The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[STURM]

If the ammo usage is limited by different systems then yes a true nightmare, If not then its more annoying then a major limitation.

Wouldn't NATO standard 155mm ammo be compatible to every 155mm piece?

I would think that the main challenge would be ensuring that sufficient quantities of various non compatible parts are available for the various systems operated. Another issue is that of training. In an article posted previously it was mentioned that "x" number of M-777s were out service soon after delivery because of certain technical issues. Another article I read somewhere was problems faced by the overly complex FCS on the Caesar. Operating and sustaining such a large number of different arty pieces would be challenging for a peacetime army; let alone one in the midst of a major war.

I'd be interested in knowing if any feedback is first sought from the Ukrainians before sending them certain kit and whether the Ukrainians have ever politely but firmly rejected some kit because of support/commonality issues. In the early days the Ukrainians were grateful for anything that was sent. I suspect they've become a bit selective now because of sustainment issues.

 

[John Fedup]

Wouldn't NATO standard 155mm ammo be compatible to every 155mm piece?

I would think that the main challenge would be ensuring that sufficient quantities of various non compatible parts are available for the various systems operated. Another issue is that of training. In an article posted previously it was mentioned that "x" number of M-777s were out service soon after delivery because of certain technical issues. Another article I read somewhere was problems faced by the overly complex FCS on the Caesar. Operating and sustaining such a large number of different arty pieces would be challenging for a peacetime army; let alone one in the midst of a major war.

I'd be interested in knowing if any feedback is first sought from the Ukrainians before sending them certain kit and whether the Ukrainians have ever politely but firmly rejected some kit because of support/commonality issues. In the early days the Ukrainians were grateful for anything that was sent. I suspect they've become a bit selective now because of sustainment issues.

Excalibur 155 shells can be be used with several artillery guns from different vendors so I would think dumb rounds would be even more compatible.
WRT being selective on kit, as long as preferred kit is available, maybe they can be. On the other hand less desirable kit is likely better than no kit (most of the time).

 

[STURM]

so I would think dumb rounds would be even more compatible.

I can't see why not. Take 105mm ammo; the M1 round is compatible with Model 56s produced in the 1960's as well as Nexter Light Guns produced in the late 2000's. HE 155mm rounds produced by Denel have had no problems being fired from Caesar.

With 30mm ammo it's different; I know for a fact that Russian and Chinese made rounds can't be fired from a Western made 30mm gun.

On the other hand less desirable kit is likely better than no kit (most of the time).

Agreed but then again there is little point in getting a small quantity of SPHs and going through the trouble of training people to operate it only to find that 3 weeks later half are inoperable because of spares issues or because of a shortage of trained maintenance personnel.

It's more than 3 months after the invasion and the Ukrainians by now have a good idea as to what they need; what they don't need; what they can sustain and what they can't.

I have no doubt at all that they're very grateful for the support they're receiving but that they also wish that certain kit not be delivered on account of sustainment issues. Note that there's been a lot of coverage about the various stuff delivered and how effective certain things have been but there's little to no news [to the best of my knowledge] about the difficulties the Ukrainians may have had in absorbing all of this stuff.

 

[tabu]

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.

https://euromaidanpress.com/2022/07/07/lt-gen-ben-hodges-no-silver-bullet-no-magic-number-the-weapons-ukraine-needs/?swcfpc=1

It's not just about the number of shells and their production. It's not so much about production today. Barrels - since the beginning of combat operations I have been interested in this question. They are not eternal in storage. The deterioration of barrels is already a problem for the Russians.
And without the creation of normal aviation Ukraine will not be able to complete this war.

 

[2007yellow430]

And without the creation of normal aviation Ukraine will not be able to complete this war.

care to explain that comment? Don’t understand what you meant.

thanks

Art

 

[kato]

Apparently Germany has contracted Nammo to open a new production line for 35x228 Oerlikon KDA ammunition for those Gepards to be delivered to Ukraine.

Oerlikon KDA ammunition is belted and - unlike and not compatible with Oerlikon KDB/KDC/KDE ammunition - has an additional groove in the case that is required for indexing the belt. Nammo according to their catalogue so far has only produced ammunition for Oerlikon KDB (compatible for Bushmaster III).

 

[Aerojoe]

Apparently Germany has contracted Nammo to open a new production line for 35x228 Oerlikon KDA ammunition for those Gepards to be delivered to Ukraine.

Oerlikon KDA ammunition is belted and - unlike and not compatible with Oerlikon KDB/KDC/KDE ammunition - has an additional groove in the case that is required for indexing the belt. Nammo according to their catalogue so far has only produced ammunition for Oerlikon KDB (compatible for Bushmaster III).

IRC an earlier post referred to a large proportion of the Geperds in store had been sold to Brazil and other customers. If that’s the case has then been discussion to access the ammo stores that no doubt went with those sale? I imagine if there is it will very much be on the quiet given Brazil at least is a BRICs member.

 

[vikingatespam]

An interesting video on the subject of Russian artillery stocks, by project Owl, an OSINT entity.

They also did a review of likely Russian tank reserves:

 

[ngatimozart]

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.

When I think about it, there's really nothing to stop them changing the seeker on it making it more jam resistant. It would be expecting to much to make it more manoeuvrable but every little bit helps.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

When I think about it, there's really nothing to stop them changing the seeker on it making it more jam resistant. It would be expecting to much to make it more manoeuvrable but every little bit helps.

Changing the design is easy today. Give a competent team 1-2 years and they'll do it all the way down to certification. But this is an all-analog system, everything is defined by hardware, and software is very low level.
You could eventually redesign the hardware, but there are certain generic components that are necessary no matter what, and that's what's under sanctions.
For example high capacity FPGAs are gone? They'll have to significantly dumb down the missile when going for a lower capacity one (capacity = logical operations and memory).
High frequency oscillators are not available? Gotta redo some communication systems.
Switches are lower quality? Circuits will start showing system-breaking anomalies.

Russia might be missing the necessary analog system engineers, and production of said components.

Jamming resistance methods for probably an all analog missile? That's not my area of expertise but I am fairly confident it's not really doable at this stage. All the methods I'm familiar with are complex and either need space-consuming hardware, or software-defined hardware.

You can't really take an expensive cruise missile and dumb it down in a way that prevents it from being used as such. What you CAN do is take the already lower quality products and make small alterations to them - artillery PGMs, small drones and other tactical level equipment. That's in the short to mid term.

 

[koxinga]

It is a big missile and if the flight profile described online are accurate, it would not be difficult for a modern, multi-layered air defence system to intercept. Making them more jam resistance would not increase their utility, given these inherent limitations.

I would use them as disposable penetration/saturation aids, fire a bunch of them at a CBG while sneaking in a couple of more modern ones like Oniks or KH-35s in an attempt to overwhelm the defenses or to use up the defenders missiles.

 

[tabu]

Wouldn't NATO standard 155mm ammo be compatible to every 155mm piece?

I would think that the main challenge would be ensuring that sufficient quantities of various non compatible parts are available for the various systems operated. Another issue is that of training. In an article posted previously it was mentioned that "x" number of M-777s were out service soon after delivery because of certain technical issues. Another article I read somewhere was problems faced by the overly complex FCS on the Caesar. Operating and sustaining such a large number of different arty pieces would be challenging for a peacetime army; let alone one in the midst of a major war.

I'd be interested in knowing if any feedback is first sought from the Ukrainians before sending them certain kit and whether the Ukrainians have ever politely but firmly rejected some kit because of support/commonality issues. In the early days the Ukrainians were grateful for anything that was sent. I suspect they've become a bit selective now because of sustainment issues.

The Ukrainians told me that there is no logistical nightmare because all NATO artillery is standardised on shells and also on oils and other retardants.

 

[tabu]

care to explain that comment? Don’t understand what you meant.

thanks

Art

Ukraine has almost no aviation, and without aviation any counter-offensive in the steppes and open terrain would end in disaster. The best approach to the needs of Ukraine's army right now is to supply F-16s as the most realistic option.

 

[tabu]

In Nizhny Tagil continues to recruit contract servicemen to take part in Russia's special operation in Ukraine. An announcement to this effect has been published on the city administration's official community.

The minimum term of the contract is 4 months, candidates are promised two weeks of training and a place in units of the Central Military District and the Airborne Troops. The prospective soldier must meet the following requirements:

past military service;fit or fit with minor health restrictions;military units of the Central Military District - age up to 50 years;airborne troops - age up to 55 years.The announcement also disclosed figures for military pay:

private - from 200,242 to 452,886 rubles;corporal - from 204,924 to 458,828 rubles;junior sergeant - from 209,502 to 463,058 rubles;sergeant - from 209,964 to 465,606 rubles;senior sergeant - from 221,879 to 467,761 rubles.

Source:

VK.com | VK

m.vk.com

The Russian army is short of personnel. The Russians failed to encircle the Ukrainian forces in Donbass because they lacked infantry and the Ukrainians were able to withdraw their main units.

 

[tabu]

3,000 155 shells fired by Ukrainians a day(!)

But perhaps the guided ammunition is not supplied by the Americans because of cost and because the upgraded guns might end up in the hands of the Russians during the retreat.

Ukraine Situation Report: 3,000 155mm NATO Artillery Rounds Being Fired A Day

The artillery duel in Ukraine's east shows no signs of slowing as troops gobble through thousands of 155mm rounds every single day.

www.thedrive.com

The Russians are not observing safety at their depots, again lighting fires and setting off fireworks.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1545977543941046272

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1546031477586026498

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1545944176021454849

 

[STURM]

The Ukrainians told me that there is no logistical nightmare because all NATO artillery is standardised on shells and also on oils and other retardants.

The ammo is indeed compatible but the Soviet era arty pieces; as well as Bohdanas, FH-70s, M-777s, Caesars, Krabs, Danas, M-109s and Panzerhaubitzes have spares/components which are not compatible. Spares/components for all these different arty pieces have to be stockpiled and crews have to be trained. It is a challenge to put it mildly.

The Russians failed to encircle the Ukrainian forces in Donbass because they lacked infantry and the Ukrainians were able to withdraw their main units.

Which ironically is the same problem the Germans faced in WW2; a lack of infantry [as well as a lack of motorised infantry] often enabled the Soviets to break out of encirclements.

I'm currently reading ''From the Realm of a Dying Sun: Volume 1: IV. SS-Panzerkorps and the Battles for Warsaw, July-November 1944'' [Douglas Nash]. The parallels between events described in the book and those we're seeing now are striking.

 

[kato]

3,000 155 shells fired by Ukrainians a day(!)

I wonder - regarding that exclamation mark - how many people realize that a single NATO artillery battalion fully involved is calculated at 7,200 rounds per combat day for ammunition supply?
(and the Soviet standard for 152mm is about the same btw)

The ammo is indeed compatible but the Soviet era arty pieces; as well as Bohdanas, FH-70s, M-777s, Caesars, Krabs, Danas, M-109s and Panzerhaubitzes have spares/components which are not compatible.

*cough* also fuel *cough*

 

[Feanor]

Ukraine has almost no aviation, and without aviation any counter-offensive in the steppes and open terrain would end in disaster. The best approach to the needs of Ukraine's army right now is to supply F-16s as the most realistic option.

Consider the training cycle length for pilots and ground crew, and the consider what "right now" would look like in context.

The Russians are not observing safety at their depots, again lighting fires and setting off fireworks.

This is not a safety issue, it's a continuing series of surprisingly well planned Ukrainian strikes.

 

[tabu]

Consider the training cycle length for pilots and ground crew, and the consider what "right now" would look like in context.

I would not be surprised if it is known that Ukrainian pilots and ground staff have been mastering the F-16s for a long time.

There is simply no other way out.
Ukrainian fighters have no shot-forget missiles, no air-to-surface guided weapons, and the Su-24Ms were few and far between ..... I.e. there are almost no strike vehicles left (Su-24M), or they only use air-to-surface guided missiles from the cockpit. Maybe they still throw cast iron, but there is no photo-video evidence of this. There are no guided weapons and/or crews capable of using them. That is, there are actually planes (still) there, but no strike vehicles. The fighters have a slim chance of achieving an air victory. With all the courage of Ukrainian pilots, the air war cannot be won on these museum pieces.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Consider the training cycle length for pilots and ground crew, and the consider what "right now" would look like in context.

Hence this article from TWZ (from April 2022):

Just Pick A Fighter And Start Training Ukrainian Pilots On It As Soon As Possible

Ukraine's pilots should have been in training yesterday and there are plenty of second-hand fighter options to accommodate their needs.

www.thedrive.com

The US could start training a batch of Ukrainian aviators that would themselves become instructors for future batches, at no cost.
Then it can decide which fighter it wants to finish their training with (and sell). Or just cancel.

There is no public information to confirm the US did this. There is also no information indicating otherwise...

What reinforces the probability that this DOES happen, is the fact the post-war Ukraine, in or out of NATO, will have to buy western aircraft - i.e F-15/16/18.