The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
A bit more context into the F-16 crash:

A Russian missile exploded near the F-16 shortly before it disappeared off the radar, a U.S. official said, leading to one theory that the explosion either damaged the aircraft or led the pilot to maneuver too low to the ground, contributing to the crash, according to the U.S. official. While Ukraine is leading the investigation, U.S. advisers based in other parts of Europe are advising, defense officials said.


I wonder how Ukraine is leading the investigation if they have very little knowledge of these airframes.

A little more from the article:

A fatal crash of a Ukrainian F-16 on the first day the jet fighters were used in combat last week has raised questions about the rush to train pilots and deploy them into combat only weeks after they had arrived in Ukraine, according to U.S. and Western officials.

Ukraine’s air force still hasn’t determined the cause of the crash, which occurred during what Kyiv later described as the largest Russian missile and drone barrage of the war. U.S. officials say Ukraine has yet to find evidence the jet was shot down, either by friendly or enemy fire, or that a mechanical failure led to the crash.[…]

Western pilots, even after completing their training, often fly for many months with their units and in exercises before attempting complex missions in combat zones. The Ukrainian pilots, on the other hand, went quickly from training to the battlefield.

Now, Western officials are debating the wisdom of Ukraine’s decision to deploy the new jets in combat just weeks after they first arrived in the country, and sending up pilots who had limited flying hours on the advanced American jet.[…]

The pilot who died, Oleksiy Mes, was one of a small group of Ukrainians to begin training on the F-16 in Denmark in August 2023. A few months later, another cadre started training under the U.S. Air National Guard pilots at Morris Air National Guard Base, Ariz. The first pilots to graduate from those programs finished up their training in Europe before arriving in Ukraine this summer along with the jets.

Before the crash, representatives from the Danish government had expressed concern about the ability of some of the pilots to fly solo, the senior defense official said.

The Ukrainian pilots had years of combat experience in their older Soviet jets, but some struggled to learn how to operate the advanced F-16—particularly because the training manuals were in English and not all of the pilots had sufficient English language skills. Some pilots who began the course in Denmark failed the program, a Western official said.

Mes, known as Moonfish, wasn’t one of the pilots that sparked concern. He was among the small cadre of pilots who completed an accelerated training course at the Danish military air base in Skrydstrup that was tailored to the scenarios they would face on the battlefield. The pilots focused on air defense, rather than learning all of the missions the multirole aircraft is capable of performing, according to a senior U.S. official.[…]

Today, a small number of Ukrainian pilots are still going through the training programs in Arizona, Denmark and a newly opened facility in Romania. The Danish facility will shutter at the end of the year as the Danish Air Force transitions from the F-16 to the new F-35.

Ukrainian and Western officials have declined to provide exact numbers, but they acknowledge that it will be months before Ukraine has enough trained pilots to fly a full squadron of F-16s.


I am assuming the actual number of pilots that were previously reported to have been training in various countries is even less due to some of them failing the program. Is that a fair assumption?

Iran has sent short range ballistic missiles to Russia, according to the US officials:

A U.S. official confirmed the missiles 'have finally been delivered'[…]

The shipment involves a couple of hundred short-range ballistic missiles, according to Western officials. Iran has a variety of such weapons, with a range stretching up to around 500 miles.[…]

'This is not the end,' a senior European official said, noting that Iran is expected to keep weapons flowing into Russia



Edit: In the meantime,

But, questioned by reporters, the Pentagon chief pushed back on the idea that allowing deep strikes inside Russia with Western weapons would be a game-changer.

He said Russia had already moved aircraft that launch glide bombs into Ukraine beyond the range of U.S.-supplied ATACM missiles.

"There's no one capability that will in and of itself be decisive in this campaign," Austin told reporters at the end of the meeting.

He also said Ukraine had capabilities of its own - such as drones - to hit targets inside Russia that were beyond the reach of ATACM and British-supplied Storm Shadow missiles.

"There are a lot of targets in Russia - big country, obviously," Austin said. "And there's a lot of capability that Ukraine has in terms of UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) and other things to address those targets."


 
Last edited:

Fredled

Active Member
wsj said:
The Ukrainian pilots, on the other hand, went quickly from training to the battlefield.
That's not accurate. The pilot who died was not in combat operation or in the battlefield and none of other pilots were.
They were chasing cruising missiles in an area where Russian fighter jets and ground to air missiles don't go. They not only didn't engage in a combat operation, but they also made sure that they couldn't.

According to Xavier Tytteleman, former french Rafale pilot and air defense expert (and pro unkrainian vidblogger), Ukes know perfectly well what caused the crash and don't tell us the exact truth.

The F16 was shot down by friendly fire but not by a Patriot missile. The Patriot couldn't engage the F16 thanks to identification via the jet's responder.
Feonor suggested that the F16 was hit by debris from the explosion or by the explosion shock wave as both the F16 and the Patriot were closing in on the Russian missile together at the same time.

But that's not Xavier Tytteleman's interpretation. He said that the F16 was hit by a soviet made air defense missile, BUK or S300 which don't acknowledge F16's as friendly planes. (Adapting to this is not that simple.) And that's the reason why Ukrainians are transforming the truth, first by suggesting that it could be a Patriot, then by saying that the investigation is still going on, to find the cause. That's bs because they probably knew minutes later what caused the crash. They don't tell the truth because that would be admitting that Russian air defense system are capable to shot down F16's. That shouldn't be a surprised because these systems are not bad. Ukes are not going to engage their precious, albeit 40 years old F16's within range of Russian air defense anytime soon. But that would make Russians more confident in their ability to destroy them. It would break the myth that the Russians made up around this war plane since they expected to see them in the Ukrainian sky.

F16's will only venture into strikes on the front line when there will be enough of them to protect the sky from cruise missiles and when Mirage 2000 come. The Mirage 2000 could come as early as the end of this year (add 2 or 3 months delay as usual). Then F16's could be freed for other missions.
It should be noted that F16's can carry a range of air to ground missiles (I forgot the name exactly of what was delivered) and gliding bombs, but curiously, they are unable to carry the Storm Shadow/Scalp missiles because they are not US made... As a result, Americans will (finally) deliver their own F16 compatible cruise missiles in the future.

Of course, this is one theory. It doens't mean that it's the truth. He didn't have insider information. But he is definetely more qualified in the air defense field (he had worked secificaly on this in the past) and in the war in Ukraine than most of those who write or talk about this topic.

In his video (sorry it's only available in french without english subtitle), he also gave a more optimistic picture of the front. He says that Ukrainian soldiers near Pokrovsk enjoy much less pressure from Russian air bombing, and also from Russian long range artillery and other artillery to a lesser extent, and less pressure in general from Russian attacks since the Kursk Incursion. Therefore they are fully supporting it. Despite the retreats, the moral is better now than before the Inkursktion.
He was there, practicly on the front line with other soldiers. Sometimes as close as a few hundred meters from the Russians.

He also said that Russians made increasingly more use of civilian vehicles during their meat assaults, making the death tall even higher. Indicating a shortage of IFV's.
Russians, on the other hand, improved their drone arsenal both in quantity and in quality, but they waste them insanely. When they recieve a batch of drones, say 3000, they fly them immediately, as many as possible, without knowing what target to hit or if they will even find a target. And a big part of them just fell in the fields because they didn't find any target. This is because Russians get large quantities of drones but don't have enough reconnaissance drones to prepare for the swarm attack. Whereas Ukrainians reconnaissance drones watch permanently from the sky 24/7. Russians also don't have Baba Yaga equivalent able drop large payloads.
(another video from him)

He doesn't understand the attitude of the Ukrainian Head Quarter. It's known that they have reserves. They see that the front is collapsing in Pokrovsk and punctured in several othe points. Yet, they don't send these reserves.
They did it recently, but only when Russians were less than 8 km from Pokrovsk! It looks like they are not worried at all. And Ukrainian soldiers there are not worried neither (it's still very hard, of course, but not as much as in Bahmut or Avdiivka) because they don't see these retreats as critical (except in the case Pokrovsk fell). Even better, they got the right to withdraw from their assigned position if their life were in danger. They don't recieve the order to hold the position at any cost anymore. There is also better rotation than before.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
That's not accurate. The pilot who died was not in combat operation or in the battlefield and none of other pilots were.
They were chasing cruising missiles in an area where Russian fighter jets and ground to air missiles don't go. They not only didn't engage in a combat operation, but they also made sure that they couldn't.
If you are on a combat mission intercepting enemy missiles and other projectiles, you are on the battlefield and not a training exercise. I believe this is very clear.

According to Xavier Tytteleman, former french Rafale pilot and air defense expert (and pro unkrainian vidblogger), Ukes know perfectly well what caused the crash and don't tell us the exact truth.

The F16 was shot down by friendly fire but not by a Patriot missile. The Patriot couldn't engage the F16 thanks to identification via the jet's responder.
Feonor suggested that the F16 was hit by debris from the explosion or by the explosion shock wave as both the F16 and the Patriot were closing in on the Russian missile together at the same time.

But that's not Xavier Tytteleman's interpretation. He said that the F16 was hit by a soviet made air defense missile, BUK or S300 which don't acknowledge F16's as friendly planes. (Adapting to this is not that simple.) And that's the reason why Ukrainians are transforming the truth, first by suggesting that it could be a Patriot, then by saying that the investigation is still going on, to find the cause. That's bs because they probably knew minutes later what caused the crash. They don't tell the truth because that would be admitting that Russian air defense system are capable to shot down F16's. That shouldn't be a surprised because these systems are not bad. Ukes are not going to engage their precious, albeit 40 years old F16's within range of Russian air defense anytime soon. But that would make Russians more confident in their ability to destroy them. It would break the myth that the Russians made up around this war plane since they expected to see them in the Ukrainian sky.
I also believe everyone is aware that most Russian AD assets can intercept F-16s and there is no myth or secret about it. It has been talked about by a great number of experts over a long period of time snd cited here a number of times. Unless the Ukes want to build another myth around it, which they are good at.

F16's will only venture into strikes on the front line when there will be enough of them to protect the sky from cruise missiles and when Mirage 2000 come. The Mirage 2000 could come as early as the end of this year (add 2 or 3 months delay as usual). Then F16's could be freed for other missions.
It should be noted that F16's can carry a range of air to ground missiles (I forgot the name exactly of what was delivered) and gliding bombs, but curiously, they are unable to carry the Storm Shadow/Scalp missiles because they are not US made... As a result, Americans will (finally) deliver their own F16 compatible cruise missiles in the future.
The F-16s could carry United Kingdom-supplied Storm Shadow air-launched cruise missiles with a range of more than 250 kilometers (155 miles), potentially striking targets inside Russia.


There are better sources, of course, but this is the first google search result to support my claim.

One of the main arguments for delivering F-16s to Ukraine was that it would make it easier to use the Storm Shadows/Scalps and make it more efficient. This is also no secret.

In his video (sorry it's only available in french without english subtitle), he also gave a more optimistic picture of the front. He says that Ukrainian soldiers near Pokrovsk enjoy much less pressure from Russian air bombing, and also from Russian long range artillery and other artillery to a lesser extent, and less pressure in general from Russian attacks since the Kursk Incursion. Therefore they are fully supporting it. Despite the retreats, the moral is better now than before the Inkursktion.
He was there, practicly on the front line with other soldiers. Sometimes as close as a few hundred meters from the Russians.
Most of everyone else, including the US intel that I cited earlier, suggests that the situation is the opposite.

He also said that Russians made increasingly more use of civilian vehicles during their meat assaults, making the death tall even higher. Indicating a shortage of IFV's.
Russians, on the other hand, improved their drone arsenal both in quantity and in quality, but they waste them insanely. When they recieve a batch of drones, say 3000, they fly them immediately, as many as possible, without knowing what target to hit or if they will even find a target. And a big part of them just fell in the fields because they didn't find any target. This is because Russians get large quantities of drones but don't have enough reconnaissance drones to prepare for the swarm attack. Whereas Ukrainians reconnaissance drones watch permanently from the sky 24/7. Russians also don't have Baba Yaga equivalent able drop large payloads.
(another video from him)
Is there any evidence that suggests Ukraine has more recon UAVs than Russia? Pretty sure the situation is the opposite. I think Russia has more and they fly much further.

I would check my sources of information, if I were you, haha.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Minor update it appears Russia is also moving on Ukrainsk despite the setback in nearby Selidovo. This suggests that Russia thinks Ukraine doesn't have enough to put up a good defense in both towns. It's also possible they decided to not fight Ukraine where Ukraine is defending, and try further south. The direction they seem to be approaching from is a bit odd to me. Yes they've got Galitsinovka and Dolinovka at their backs, but they're on the side of town opposite the refuse mound whose bulk and height dominates the tiny town (iirc population ~10k). Take the mound and you cover the fields south of Selidovo, and the town. Instead Russian forces enter the town from the gully to the south-east, and from Lisovka, the village/suburb of Ukrainsk to the east. Why they couldn't push into the fields west of Memrik and then south into Ukrainsk is unclear. Perhaps there are reasons not obvious from looking at maps.

The situation in Novgorodskoe phenol plant area remains unclear.

 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
The new production numbers released by the US Department of Defense suggest the following:

The United States has invested $5.3 billion to expand domestic production capacity of the following munitions or subcomponents (NOTE: entries reflect increases from 2022 to current production rates):

- 155mm Projectiles: 14,400 per month to 40,000 per month (178% increase)
- 155mm Propelling Charge: 14,494 per month to 18,000 per month (24% increase)
- GMLRS: 833 per month to 1,167 per month (40% increase)
- Javelin: 175 per month to 200 per month (14% increase)
- AIM-9X: 116 per month to 137 per month (18% increase)
- PAC-3 MSE: 21 per month to 42 per month (100% increase)
- HIMARS: 5 per month to 8 per month (60% increase)
- M777 Tubes: 11 per month to 18 per month (64% increase)


Outside of the US production lacks hard numbers for the most part and is mostly forecasts and plans.

Examples of production expansion and munitions delivery efforts announced by UDCG members include, but are not limited to:

- France and Sweden will double capacity of ammunition and explosives loading by 2025, double capacity of modular charges by 2026, and increase powder production capacity ten-fold by 2026.
- Sites in Germany, Spain, Hungary, South Africa, and Australia plan to increase production up to 700,000 artillery shells and up to 10,000 tons of gunpowder per year by 2025; this includes a new gunpowder factory in Romania as part of a project developed with the European Commission and a new artillery ammunition facility in Germany.
- Germany, the Netherlands, Romania, and Spain will co-produce up to 1,000 Patriot GEM-T missiles in Germany.
- A consortium of 15 countries led by the Czech Republic have pledged €1.7 billion to source 500,000 artillery rounds from around the world by the end of 2024.
- Through the Act in Support of Ammunition Production (ASAP), European defense industry is expected to increase annual ammunition shell production capacity to 2 million by the end of 2025. 31 projects cover five areas: explosives, powder, shells, missiles, and testing and reconditioning certification.
- Norway will invest more than NOK 1 billion to significantly expand artillery production for at least 15 years.
- Nordic other participating nations are increasing ammunition production through the NORDEFCO++ initiative to support Ukraine as well as to strengthen long-term capacity to ensure regional security of supply.


To note, we know that some of these have already semi-failed, such as the Czech initiative, for example (but they are also already reflecting a reduced number of shells than was originally planned). Another interesting thing to note is that South Africa is listed among the members of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group.

There are more interesting tidbits in the report. For instance, they delivered 90 refurbished T-72 tanks to Ukraine, half was delivered by the Dutch and the other half by the Americans (no idea who refurbished them), along with 100,000 spare parts. It also talks about the partnerships with the Ukrainian MIC.

The report can be found here:

 

swerve

Super Moderator
The Czechs have reported that some of the shells they've identified as for sale were found to have problems, & I think some may have turned out to be not worth buying, but they've been making deliveries since June. It was announced in July that 45,000 had been delivered, with another 100,000 due to be delivered by the end of August, & a continuing thereafter.

The Czechs have been deliberately vague about sources, & increasingly vague about numbers, saying that Russia has been trying to interfere.

The Slovaks have said that their factories are renovating some of the rounds bought under the Czech initiative. That may mean refilling.

"Outside of the US production lacks hard numbers for the most part and is mostly forecasts and plans."
A lot of those "forecasts & plans" have been partly fulfilled since being announced. Contracts were awarded & work began in 2022 & 2023. Existing production lines started working more hours, workers recruited, etc.

It's easier for the USA to increase production, as the US army has its own factories, & a few external suppliers closely tied in. Orders can be given & work begun, pretty much. Europe's more capitalist, with multiple private companies making most ammunition & its components, & governments have to negotiate - & convince manufacturers they won't be left with white elephants if they invest to expand production.

From what I've read, bottlenecks were hit early on in fuses & explosives, & there's had to be investment there.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
The Czechs have reported that some of the shells they've identified as for sale were found to have problems, & I think some may have turned out to be not worth buying, but they've been making deliveries since June. It was announced in July that 45,000 had been delivered, with another 100,000 due to be delivered by the end of August, & a continuing thereafter.

The Czechs have been deliberately vague about sources, & increasingly vague about numbers, saying that Russia has been trying to interfere.

The Slovaks have said that their factories are renovating some of the rounds bought under the Czech initiative. That may mean refilling.
I am pretty sure it was already discussed here a while ago that Czechs hit some pretty big hiccups along the way, including poor quality of munitions; competition with Russia; prices significantly higher than expected (like way over), especially provided the quality; some countries never committed any funds (they promised to commit) to the initiative, and so on. I think it was 18 countries that agreed to provide the funds, with only 3 or 4 actually ponying in the first months. The last news I saw was 14 or 15 out of 18 paid some money. At the end if the day, it was announced that they will use the funds from the interest accrued on the frozen Russian assets on this initiative as well because those committed do not contribute enough money.

From what I heard last, 100,000 (in total) was expected to be delivered by the end of summer. What was actually delivered we don’t know, of course. Keep in mind that they started with a million (or 1.5M?) shells when first announced (I wouldn’t quote myself on these numbers as it was a while ago now). They then trimmed the number to 800,000. The last number was 500,000 by the end of this year (the number also reflected in the report cited above). The math for 500,000 is also unlikely to add up by the end of the year, in my opinion. The following article supports some of my claims above and if there is something it doesn’t cover, take it as a hearsay as I really don’t want to look for more at this moment, but may come back to it later (I think all or most of it was already discussed here by me and others anyway).


"Outside of the US production lacks hard numbers for the most part and is mostly forecasts and plans."
A lot of those "forecasts & plans" have been partly fulfilled since being announced. Contracts were awarded & work began in 2022 & 2023. Existing production lines started working more hours, workers recruited, etc.

It's easier for the USA to increase production, as the US army has its own factories, & a few external suppliers closely tied in. Orders can be given & work begun, pretty much. Europe's more capitalist, with multiple private companies making most ammunition & its components, & governments have to negotiate - & convince manufacturers they won't be left with white elephants if they invest to expand production.

From what I've read, bottlenecks were hit early on in fuses & explosives, & there's had to be investment there.
Yes, I completely agree about the market economy in Europe as far the ammunition is concerned.

Even the US, unless I remember it wrong, is falling short of their planned expansion. In Europe things are way more complicated. Like you said, there was reported shortage if fuses, gun powder, you name it. And things aren’t looking brightly. I do not believe the aforementioned targets (“forecast and plans”) will be achieved in the timeframe provided. And it is not only me who thinks so. For example:

The European Union's capacity to produce 155 mm artillery ammunition may be less than half as large as public estimates by senior EU officials indicate, affecting the bloc's ability to keep promises about supplies to Ukraine, Schemes and its partners in a journalistic investigation have found.[…]

In addition to the capacity issue, interviews with ammunition producers, buyers, government officials, policy advisers, and defense experts in EU member states and Ukraine showed that the EU has given Ukraine about half as many shells as it has promised, with a significant delay.

In March, the European Commission said that thanks to its measures, European annual production capacity for 155 mm shells had reached 1 million a month earlier.

Three months later, in June, Thierry Breton, the European commissioner for the internal market, said that EU producers would reach an annual capacity of 1.7 million 155 mm shells by the end of this year and that capacity would continue to grow. However, according to a high-ranking European arms industry source, the current capacity is about one-third of this.

"It's a very bad idea to convince ourselves that we have three times the actual production capacity and make decisions based on that. Then suddenly to find out that nothing is coming out of the factories and you cannot supply Ukraine and the NATO alliance," the source said.[…]

This testimony aligns with that of two other knowledgeable industry sources journalists spoke to in June -- high-level officials in an EU country and in Ukraine -- who assessed the annual capacity of European 155 mm ammunition production at over half a million.

"Declarations of the EU leaders regarding the 155 mm production capacity that is to be reached by the end of this year are not reasonable. Production increases across Europe are lagging behind, with the current total capacity reaching about 580,000 shells per year," said a well-informed artillery industry source from Slovakia.

Two other documents estimate the European industry's annual capacity as of the beginning of the year at not much higher than half a million.

According to a December 2023 Estonian Defense Ministry report, the EU production capacity is about 600,000 shells a year. This fits with German arms maker Rheinmetall's January 2024 estimate, an internal document that journalists obtained, which says that all Western European arms makers taken together could produce around 550,000 shells annually as of the beginning of this year.[…]

The Rheinmetall estimate contradicts the European Commission's claim that in January 2024, the EU's production capacity reached 1 million rounds of ammunition per year.


And so on. This is from an article from exactly two months ago.


There was a number of articles on the subject that also talked about the issue of lacking funds that were promised by the various governments, some suggesting that they still didn’t see the investments that were promised almost two years ago now. I believe the article cited talks a little bit about that issue as well. So the producers are simply not expanding their existing capacities nearly as much as often reported and claimed by the officials. This is quite an issue. And this issue is fully supported by the situation reported from the frontline in Ukraine. And we had already seen this with the previous “EU pledge” of 1M or whatever many shells it was by the end of the year, when they delivered half, if that (I don’t remember off the top of my head). The situation doesn’t seem to have changed.

With most certainty, we can only say that the current production of the entire west is about 1 million rounds per annum. And there is not much that suggests it is going to increase drastically any time soon. We then need to consider that many governments had already stated that their priority now would be replenishing their own stocks and the situation looks even worse then.

I believe at this point it is pretty clear that there is way more talk and promises that are detached from reality than actions by the western countries. This is not to say that they are not doing anything and everything, but they simply lack the ability to do what they talk about. This seems to be the real reality. And I, personally, have sever lack of understanding of why they constantly talk about things they cannot deliver. I guess that’s a regular day in any politician’s life, but this is not just another regular day.

On the subject, consider the recent announcement of 77 additional Leo-1 MBTs to be delivered to Ukraine. Well, this is pretty legit source for all German as related to aid to Ukraine:

IMG_6903.jpeg

He also talks about the newly promised PhZ 2000 in the same thread, but he isn’t certain about these claims yet.

IMG_6904.jpeg

I am fairly certain that this is exactly the case and I brought up this issue here previously on the real example of artillery shell pledges (I think that’s what I used for my example): they promise x, deliver n, then talk about x-n as a new pledge, completely distorting the reality, and then rinse repeat after delivering another n1, so the next pledge is x-n-n1. Germans are not the only ones good at it. One would have to be insane to built their medium and long-term plans based on these talks. I am assuming Ukrainians understand this completely, obviously.

So trying to figure out what’s real citing politicians’ statements is far from ideal course of action, haha.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
I have a feeling I ran out of words in the post above, so I will start a new one about a couple of things I actually wanted to post, lol.

On the subject of the Iranian missiles being delivered to Russia as previously reported. It appears that this isn’t necessarily factual at this point. At least both White House and Burns (CIA’s head) refused to confirm this had taken place:

IMG_6906.jpeg

That would be a post on Twitter by the defense editor at The Economist.

In other news, Russians appear to be recruiting about 1,000 troops per day. The estimates suggest that they have recruited 73,400 in the first quarter of 2024 and 92,900 in the second quarter.


Note that we cannot entirely trust these estimates for various reasons. The most obvious one would be the timeline of when the bonuses are paid (are they paid immediately upon signing, month from signing, two, more?). However, this still suggests that the recruitment is either stable or on the rise. I doubt it would be multiple months from signing too as it simply wouldn’t make sense. I wouldn’t be surprised if the next quarter numbers will be significantly higher. These numbers are further supported by the Ukrainian and western intel of well over 30,000 recruits per month. Of course, here we have another issue: do they take their numbers from similar reports? It isn’t a farfetched scensrio (I showed before they use google translate and post it as their findings).

What do these numbers suggest though? I don’t know. One thing is that it is likely that the Russian Forces are growing at a pace of about 20,000 troops per month (Ukrainian MoD’s casualties reports aside since they don’t lose 1,000+ troops daily). I would say that the 20,000 is probably a fairly conservative estimate, realistically. Another thing would probably be that the Russian authorities are pretty serious in their intentions. They are probably also trying to avoid another round of mobilization by building some reserves (that they also use on the frontline) in case things go sour. But I also believe they feel that things are going their way (and they sure are, at least for now) and maybe want to speed things up a bit. I will try to comment more on this topic later, as it is getting late now.

On the subject of “not a metre in Pokrovsk direction” or whatever he said:

IMG_6905.jpeg

The original Twitter post: x.com

I want to note here that I started pasting the snapshots of the twitter posts, as I am sure everyone noticed. Two main reasons for this: 1) I lately noticed that posts simply disappear and this way reference is still provided; 2) for convenience of those who do not have an X account.

Last thing for those interested in the subject matter. A great thread about T-90M MBT:


And the original post on X for those who prefer it that way: x.com
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
Edit: A couple more things and then I am done.

From earlier today (technically yesterday):

IMG_6908.jpeg

The post on X: x.com

The most reasonable explanation, in my opinion, for the question asked from a few minutes ago:

IMG_6907.jpeg

Post on X: x.com

It appears Ukraine doesn’t have enough funds to pay the soldiers in September (due on Sept 20). The article states, citing the head of the Rada budget committee; that the issue will be solved by a vote in Rada for changes in the budget during their next session before Sept 17-18. No details as to what changes exactly.


Edit: I intended to edit my previous post, but I guess it is really getting late, haha.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Edit: A couple more things and then I am done.

From earlier today (technically yesterday):

View attachment 51687

The post on X: x.com

The most reasonable explanation, in my opinion, for the question asked from a few minutes ago:

View attachment 51688
Except Russia is counter-attacking in Kursk region. Some villages are changing hands over and over again. Malaya Loktnya for example went from Russian to Ukrainian to Russian to Ukrainian. There is a lot of that kind of fighting.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
^ All these people are asking why there isn’t some grand counteroffensive by the Russians to take back the territory. Motherland and all. They aren’t talking about some relatively small positional fighting, but, I believe, what Ukrainians were counting on and also seriously miscalculated, which I discussed previously.

The guy asking the question is a former Prime Minister of Sweden (only 3 years though), but also a former Minister of Foreign Affairs (for 8). He is currently a co-chair of the European Council of Foreign Relations. This, in my opinion, shows how deep and high the lack of understanding goes in regard to what is happening, how, and why. Moreover, these guys feel completely alright with expressing it in the most public ways.

So far, I think, Russians are doing what I thought they would. Relatively small positional battles in Kirsk, but decimating the area with drones, artillery, and glide bombs, while continuing their offensive in Ukraine. Here is what a guy who watches more videos from the battlefield than he should had to say on the subject today:

IMG_6922.jpeg

To note, “faggots” is how Ukrainians generally refer to Russians, regardless of how weird it is. Under “show more” it says “their stocks allow them to do this”. Well, in his post it says “our stocks allow us to do this”, but that would be an incorrect translation of the original post on Telegram:


I really do not see why would they do anything else at this moment, but grind the Ukrainian forces slowly but surely. And I really do not understand why people seem to be surprised by that. I do wonder if this had any significant effect on the amount of glide bombs dropped in Ukraine. I also wonder whether, if it did, it actually matters as much.

Deepstate reported today that Russians advanced in Hrodivka and captured Vodyane (so much serious fighting took place for that village!). I wonder how long it will now be until they take Vuhledar.


Other developments:

IMG_6923.jpeg

Post on X: x.com

None of the Ukrainian sources I follow reported any advances in Kursk by neither side.

Interesting remarks by Scholz today (via Google translate from German):

In the interview, Scholz also spoke out in favor of Russia taking part in the second "peace summit." He said he and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Selensky agreed on this.

“I believe that now is the moment when we need to discuss how we can get out of this war situation and achieve peace more quickly than it currently seems.”


 

Redshift

Active Member
Except Russia is counter-attacking in Kursk region. Some villages are changing hands over and over again. Malaya Loktnya for example went from Russian to Ukrainian to Russian to Ukrainian. There is a lot of that kind of fighting.
Leaving villages and towns utterly ruined I expect, what a wonderful war!
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Leaving villages and towns utterly ruined I expect, what a wonderful war!
With the heavy use of artillery and bombs, even in places that don't change hands repeatedly, destruction tends to be total or near total. Mariupol' was essentially lucky compared to places like Artemovsk/Bakhmut, or Dzerzhinsk/Toretsk that's current being demolished. Unless the dynamic changes and the front lines start to move much faster, anywhere this roller of death passes in either direction will be left in ruins.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
With the heavy use of artillery and bombs, even in places that don't change hands repeatedly, destruction tends to be total or near total. Mariupol' was essentially lucky compared to places like Artemovsk/Bakhmut, or Dzerzhinsk/Toretsk that's current being demolished.
By historic comparison (WW1, WW2) the damage is actually fairly light. In the sense of "can be torn down and rebuilt within a few years" as opposed to decades.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
By historic comparison (WW1, WW2) the damage is actually fairly light. In the sense of "can be torn down and rebuilt within a few years" as opposed to decades.
I think this has to do with the scale and depth of the conflict. So for example rebuilding Mariupol' within a few years is something Russia can do, and it likely even gave Russian construction companies a boost. But if Russia has to rebuild large swatches of occupied Ukraine, it might be more difficult. At the end of the day WWII had millions of men on the front lines, and swept across large swathes of the European continent. Here Russia has gloriously advanced from the suburbs of Donetsk to the next row of small towns west of Donetsk. It doesn't matter how many times you drop a 152mm artillery shell on a building. Past a certain point the building is a total loss anyway and has to be completely demolished and replaced. So re-shelling parts of Artemovsk/Bakhmut over and over again doesn't really increase the level of destruction beyond a certain point.

On a side note I think the biggest problem Ukraine faces is not the rebuilding of destroyed towns but the continuing depopulation. Ukrainian birth rates are catastrophically low, and were terrible even before the war. Mortality has spiked as access to healthcare has suffered. Ukraine might be left with a population of as low as 15 million people in the government-controlled part of the territory (as opposed to the part Russia occupies) by 2030, if millions of war refugees don't all flood back. In many cases Ukraine might end up with semi-empty cities especially as the older groups start to die off. Russian authorities in the Lugansk region have already made some comments to the effect that rebuilding some of the destroyed towns doesn't make sense because nobody is going to live there anyway.
 

Fredled

Active Member
KipPotapych said:
If you are on a combat mission intercepting enemy missiles and other projectiles, you are on the battlefield and not a training exercise.
How shooting down unmanned targets is a combat mission? Please define "combat".

You said:
also believe everyone is aware that most Russian AD assets can intercept F-16s and there is no myth or secret about it. It has been talked about by a great number of experts over a long period of time snd cited here a number of times. Unless the Ukes want to build another myth around it, which they are good at.
I said that the Russians, not the Ukrainians, build up a myth around the F16 despite that it's 40 years old and that theoricaly the basic S300 would be able to destroy it.
Nevertheless, the Russian military leadership is scarred about the first encounter with this plane.

You said:
The F-16s could carry United Kingdom-supplied Storm Shadow
Yes it could if they would upgrade it to that effect. Currently F16s given to Ukraine are not able to to that and there is no program to adapt to make the F16 compatible with Storm Shadow, or this program is still secret.

This illustrates the lack of political will in the US to give Ukraine really what they need to win the war. It's as if they just want the Ukraiians to stop the Russians but not to be able to take back territories.
It would be much more simple that the Amercans give their own cruise missiles which can be nounted directly on F16s than to adapt the F16s to Storm Shadows, which are in limited edition anyway.

The US could give immediately over 1000 ATACMS that have to be decomissioned and they would even save money. But they don't.
The US stocks are full of old vehicles and weapons that are to be replaced and could be given to Ukraine. With this alone, Ukrainian forces could be twice as strong as today.

This lack of political will to take decisive decisions is hard to explain.

I said:
Russian long range artillery and other artillery to a lesser extent, and less pressure in general from Russian attacks since the Kursk Incursion. Therefore they are fully supporting it. Despite the retreats, the moral is better now than before the Inkursktion.
He was there, practicaly on the front line with other soldiers. Sometimes as close as a few hundred meters from the Russians.
You said:
Most of everyone else, including the US intel that I cited earlier, suggests that the situation is the opposite.
In this case, I would rather believe the guy who met the soldiers on the fron tline, and who has daily contacts with french volunteers fighting and training recruits in Ukraine than politically motivated US intel agency.

IMO, Americans are not happy with Zelensky not to have told of their plan to invade the Kursk Oblast in advance. Maybe he said something vague like we are to make some short incursions and hit a few targets, but they didn't tell that they wuld make an operation of this size.
And Zelensky didn't tell them because the Americans would have been against. Therefore they are criticizing it.

Anyway, the fact that Pokrovsk and Chasiv Yar are still resisting proves that the morale of the Ukrainians is better or at least not worse.

You said:
s there any evidence that suggests Ukraine has more recon UAVs than Russia? Pretty sure the situation is the opposite.
No. I just repeat what Xavier Tytelmann repeated from drone operators on the front line.
These operators said that many times they spotted two or three Russian soldiers advancing, gave the location to the headquarter and the headquarter did nothing. And they didn't understand why. Short of ammunition, Artillery not ready, don;t want to disclose artillery location for a small squad of foot soldiers, let's pretend that we don't see them to better surprise them later, not worth responding because these soldiers are cut from the supply base anyway and will give up in a couple of days...

But back to the topic: You have the right to be skeptical. but as anything else here, it's interesting bits of information which could explain future development. Or not.
My goal is not to say "hey, Ukraine is going to win the war" or something. But sharing what somebody has heard from somebody about something. Nothing more.
If you wanted only sources with indisputable evidence, you could remove 90% of the links here, and the conversation would get boring very quickly. ;)

First Russia has always been late with drone development including reconnaissance ones. They began the war with drone fitted with a Nikon photo camera and a small motor to press on the button. The drone had to return to its base so that Russians could read the SIM card.
Now they can view in real time, but it was a late development, almost entirely dependent on Chinese made parts, if not entire systems.

Recently Ukrainians are claiming that they are able to jam reconnaissance drone much more effectively than before. More recently they also said that they found a way to jam Shaheds.
The next weeks will show if it's true.

You said:
I believe at this point it is pretty clear that there is way more talk and promises that are detached from reality than actions by the western countries. This is not to say that they are not doing anything and everything, but they simply lack the ability to do what they talk about.
I fully agree with you. The European leadership is living on an ivory tower above the clouds.
Turning promises into reality is a long way. It's not as easy as they think.
You also have to realize that many countries who propose help to Ukraine have disastrous balance sheets, with oile of debts and deficits above 5% of GDP. They simply can't afford extra hundred of billion for the defense industry. Whereas the US already has and is already used to 12 digits defence spending. But more importantly, the US already has in stock what Ukrainian need.
Europeans hit the wall of economic reality.

The Czech Initiative was not realistic. I think that they wanted to buy shells from countries in Africa or South East Asia, or South America who would re-sell their old stock. They did't have contact with actual producers. And of course, many of these shells were not fit for use or didn't materialy exist as promised, or the Russians knew of the deal and offered a better price. Reihnmetal is more reliable
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
How shooting down unmanned targets is a combat mission? Please define "combat".
How is it not? It's an enemy inbound with a real payload that you are trying to intercept. SAM crews downing them are in combat. Jets engaging them are in combat. Ukraine has lost jets before in similar circumstances, so you can't even claim it's a "safe" situation.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The crew of German frigate Hessen got the "combat medal" a week ago for shooting down Houthi missiles and UCAVs over the Red Sea. Exact same thing.

... and there's people in that case who consider it "not combat" either.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
The crew of German frigate Hessen got the "combat medal" a week ago for shooting down Houthi missiles and UCAVs over the Red Sea. Exact same thing.

... and there's people in that case who consider it "not combat" either.
I mean... I can see it more in that case. I still disagree and I think it does count as combat action. But in the case of Russia's massive strikes on Ukraine, with jets and SAMs being lost in those attacks, calling it "not combat" is in my opinion just ridiculous.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
How shooting down unmanned targets is a combat mission? Please define "combat".
I don’t know, but, without me having to type much for a change (lol), maybe this can be an example:

The friendly fire, in this case, can be explained by the intensity of the battle, the number of flying objects, the lack of precedence (no other country in the world has ever had to face such modern missile attack of this scale and to chase so many missiles at once), lack of experience by the pilot and the Ukrainian Air Force.
 
Top