The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[Vivendi]

Ukraine should have the advantage in numbers of light infantry so all the Manpads/atgms supplied by the west make sense but with all footage of Ukrainian artillery getting hit and smashed gbad is there anything that can be sent to replace those losses in a meaningful timeframe? I understand that something like patriot is way too complicated but just thinking for example: a M777 might be something that an ex-D20 user might be able to be rapidly trained on? (assuming they have more men than guns?) If this war keeps dragging on then there's more time for this kind of effort to bear fruit - if the training starts now. Although I for one wouldn't want to be the one manning towed artillery on the modern battlefield (which perhaps lends weight to dumping the M777s on the poor Ukrainians in the first place)

According to Oryx and also some other sources Ukraine has for instance captured more Russian tanks than what they have lost... However no doubt Ukraine has also had significant losses in terms of soldiers killed and injured.

Tyler Rogoway has a new op-ed: Russia Has Already Lost | The Drive re-iterating many of the points mentioned in this thread already. No doubt Russia has already lost more than they can possibly gain from this. Even if they succeed in occupying parts of Ukraine and install puppets, the hatred towards Russia in the local population will be very strong, and Russia will have to fight a "never-ending" insurgence, supported by NATO. However one chilling possibility that Rogoway does not dig into is the possibility of Russia using WMD in Ukraine, most likely chemical and/or nuclear weapons.

Mark Schneider has a long piece on the Russian nuclear policy, and Ukraine well worth a read: Nuclear Threats and Putin’s War Against Ukraine | RealClearDefense. Central to Russian nuclear strategy is the idea of "escalate to deescalate" or "escalate to win.” This was announced officially in 2003. The idea is that Putin launches a small low yield/low-collateral damage nuclear attack, his victims do not retaliate, and as a result, Russia wins.

My estimate of the number of Russian tactical nuclear weapons is over 5,000. This is based on Russian press reports like Pravda.ru which in 2014 said, “Russia, according to conservative estimates, has 5,000 pieces of different classes of TNW [tactical nuclear weapons] - from Iskander warheads to torpedo, aerial and artillery warheads!” The official Russian claim that it has reduced its tactical nuclear weapons 75% from Cold War levels equates to about the same number. Mr. Rogov has noted that assessments of Russian nonstrategic nuclear weapons range between several thousand and over 10,000.

Dr. Philip Karber, President of the Potomac Foundation, has stated that roughly half of Russia's 5,000 tactical nuclear weapons have been modernized with new sub-kiloton nuclear warheads for air defense, torpedoes and cruise missiles. Dr. Karber’s source is under Chatham House rules, but the source is a very good one.

In other news, France now has 3 of their 4 nuclear submarines simultaneously at sea: France increases nuclear submarine presence in response to Russian threats | News | The Times

 

[CumbrianRover]

1. Towed systems will be killed in a peer war. Self propelled is the way to go. Self propelled artillery’s role is to deliver indirect fires against both enemy and to suppress or destroy opposing artillery’s ability to deliver similar fires (known as counter-battery work). If you don’t know, read up.

2. The biggest problem with M777 155mm/39 systems is keeping the ammo supply train going. The US Marines will insert their M777 by helicopter.

I'd agree, but, upstream in the thread, RusMil are being targetted by their thermal signatures, hence, would an L118 be a better asset?

Agree with your point on ammo resup.

 

[OPSSG]

In other news, France now has 3 of their 4 nuclear submarines simultaneously at sea: France increases nuclear submarine presence in response to Russian threats | News | The Times

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1506849721268293636

That is confirmed as NOT Accurate.

 

[swerve]

I like Xavier.

 

[GermanHerman]

According to Oryx and also some other sources Ukraine has for instance captured more Russian tanks than what they have lost... However no doubt Ukraine has also had significant losses in terms of soldiers killed and injured.

Tyler Rogoway has a new op-ed: Russia Has Already Lost | The Drive re-iterating many of the points mentioned in this thread already. No doubt Russia has already lost more than they can possibly gain from this. Even if they succeed in occupying parts of Ukraine and install puppets, the hatred towards Russia in the local population will be very strong, and Russia will have to fight a "never-ending" insurgence, supported by NATO. However one chilling possibility that Rogoway does not dig into is the possibility of Russia using WMD in Ukraine, most likely chemical and/or nuclear weapons.

I think if Russia annexes the territories in the East and South it will not try to force the population to stay. So most people that are strongly against russia will leave anyhow and it is questionable if those left behind cant be effectivly monitored and controlled.

I dont see a prologned insurgency as a defacto guaranteed outcome of this as long as russia dosnt go for the western parts of ukriane.

As for oryx numbers I highly question the ukrainian count. He himself has stated that he dosnt get enough ukrainian losses reported.

Ukrainians wont share their own losses on Twitter for obvious reasons and the russian MoD releaes extremly little footage. The russian troops themselfs are not Sharing anything so most what we See is from the Rebels.

But Ukraine had multiple hundreds of tanks, where are they If they are still around?

Last Time I checked oryx listed 3 Out of at least 100 t-80s destroyed/lost. Where are the 97 other t-80's? It's not an insignificant number...

So I personaly dont think the numbers for ukriane from oryx are any where near the real number.

 

[ngatimozart]

The claim that russia has lost 40.000 troops is somewhat questionable as that would be Close top 25% of their total force.

That would leave anywhere between 30-40% of their BTG's beyond combat ineffective and Replacement Units would need to be formed from the remains of decimated BTGs.

I don't know what to make of the counter offensive at Kiev yet as Ukraine has a made quite some claims about counter offensives that turned out to be nothing.

If it is true how ever it provides some credibility to the 40.000 lost.

However, there remains the question why ukraine is unable to capitalize these huge losses. Why are russians able to keep their frontlines from collapsing? Why are the ukrianans unable to penetrante and overcome the russian forces?

The most likely answer is that the ukrainian army was hit even harder then the russian given their numeral advantage at the start of the war.

This is of cause also highlighted by the fact that they are unable to lift the siege of Kherson or Mariopol. At the same time this unability puts into question the 40k lossese.

If Russia has lost 25% of their troops, how can they still maintain costly urban warfare at Mariopol? How can they still make progress at the Donbass Front? How are they still holding most of Izyum where some of the heaviest forces of Ukraine are at work.

Are all the combat effective troops left down in the south?

Once again, we will see how the counter offensive in kiev goes and get a partial answer.

What claim of 40,000 lost? In your posts, you are making claims without providing sources.

You are required to provide reliable reputable sources and Sputnik, Pravda, or RT are not reliable or reputable because they are propaganda channels.

 

[koxinga]

Interesting attack. Not a total surprise as the Russians were filmed by their own media disembarking from the port. Curious what ballastic missile was used. Tochka-U?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1506900560167026690

 

[ngatimozart]

I think if Russia annexes the territories in the East and South it will not try to force the population to stay. So most people that are strongly against russia will leave anyhow and it is questionable if those left behind cant be effectivly monitored and controlled.

I dont see a prologned insurgency as a defacto guaranteed outcome of this as long as russia dosnt go for the western parts of ukriane.

As for oryx numbers I highly question the ukrainian count. He himself has stated that he dosnt get enough ukrainian losses reported.

Ukrainians wont share their own losses on Twitter for obvious reasons and the russian MoD releaes extremly little footage. The russian troops themselfs are not Sharing anything so most what we See is from the Rebels.

But Ukraine had multiple hundreds of tanks, where are they If they are still around?I suggest

Last Time I checked oryx listed 3 Out of at least 100 t-80s destroyed/lost. Where are the 97 other t-80's? It's not an insignificant number...

So I personaly dont think the numbers for ukriane from oryx are any where near the real number.

Oryx details his methodology which is quite good. He only counts losses / damages where he has photographic evidence which is about as good as you're going to get so don't complain. It's not a video game where the computer tallies everything for you. I suggest that you watch the video and learn, and stay away from Russian propaganda sources because Putin isn't telling his own people the facts let alone anyone else.

 

[koxinga]

-deleted- unconfirmed

 

[the road runner]

Russian Alligator class landing ship "ORSK " believed to be hit by a ballistic missile sinks while another ship catches fire

Ukraine War - Large Russian Landing Ship Explodes After Ukrainian Missile Strike In Berdyansk - YouTube

A sunken ship in port will make part of if not all of the port non operational...

 

[Vivendi]

The claim that russia has lost 40.000 troops is somewhat questionable as that would be Close top 25% of their total force.

That is the last high end estimate, not sure why you refer to the "high end" only, given the high uncertainties. NATO: Up to 40,000 Russian Troops Killed, Wounded, Taken Prisoner or Missing in Ukraine (wsj.com) Also in the same estimate, they refer to the "total force" of being 190,000. If you use the low-end estimate, (30,000) then roughly 15% of the Russian soldiers have been captured, wounded, escaped, or killed (what you refer to as "lost"). Taking the upper (not realistic IMHO) estimate you end up with 21%. They also say that "more than 10%" have been lost, not "more than 20% have been lost" (Analysis: Russia falls back on urban siege warfare in Ukraine | Russia-Ukraine war News | Al Jazeera ), another indication that they believe the actual number is probably closer to 30,000 than 40,000.

I definitely think the number is at the lower end of the range, one reason is that in the NATO estimate they assume the "traditional" 1:3 ratio of killed and wounded, however there are several indications that in this conflict, the ratio is much worse for Russia, and therefore they may over-estimate the number of wounded. For example, if we assume 7,000 killed and 1:2 ratio then they have 14,000 wounded not 21,000.

 

[swerve]

Oryx details his methodology which is quite good. He only counts losses / damages where he has photographic evidence which is about as good as you're going to get so don't complain. It's not a video game where the computer tallies everything for you. I suggest that you watch the video and learn, and stay away from Russian propaganda sources because Putin isn't telling his own people the facts let alone anyone else.

Mr Moran hasn't lost his accent, despite many years in the USA. Sounds a bit more American than I remember, though.

 

[Vivendi]

As of 22 March, WHO had verified 64 incidents of attacks on health care in 25 days (between 24 February and 21 March) causing 15 deaths and 37 injuries. That is 2–3 attacks per day.

“Attacks on health care are a violation of international humanitarian law, but a disturbingly common tactic of war – they destroy critical infrastructure, but worse, they destroy hope,” said Dr Jarno Habicht, WHO representative in Ukraine. “They deprive already vulnerable people of care that is often the difference between life and death. Health care is not – and should never be – a target.”

7 million are internally displaced, and 4 million have fled Ukraine.

WHO Ukraine report: 28 days of war, 64 verified attacks on health care, and 18 million people affected — MercoPress

Edit: UN update:

The civilian death toll in Ukraine has exceeded 1,000 since the start of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights said Thursday — warning that "the actual figures are considerably higher."
“Most of the civilian casualties recorded were caused by the use of explosive weapons with a wide impact area, including shelling from heavy artillery and multiple-launch rocket systems, and missile and air strikes,” according to the OHCHR.
In a statement, the UN body detailed the 1,035 civilian deaths as “214 men, 160 women, 14 girls, and 28 boys, as well as 48 children and 571 adults whose sex is yet unknown.”
It added that at least 1,650 civilians have been injured since the start of the invasion.
In the Donetsk and Luhansk regions in eastern Ukraine, the OHCHR has recorded 311 civilian deaths and 857 civilians injured. In other regions, including the city of Kyiv, Cherkasy, Chernihiv, Kharkiv, Kherson, Kyiv, Mykolaiv, Odesa, Sumy, Zaporizhzhia, Dnipropetrovsk and Zhytomyr regions, 724 civilians have been killed and 793 injured.
“OHCHR believes that the actual figures are considerably higher, as the receipt of information from some locations where intense hostilities have been going on has been delayed and many reports are still pending corroboration. This concerns, for example, Mariupol and Volnovakha (Donetsk region), Izium (Kharkiv region), Sievierodonetsk and Rubizhne (Luhansk region), and Trostianets (Sumy region), where there are allegations of numerous civilian casualties,” it said.

Live updates: Russia invades Ukraine, Mariupol besieged (cnn.com)

 

[Feanor]

Russian Alligator class landing ship "ORSK " believed to be hit by a ballistic missile sinks while another ship catches fire

Ukraine War - Large Russian Landing Ship Explodes After Ukrainian Missile Strike In Berdyansk - YouTube

A sunken ship in port will make part of if not all of the port non operational...

Russian sources are claiming they scuttled it intentionally to prevent the cargo of munitions from cooking off, and two other ships were able to leave. The ship is allegedly the Orsk.

 

[Vivendi]

Interesting article by Alex Hollings, comparing US and Russian air warfare doctrine: How Russia's warfare doctrine is failing in Ukraine - Sandboxx

Whereas the US doctrine is focusing on obtaining air dominance as soon as possible, to be able to provide CAS and ISR to ground forces in a very efficient manner, Russia is using air force more like an "airborne artillery" -- conducting airstrikes in support for its ground forces. Perhaps one reason for this is that Russia realized they would not be able to establish air dominance in a potential conflict with NATO, due to many factors, lack of dedicated SEAD platforms being only one of them. Therefore they aim to operate in conflicted air space, with all the challenges and limitations this implies.

Clearly this has not worked very well against Ukraine, which is able to fly their (dwindling) number of fighter jets even after one month of war.

Probably Russia will reconsider their air warfare doctrine after this.

 

[GermanHerman]

Oryx details his methodology which is quite good. He only counts losses / damages where he has photographic evidence which is about as good as you're going to get so don't complain. It's not a video game where the computer tallies everything for you. I suggest that you watch the video and learn, and stay away from Russian propaganda sources because Putin isn't telling his own people the facts let alone anyone else.

I fail to see where I'm complaining.
Also I fail to see from where you are getting the idea I was under the impression this was "a video game"

I simply stated there is asymmetry in the reporting of losses due to the channels they are reported from. The video you postet makes the very same point:

"we only see the video which is uploaded.
We seeing lot of sequences of ukrainian shooting at russians. They are the ones with the good cellphone availability."

Thats exactly what I'm saying. Oryx list gives us only a bare minimum but that doesnt tell us much about the actual number of losses. Oryx is aware of this, everyone is. So where is that a complain, where is the assumption that this is a video game where we are exposed to all the facts? I stated literaly the opposite of that and I quite honestly dont get where the misunderstanding happened.

What claim of 40,000 lost? In your posts, you are making claims without providing sources.

You are required to provide reliable reputable sources and Sputnik, Pravda, or RT are not reliable or reputable because they are propaganda channels.

This was a reply to this:

I am still not seeing any actual real proof from all the sources here and elsewhere being followed. We have footage of armor being blown up on the Russian side, but not necessarily the personnel with it.
Last week Western media stated Russian loss figure was at 7000, then a day ago it was at 20k, and now they are reporting 40k losses. Getting a bit ridiculous.
The same sources pushing video game footage, Ghost of Kiev, Snake island, and Instagram models protecting cities nonsense are feeding this info into the wild...
From actual Russian military sources on the front lines, most of the losses and wounds are coming from artillery shelling. There arent many being wounded by bullets - of course its not the case everywhere. Also not counting the armor hits and crew deaths.
The point is there is an astounding misinformation campaign coming from the Ukrainian side because they and the West control the narrative. If we were to believe the things that came from Ukrainian/Western side then the Russians never made it past Donbass region and all ran out of diesel on the highway.

In addition a source:

NATO: Up to 40,000 Russian Troops Killed, Wounded, Taken Prisoner or Missing in Ukraine

NATO says that up to 40,000 Russian troops have been killed, wounded, taken prisoner or are missing in Ukraine, said a senior military official from the alliance. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization calculates the figure based on information provided by Ukrainian authorities and information obta

www.wsj.com

it's been discussed on twitter by several people who have been used as source around here so I asumed it common knowledge at this point, sorry for that I'll provide links in the future.

That is the last high end estimate, not sure why you refer to the "high end" only, given the high uncertainties. NATO: Up to 40,000 Russian Troops Killed, Wounded, Taken Prisoner or Missing in Ukraine (wsj.com) Also in the same estimate, they refer to the "total force" of being 190,000. If you use the low-end estimate, (30,000) then roughly 15% of the Russian soldiers have been captured, wounded, escaped, or killed (what you refer to as "lost"). Taking the upper (not realistic IMHO) estimate you end up with 21%. They also say that "more than 10%" have been lost, not "more than 20% have been lost" (Analysis: Russia falls back on urban siege warfare in Ukraine | Russia-Ukraine war News | Al Jazeera ), another indication that they believe the actual number is probably closer to 30,000 than 40,000.

I definitely think the number is at the lower end of the range, one reason is that in the NATO estimate they assume the "traditional" 1:3 ratio of killed and wounded, however there are several indications that in this conflict, the ratio is much worse for Russia, and therefore they may over-estimate the number of wounded. For example, if we assume 7,000 killed and 1:2 ratio then they have 14,000 wounded not 21,000.

There might be potential for misunderstandings due to the language barrier, when I say "losses" or "lost" I do include POW / WIA and not just KIA. Maybe thats unclear as "lost" / "loss" in english refers specificly to kia? In german its used for all soliders that are no longer able to activly participate in the war effort and therefore are "lost".

In general I'm just not sure how reliable those numbers are. Even "only" 15% of their troops unable to further participate in the war is a very heavy hit. I think we have to wait and see what happens on the gorund and if russia will be able to regain momentum or if ukraine will get the upper hand and start counter offensives. That tells us more about the situation then these guesstimates of KIA/WIA/POW.

 

[John Fedup]

The link mentions the WSJ was using data supplied by Ukrainian authorities so perhaps the 40 k number is somewhat inflated. In any event the actual number is significant and higher than Russia is willing to admit at this point.

 

[Vivendi]

There might be potential for misunderstandings due to the language barrier, when I say "losses" or "lost" I do include POW / WIA and not just KIA. Maybe thats unclear as "lost" / "loss" in english refers specificly to kia? In german its used for all soliders that are no longer able to activly participate in the war effort and therefore are "lost".

In general I'm just not sure how reliable those numbers are. Even "only" 15% of their troops unable to further participate in the war is a very heavy hit. I think we have to wait and see what happens on the gorund and if russia will be able to regain momentum or if ukraine will get the upper hand and start counter offensives. That tells us more about the situation then these guesstimates of KIA/WIA/POW.

It seems the post you referred to (by Borealis) was the one mixing things up -- the 7,000 number referred to was estimated soldiers KIA, whereas the 40,000 referred to in the same sentence was "lost" (ie., KIA, wounded, captured, deserted). Anyways, if you had quoted the post you referred to in your original post, everything has been a bit more clear to everybody I think...

I did understand your post to use the word "lost" to mean as you describe above, as I hope was clear from my response, apologies if this was not clear. I believe "loss" can refer to either KIA or refer to KIA+POW+wounded+deserted, as we both did above.

As for the reliability of those estimates -- we don't really know at this stage. A 15% hit could explain why the Russians seem to have stalled, in spite of having an overwhelming numerical advantage (although logistics supplies may also explain a lot of the stalling). Keep in mind neither party has air dominance, and both have roughly the same level of technology in terms of equipment. Ukrainian forces have developed tremendously the last 8 years. For these reasons they are probably inflicting quite a lot of damage on each other, so numbers should be high on both sides. How many wars like this has the world seen since WW2, between two countries with roughly same level of technology? Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq can not be used as a reference. What were the losses in WW2 battles?

 

[Vivendi]

The link mentions the WSJ was using data supplied by Ukrainian authorities so perhaps the 40 k number is somewhat inflated. In any event the actual number is significant and higher than Russia is willing to admit at this point.

NATO says that up to 40,000 Russian troops have been killed, wounded, taken prisoner or are missing in Ukraine, said a senior military official from the alliance.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization calculates the figure based on information provided by Ukrainian authorities and information obtained from Russia--both officially and unintentionally, the official said.

NATO estimates that between 7,000 and 15,000 Russian soldiers have been killed since the invasion began on Feb. 24. Using statistical averages from past conflicts that for every casualty roughly three soldiers are wounded, NATO analysts reach their total figure.

The 15,000 KIA is roughly the official Ukrainians number, and for sure inflated, but that's the upper limit of the range they provide... Also, if you use that number and assume no soldiers were captured or deserted you would still get 60,000 soldiers "lost" (KIA+wounded, assuming 1:3 ratio), way beyond their upper figure of 40,000 soldiers lost. So perhaps the statement in WSJ that they use the 1:3 ratio is wrong, or they did not use the 15,000 KIA to estimate the upper bound.

 

[Vivendi]

Not sure if Nathan Ruser's maps have been posted already? IMHO a good alternative to maps produced by mainstream media:
Nathan Ruser on Twitter: "And finally, the traditional map that I've been making since the start of the invasion" / Twitter

Basically his maps don't show territorial control, they show the movement of Russian troops. He explains why, and the issues with the "standard" maps: Nathan Ruser on Twitter: "Because a few people seem to be confused and misreading the daily Ukraine maps that I have been making, this THREAD will talk about what they do show, and more importantly what they don't show. " / Twitter

He has also other maps, e.g.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1506986354240294913