The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

tonnyc

Well-Known Member
I was surprised to see that Russia has been lax in garrisoning the left bank of the Dniepr but I agree with the others that this "foothold" is not much of one. The area is marshy and there is no secure supply line. All supplies will have to be ferried with small boats. Ukraine can not send in heavy armoured vehicles nor a large number of lighter vehicles either. So I do not expect to see much beyond probing attacks and guerilla raids.

That said, WTH were the Russian thinking leaving the left bank open like that. Sure Ukraine can't send it a tank battalion over there but a couple hundred infantry operating behind your lines is really going to complicate matters. At best Russia will have to shift forces to contain and push the Ukrainian units back and that would have required a larger number of troops than if they just defended the left bank of the river and prevent the landing. Those extra troops will have to come from somewhere.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
There are a lot of jetties for small boats on that bank, on the stretch with the dachas. But as said, there's marshy land behind the bank as far as Oleshky, where the ground seems to rise slightly.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group


Video on Russian AF send FAB-500 glide bombs to Ukrainian Army possition in that Dniper bank. First ones is on telegram, second one is in youtube, same video but reposted by Indonesian Media in youtube.

Seems youtube give permissions to put stuff originate from Pro-Russian telegram, as long as it is posted by other countries media with large number of subscribers.

So yes, Russian admitted Ukrainian possition on that swampy banks, and seems assides artillery they are now send their AF. Have to wait on the effectiveness on that.
 

Pukovnik7

Member
Let's refrain from simple advertisement and self-promotion. Please provide some context and expand on what the relevance of your points are to the discussion taking place.
I could have basically copy-pasted the entire post, then.

But to sum it up:
1. "Soft power" is useless without hard power to back it up.
2. Cultural differences between societies matter.
3. Appeasement does not work.
4. Nuclear weapons do not prevent conventional conflict between states, even when one of states is a nuclear power.
5. Nuclear deterrent is indispensable.
6. Nuclear energy is indispensable. People promoting "green" energy to exclusion of nuclear power are morons.
7. Predictions are difficult. You cannot prepare for the next war because it is next to impossible to know what the next war will look like.
8. Just because military has a doctrine does not mean it will follow it, or be able to implement it in practice.
9. Assymetric warfare works, which is why simple military superiority does not ensure success.
10. If attempted, attempts to remodel Ukrainian military according to NATO model may do more harm to Ukraine than good. Any such attempts should be made with care.
11. Morale still trumps everything else when it comes to determining outcome of the war.
12. Territorial Defense is a must for states facing attack by potentially superior enemies.
13. Numbers matter.
14. MANPADS and large SAMs have to work together for air defense to be effective.

@Pukovnik7 No need to backchat a Moderator.

Ngatimozart.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Update. Mar. 13th-14th

The North.


Znob-Novogorodskoe, a town in Sumy region, was recently hit. It's unclear what Russia was targeting.


Zaporozhye-Dnepropetrovsk.

Russian 810th Marines operating T-90Ms in Zaporozhye. The T-90M has become more and more common among various Russian units. Note these have Nakidka kits, which not all T-90M units receive.


Some general footage of the 810th MarBde in Zaporozhye. Note the 2S3s in the footage. Pre-war the unit operated Msta-B towed by armored Kamaz trucks specifically meant for artillery towing. It's possible these were replaced due to losses (we know for a fact at least some were lost). The infantry kit looks interesting. Some are clearly recon, since they have suppressed weapons, but others appear to be regular infantry. Their weapons are a mix of regular AK-74Ms and the KM-AK upgrade variants, with some having optics and some not. They're still riding BTR-82As, and have apparently added ATGM technicals to their arsenal.


A businessman who owns a logistics company in Melitopol' was killed by a car bomb. This is part of a series of car bombs though the previous cases were against Russian officials.


LDNR Front.

M777 getting hit in Serebryanka, dead east of Belogorovka.


A Switchblade-300 struck Wagner positions but failed to detonate. There have been a few SB-300s that have failed to go off.


Wagner fighters operating an MT-12 as artillery, somewhere near Artemovsk/Bakhmut.


Wagner fighters inside Vostokmash, Artemovsk/Bakhmut.


Russia apparently hit Ukrainian munition storage inside Artemovsk/Bakhmut.


Ukrainian footage of the western outskirts of Artemovsk/Bakhmut. The city is in ruins, fires burn. There are destroyed vehicles everywhere. Some are clearly Ukrainian military pickups, some it's unclear.


Panoramic footage of Artemovsk/Bakhmut.


Ukrainian BTR-4 in action on the road out of Artemovsk/Bakhmut getting hit.


Ukrainian reinforcements in Chasov Yar. With highsight, we still don't have a clear picture of what happened to these forces. Are they committed to the fighting around Artemovsk/Bakhmut? Some must be considering the losses. But we haven't spotted them, at least I haven't. In the footage we have BMP-1s, MaxxPros, Humvees, BRDM-2s, IMR-2, M113, YPR-765, BTR-4, some armored car, and a Dingo-2.


Ukrainian soldier from the 24th Mech Bde in New York (Novogorodskoe) with a Bulgarian Bullspike RPG.


A Russian strike hit a school in Avdeevka. Allegedly a local teacher was killed.


Two Russian tanks getting hit near Donetsk, allegedly by Javelins.


Destroyed Russian MBTs near Ugledar, likely another failed attack.


Russian 155th Marines in action in Ugledar.


Russian 5th Tanks mortar team in action near Ugledar.


A Russian strike hit Konstantinovka. It's a logistical hub, and troop artery for the fighting around Artemovsk/Bakhmut.


A Russian strike hit a residential building in Kramatorsk.


A school in Donetsk got hit. Allegedly a teacher and an assistant were wounded.


Donetsk got hit by a Tochka strike killing 22 civilians.


Volnovakha got hit, allegedly a HIMARS strike. Reportedly two civilians killed, two wounded.


Russian reconstruction efforts in Mariupol'. They're quite significant but of course the city is nowhere near what it was pre-war.


Russia.

Reportedly another Ukrainian strike intercepted over Belgorod. There are reports that at least one SAM fell on the city, and fragments from SAMs and likely intercepts fell too.


A BTR-50P pulled from storage for refurbishment, Russia. The type surfaced briefly but has been mostly out of sight since.


Russian territorial defense formations training with Wagner instructors.


Misc.


Allegedly a Ukrainian MBT shooting up Russian trenches.


Russian T-90M tank fires in support of VDV operations. This is probably the Kremennaya area, but it's hard to be sure.


A damaged M777 and a destroyed towing truck, possibly an Oshkosh.


A rare Ukrainian BTR-4EP crossing on an improvised bridge, location and context unclear. It's also missing a wheel.


An interesting video of what appears to be a Ukrainian service member talking to someone higher-up via phone, cursing him out, and claiming their btln has 160 KIAs. Context is lacking, but those are catastrophic casualties for a btln of any size.


An improvised Ukrainian armored ambulance bus.


NATO/EU.

Luxemburg has handed over 8 of the 14 armored ambulances meant for Ukraine.


Ukrainian tankers training on Leo-2A4s in Spain. Spain is handing over 6 MBTs of the type.


Ukrainian tanker training on a Polish PT-91.


Ukrainian servicemembers training on M1 Abrams in the US.


Ukrainian service members training on AMX-10s in France.

 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Even “established a foothold” is quite a statement in this case, in my opinion. ISW also mentioned that they established supply lines to those “footholds”, according to the same sources. At the very least, the latter part has to be rubbish. It doesn’t take much to look at what the location of those “footholds” actually is. Some “dachas” directly on the left shore aside, the whole area is literally swamps that have little to none potential beyond “probing attacks” and “guerrilla tactics”, if that. But it does provide some sort of development and “good vibes” - that is, reason to speculate - for the readers. Especially because recently, most of everything else regarding the counteroffensive has been quite… I don’t want to call it negative, but it doesn’t look like any of the western leaders and intelligence communities (and it appears many analysts agree) expect any significant breakthroughs or gains by the Ukrainian forces. We shall see.



Why is it rubbish? Ukrainian logistics is far better than Russian logistics and they will have planned a way for their logistics to cross the water. Just because bridges don't exist doesn't mean that logistics can't be delivered to the front line. This will have been carefully thought out.
I suspect they would have a hard time doing a mad dash to Mariupol with no vehicles. With no permanent bridges over the Dnepr (whats the status of the dam), you will have a problem with supply and heavy equipment. Unless the RU have completely denuded the area (they cant be THAT stupid) all this is, is a series of raid and pin-pricks to keep the RU occupied.
How do you figure no vehicles? The Ukrainians did quite well during the September offensive getting in behind the Russian lines, creating panic and havoc. They didn't do it with tanks and IFVs but ATV and technicals. I went and had a look at the map because I wrote that post from memory. It's a long way from Kherson to Mariupol. However they need to get through to Melitopol and to from their to coast of the Sea of Azov.

SE Ukraine.png
Source: After Google Maps.
I could have basically copy-pasted the entire post, then.

But to sum it up:
1. "Soft power" is useless without hard power to back it up.
2. Cultural differences between societies matter.
3. Appeasement does not work.
4. Nuclear weapons do not prevent conventional conflict between states, even when one of states is a nuclear power.
5. Nuclear deterrent is indispensable.
6. Nuclear energy is indispensable. People promoting "green" energy to exclusion of nuclear power are morons.
7. Predictions are difficult. You cannot prepare for the next war because it is next to impossible to know what the next war will look like.
8. Just because military has a doctrine does not mean it will follow it, or be able to implement it in practice.
9. Assymetric warfare works, which is why simple military superiority does not ensure success.
10. If attempted, attempts to remodel Ukrainian military according to NATO model may do more harm to Ukraine than good. Any such attempts should be made with care.
11. Morale still trumps everything else when it comes to determining outcome of the war.
12. Territorial Defense is a must for states facing attack by potentially superior enemies.
13. Numbers matter.
14. MANPADS and large SAMs have to work together for air defense to be effective.
"6. Nuclear energy is indispensable. People promoting "green" energy to exclusion of nuclear power are morons."
That's quite an arrogant statement and political.

"9. Assymetric warfare works, which is why simple military superiority does not ensure success."
It works to a degree but it's not the be all to end all that you claim. If you look at the Western foul ups in Afghanistan, a lot of that was political rather than military. The same can be said for the US involvement in Vietnam.

"10. If attempted, attempts to remodel Ukrainian military according to NATO model may do more harm to Ukraine than good. Any such attempts should be made with care."
It's happening and it is working. Evidence for that can be seen on the battlefield.

"11. Morale still trumps everything else when it comes to determining outcome of the war."
No it doesn't, but it helps. I think it was Churchill who said "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm." Training and things like telling the troops what the Commander's intent is why, and leaving it to the troops on the ground to turn that intent into action, makes a huge difference. Production determines the outcome of a war because if a country doesn't have enough war material it will lose. The US proved that in WW2 and the Russians are paying for their inability to produce large numbers of modern war material.
I was surprised to see that Russia has been lax in garrisoning the left bank of the Dniepr but I agree with the others that this "foothold" is not much of one. The area is marshy and there is no secure supply line. All supplies will have to be ferried with small boats. Ukraine can not send in heavy armoured vehicles nor a large number of lighter vehicles either. So I do not expect to see much beyond probing attacks and guerilla raids.

That said, WTH were the Russian thinking leaving the left bank open like that. Sure Ukraine can't send it a tank battalion over there but a couple hundred infantry operating behind your lines is really going to complicate matters. At best Russia will have to shift forces to contain and push the Ukrainian units back and that would have required a larger number of troops than if they just defended the left bank of the river and prevent the landing. Those extra troops will have to come from somewhere.
Russia has only so many troops that it can use for garrison duties. They have quite a long front, which i think is something like 1,880 km, to cover, plus they are putting in a major effort in the Donbass. I believe that they have fortified the area back from the eastern (left) bank of the Dnipro. How good those fortifications are remains to be seen.
 

Pukovnik7

Member
"6. Nuclear energy is indispensable. People promoting "green" energy to exclusion of nuclear power are morons."
That's quite an arrogant statement and political.
War is politics. And statement is 100% true, when you look at how dependance on fossil fuels is impacting EUrope in both political and practical terms. Germany was basically acting like a Russian puppet because it is dependant on Russian gas. It took open invasion for Germany to do anything, and even then it kept dragging its feet. Poland and other eastern European countries as well as US have to twist Germany's arm hard for any help to be sent to Ukraine either by Germany or with German allowance. As for Germany itself... And in practical terms... yeah, well. That stuff wouldn't even be a concern if a bunch of little green men hadn't pushed Germany to shut down its nuclear plants.

So yeah. I can understand reluctance to send tanks, as any destroyed Leopard 2s would allow the US to say "oh lookie, tank is crap, now buy our absolutely tested in combat against first-world opponents Abrams". But everything else?

Fact is, "Greens" and other "environmentalist" parties in Europe have been (effectively, if not technically) Russian puppets for years, if not decades. And some things I've read suggests that they have been actual, not just effective, Russian puppets from the start:

Some of these articles focus on fracking, but anti-nuclear activists were far more impactful.

"9. Assymetric warfare works, which is why simple military superiority does not ensure success."
It works to a degree but it's not the be all to end all that you claim. If you look at the Western foul ups in Afghanistan, a lot of that was political rather than military. The same can be said for the US involvement in Vietnam.
And where have I maid a claim that it is "be all to end all", exactly?

"10. If attempted, attempts to remodel Ukrainian military according to NATO model may do more harm to Ukraine than good. Any such attempts should be made with care."
It's happening and it is working. Evidence for that can be seen on the battlefield.
Such as? Anyway, what I was referring to was a) professionalization - most NATO armies do not have territorial defense and b) focus on air force, which Ukraine would not have resources for.

"11. Morale still trumps everything else when it comes to determining outcome of the war."
No it doesn't, but it helps. I think it was Churchill who said "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm." Training and things like telling the troops what the Commander's intent is why, and leaving it to the troops on the ground to turn that intent into action, makes a huge difference. Production determines the outcome of a war because if a country doesn't have enough war material it will lose. The US proved that in WW2 and the Russians are paying for their inability to produce large numbers of modern war material.
Russians are, first and foremost, paying for their underestimation of Ukrainian military capability. Which in large part has to do with their underestimation of capability of Ukrainian Territorial Defense, and this in turn was caused by their underestimation of morale factors in war - same mistake made by Western analysts who had predicted Russia would take Kiev in matter of days.

Lack of war material is the consequence of Russian inability to win as quickly as they had expected, not the cause.
 

vikingatespam

Well-Known Member
How do you figure no vehicles? The Ukrainians did quite well during the September offensive getting in behind the Russian lines, creating panic and havoc. They didn't do it with tanks and IFVs but ATV and technicals. I went and had a look at the map because I wrote that post from memory. It's a long way from Kherson to Mariupol. However they need to get through to Melitopol and to from their to coast of the Sea of Azov.

View attachment 50448
I have not heard that no heavy vehicles were involved at Izyum before.

How are you going to get heavy vehicles across the Dnepr with no bridge (not sure if the Dam is passable or nor, or rigged for further damaged) ? How are you going to supply a mass of troops over a ~100 mile push to Melitopol ?

I doubt very much that the UKR have the expertise or equipment to supply anything other than token forces across such a wide water body, especially under the range of RU artillery.

Think back to the Allied crossing of the Rhine in 1945. While Patton was able to steal a crossing with light forces in order to get a jump on Monty, by and large the Rhine crossing was a massive affair involving a huge industrial effort of engineering and vehicles.

Now, if the RU got very stupid again, thats another question.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
War is politics. And statement is 100% true, when you look at how dependance on fossil fuels is impacting EUrope in both political and practical terms. Germany was basically acting like a Russian puppet because it is dependant on Russian gas. It took open invasion for Germany to do anything, and even then it kept dragging its feet. Poland and other eastern European countries as well as US have to twist Germany's arm hard for any help to be sent to Ukraine either by Germany or with German allowance. As for Germany itself... And in practical terms... yeah, well. That stuff wouldn't even be a concern if a bunch of little green men hadn't pushed Germany to shut down its nuclear plants.

So yeah. I can understand reluctance to send tanks, as any destroyed Leopard 2s would allow the US to say "oh lookie, tank is crap, now buy our absolutely tested in combat against first-world opponents Abrams". But everything else?

Fact is, "Greens" and other "environmentalist" parties in Europe have been (effectively, if not technically) Russian puppets for years, if not decades. And some things I've read suggests that they have been actual, not just effective, Russian puppets from the start:

Some of these articles focus on fracking, but anti-nuclear activists were far more impactful.
War is politics by another means, according to von Clausewitz. He's right in that aspect because war is a political expression. Sun Tzu said that a wise ruler only uses war as a final option after all other methods have failed to achieve the desired goal. Both the CCP/PRC and Russia are very good at grey warfare and using political and other activists to advance their agendas.

However it doesn't mean that we have the right to bad mouth environmental activists on here. In fact that is one reason why we don't allow politics to be discussed on here unless they are related to defence procurement. If you continue to pursue this line of thought the Moderation Team will actively consider sanctioning you.
And where have I maid a claim that it is "be all to end all", exactly?
It is present right through your writings on this topic.
Such as? Anyway, what I was referring to was a) professionalization - most NATO armies do not have territorial defense and b) focus on air force, which Ukraine would not have resources for.
You are basing your whole argument on generalisations and ignorance. You show that you understand very little about how NATO works, nor do you understand how a military operates. There's a big difference between strategy and tactics, with strategy having many levels. One trick is to look at things at the micro, meso, and macro scale simultaneously. That's a skill that needs to be learned.
Russians are, first and foremost, paying for their underestimation of Ukrainian military capability. Which in large part has to do with their underestimation of capability of Ukrainian Territorial Defense, and this in turn was caused by their underestimation of morale factors in war - same mistake made by Western analysts who had predicted Russia would take Kiev in matter of days.

Lack of war material is the consequence of Russian inability to win as quickly as they had expected, not the cause.
Lack of war material is the consequence of Russian inability to win as quickly as they had expected, not the cause.
Only a fool would start a war without ensuring the that they have covered all possibilities. The Russian planning and logistics was an absolute load of rubbish.They made the classic mistake of underestimating their enemy. They knew for at least 2 months that their operation had been blown and they still went ahead against a prepared defence. Except it was a known defence strategy they hadn't bothered to consider.

Yes western analysts and others, including myself, totally underestimated the Ukrainian defence and the kindergarten level of the Russian senior leadership. We also underestimated the quality of Russian equipment. Even Field Marshall General Admiral Idi Amin could've done a far better job of the invasion than the Russians did. However we didn't continually repeat out mistakes unlike the Russian senior leadership.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Update. Mar. 14th-16th

Kherson-Nikolaev-Odessa.

More footage of the failed Ukrainian landing at Novaya Kahovka that was recently repulsed.


Russian Kh-31P strike against Odessa aimed at Ukrainian air defenses in the area.


Zaporozhye-Dnepropetrovsk.

Russian loitering munition strike against either an M777 or a decoy. Note the lack of gun crew or ammo visible. On the other hand it could be hidden from sight in the tree line. Zaporozhye region.


Allegedly a Ukrainian artillery piece getting hit, Zaporozhye. Note I can't make out what gets hit but it causes a fire.


The North.

Ukrainian NASAMS position, somewhere near Kiev.


Oskol Front.

Allegedly a failed Ukrainian attack near Chernopopovka with retreating infantry being hit by artillery.


Footage from the front line near Svatovo-Kremennaya of a lone Russian soldier who captured an enemy trench line, killing 3 Ukrainian soldiers and capturing two more. This soldier was later killed in subsequent fighting.


Ukrainian ASU-1 Valkiriya UAV downed near Kremennaya.


VDV sappers at work near Kremennaya.


Russian T-72B3mod'22 in the woods near Kremennaya.


Ukrainian foreign legion fighter in the Kupyansk area with an M14.


LDNR Front.

Somewhere near Lisichansk, Russian forces allegedly struck a Ukrainian sniper position with an SPG, then apparently dropped quadcopter munitions of a group of Ukrainian infantry presumably heading to evacuate him.


Ukrainian BTR-4 fires, Artemovsk/Bakhmut.


Wagner fighters posing with a knocked out Ukrainian MBT, Artemovsk/Bakhmut area.


3 destroyed vans and a truck belonging to Ukraine's 127th Bde, Artemovsk/Bakhmut.


A damaged vehicle belonging to Ukraine's 93rd Bde, in Chasov Yar.


Ukrainian 2S7 near Artemovsk/Bakhmut.


Russian airstrike near Avdeevka.


Russian helo rocket lobbing near Avdeevka and it's results. The effectiveness of such fires is extremely low.


Russian 1st Army Corps (former DNR forces) firing a D-20 at Avdeevka. Note they're using shells manufactured in 2023, and even firing cumulative shells towards the enemy.


A Russian assault column near Vodyanoe getting hit. Note, the terrain here is unfavorable from the Russia side towards Avdeevka. Consequently the main push has been from the east and north-east.


Russian BTR-82A hits a landmine, the commander and gunner are killed, the driver manages to escape the burning wreck. Reportedly he survived and made it back to friendly lines, wounded. This is the 155th MarBde near Ugledar.


Russian 155th MarBde inside Ugledar.


Russia.

A Ukrainian Mugin-5 UAV was downed over Crimea carrying an improvised warhead.


Another batch of improvised armored Urals heading to the front. Note the BRDM-2 turret on one of them.


T-62MVmod'22s getting ready to ship to the front from the 103rd Armored Repair Plant.


Prigozhin visits a Wagner training center. I suspect after the fighting around Artemovsk/Bakhmut is done, he intends to transition his organization into more of a training resource for the Russian military.


Misc.

Ukrainian SP howitzers, allegedly an M109, getting hit by a loitering munition.


A Ukrainian howitzer, possibly M777, getting hit by a loitering munition. A fire breaks out, presumably the munitions cooking off.


Allegedly a Ukrainian position in a two-story house getting hit by a Russian FPV drone.


Ukrainian Tu-143 Reys launch. Note these Soviet UAVs are being turned into cruise missiles.


Ukrainian M101 howitzers on the front line. They're a "worthy" counterpart to Russia's antiquated D-1s.


Allegedly a Ukrainian T-64 destroyed somewhere in Ukraine.

.

Allegedly a downed Ukrainian UAV/improvised loitering munition with the ZOV tactical markings written on the wings to presumably confuse visual observers.


A Ukrainian Buk-M1 that was allegedly hit by a Lancet strike last November. We don't have video from the munition itself, raising the question about how many Lancet strike videos never get uploaded.


A knocked out Ukrainian Bushmaster armored vehicle. Note while the vehicle looks trashed it's not clear that it's actually destroyed. The damage could be limited.


A Ukrainian 2S1 after getting hit by a Russian loitering munition that failed to detonate.


Fragments of a Russian Lancet-3 loitering munition that struck a Ukrainian 2S1 but presumably failed to detonate. The warhead is a KZ-6 cumulative charge installed rather poorly.


Ukrainian MBT pulling a damaged M777 out of the mud.


Ukrainian Kipri MRAP stuck in the mud and getting pulled out by tanks.


Ukrainian FH-70 position, location and context unclear.


Ukrainian forces setting up an anti-loitering munition net somewhere in southern Ukraine.


Ukraine's 46th Assault Bde riding Husky TSVs in training somewhere.


A Russian BTR-82A variant with the mounts for extra armor but without the thermals, possibly an intermediate variant produced in '21-'22 before the BTR-82AT.


Ukrainian defense industry company UkrOboronProm has begun producing 125mm tank shells, but is doing it in a NATO country.


The World.

Flights from Iran to Moscow continue.


First 4 Polish MiG-29s are arriving in Ukraine shortly.


Ukrainian service members training on M109 Paladins and M2 Bradleys in Germany.


French AMX-10s have arrived in Ukraine. Some are allegedly already on the front lines.


Sweden will reportedly deliver 8 Archer howitzers to Ukraine.

 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
An interesting picture has emerged in Kherson region. It appears Russia, after systematically striking air defense systems, starting with SHORAD and moving on to an S-300 unit, Russia then delivered a cruise missile strike against a Ukrainian military HQ in Nikolaev. Rare systems struck include a Tor-M1 and apparently a Gepard AAA, the first of the type. Even Ukrainian sources are apparently talking about a new Russian approach to strikes, including using submarines for the cruise missile launches from an unexpected area, to make detection more difficult, and adjusting the flight profiles to dodge SAM engagement envelopes. This comes after reports that Russia was using combat jets to bait Ukrainian air defense while another aircraft was ready to strike an AA assets that emerged. Russia, pre-war, was notoriously lacking experience in suppressing enemy air defense, but there have been signs that Russian approaches to SEAD/DEAD are evolving.


EDIT: Two more S-300 TELs getting hit. While we can't be certain it's the same unit, it seems likely. In the video above we saw one TEL get hit, while another was parked nearby and intact. The greenery looks similar, and it's quite likely surviving TELs would try to escape, it's also likely Russia would try for follow-on strikes to finish the battery off. Note the crews bailing out of the front TEL in the video below (though it's the back TEL that gets hit). You can also see a hole in the transport container for the SAM on the back TEL, further suggesting that it may be the parked TEL from above, that may have sustained some damage in that strike.

 

Pukovnik7

Member
You are basing your whole argument on generalisations and ignorance. You show that you understand very little about how NATO works, nor do you understand how a military operates. There's a big difference between strategy and tactics, with strategy having many levels. One trick is to look at things at the micro, meso, and macro scale simultaneously. That's a skill that needs to be learned.
NATO is a defense alliance. I am not making any argument about how NATO itself operates, but rather about how militaries of NATO members operate.

When Croatia was a candidate and about to join NATO, one of requirements was to create a "smaller, more professional military". Other European countries had been moving that way since the end of World War 2.

So, what exactly is wrong in the above?

Lack of war material is the consequence of Russian inability to win as quickly as they had expected, not the cause.
Only a fool would start a war without ensuring the that they have covered all possibilities. The Russian planning and logistics was an absolute load of rubbish.They made the classic mistake of underestimating their enemy. They knew for at least 2 months that their operation had been blown and they still went ahead against a prepared defence. Except it was a known defence strategy they hadn't bothered to consider.

Yes western analysts and others, including myself, totally underestimated the Ukrainian defence and the kindergarten level of the Russian senior leadership. We also underestimated the quality of Russian equipment. Even Field Marshall General Admiral Idi Amin could've done a far better job of the invasion than the Russians did. However we didn't continually repeat out mistakes unlike the Russian senior leadership.
I could point you through literally dozens of wars where a country underestimated how long a war will last. Russian mistake in that regard is hardly exceptional. In fact, I would say that aggressor underestimating enemy's capacity for defense is less of an exception and more of a rule. Only times I can remember where invading country overestimated the enemy were United States in campaigns against Arab armies, and Germany in campaigns against France and Yugoslavia.

Issue is not that the Russians underestimated the enemy. Issue is, as you have pointed out, that they had not adapted. And that speaks to either psychological or organizational failures. Though, how frequent it is that the leadership will actually adapt to circumstances that were outside the expected? Especially in a country run by autocratic regime that had essentially banked its legitimacy on the invasion.

Also, in the analyses I have read, all too often the focus was on Russian failures - almost as if Ukrainian defense preparations (which had been ongoing ever since 2014.) were irrelevant in overall conduct of the war. That is why I tend to harp on about territorial defense etc.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
You're right to mention Ukrainian preparations since 2014 as important, but they've not exactly been secret. The Russians seem to have ignored them. This suggests a lack of interest in analysis of their enemy's abilities & readiness, which is always foolish.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
An interesting picture has emerged in Kherson region. It appears Russia, after systematically striking air defense systems, starting with SHORAD and moving on to an S-300 unit, Russia then delivered a cruise missile strike against a Ukrainian military HQ in Nikolaev. Rare systems struck include a Tor-M1 and apparently a Gepard AAA, the first of the type. Even Ukrainian sources are apparently talking about a new Russian approach to strikes, including using submarines for the cruise missile launches from an unexpected area, to make detection more difficult, and adjusting the flight profiles to dodge SAM engagement envelopes. This comes after reports that Russia was using combat jets to bait Ukrainian air defense while another aircraft was ready to strike an AA assets that emerged. Russia, pre-war, was notoriously lacking experience in suppressing enemy air defense, but there have been signs that Russian approaches to SEAD/DEAD are evolving.


EDIT: Two more S-300 TELs getting hit. While we can't be certain it's the same unit, it seems likely. In the video above we saw one TEL get hit, while another was parked nearby and intact. The greenery looks similar, and it's quite likely surviving TELs would try to escape, it's also likely Russia would try for follow-on strikes to finish the battery off. Note the crews bailing out of the front TEL in the video below (though it's the back TEL that gets hit). You can also see a hole in the transport container for the SAM on the back TEL, further suggesting that it may be the parked TEL from above, that may have sustained some damage in that strike.

Some updates on this.

First, here's the video of the Gepard getting hit. I think we can be relatively confident it isn't destroyed, but it does look like the radar might be hit along with other parts of the turret roof. Likely major repairs needed.


Another S-300 TEL was destroyed in Nikolaev region, near Snegirevka, likely unrelated to the unit of S-300s we saw getting hit in Kherson region. But these units are fairly close together and it's likely this was part of the same SEAD/DEAD efforts.


Allegedly the 4th S-300 TEL from the same unit in Kherson region getting hit.


Lastly, according to Rybar the Tor we saw getting hit was actually in Zaporozhye region, so probably not part of this pattern of strikes though it's hard to be sure. I've seen a video of a ZU-23-2, and a Ukrainian Buk both getting hit but without a location, so it's possible there was a wider series of strikes. He also lists 4 S-300 TELs hit but only 2 destroyed and 2 damaged in Kherson region, not counting the one in Nikolaev.

 
Top