I really can’t see what Russia can do at this point.
It will do its best to hold on to territory whilst conducting tactical advances in certain areas to keep the enemy off balance and to inflict as much damage as it can on the enemy until such a time when it's in a better position. What else can it do?
It doesn't lack an APS. It carries the Afghanit. What they gain is a number of modern tanks on the front lines. They're deploying vintage T-62Ms currently.
The idea of tens of thousands of pieces of debris falling down on Gaza and Israeli cities is not a very appealing one. Good for defense of bases. Not very good for defense of cities.Instead, Israel went for a purpose built, missile based system, the Iron Dome. This would give you sufficient range, short reaction time and lower cost compared to a full blown SAM.
Could the lanyard be that long because of the risk of explosion?
At 00.4 the gunner pulls the lanyard. Curious as to why the lanyard is so long?
It will do its best to hold on to territory whilst conducting tactical advances in certain areas to keep the enemy off balance and to inflict as much damage as it can on the enemy until such a time when it's in a better position. What else can it do?
Important to note that Russia is weak but it's not out of the fight yet. It still has resources even if those resources are lacking in numbers or quality.
Russia does not have the operational momentum, and tactical advances doesn't add up in the bigger picture.
seeing where things are now, it is at best a long shot.
I do not understand people (often Ukrainian propagandist) saying that Russia should negotiate a truce and withdraw to it’s borders. Why would they give away all the leverage they have in exchange of nothing?What Russia can do, and what it will, are two different discussions, to some extent.
They could offer a truce while they withdraw behind their own borders.
They could do ditto while offering to withdraw behind the lines that existed at the start of this current invasion.
What the Ukrainians will accept, is another matter, and I’m weird enough to think that they get a vote.
What the Ukrainians will accept, is another matter, and I’m weird enough to think that they get a vote.
I suspect what they will do - assuming that Putin doesn’t suddenly fall out of own window - will be along the lines you mention. Some combination of minimising losses (both territory and men and materiel ) while playing for time in which to rebuild units, refurbish stored weaponry and train/retrain conscripts. They will be hoping that the West grows tired and selfish enough to drop support for Ukraine (and they have grounds for that, whether Vietnam or Afghanistan), but what economic analysis that I’ve seen suggests that Russia will be defeated economically as well as militarily
I sometimes feel as if I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop. Much as I want the Ukrainians to win on principle (Self-determination is good, big country invading little country is probably bad) it is counter-intuitive to accept that the Russians are not only this bad, but incapable of fixing their shortcomings.
Maybe hoping for another Stalingrad?
They may have only limited numbers of Afghanit systems considering their need for western electronics.
But regardless, the T-14 are unlikely to add any more value than a T-72. The reasons are:
- Lack of proper training significantly reduces their effectiveness.
- Lack of modern, well trained combat and logistical envelope further degrades effectiveness.
- Doctrine for them either doesn't exist, was lost with expended servicemen, or won't be properly passed down to new crews.
- APS was designed for the needs of yesterday, and was conceptually obsolete by its public debut, due to neglect of upper hemisphere threats. It can defeat a Stugna from the front and sides. It can defeat a HEAT shell, but Javelins, NLAWS, drones, will simply bypass its horizontal interceptors. The occasional Javelin may be fooled, under certain conditions, by its soft kill system, but drones and NLAWs won't be. It also won't help it during the occasional tank vs tank engagements.
- Armor may have improved, but frontal hits are rare even in this war. The T-14's resistance to mission-kills has not improved over its predecessors. Its ability to drive away from artillery attacks has improved, but its core systems are actually more vulnerable. It will be mission-killed more easily, but will save the crews far more often, which is not really a relevant metric considering how little Russia cares to train them in the first place.
- Systems related to surveillance and firepower became more effective due to internal layout, but they require a lengthy training period to be used effectively.
Now for my own question.
How likely do you guys think it is for Ukraine to try and occupy Belgorod before starting any Crimean offensive, or at all?
This is an attrition industrial scale war. Armata is very expensive and difficult to produce.All those criticisms are fair, however I would submit several things. Russia is pulling T-62Ms out of storage. Something that brings the value of aT-72 is clearly superior. Most of Russia's T-80BV and T-72 fleet have no thermals and old FCS. This tank has a modern FCS and thermals. This already offers a significant advantage. We have many videos of Russian troops using thermals at night to strike targets. The side armor on a T-14 is actually significantly upgraded over even a T-72B3mod'16, at least from what we know. Increased side armor protection was one of the reasons commonly cited for development delays. They won't offer a revolutionary advantage or change the course of the war. But in my opinion they would be bettern then the overwhelming majority of what Russia is sending to the front lines currently.
The border area is certainly heating up right now. It's unclear what value this would bring if any, though.
Sturm...
We don’t have to be told.
Explains why they are so hard to shootdown with GBAD.
Indeed. We discussed this in a previous post. Also explains why they would be hard for aircraft launched missiles to target. They same would apply to most or all other mini UASs and loitering munitions with a certain RCS and IR signature.