It is very difficult or simply impossible to understand that one can be pro-Russian in this conflict in this forum.
The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread
- Thread starter Feanor
- Start date
Ananda
The Bunker Group
What's your point puting that ? Have you read Ngati post before yours ? Everyone has their own opinion in this forum and what are you as new member try to put provocative statement like that in this forum ?
This forum analyzes the military shaping of conflict by the parties to the conflict and their supporters. The cause of the conflict is not investigated here. The attitudes of the respective commentators regarding the perception of the topic differ from each other. The level of information is different, as well as the personal definition of ethics and morality.
For me personally, even the use of terms such as "pro-Russian" is a sign of simple-minded, same-same political propaganda - in other words, ridiculous. Whenever people start this "If you're not for me, you're against me!" crap, I'm definitely against these nutcases.
The German or Dutch PzH 2000 in action. The view from inside.
A new military support package.
The HIMARS is a very accurate weapon. The M26 hits the area. The M30 from A1 and M31 need accurate target coordinates. The counter-battery radar detects targets with a certain margin of error. You have to send a drone or work in real time with a satellite constellation to refine the coordinates. In the second case, a counter-battery will do the trick. In the first case, as long as the drone will reach there, and if the guns operate in the "correct" mode, there will be nothing to shoot at (like the HIMARS). So, in this war, the main targets for Himars are warehouses, headquarters, fortifications. (They may, for example, shatter enemy fortifications not only before assault, but during assault as well, without damaging their own. This is what it was created for, by the way. And it was prohibited to use M26 on targets closer than 2 km from the own ones.
A new military support package.
The HIMARS is a very accurate weapon. The M26 hits the area. The M30 from A1 and M31 need accurate target coordinates. The counter-battery radar detects targets with a certain margin of error. You have to send a drone or work in real time with a satellite constellation to refine the coordinates. In the second case, a counter-battery will do the trick. In the first case, as long as the drone will reach there, and if the guns operate in the "correct" mode, there will be nothing to shoot at (like the HIMARS). So, in this war, the main targets for Himars are warehouses, headquarters, fortifications. (They may, for example, shatter enemy fortifications not only before assault, but during assault as well, without damaging their own. This is what it was created for, by the way. And it was prohibited to use M26 on targets closer than 2 km from the own ones.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #3,965
Atunga the problem is that you were specifically warned away from discussing certain conspiracy-theory level topics and immediately proceeded to do that. The issue is not your point of view, it's your quality of posts.
Please avoid one-liners and simply posting videos. If you wish to discuss the contents of the video in question, the expectation is that you provide some input of your own to start the conversation.
Last edited:
Big_Zucchini
Well-Known Member
I've been hearing all around that "Russia's expending its guided munitions at a staggering rate", but is there an actual public study of the subject?
i.e comparing numbers and production rates pre-war with wartime.
i.e comparing numbers and production rates pre-war with wartime.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Have not heard of any actual public study, but I have not heard of there being reliable figures available to the public either. Given the number of accidents and incidents at various Russian arms and ordnance depots over the past ~11 years, it is quite possible that the amount of specific munitions available for deployment at the start of the present combat in Ukraine might be less than had been produced. One of the depots had held 75,000 tonnes of munitions prior to the incident, so it is distinctly possible that what Russia and/or the Soviet Union held built originally, might have been expended already.
It is also quite possible that theft could have further reduced reduced the quantities available.
Whilst I suspect most of the munitions which would have been lost to have been non-precision ordnance, likely being ordinary artillery and mortar shells and dumb rockets or free-fall 'iron' bombs, the number of incidents in slightly more than a decade does suggest that large quantities of munitions are not stored in the best nick. This in turn leads me to suspect that at least some of the newer, more capable precision munitions might also be kept in such conditions and/or have been lost in some of these incidents.
Russia has in the past had serious problems with the safe storing of ammunition
Stupendous ammo dump explosion at Krasnoyarsk - Combat Mission Black Sea - Battlefront.com Community
Unplanned Explosions at Munitions Sites incidents in country formerly part of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact · Mapping Cultural Space Across Eurasia (harvard.edu)
But has also been accused of involvement in the destruction of N.A.T.O ammunition dumps
Village Caught in Czech-Russia Spy Case Just Wants Things to Stop Blowing Up - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
Stupendous ammo dump explosion at Krasnoyarsk - Combat Mission Black Sea - Battlefront.com Community
Unplanned Explosions at Munitions Sites incidents in country formerly part of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact · Mapping Cultural Space Across Eurasia (harvard.edu)
But has also been accused of involvement in the destruction of N.A.T.O ammunition dumps
Village Caught in Czech-Russia Spy Case Just Wants Things to Stop Blowing Up - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
Lots of discussion about russia's inventory of artillery shells. Via Gen Ben Hodges
"One of the flaws in my analysis is that I do not know how much ammunition Russia still has of conventional artillery and rocket ammunition. They seem to have endless amounts. I don’t know how much they have, I don’t know how much they have started with. The consumption rate — what they’re using now — is huge. They already fire more than we have used in 20 years in Iraq and Afghanistan."
I would think that is anyone had at least a general idea of russian stores it would be someone like this.
One thing that is significant though:
"When it comes to precision weapons, the big missiles, and rockets that is that they are below 50% of what they had. They have used so many against civilian targets. They don’t have the ability to replace those because they require some components that have to be imported. The sanctions have stopped that so I do think we’re approaching the end of precision weapons that the Russians have."
Russia (if they are smart_ won't completely exhaust their inventory of PGM's so that phase may be almost over for russia. The other downside to this for russia is that Ukraine's inventory of PGM's is steadily increasing.
"One of the flaws in my analysis is that I do not know how much ammunition Russia still has of conventional artillery and rocket ammunition. They seem to have endless amounts. I don’t know how much they have, I don’t know how much they have started with. The consumption rate — what they’re using now — is huge. They already fire more than we have used in 20 years in Iraq and Afghanistan."
I would think that is anyone had at least a general idea of russian stores it would be someone like this.
One thing that is significant though:
"When it comes to precision weapons, the big missiles, and rockets that is that they are below 50% of what they had. They have used so many against civilian targets. They don’t have the ability to replace those because they require some components that have to be imported. The sanctions have stopped that so I do think we’re approaching the end of precision weapons that the Russians have."
Russia (if they are smart_ won't completely exhaust their inventory of PGM's so that phase may be almost over for russia. The other downside to this for russia is that Ukraine's inventory of PGM's is steadily increasing.
I refer you to my earlier post and this specific part of it:
If we were so anti Russian as you claim we would have banned one of our own, @Feanor , for his views and posts, plus there are some others on here who haven't been censured or banned because of their pro Russian views. With Feanor, even though we might disagree on some things, I hold him in the highest respect. There are other pro Russian posters who I mightn't agree with there views, but I do have respect for them and there's a couple of those individuals I hold in very high respect. I am sure that I not the only Moderator like this either. The common thing about these pro Russian posters is that they have the knack of being able to discern what is obviously propaganda and disinformation and what is not.
You have to be able to set your emotions aside and obtain the ability of being able to discern what is obviously propaganda and disinformation and what is not because if you don't any analysis that you undertake will always be flawed due to your bias. All of us have an inherent subconscious bias and that's to be expected, but we can and are required to set that aside when we are doing assessments etc. Any military officer and SNCO will tell you that because if you allow the emotion to over rule the logic your people get unnecessarily killed and that's bad. The same applies when we post, except people don't get killed. Emotion clouds logic and it is that rational thought and logic that adds to the quality of posts. Nevertheless it is sometimes difficult to let go of long held views and I am well known on here for my dislike of politicians.
Unfortunately that tends to be rather prevalent in some of my posts and it's a habit hard to break. I suppose it's time to seek penance from the Father Confessor @Preceptor yet again
I am a scientist so I am used to the scientific method and such a methodology is second nature to me. For people not used to that or who haven't been to a university it is something of a foreign concept and somewhat strange, but it creates a clarity of thought where others who read what you have written are not mislead, the sources that you provide are evidence for your claims, and you are adding verifiable, factual knowledge to the ongoing conversation. That way we all are learning.
Not a bad post, but yes will investigate causes of conflicts to a certain degree because no conflict starts spontaneously. I don't believe that the terms pro-Russian and pro-Ukrainian are simplistic at all, because you have to call their supports something and dancing around that label is pure sophistry beholden of some in todays society. You are correct when you say "The attitudes of the respective commentators regarding the perception of the topic differ from each other. The level of information is different, as well as the personal definition of ethics and morality." The forum would be pretty boring if everyone thought the same; it would be a bit like Orwell's "group-thought" from 1984.
The UK Forces News recently posted a video postulating that the Russians have started using AShM such as the old KH-22, against land based targets because their stocks of PGM are running low. It is suggested that they are unable to keep PGM production rates anywhere near the PGM expenditure rate, but in reality no one knows because such information is a closely guarded secret; not just in Russia, but in every nation that produces PGM.
Blocked by paywall from NYT. I am curious to how any forces defend their munitions. Living as a casual civ observer during the 1st Gulf War and Enduring Freedom or even the long Afghanistan war I never heard of US ammo depots being blown up or neglected in this way. Perhaps this is due to the unique nature of this war, where both sides are keenly aware of operations of one another, and the relative tight battle sphere...
In the all of the two Gulf wars the US & Coalition forces had complete air superiority and Saddam's missiles were able to take out their logistics hubs. After Saddam's fall and capture it became a ground based war against irregular forces just like in Afghanistan with no SSM or air opposition. In the Ukrainian Russian War you have two nation - states in a near peer war, using all conventional weapons at their disposal across the air, ground, maritime, space, and cyber domains. it's a totally different war.
There is a claim that Russia is firing up to 20000 shells a day according to an article in the Royal United Service Institute
rusi.org
This article suggests that the way Russia uses artillery requires large ammunition dumps that may be vulnerable
Introducing the West’s new weapon working overtime to tilt war in Kyiv’s favour - VTL News
Introducing the West’s new weapon working overtime to tilt war in Kyiv’s favour
Russia is currently firing an estimated 20,000 artillery rounds a day compared to Ukraine’s 6,000 rounds, according to Ukrainian officials cited in a recent report by the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi).
rusi.org
Introducing the West’s new weapon working overtime to tilt war in Kyiv’s favour - VTL News
No, not really because the likes of the KH-22 was specifically designed to counter USN carriers. The USN CVN threat hasn't disappeared so even though they will have developed and fielded more modern AShM, they will not have thrown out the KH-22 if it's still usable for its intended purpose. It does have that tad large warhead that would do significant damage to a CVN or any ship it managed to hit. The use of AShM against land targets suggests more a shortage of PGM than anything else. They won't be the only ones with that problem either and you can be sure that NATO and other militaries will be furiously restocking their supplies and ensuring that their suppliers are well and truly kept busy for the foreseeable future. The current chip shortage won't be helping matters much either.
I would think in addition to concealment; how vulnerable those dumps also depends on the quantity of ammo stored. Traditionally the Russians have long employed the "push" system in which consumables are sent to units based on usage rates without run its having to request for them. This of course was dependent on having adequate numbers of transports to deliver the consumables.There is a claim that Russia is firing up to 20000 shells a day according to an article in the Royal United Service Institute
This article suggests that the way Russia uses artillery requires large ammunition dumps that may be vulnerableIntroducing the West’s new weapon working overtime to tilt war in Kyiv’s favour
Russia is currently firing an estimated 20,000 artillery rounds a day compared to Ukraine’s 6,000 rounds, according to Ukrainian officials cited in a recent report by the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi).
The article you posted mentioned something I've long wondered about. In addition to the various Cold War arty pieces they've long had; the Ukranians now have FH-70s,
M-777s, Casear and Panzerhaubitze. A logistical nightmare.
"The haphazard deliveries – partly the result of multiple well-meaning heads of state asking their armies what they can spare – has created what Mr Zagorodnyuk calls a “logistical nightmare” of separate training programmes and ammunition supply chains for different units"
Well I can see that being a problem but they'll figure it out. They kinda have to don't they.
While I can see a clear nightmare in the training and sustainment of said systems off hand are the various national 155mm shells able to be used in all of the various 155mm systems that have been delivered to Ukraine or are some/all the systems limited to ammo designed specifically for said system? If the ammo usage is limited by different systems then yes a true nightmare, If not then its more annoying then a major limitation.
As the KH-22 is liquid fueled, the Russians can probably keep them way longer than modern solid fuel ASHMs, which needs to be inspected regularly for degradation.
Keeping them make sense, because even if they are not sophisticated (read: fancy evasive maneuvers, jam resistance) enough to avoid modern deception systems or hard kill methods, they will function very very well as saturation aids against a well defended target like a carrier.