The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[KipPotapych]

It appears, the UK is supposedly/reportedly set some LRM’s to Ukraine with the condition that they are to be only used on the UA territory, not Russia. US says they are not sending theirs regardless. One link for both, though there are a few articles with a little more detail (but nothing concrete yet that I have seen):

No ATACMS to Ukraine following U.K. move

www.politico.com

 

[ngatimozart]

I can hope the UKR would of noticed a 2 km hole in the RU line. There should be a way to confirm this.

Ukrainian report on it.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656064355539058688

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656060182965678081

Oops

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1655946975836262400

 

[Vivendi]

The Blinken and Cleverly made it clear in a press conference that support to Ukraine will continue independent of outcome of the upcoming Ukrainian counteroffensive.

Russia never expected the strong, unified support for Ukraine, they never expected it to continue for so long, and they probably also don't expect it to continue if Ukrainian counteroffensive is not highly successful. They are wrong about that as well. The sooner Russia realize this the better.

And when it comes to the Ukrainians’ forthcoming counteroffensive, I’ve made the point that this is not a film. There are no certainties when it comes to conflict. The Ukrainians have consistently outperformed expectations, but there can be no guarantees in war. So we have to recognize that we are giving the Ukrainians a huge amount of support – as I’ve said, they have learned quickly; they have adapted very, very successfully, and they have defended themselves incredibly effectively – and we need to continue to support them, irrespective of whether this forthcoming offensive generates huge gains on the battlefield, because until this conflict is resolved and resolved properly, it is not over. And that’s the message that I have spoken about back home in the UK and I will continue to say to those friends and colleagues here in the United States of America as well.

SECRETARY BLINKEN: Thank you. First, I can only violently agree with my friend and strongly endorse what he’s just said. We have exactly the same perspective.

Second, I would also dispute the notion of waning support. I would refer you, for example, just recently to the very strong statement made by the Speaker of the House McCarthy about support for Ukraine and the enduring support and determination to see this through.

Secretary Antony J. Blinken And UK Foreign Secretary James Cleverly At a Joint Press Availability - United States Department of State

 

[Vivendi]

Greg Yudin, at the Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences has some comments and observations from Russia. Talk about a possible defeat happens very often now, a huge difference from the early phase of the war. He notices this change in mood in people from various industries. In addition, also official and "semi-official" people are now talking more and more about defeat.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656074583559262208

With so many people in Russia, from soldiers and up to high-level officials are talking and thinking about defeat, in combination with lack of ammo, lack of equipment, lack of medical supplies, lack of strategy, the situation looks extremely grim for Russia at the moment. And seeing Ukraine receiving more and more Western equipment, and more and more ammo certainly will not help the mood in Russia. Yesterday the US announced a new USD 1.2 billion package. Biden Administration Announces Additional Security Assistance for Ukraine > U.S. Department of Defense > Release

 

[Feanor]

We have what appears to be good footage of the RS-74 Kinzhal that Ukraine shot down in Kiev region. I think we can state a shootdown really happened pretty reliably here. And I think this is history. If I'm not mistaken it's the first combat intercept of a hypersonic munition. Note what we're looking at is not the missile itself but rather the section where presumably the payload was supposed to have been.

По поводу «Кинжала»

По поводу сбитого Кинжала. Сейчас многие сравнивают фото, утверждают, что это не похоже на Кинжал или похоже на Оникс, Фигхтербомбир вообще посмеялся и сказал, что это не Кинжал так как там носовая часть с радиопрозрачным обтекателем. Но суть…

andrei-bt.livejournal.com

Триумф ЗРК «Patriot»

Вот сейчас с полной уверенностью можно сказать, что сбили. Разбор подробно - https://t.me/btvt2019/2117

andrei-bt.livejournal.com

 

[Dex]

Greg Yudin, at the Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences has some comments and observations from Russia. Talk about a possible defeat happens very often now, a huge difference from the early phase of the war. He notices this change in mood in people from various industries. In addition, also official and "semi-official" people are now talking more and more about defeat.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656074583559262208

With so many people in Russia, from soldiers and up to high-level officials are talking and thinking about defeat, in combination with lack of ammo, lack of equipment, lack of medical supplies, lack of strategy, the situation looks extremely grim for Russia at the moment. And seeing Ukraine receiving more and more Western equipment, and more and more ammo certainly will not help the mood in Russia. Yesterday the US announced a new USD 1.2 billion package. Biden Administration Announces Additional Security Assistance for Ukraine > U.S. Department of Defense > Release

If Ukraine has some quick successes, I wouldn't be surprised if there is an even faster collapse in the Russian army when the panic sets in for the inevitable defeat.

 

[John Fedup]

If Ukraine has some quick successes, I wouldn't be surprised if there is an even faster collapse in the Russian army when the panic sets in for the inevitable defeat.

Nothing is certain about any future offensive. The link below discusses how the possible consequences of a successful offensive could be problematic and how the West really isn’t prepared. A huge failure that Russia is able to exploit would present a huge problem as well.

Catastrophic Success: What if the Ukrainian Counteroffensive Achieves More than Expected? - Modern War Institute

Around the world—in European capitals, in Washington DC, and even in Moscow—the outcome of the coming Ukrainian counteroffensive seems to have already been largely determined. As recently as March, the […]

mwi.usma.edu

 

[seaspear]

It appears, the UK is supposedly/reportedly set some LRM’s to Ukraine with the condition that they are to be only used on the UA territory, not Russia. US says they are not sending theirs regardless. One link for both, though there are a few articles with a little more detail (but nothing concrete yet that I have seen):

No ATACMS to Ukraine following U.K. move

www.politico.com

It looks like a number Storm Shadow missiles have been delivered the missile is believed easily suited to firing from the MIG 29 of Ukraine
Ukraine Should Have No Problem Arming Its Old Soviet Jets With New British Cruise Missiles (forbes.com)



Britain has delivered long-range 'Storm Shadow' cruise missiles to Ukraine ahead of expected counteroffensive | CNN Politics
Storm Shadow / SCALP Long-Range, Air-Launched, Stand-Off Attack Missile - Airforce Technology (airforce-technology.com)

 

[Vivendi]

Nothing is certain about any future offensive. The link below discusses how the possible consequences of a successful offensive could be problematic and how the West really isn’t prepared. A huge failure that Russia is able to exploit would present a huge problem as well.

Catastrophic Success: What if the Ukrainian Counteroffensive Achieves More than Expected? - Modern War Institute

Around the world—in European capitals, in Washington DC, and even in Moscow—the outcome of the coming Ukrainian counteroffensive seems to have already been largely determined. As recently as March, the […]

mwi.usma.edu

Personally I think it is wrong to give in to Russian nuclear blackmail. All the evidence so far shows that Putin is bluffing. It also helps that China has been very clear on the use of nukes, and also made clear that Crimea belongs to Ukraine. Thus I support the position of Gen. Hodges, Applebaum, and the Ukrainian leadership. If feasible from a military perspective, then Ukraine should take back Crimea. Putin wants to keep it of course, but what is even more important to Putin than Crimea is his own position and his own life. Thus he will not use nukes. He knows it will not save Crimea, it will just just make everything much, much worse for him, and for Russia. It will be suicidal.

 

[John Fedup]

Personally I think it is wrong to give in to Russian nuclear blackmail. All the evidence so far shows that Putin is bluffing. It also helps that China has been very clear on the use of nukes, and also made clear that Crimea belongs to Ukraine. Thus I support the position of Gen. Hodges, Applebaum, and the Ukrainian leadership. If feasible from a military perspective, then Ukraine should take back Crimea. Putin wants to keep it of course, but what is even more important to Putin than Crimea is his own position and his own life. Thus he will not use nukes. He knows it will not save Crimea, it will just just make everything much, much worse for him, and for Russia. It will be suicidal.

Desperation can lead to some really dumb decisions. No idea how the coming offensive will work out but a major success or failure is not likely and this $hitshow will continue. At some point the losses in both treasure and blood will have to be accounted for by both sides (and allies) and decisions on negotiating will hopefully result.

 

[Vivendi]

Desperation can lead to some really dumb decisions. No idea how the coming offensive will work out but a major success or failure is not likely and this $hitshow will continue. At some point the losses in both treasure and blood will have to be accounted for by both sides (and allies) and decisions on negotiating will hopefully result.

I agree, the most likely scenario is that no major breakthroughs will be made, and the war will continue. However I hope "the West" will not force anything on Ukraine. I think it should be up to Ukraine to decide when to enter negotiations, and on what terms. The Taliban kept going for 20 years before "negotiating" the US withdrawal. I think it should be up to Ukraine whether they want to fight for another 2 months, 2 years, or 20 years. It's their country and their decision. Clearly they will not receive the same amount of support for 20 years as they have seen until now, however Afghanistan (and other conflicts) show that even with strongly reduced support, a country with a strong will to fight can keep going for a very long time even with few and very primitive weapons. Some countries will keep support them for a very long time indeed. And volunteers will support them, no matter how long it takes.

Likewise, if Ukraine decides soon that "enough is enough" then US/Europe should fully support Ukraine in their peace negotiations. Again, it's their country, they should decide.

 

[KipPotapych]

I agree, the most likely scenario is that no major breakthroughs will be made, and the war will continue. However I hope "the West" will not force anything on Ukraine. I think it should be up to Ukraine to decide when to enter negotiations, and on what terms. The Taliban kept going for 20 years before "negotiating" the US withdrawal. I think it should be up to Ukraine whether they want to fight for another 2 months, 2 years, or 20 years. It's their country and their decision.

The biggest issue with this is that it is not their money that decide what is going to happen. Imagine this going on for any extended period of time, as in a long-term normality. It is simply not sustainable. The country is in ruins and needs a loan after loan just to cover salaries of their public sector employees. The most recent one, via Google translate, from the May 8 update by Ministry of Finance of Ukraine:

The general fund of the state budget of Ukraine received EUR 189.32 million in funding from the World Bank. Funds were provided on preferential terms from the International Development Association (IDA).

"I am grateful to the World Bank team for supporting the financial stability of Ukraine. The raised funds will make it possible to reimburse the priority social expenditures of the state budget, in particular, the financing of the wages of employees of the public sector, as well as in the future to ensure stable state administration in Ukraine," said the Minister of Finance of Ukraine, Serhiy Marchenko.[…]

The funds will be directed to partial reimbursement of state budget expenditures made to ensure the payment of wages to employees of state bodies and teaching staff for February 2023.

Note above that we are in May and they are talking about teachers’ salaries from February. And the military aid? From yesterday’s Bloomberg article:

Kyiv’s troops will leverage that hardware — shipments delivered since December that cost more than any NATO member except the US buys in a year — to try to overrun dug-in Russian positions and retake occupied territory. The question is whether it’s enough.[…]

Allies sent over $67 billion of weapons[…]

In no way this is sustainable and why, in my opinion, we will be pushing for a stop to this - ie negotiations - regardless of the results of the counteroffensive. I made a post about it a couple or so moths ago, outlining that UA needs external help in the amount of (at the very least) about $120 billion annually just to stay afloat and keep fighting (note, not succeed, but to keep fighting). It hasn’t changed since and not going to in the foreseeable future. They’ll need a lot of financial aid long after this is all over as well just to get back to where they started and it wasn’t a desirable state of affairs to begin with. So yes, for this to go on for years is not in anyone’s interest. This is especially true for Ukraine. As things are today, no matter how much we pretend for this to be true, Ukraine is no position to decide when it is time to start wrapping it up. Seems to be a simple reality to me.

I also expressed my view in regards to Crimea, but I’ll add the following. I believe it is asinine to try and get it back. Beyond escalating to the point of no return, I haven’t seen a single evidence that there is any significant amount of people in Crimea that actually want to be part of Ukraine. Quite the opposite is true, actually. Not sure why this fact is being avoided by all parties and especially us. Isn’t it all about people’s will and why we are here in the first place?

 

[Feanor]

Isn’t it all about people’s will and why we are here in the first place?

I don't know where you got this idea but it's absolutely not true. Nothing in this conflict is about the will of the people. The only side theoretically arguing that they're acting in the will of the people is Russia, and the credibility of that argument went out the window when they annexed Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, territories that clearly didn't have any significant pro-Russian presence in '22. To be clear even in the Donbass it's not clear that the majority is in favor of seceding from Ukraine to join Russia. It seems likely, and 8 (now 9) years of war have much to do with that. But even there I think it would take a referendum to find out. Ukraine's position is and has been that the territory is theirs regardless of what the residents there think. And statements from Ukrainian public officials and politicians have included ideas like taking away civil liberties from citizens in the LDNR areas once retaken until "they learn how to love Ukraine". I.e. literally against the will of the people. This conflict is about Russian imperialism attempting to reset the results of the '14-'15 conflict and get a better outcome, and failing spectacularly. The territorial question is merely an attempt to salvage the situation back in '22 when it became the original plan wasn't working.

EDIT: Some info about Russian use of T-54/55s. Apparently a company of them have been handed over to a howitzer btln and are being used in indirect fire, with fire tables and UAV-directed corrections. Apparently initially T-62Ms were also being used this way but now a few units have been using them in direct-fire.

Танки. История и современность. Btvt.info

Особенности применения Т-54, сообщает участник событий из ВС РФ – Т-54Б, южное направление. Месяц назад до роты таких машин (Т-54 и 55) было передано в гаубичный дивизион. Работают с ЗОП, в составе экипажей из 3 человек. Экипажи набирались из танкового батальона и артиллерии, после чего на...

t.me

Танки. История и современность. Btvt.info

В продолжение темы про применение Т-54 https://t.me/btvt2019/2153 в ВС РФ от участника. Цитата: Т-62М идут в танковые подразделения в качестве линейных танков. Хотя в таком качестве их сейчас использует преимущественно шторм, в обычных частях желающих выехать порамсить с опорником на прямую...

t.me

 

[vikingatespam]

I don't know where you got this idea but it's absolutely not true. Nothing in this conflict is about the will of the people. The only side theoretically arguing that they're acting in the will of the people is Russia, and the credibility of that argument went out the window when they annexed Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, territories that clearly didn't have any significant pro-Russian presence in '22. To be clear even in the Donbass it's not clear that the majority is in favor of seceding from Ukraine to join Russia. It seems likely, and 8 (now 9) years of war have much to do with that. But even there I think it would take a referendum to find out. Ukraine's position is and has been that the territory is theirs regardless of what the residents there think. And statements from Ukrainian public officials and politicians have included ideas like taking away civil liberties from citizens in the LDNR areas once retaken until "they learn how to love Ukraine". I.e. literally against the will of the people. This conflict is about Russian imperialism attempting to reset the results of the '14-'15 conflict and get a better outcome, and failing spectacularly. The territorial question is merely an attempt to salvage the situation back in '22 when it became the original plan wasn't working.

As a not-Ukrainian, I have to wonder does UKR really want areas (LPR, DPR, Crimea) full of hostile people likely to continue a RU-funded guerilla war ? Logically no. But if UKR gives these area up, what will RU give in return ?

EDIT: Some info about Russian use of T-54/55s. Apparently a company of them have been handed over to a howitzer btln and are being used in indirect fire, with fire tables and UAV-directed corrections. Apparently initially T-62Ms were also being used this way but now a few units have been using them in direct-fire.

God help those poor fool RU troops who call on T-54 "artillery" for help. The shot dispersion will be crap, likely heavy on the shorts given the age of the ammo.

 

[tonnyc]

As a not-Ukrainian, I have to wonder does UKR really want areas (LPR, DPR, Crimea) full of hostile people likely to continue a RU-funded guerilla war ? Logically no. But if UKR gives these area up, what will RU give in return ?

Ukraine won't give those area up. They can be forced (by sheer military might) to accept the occupation of those areas, but they can't give those up and if forced they will always try to regain it. The concept of territorial integrity these days are tightly intertwined with the national identity. China will not give up Taiwan. If someone invades Tasmania, Australia will not stop until they recover the island. Same thing if someone conquers Hawaii. The list goes on.

Basically, in our current era, any government who gives up territory in response to a foreign invasion will fall and be replaced with a government who won't. The only way a government may give up their national territory is if the government is falling anyway from utter military defeat and even so that's uncertain, as some people may decide to switch to guerilla warfare in the conquered areas. See the French Resistance after France's defeat in the Second World War.

So for Ukraine to give up LPR, DPR, and Crimea, Ukraine must be defeated to such an extent that Kyiv is under Russian occupation. Since that didn't happen and is unlikely to happen now, Ukraine won't give Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea up.

 

[King Wally]

It looks like a number Storm Shadow missiles have been delivered the missile is believed easily suited to firing from the MIG 29 of Ukraine
Ukraine Should Have No Problem Arming Its Old Soviet Jets With New British Cruise Missiles (forbes.com)



Britain has delivered long-range 'Storm Shadow' cruise missiles to Ukraine ahead of expected counteroffensive | CNN Politics
Storm Shadow / SCALP Long-Range, Air-Launched, Stand-Off Attack Missile - Airforce Technology (airforce-technology.com)

Elements of the media are claiming this now puts the Kerch bridge in range. (The bridge is roughly 300km from the front line and Wikipedia quotes the missile range of 560km.)

Storm Shadow has a lot more punch than your standard HIMARS strike as well. This really could be a critical move if everything comes together as planned.

 

[Ananda]

The territorial question is merely an attempt to salvage the situation back in '22 when it became the original plan wasn't working.

It could be argue now what Russia do so far by annexing Zaporozhye, Kherson, and Donbass is to guard Crimea flanks. Including save guarding sea of azov.

 

[Feanor]

As a not-Ukrainian, I have to wonder does UKR really want areas (LPR, DPR, Crimea) full of hostile people likely to continue a RU-funded guerilla war ? Logically no. But if UKR gives these area up, what will RU give in return ?

I suspect quite a lot. But as noted above it seems unlikely.

God help those poor fool RU troops who call on T-54 "artillery" for help. The shot dispersion will be crap, likely heavy on the shorts given the age of the ammo.

I recall that the BMP-3's 100mm shells were usable in a T-55 (the 2A70 shells were derived from BS-3 shells which were compatible with the D-10T). And Iran produces 100mm tank shells for their T-55s. If rumors of DPRK shells in Russia are true, that's another source of more modern shells.

EDIT; It appears Ukraine's counter-offensive has begun around Artemovsk/Bakhmut, aimed against the Russian Min-Def units that took over from Wagner forces on the flanks. Consequently they've regained some ground on multiple directions. So far these are small tactical gains and it's not immediately obvious if it's a fundamental failure of the Russian units or Ukrainian forces taking advantage of the handover as a moment of disorganization. According to Russian sources, the last Ukrainian stronghold in the city, The Nest, is currently being assaulted by Wagner forces with less then 700m left to the city outskirts.

https://rybar.ru/piwigo/upload/2023/05/11/20230511233138-c1fbddc5.jpg

 

[vikingatespam]

I suspect quite a lot. But as noted above it seems unlikely.



I recall that the BMP-3's 100mm shells were usable in a T-55 (the 2A70 shells were derived from BS-3 shells which were compatible with the D-10T). And Iran produces 100mm tank shells for their T-55s. If rumors of DPRK shells in Russia are true, that's another source of more modern shells.

Well, if they can use ammo that isnt older than me, then that at least removes the danger of unstable shells. Its still a very poor artillery platform.

However, the BMP-3 gun is a low pressure gun with shell velocities far lower than used in the D-10T. Wikipedia gives different shell ID for the BMP-3 gun vs the D-10T. Therefore, I do not think the ammo is compatible.

 

[Feanor]

Well, if they can use ammo that isnt older than me, then that at least removes the danger of unstable shells. Its still a very poor artillery platform.

BMP-3 ammo is still in production today. They can presumably use ammo from 2 weeks ago assuming they can get it to the front fast enough.

However, the BMP-3 gun is a low pressure gun with shell velocities far lower than used in the D-10T. Wikipedia gives different shell ID for the BMP-3 gun vs the D-10T. Therefore, I do not think the ammo is compatible.

Yes. The secret is in the details. The BMP-3 gun HE-FRAG is apparently compatible with the BS-3. And comically it's a poor HE-FRAG around as a result, since the BS-3 is a high-velocity gun requiring shells to have thicker sides to withstand the higher pressures and heat. But on the flip side the caliber of the BS-3 and D-10T are a perfect match 100mm X 695mm. I even recall reading somewhere that this was the reason for the 100mm caliber gun (as opposed to some other caliber) on the BMP-3.