a complex on the same site where a factory was built by Nazi German occupiers to support an invasion of the Soviet Union now makes thousands of tons of TNT every year. The problem for Ukraine is that the factory, located near the city of Bydgoszcz, is the last surviving TNT plant in Europe or North America.

Workers there now work around the clock. It’s run by a state-owned company, Nitro-Chem, and makes about 10,000 tons of TNT per year. The company declined to say exactly how much. A single 155mm round typically requires about 10 kg of TNT. That means that the 10,000 tons of TNT would be enough to provide for about 1 million rounds, if every bit were used for 155mm shells.

Besides the plant in Poland, production of TNT is now concentrated in China and India. Customs records examined by Reuters show at least 1,200 tons of TNT were exported from India in 2023 and 2024 to arms makers that supply Western forces. India also shipped large volumes of the explosive fillers RDX and HMX to Poland’s Nitro-Chem.

But both India and China also have tried to maintain good relations with Russia. And neither likely would be able to fill NATO’s needs, even if willing. “You cannot imagine just how overheated the market is at the moment,” said a European defense industry executive. “The worst thing at the moment is the global shortage of TNT and RDX. The shortage of these raw materials is the basic reason why production cannot be ramped up much more at this point.”

[dan/california]

 

Quote

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holston_Army_Ammunition_Plant

Capabilities of the plant include: production and development of insensitive munitions explosives; synthesis and manufacture of high explosives; recrystallization and purification from organic solvents; melt-cast, cast-cured, pressed and extruded explosives formulation; explosives performance testing; full-spectrum explosives research and development capability; and custom and fine chemical manufacture for the defense industry. 

 

I fully agree that Western explosives and munitions production needs to be expanded, quite possibly a by factor of ten. Having said that, one of the reasons TNT production is declining is that it it not the first choice for many applications any more. I did read that they were starting to make some propellant charges with a TNT blend because they maxed out on the newer formula.

[Vanir Ausf B]

38 minutes ago, dan/california said:

I did read that they were starting to make some propellant charges with a TNT blend because they maxed out on the newer formula.

IMX-101, or something else?

From the linked report:

Decades later, in 2014, the Army began trying to transition away from TNT to a different explosive compound called IMX-101. At the time, the Army said IMX-101 was more environmentally friendly and less vulnerable to detonation by accident or terrorist attack.

But Reuters learned that last summer, about 17 months into the war in Ukraine, the Army quietly switched back to TNT for cost and efficiency reasons.

 

[dan/california]

54 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

IMX-101, or something else?

From the linked report:

Decades later, in 2014, the Army began trying to transition away from TNT to a different explosive compound called IMX-101. At the time, the Army said IMX-101 was more environmentally friendly and less vulnerable to detonation by accident or terrorist attack.

But Reuters learned that last summer, about 17 months into the war in Ukraine, the Army quietly switched back to TNT for cost and efficiency reasons.

 

Probably, I distinctly remember a video where someone said that switching back to the TNT based propellant significantly increased the degree of caution required in manufacturing and handling. Given the overall level of demand now I would assume they are making as much as they physically can of both.

[cesmonkey]

 

[cesmonkey]

Mashovets today:
https://t.me/zvizdecmanhustu/2047
 

Quote

The famous proverb that...

"An extra straw breaks a camel's back"...
will obviously become very relevant this fall...

The only question is how to determine the very moment of placing this "straw" on the same spine... and, of course, in the very process of "harvesting straw"...
The "struggle" of reserves is intensifying...

 

[cesmonkey]

 

[ArmouredTopHat]

pretty big strike this morning 

[The_Capt]

Is it me, or is there a slight tonal change in the wind:

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky reiterated the importance of developing an international consensus for pursuing peace negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. Zelensky stated during an interview with the BBC published on July 18 that the world needs to develop a united consensus on a possible end state for the war in Ukraine and present this consensus to Russia in order to encourage Russia to come to the negotiating table.[1] Zelensky added that diplomacy will be an important element of restoring Ukraine's territorial integrity and that Ukraine does not necessarily need to liberate all of its territory "by force" but must significantly weaken Russia's battlefield position in order to develop a stronger negotiating position for future peace negotiations. Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have consistently presented their vision for a negotiated settlement for the war in Ukraine, which includes the restoration of Ukraine's territorial integrity and long-term security guarantees for Ukraine's sovereignty and national security against future aggression.[2] Ukrainian officials have not articulated a willingness to concede territory to Russia in exchange for peace, and Zelensky's statements are consistent with this position.[3] Ukrainian officials continue to signal their willingness to participate in good faith peace negotiations with Russian representatives based on Ukrainian sovereignty, territorial integrity, and international law, and Kremlin officials continue to frame such negotiations as outlandish and an "ultimatum" and call for a settlement tantamount to Ukrainian surrender.[4]

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-19-2024

[Vanir Ausf B]

6 hours ago, dan/california said:

Probably, I distinctly remember a video where someone said that switching back to the TNT based propellant significantly increased the degree of caution required in manufacturing and handling. Given the overall level of demand now I would assume they are making as much as they physically can of both.

You would think, but the report says the IMX-101 plant has been mothballed.

In a statement to Reuters, the Army confirmed for the first time publicly that “the plan changed” and it stopped producing IMX-101 for the 155mm shell last July.

Army procurement official Bush said the unused IMX facility is an “insurance policy,” adding, “We’re going to use it at some point.”

[The Steppenwulf]

3 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Is it me, or is there a slight tonal change in the wind:

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky reiterated the importance of developing an international consensus for pursuing peace negotiations to end the war in Ukraine.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-19-2024

It's interesting! 

The backdrop to this, is that continued US support for Ukraine could well be destined for curtailment. That threat is underlined by Zelensky's one to one conversation with Trump yesterday, where clearly he needs to establish a positive dialogue with a possible new administration which has spoken in terms that are not good news for Ukraine.

As we all know, the weakness in the MAGA position on Ukraine is that a Trump brokered 'peace deal' with Putin won't be achieved with any significant concessions by Putin. Trump may well think he can bully Putin into something conciliatory but it's unlikely, and Zelensky certainly believes that it won't happen. 

So I read here that Zelensky is playing a rather clever ante (but one with which we are somewhat familiar). That it's Russian intransigence that prevents successful negotiation not Ukrainian. If Ukraine enters negotiations in good faith and reasonableness and they fail, then it's because Russia lacked good intentions, is unreasonable with its demands and a sustainable settlement is just not viable. That is because throwing Ukraine under a bus altogether (i.e. cutting support in absence of settlement) could never be a good political move for the US, because of the far reaching geo-political implications.

If this above were the scenario in an hypothetical autumn negotiation, where Putin does not play ball (and both we and Zelensky don't think he will) would a Trump administration find it genuinely politically viable (domestically or internationally) to cut-off support as they aim for? I'd suggest the US will only withdraw assistance if a sustainable settlement can be found.

In summary, Zelensky understands very well that he can exploit Putin's intransigence over terms of any negotiated settlement and he will play this over and over again to prevent the US disengaging from this war. Therefore Zelensky is outlining this here very clearly, so no one can mistake where the fault lines lay in any prospective negotiation.      

Edited July 20 by The Steppenwulf

[The_Capt]

9 minutes ago, The Steppenwulf said:

It's interesting! 

The backdrop to this, is that continued US support for Ukraine could well be destined for curtailment. That threat is underlined by Zelensky's one to one conversation with Trump yesterday, where clearly he needs to establish a positive dialogue with a possible new administration which has spoken in terms that are not good news for Ukraine.

As we all know, the weakness in the MAGA position on Ukraine is that a Trump brokered 'peace deal' with Putin won't be achieved with any significant concessions by Putin. Trump may well think he can bully Putin into something conciliatory but it's unlikely, and Zelensky certainly believes that it won't happen. 

So I read here that Zelensky is playing a rather clever ante (but one with which we are somewhat familiar). That it's Russian intransigence that prevents successful negotiation not Ukrainian. If Ukraine enters negotiations in good faith and reasonableness and they fail, then it's because Russia lacked good intentions, is unreasonable with its demands and a sustainable settlement is just not viable. That is because throwing Ukraine under a bus altogether (i.e. cutting support in absence of settlement) could never be a good political move for the US, because of the far reaching geo-political implications.

If this above were the scenario in an hypothetical autumn negotiation, where Putin does not play ball (and both we and Zelensky don't think he will) would a Trump administration find it genuinely politically viable (domestically or internationally) to cut-off support as they aim for? I'd suggest the US will only withdraw assistance if a sustainable settlement can be found.

In summary, Zelensky understands very well that he can exploit Putin's intransigence over terms of any negotiated settlement and he will play this over and over again to prevent the US disengaging from this war. Therefore Zelensky is outlining this here very clearly, so no one can mistake where the fault lines lay in any prospective negotiation.      

The fundamental problem with the Republicans right now is that their entire position is built on “the opposite of whatever the other team is doing/saying/believing”.  They have not been able to articulate clear policy positions or platforms beyond “they are wrong and we will do the opposite…and everything will be wonderful.”  So with respect to Ukraine: Dems support = we don’t, or at least as much or for the same ends.  This is not a good nor professional way to do business.  What are the strategic ends the Republicans seek with respect to Ukraine?  What is their vision for European security?  How do they see a road to security post-war?  How do they plan to handle Russia and the Putin regime?  

Simply declaring that whatever the other side is doing is “wrong” does not actually chart political courses. Frankly we saw this on the last iteration, the pandemic just heightened the effects, and we see no indication this iteration will be any better.  If the US remains internally obsessed then the other power poles will recover and work to steal our lunches…again.

[Haiduk]

The Eagles are coming! 

Russian assault group bursted into UKR position and blocked in blindage UKR group of rifle battalion of 115th mech.brigade, attached to 63rd mech.brigade (don't ask me why). UKR FPVs came and eliminated Russians. UKR group counter-attacked and cleaned the trench from remains of Russians

 

Edited July 20 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

Several says ago UKR drones struck on of crucial power substations in Rostov oblast, huge disturbance in power grid caused emergency halting of Rostov nuclear plant, whih in own turn caused failure of one of generators and as claimed some Russian sources radionuclides leaking 

About 5 millions of people in southern regions of Russia, including Crimea now have severe limitations of electricity. Some urban quarters have no power three days so far. South of Russia also suffers from abnormal heat, so increaced load caused chains of smaller failures on substations, especially in Crimea. 

In some regions of Russia, for example in Anapa, Krasnodar, Bataisk people, sitting several days without electricity came on the streets and blocked roads, demanding to give them electricity and introduce fair power supply shedules

Interesting, that yeasterady Putin expalined problems with electicity by... working of cryptominers, "who overloaded the system in this hot wether"

Other probably diversion - water feeding of so called DNR by "Don - Donbas" canal, building by occupants almost halted. Reportedly somebody shut up the pipe damper and broke the wheel, opening this damper. As result the pipe was broken due to water hammer and feeding of water was stopped. 

 

[The Steppenwulf]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

The fundamental problem with the Republicans right now is that their entire position is built on “the opposite of whatever the other team is doing/saying/believing”.  They have not been able to articulate clear policy positions or platforms beyond “they are wrong and we will do the opposite…and everything will be wonderful.”  So with respect to Ukraine: Dems support = we don’t, or at least as much or for the same ends.  This is not a good nor professional way to do business.  What are the strategic ends the Republicans seek with respect to Ukraine?  What is their vision for European security?  How do they see a road to security post-war?  How do they plan to handle Russia and the Putin regime?  

Simply declaring that whatever the other side is doing is “wrong” does not actually chart political courses. Frankly we saw this on the last iteration, the pandemic just heightened the effects, and we see no indication this iteration will be any better.  If the US remains internally obsessed then the other power poles will recover and work to steal our lunches…again.

This is quite true of course. But let's not overlook that this nebulosity is largely explained by election campaigning. A phenomena not exclusive to the US, as it also strongly characterised the recent UK elections over economic policy and EU relations. So much so that the UK press repeatedly challenged the lack of honesty of all the main parties' respective manifesto positions. And manifesto commitments in UK politics are arguably more detailed and indelible than their US party platform equivalent/s.

Nevertheless, is it not the case that once in govt, reality bites? Whatever is considered, suggested or indicated during campaigning, hits hard tarmac once it actually lands. That is govt, but due to the nature of how US administration is structured it's much more prevalent as the default character. 

And with specific regard to the Republican party presently, let's look back to Trump's first round out in the Whitehouse and consider the disconnect between his election rhetoric and actual policy implementation. Nebulous rhetoric is one thing, Realpolitik another.

Edited July 20 by The Steppenwulf

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

 This is not a good nor professional way to do business.

A truly masterful understatement.

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

Several says ago UKR drones struck on of crucial power substations in Rostov oblast, huge disturbance in power grid caused emergency halting of Rostov nuclear plant, whih in own turn caused failure of one of generators and as claimed some Russian sources radionuclides leaking 

About 5 millions of people in southern regions of Russia, including Crimea now have severe limitations of electricity. Some urban quarters have no power three days so far. South of Russia also suffers from abnormal heat, so increaced load caused chains of smaller failures on substations, especially in Crimea. 

In some regions of Russia, for example in Anapa, Krasnodar, Bataisk people, sitting several days without electricity came on the streets and blocked roads, demanding to give them electricity and introduce fair power supply shedules

Interesting, that yeasterady Putin expalined problems with electicity by... working of cryptominers, "who overloaded the system in this hot wether"

Other probably diversion - water feeding of so called DNR by "Don - Donbas" canal, building by occupants almost halted. Reportedly somebody shut up the pipe damper and broke the wheel, opening this damper. As result the pipe was broken due to water hammer and feeding of water was stopped. 

 

Ukraine seems to be trying both the carrot, and the stick to get Putin to the negotiating table in a somewhat reasonable mood. They are both signaling a somewhat softer opening position, and demonstrating that they can make their strategic strike campaign significantly more painful than it has been so far.

[kimbosbread]

Ukraine just needs to play defense and hit Russian strategic assets. Keeping on destroying substations, oil storage and refineries. That is the path to Russia giving in or collapsing.

The sad part is demographically Ukraine is as screwed as Russia. Many of those who left likely won’t go back, especially young people.

[billbindc]

On 7/19/2024 at 7:52 AM, Sgt Joch said:

As I see it, the only reason Vance is there is to help Trump win Ohio which is a key swing state. VP choices are basically otherwise irrelevant.

On the wider point, Ukraine is basically becoming irrelevant in U.S. politics. I think whoever the next POTUS is, you will see a lot of pressure on Ukraine in 2025 to declare “victory” and agree to a ceasefire more or less along the current front lines. No one will want the Ukraine war to still be an issue as we get closer to the 2028 election when neither Biden nor Trump will be running.

Ohio has not been a swing state in over a decade and Vance ran far behind other Republicans in the state. He’s there to pull in Silicon Valley money (i.e. Peter Thiel). As to Ukraine, I’d be happy to be surprised but every indication is that first sanctions on Russia would be lifted and then a deal forced on Kyiv. 

[The_Capt]

Just now, billbindc said:

Ohio has not been a swing state in over a decade and Vance ran far behind other Republicans in the state. He’s there to pull in Silicon Valley money (i.e. Peter Thiel). As to Ukraine, I’d be happy to be surprised but every indication is that first sanctions on Russia would be lifted and then a deal forced on Kyiv. 

If the US backs off on sanctions and renormalizes relations with Putin’s Russia, the damage to the international order will be pretty much irreversible. It essentially would mean the US based international rules system is dead. The repercussions of that are world breaking.  

[billbindc]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

The fundamental problem with the Republicans right now is that their entire position is built on “the opposite of whatever the other team is doing/saying/believing”.  They have not been able to articulate clear policy positions or platforms beyond “they are wrong and we will do the opposite…and everything will be wonderful.”  So with respect to Ukraine: Dems support = we don’t, or at least as much or for the same ends.  This is not a good nor professional way to do business.  What are the strategic ends the Republicans seek with respect to Ukraine?  What is their vision for European security?  How do they see a road to security post-war?  How do they plan to handle Russia and the Putin regime?  

Simply declaring that whatever the other side is doing is “wrong” does not actually chart political courses. Frankly we saw this on the last iteration, the pandemic just heightened the effects, and we see no indication this iteration will be any better.  If the US remains internally obsessed then the other power poles will recover and work to steal our lunches…again.

I think it’s important to note that while rank and file Republicans are at worst split on Ukraine, within the most politically active MAGA folks there is outright disdain for Ukraine and overt admiration for Putin. It has gone beyond reflexive politics. They see Putin as a strong man of the sort they would like in the US in Trump. It has become ideological and will not ease with a Trump victory.