The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread
- Thread starter Feanor
- Start date
Al Jazeera's reporting on the Ukraine has been consistent and balanced. If anything it has been more pro Western.
As for what's reliable or not; depends who you ask and what is being reported. Certain news outlets are more reliable or balanced on certain issues compared to their competitions and vice versa.
As for what's reliable or not; depends who you ask and what is being reported. Certain news outlets are more reliable or balanced on certain issues compared to their competitions and vice versa.
Repairing and refurbishing tanks is all well and good but without air and infantry support they are going to continue being cleaned up on the battlefield.
Russia’s infantry and attack helicopters are suffering extremely high attrition rates as well. Big losses among their battlefield commanders as well.
I really can’t see what Russia can do at this point. It does make me worry a little about a Hail Mary move using tactical nukes but even they might cause more problems than they are worth on the battle field.
Russia’s infantry and attack helicopters are suffering extremely high attrition rates as well. Big losses among their battlefield commanders as well.
I really can’t see what Russia can do at this point. It does make me worry a little about a Hail Mary move using tactical nukes but even they might cause more problems than they are worth on the battle field.
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.
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.
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?
Big_Zucchini
Well-Known Member
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.
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.
Of course, if the area is already a war zone, it might sound appealing again, e.g. for Ukraine.
Was also expensive considering Israel has a huge number of strategic sites spread all over, but if Ukraine limits its coverage only to sites in Kyiv, this could be not quite as expensive, especially as today there are retired systems available for immediate sale.
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?
Could the lanyard be that long because of the risk of explosion?
Ukrainian 2S7 Pion explodes killing its crew, unknown if this was the result of a squib or a defect with the barrel. : UkraineWarVideoReport (reddit.com)
Russia does not have the operational momentum, and tactical advances doesn't add up in the bigger picture. They might take back a village or a district or two but it forces them to fritter away their already scare resources within the theatre. I suppose the mobilisation was to give the numbers to mount an effective defense and eventually taking back the initative, but seeing where things are now, it is at best a long shot.
They are not intended to led to anything decisive but are spoiling attacks intended to strengthen Russian lines by perhaps eliminating danger to the flanks; taking key terrain and to keep the Ukrainians off balance. Not to mention the propaganda value which they need; even if it's about only taking a few villages.
Such attacks are not uncommon even by armies which have lost the tactical/operational initiative. Also bear in mind that despite being weak and somewhat disorganised in certain aspects; the Russians will still follow doctrine and it's ingrained in their doctrine that going on the defensive is merely a temporary measure until such a time they can go on the offensive again.
Where things are now isn't exactly an indicator where things will be in a few months.
We can go on all we like about a motivated, resourceful, courageous and resolute Ukraine backed by the resources of the West; against a weak and overstretched Russia weakened by sanctions and left with a demoralised and ill trained army which has suffered significant losses and is scrapping the bottom of the barrel but like I said; I haven't written the Russians off yet.
Last edited:
Señor Pomidor
Member
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?
If Russia lost the war, would western sanctions be lifted? I do not think so, the current level of economical escalation is hard to undo and probably the repairs demanded by the west would be astronomical (much like Germany after WWI). I think that in the current status of the war Russia too is fighting for survival.
Maquiavelo famous quote “The end justifies the means” has a second part often omitted: “…only if the end is achieved”.
Last edited:
Larry_L
Active Member
Ukraine site with some reliable information on the the T-62's. Some of this needs to be flavored with salt, but some good info also.
en.defence-ua.com
en.defence-ua.com
en.defence-ua.com
Ukrainian Military Captured Not Only a Large Number of Rare russian T-62 Tanks, But Also Large Amount of Rounds For Them | Defense Express
Defenders of Ukraine, liberating the village of Khreshchenivka in the Kherson region from the russians, captured a large amount of rounds for T-62 tanks - old tanks that the russians were forced to remove from storage and use in Ukraine due to heavy losses of armored vehicles on the battlefield
en.defence-ua.com
russian T-62 Could be Used as 'Mobile Firing Points' But Instead Find Themselves Abandoned | Defense Express
An officer with a "modern mindset" is nowhere to be found in the russian armed forces, to make good use of a Khrushchev-era tank in year-2022 warfare
en.defence-ua.com
Armiya-2022: russia’s T-62M Tank Latest Modernization Close-Up Look (Photo) | Defense Express
The T-62 tank was adopted back in 1961, in the 80s it was considered completely obsolete, it was withdrawn from service in the russian federation in the 2000s, but it was returned to service and is being modernized
en.defence-ua.com
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #5,376
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.
This is an attrition industrial scale war. Armata is very expensive and difficult to produce.
Best to focus on loitering munitions, guided artillery and rocket artillery, targeting pods for the air force, smart munitions, training, quicker decision making and most importantly overall battlefield awareness. Russia hasn't destroyed a single HIMARS and soviet era Ukrainian AD continues to operate.
T62s with improved sights and protection can be a good infantry support vehicle. T62-T72s are both vulnerable to Top attack weapons and not really certain whether T90M and T-14 have a solution for that issue.
This is apparently a video of a night time Shahed-136 strike. Not sure if its a lancet or a Shahed. But if it is a Shahed the heat signature is really low for a drone thats relatively big. Explains why they are so hard to shootdown with GBAD.
Here is a video of a lanccet taking out two S 300 launch vehicles. Unlike most other posts on combat footage this one did not have a date or was geolocated. @Feanor can you tell if this one was new or from earlier in the war?
Here is a video of a lanccet taking out two S 300 launch vehicles. Unlike most other posts on combat footage this one did not have a date or was geolocated. @Feanor can you tell if this one was new or from earlier in the war?
Last edited:
That's great but it was a reply to.another member
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.
Last edited:
Yep, but I really want to know if this one was a Lancet or a Shahed. Thermal image makes even small explosions look big, I dont have the expertise to determine if this is a lancet's shaped charge or the bigger warhead of a Shahed. The Shahed is several times bigger than a lancet and them having this small an IR signature makes them much more dangerous than I had previously thought. You would need proper radar based detection backed GBAD or EW jammers to take them out and that requires much more resources and a proper blanket AD network. Not an issue for someone like Israel, but most nations dont have such comprehensive AD.