akd Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 (edited) 14 minutes ago, John Kettler said: Machor, The Tunguska Wiki says nothing about FLIR or thermal sights, just optical.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K22_Tunguska Nor does WeaponSystems.net https://weaponsystems.net/system/60-2S6 Tunguska The same holds true of MilitaryToday.com. http://military-today.com/missiles/tunguska.htm Given this, am surprised CMBS equipped it with thermals. Regards, John Kettler 2S6M1 Edited March 22, 2022 by akd 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarjen Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 Russians at Bucha are surrounded. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesertFox Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 Just now, Sarjen said: Russians at Bucha are surrounded. Very good. Do we have any estimate how many? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 2 minutes ago, DesertFox said: I hope they don´t fall for the trap to only take territory. That is meaningless unless they don´t take away huge amounts of enemy soldiers. I don't see it happening any other way, as long as you define "take away" to mean "loss of combat effectiveness". Ukraine doesn't necessarily have to kill Russians to achieve it's goals of destroying Russia's ability to fight. Causing them to retreat in panic works. Taking them prisoner works. Causing mobile reserves to hesitate works. The only serious threat to taking back territory is if Russia is setting some sort of trap. OK, show of hands... who here thinks Russia has the capability to conduct traps for Ukrainians above company level? Anybody? No, I thought not If we're all correct then the traditional risks that go along with retaking territory are, at best, remote. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 7 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said: Very interesting report. As I've said for more than a week now (man, I'm losing track of time!) all the preconditions for a sudden collapse of Russian forces are in place. We are already seeing the beginning stages of it. Multiple credible reports of Russian soldiers/marines refusing to go into action, at least one report of a large mutiny, and endless examples of desertion (either temporary or permanent). What nobody knows is when all of these factors will hit some sort of tipping point. Usually tipping points are marked by one or more discrete events that are more obvious with hindsight than foresight. However, I think there's a couple of ones we can keep our eyes open for: Belarus becomes hostile to Russian base of operations coup attempt in Moscow (doesn't even have to be successful, just apparent) some event that brings NATO into the war directly Ukrainian counter attack that results in elimination of a sizeable Russian force (say 2-3 BTGs) Ukrainian counter attack that pocket a large Russian force (several thousand men) any single concentrated surrender of Russian forces (100s of soldiers) Any one of these has the potential for pushing things right into collapse, but the first three would likely be so large on their own that collapse could happen within hours or 1-2 days. Steve Hey now, Col Macgregor said the Ukrainians were on their last legs, cut off and only capable of "pin pricks". Then that slick haired SF fella, the one with the assault rifle said the Russians were only doing a "pause" to build up logistical hubs so they could resume the offensive....I am so confused! 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 1 minute ago, DesertFox said: Very good. Do we have any estimate how many? I don't think we'll have a good sense of this unless there's a mass surrender event. My gut tells me there's probably no more than 1000-2000 Russians in that immediate area. It's geographically small and the Russian forces are very worn down. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hm_stanley Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 1 minute ago, Battlefront.com said: I don't see it happening any other way, as long as you define "take away" to mean "loss of combat effectiveness". Ukraine doesn't necessarily have to kill Russians to achieve it's goals of destroying Russia's ability to fight. Causing them to retreat in panic works. Taking them prisoner works. Causing mobile reserves to hesitate works. The only serious threat to taking back territory is if Russia is setting some sort of trap. OK, show of hands... who here thinks Russia has the capability to conduct traps for Ukrainians above company level? Anybody? No, I thought not If we're all correct then the traditional risks that go along with retaking territory are, at best, remote. Steve And then it's the simple question of "Why would they", there is no reason to "trap" the Ukranians when you have "supposed" superior firepower and capabilities.. it flies in the face of reason to advance with the intent of getting surrounded and cut off in order to "dangle" red meat to the opposing army. It's just dumb and nonsensical.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 Just now, The_Capt said: Hey now, Col Macgregor said the Ukrainians were on their last legs, cut off and only capable of "pin pricks". Then that slick haired SF fella, the one with the assault rifle said the Russians were only doing a "pause" to build up logistical hubs so they could resume the offensive....I am so confused! Way to kick a couple of "respected experts" when they are down The sad thing is that after this is all over I expect most of those numbnuts who made even the most outrageously bad calls will still have audiences willing to fund their next YouTube video. That's the way this world seems to work. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinophile Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 6 minutes ago, hm_stanley said: It's just dumb and nonsensical.. Its not a legit Russian plan unless it's both of the above. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 11 minutes ago, DesertFox said: Very good. Do we have any estimate how many? Only thing confirmed so far is retaking of Makariv. Everything else is vague rumors. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 3 minutes ago, hm_stanley said: And then it's the simple question of "Why would they", there is no reason to "trap" the Ukranians when you have "supposed" superior firepower and capabilities.. it flies in the face of reason to advance with the intent of getting surrounded and cut off in order to "dangle" red meat to the opposing army. It's just dumb and nonsensical.. Good point, but I think it is worse than that. Russians on the ground have already figured out that all this nice theory they had before the war isn't holding up. In theory this could lead to what some of the talking heads have been saying the Russians would do... learn from their mistakes and adapt. This theory hinges on the Russians have the will, means, and opportunity to do make meaningful changes in time for them to matter. I see no indications that is the way it's headed. So while I agree with the experts that Russian forces SHOULD be able to adapt, I see no reason to think they WILL. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 Just now, Battlefront.com said: Way to kick a couple of "respected experts" when they are down The sad thing is that after this is all over I expect most of those numbnuts who made even the most outrageously bad calls will still have audiences willing to fund their next YouTube video. That's the way this world seems to work. Steve Respected experts would be all over finding out why their assumptions that led to their conclusions turned out to be so far off base. I don't see a lot of these YouTube types doing that but am happy to be surprised. Next war I say we stand up a BFC/CM analysis channel and bury these guys.... 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 1 minute ago, The_Capt said: Respected experts would be all over finding out why their assumptions that led to their conclusions turned out to be so far off base. I don't see a lot of these YouTube types doing that but am happy to be surprised. Next war I say we stand up a BFC/CM analysis channel and bury these guys.... Why haven'y you ALREADY done that? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hm_stanley Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 No theater commander replacements culled from destroyed BTGs no combined arms no air force overall morale in the toilet fighting a determined and entrenched enemy with very modern infantry arms multiple maneuver thrusts with no political or strategic goals (outlined covertly or broadcast publically) not enough men and materials to wage this uncoordinated mess substandard equipment and supply rasputitsa rear is threatened and in constant friction captured locations are exceptionally dangerous for the average Rosgvardiya potential 10k KIA/20k WIA (unconfirmed) Fundamentally, they are being outfought, outspent (yes) and outwitted on the battlefield. What bothers me is that, add of these things up (they know this in the Kremlin too) and you get a situation where decisions get compartmentalized and validated by a very select few. Those few might feel sovereignty and survival are at stake and move to insure some strategic or tactical goal is met, which might include the destruction and annihilation of a Kiev or Kharkov via chemical or nuclear weapons. We are not too far from that decision I fear. I'm not fear mongering, I'm just showcasing the decision tree that Putin is facing, he has to know this and he has to understand where he stands right now relative to his strength and goals. I have to assume that much. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 13 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said: I don't see it happening any other way, as long as you define "take away" to mean "loss of combat effectiveness". Ukraine doesn't necessarily have to kill Russians to achieve it's goals of destroying Russia's ability to fight. Causing them to retreat in panic works. Taking them prisoner works. Causing mobile reserves to hesitate works. The only serious threat to taking back territory is if Russia is setting some sort of trap. OK, show of hands... who here thinks Russia has the capability to conduct traps for Ukrainians above company level? Anybody? No, I thought not If we're all correct then the traditional risks that go along with retaking territory are, at best, remote. Steve Only way the Russians could pull off traps based on how the Ukrainians have been fighting is to 1) out manoeuvre them and 2) out-C4ISR them. And right now I am pretty sure that particular option set has left the building with no intention of returning. More likely the Russian defenses will be identified, isolated and cut up piece-meal until they break at the rate things appear to be going. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 5 minutes ago, dan/california said: Why haven'y you ALREADY done that? Well despite the evidence of the time we spend here, I think we all have day jobs that keep getting in the way. At least Steve has the excuse that the Russian's blew up his release schedule. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeondTheGrave Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 9 minutes ago, The_Capt said: Respected experts would be all over finding out why their assumptions that led to their conclusions turned out to be so far off base. I don't see a lot of these YouTube types doing that but am happy to be surprised. Next war I say we stand up a BFC/CM analysis channel and bury these guys.... BFC RAND Corp? Institute for the Study of Wargaming? Col. McCapt? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 5 hours ago, Haiduk said: This is unknown. We have 137th SAM brigade of S-300V1 (SA-12). But I know, that S-300PM crews also conducted trainings to shot down ballistic missiles. I don't know about real capabilities of S-330PS to intercept Iskader, but maybe they can hit Tochka-U... 5 hours ago, Haiduk said: This is unknown. We have 137th SAM brigade of S-300V1 (SA-12). But I know, that S-300PM crews also conducted trainings to shot down ballistic missiles. I don't know about real capabilities of S-330PS to intercept Iskader, but maybe they can hit Tochka-U... According to the first source, the S-300V1 fires both the 9M82 and 9M83 missiles.https://defence-blog.com/ukraine-modernise-s-300v1-air-defence-system/ The second source describes those missiles, their intended targets and stated performance.https://www.military-today.com/missiles/s300v.htmThe S-300V uses two different missiles. The missiles are largely common in design. Both of these missiles are intended to engage aerial and ballistic targets. A smaller 9M83 missile is used against aircraft, cruise missiles and smaller ballistic missiles. A single 9M83 missile has a 40-65% chance of defeating ballistic missile, 50-70% defeating cruise missile and 70-90% chance of defeating enemy aircraft. The larger 9M82 is used to engage intermediate-range ballistic missiles, AWACS and jamming aircraft at ranges of up to 100 km. Warheads of 9M82 and 9M83 missiles are packed with 150 kg of explosives. It is worth noting that the S-300V was considered as an all-round system. Soviets also fielded more specialized anti-ballistic missile systems. Given the above, the 9M83 has an ~50% chance of a single weapon downing a Tochka series, but to kill an IRBM, which is what Iskander is, will, because of far more demanding kinematics driven by far greaster warhead velocity, require the use of the 9M82. Though not stated, it would appear the Pk for this missile vs an IRBM would be the same as for the 9M83 vs the Tochka series. Knowing these things, it now becomes possible to understand how Ukraine has been able to down inbound missiles, but maybe something is wrong with Iskander, because it's supposed to be able to maneuver to defeat BMD. Have been up all night, so shall have to take up the capabilities of the S-300PS after I get some sleep. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinophile Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 5 minutes ago, BeondTheGrave said: BFC RAND Corp? Institute for the Study of Wargaming? Col. McCapt? YES PLEASE PRETTY PLEASE CHERRIES AND ICECREAM ON TOP PLEASE YES 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletpoint Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 Would chemical weapons even be a game changer militarily, if Putin decided to use them? Nerve gas is highly dangerous if you're in the area of effect, but it's not like a nuclear weapon where one small bomb can level a city. How big of an area effect do chemical weapons have? How many missiles full of nerve agent would they need to fire in order to defeat the Ukrainian Army? Would it even be useful militarily as anything apart from yet another Russian terror weapon? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 2 minutes ago, The_Capt said: Well despite the evidence of the time we spend here, I think we all have day jobs that keep getting in the way. At least Steve has the excuse that the Russian's blew up his release schedule. In hindsight we should have done something. There ARE a lot of good people out there putting out quality analysis, but I think there's room for more. Especially one that is able to smoothly switch back and forth between tactical and strategic analysis. However, I think we'd find ourselves relegated to the small slice of informed choir audience as the others out there. I don't think any of us would get picked up on by the mainstream sources of information. They're pretty set in their ways. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesertFox Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 Nice one... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 34 minutes ago, akd said: 2S6M1 akd, Went back and checked. There's nothing listed in any of the writeups regarding thermals or FLIR on even the 2s6M1. If you have a source showing thermals on any Tunguska version, please post it. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 12 minutes ago, hm_stanley said: No theater commander replacements culled from destroyed BTGs no combined arms no air force overall morale in the toilet fighting a determined and entrenched enemy with very modern infantry arms multiple maneuver thrusts with no political or strategic goals (outlined covertly or broadcast publically) not enough men and materials to wage this uncoordinated mess substandard equipment and supply rasputitsa rear is threatened and in constant friction captured locations are exceptionally dangerous for the average Rosgvardiya potential 10k KIA/20k WIA (unconfirmed) Fundamentally, they are being outfought, outspent (yes) and outwitted on the battlefield. What bothers me is that, add of these things up (they know this in the Kremlin too) and you get a situation where decisions get compartmentalized and validated by a very select few. Those few might feel sovereignty and survival are at stake and move to insure some strategic or tactical goal is met, which might include the destruction and annihilation of a Kiev or Kharkov via chemical or nuclear weapons. We are not too far from that decision I fear. I'm not fear mongering, I'm just showcasing the decision tree that Putin is facing, he has to know this and he has to understand where he stands right now relative to his strength and goals. I have to assume that much. I think the Russians next move is to push Belarus to the failure point, as discussed for several pages it is 99% chance of epic flop. It feels like Putins is determined to get some Value out of Lukashenko or get him evicted trying. Hopefully Lukashenko has his date with a rope and a lamp post, and the Russian's logistics just dissolve into goo. It has a tiny bit of logic from Putin's perspective, he losing now rather badly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 Just now, Battlefront.com said: In hindsight we should have done something. There ARE a lot of good people out there putting out quality analysis, but I think there's room for more. Especially one that is able to smoothly switch back and forth between tactical and strategic analysis. However, I think we'd find ourselves relegated to the small slice of informed choir audience as the others out there. I don't think any of us would get picked up on by the mainstream sources of information. They're pretty set in their ways. Steve Have to disagree with you there Steve, they don't have our secret weapon: Rooaaawwr!! Get those engines running ladies.... 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.