The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Update.

Zaporozhye.


Not a whole lot is going on at the front lines. Ukraine seems to have stopped major attacks after making some headway at the Vremyevskiy bulge, and being repulsed over and over again at Pyatihatka and Rabotino. There is a continuing shift in tactics on Ukraine's part from using mechanized forces to trying to use infantry-heavy assaults with armored vehicles serving only as transports. Again it remains unclear whether this is a tactical adaptation due to the nature of the battlefield or a result of losses.

One noteworthy exception is a Russian offensive action near Gulyaypole, seizing some Ukrainian strong points. It's likely this is a diversionary attack intended to force Ukraine to spread its forces. However depending on the ultimate outcome of the Ukrainian offensive, this could be another location for Russia to attack eventually.


A failed Ukrainian infantry attack near Pyatihatka. We can see Ukrainian infantry enter abandoned Russian trenches only to be hit by Russian artillery landing with quite a bit of accuracy into the trench. They then retreat under fire. Warning graphic footage.


We recently saw a video of what looked like a Ukrainian company riding MRAPs with an MBT pair drive blithely into a minefield. We now have the second half of Ukraine trying to evacuate WIAs.


A group of Ukrainian infantry gets hit by a Russian FPV drone.


YPR-765 destroyed near Rabotino.


Russian 247th VDV Rgt destroying a Ukrainian Humvee in Zaporozhye area.


Allegedly a Ukrainian MBT getting hit in Zaporozhye. Note we can't really make out what gets hit but it looks like a vehicle and makes a pretty spectacular explosion. A tank with ammo cooking off would make sense, given that this is ATGM range.


More Russian Ka-52 fires, Vremyevskiy bulge.


West of Levadnoe a Ukrainian M113 and two MRAPs destroyed. Reportedly this is due to artillery fires from Russia's 336th Marines.


Two M113s destroyed near Malaya Tokamachka.


A Ukrainian SUV hits a landmine. We've seen quite a lot of this. Note while each individual incident is not very significant, in total they do make things more difficult.


Ukrainian AMX-10 abandoned near Novodonetskoe. I think it's the same we've seen before.


Two videos, the first is a Russian loitering munition strikes ST-68U radar in Dnepropetrovsk region. Note this is a strike against a target 50 kms deep. The second is another similar strike, 40 kms deep, near Krivoy Rog. Note these are distinct SEAD efforts around the Zaporozhye area and at a considerable depth.


Russian gliding bomb strike at Malinovka.


A Russian column in Zaporozhye, looks like artillery to me, gets hit by a GMLRS strike. There has been a shift in Ukraine using GMLRS against tactical targets more frequently and with good results. Dispersal, maneuverability, and concealment, are key. It remains to be seen whether Russian forces can adapt.


It appears I was mistaken earlier. Ukraine's 67th Mech Bde that has taken over the T-55 fleet from the 47th Assault Bde is in Zaporozhye.


Ukrainian Marines with their AMX-10s.


Oskol Front.


Russian forces have reportedly seized the village of Novoselovskoe after capturing some key positions south of there. Ukrainian reserves are available so it's unclear whether Russia can hold the position.


Vega volunteer btln in the woods near Kremennaya and their kitted out BMP-3(M?).


Russian TOS-1 fires near Svatovo.


Other interesting tidbits.

Commander of Russian 106th VDV, Major General Seliverstov, has reportedly been removed. There is a rumor that this is due to him speaking out but this is not clear at this time. Note he started this war as a colonel and was promoted to general after the withdrawal from Kiev area.


Near Mar'inka the Zoo position was retaken by Ukrainian forces. Note this was a location where Russia used a presumably unmanned VBIED.


Near Klescheevka Russian forces have counter-attacked and recaptured additional positions south and west of the town.


Apparently a first sighting of a Ukrainian FPV drone with airburst capability. This new weapon type will certainly continue to evolve.


More footage of Ukrainian Leopards with K-1.


Ukrainian Strv 122 tanks. Note while technically a Leo-2A5 variant, they are likely the best protected Leopards in Ukraine.


An interesting look at a Bradley that allegedly survived a direct hit from a T-72 tank shell. Note it's also possible it got hit by a loitering munition.


A look at a Leo-2 being repaired after getting hit.


Evidence from recent Shahed fragments suggests localized Russian production of the type, including a modified warhead.


Another Russian BMP-3 with the extra armor kit. Despite earlier announcements we still don't see this useful upgrade in any sort of mass use.


Russian Su-24M with a FAB-500 UMPK gliding bomb. These munitions have not been the game changer they could have been had they been available in mass numbers at the start of the war and been employed appropriately, but nonetheless they provide a key ability to strike targets without losing jets. Based on recovered fragments it appears these bombs use a EW-resistant antenna for their satellite guidance.


A Russian Mi-28NM with a dual LMUR mount. The munition remains rare.


Among the equipment handed over by Wagner we 20+ S-60 guntrucks. It's unclear whether they're being used as AAA against UAVs, but they're definitely being used a fire support.


Some shorts of Russian Z-STS armored trucks (MRAPs?) in Ukraine.


a TR60-30 engine from a Storm Shadow in Russian hands, likely from the relatively intact missile recovered by a Russian BARS unit.

 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Does anyone know how the Russian Elite Special Forces performed in this war? Are they on the battlefield? How did they do? I remember videos back in the day claiming that they had the best special forces in the world.

@Feanor

Fanboy nonsense. Russian SpN are more shock troops then traditional special forces. Russia also has actual special forces. They did well in Syria but we have little info of their use in this war. They're definitely active, we can be sure of that. But we don't have good information on their use. For traditional SpN they're being used as elite infantry in important locations. Recent Russian pushes in the Kremennaya area were done by SpN. Russian ATGM teams hunting Ukrainian MBTs in Zaporozhye and IFVs were reportedly SpN. They're clearly a useful and important asset but I would ignore claims about them being the best in the world.
 

Larry_L

Active Member
An interesting video of a Ukrainian unit clearing trenches in the Bakhmut area.


The first I have seen of Tom Cooper and his sarcastic reports. It seems like a grain, or several of salt are needed, however he appears to have knowledgeable sources. Here he is talking about the 58th CAA after the commanders replacement. There is a link to a lengthy video of the defense of Popasna during the March, April period. I found that quite interesting as it has English subtitles. Beware. There are several corpses shown in the video.


Report of the dismissal of the commanders of the 7th and 106th VDV divisions Kornev and Selivestorov. Also the possible dismissal of Teplinsky of the VDV. Included is a translation of an unconfirmed recording of Teplinski's troops supporting him. Unlikely, since this would be mutiny, but stranger things have happened lately.

 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
Video of the damage:


Edit: According to RBC Ukraine, the attack on the bridge was the work of SBU and Ukrainian Navi (is there such a thing?). Via Google translate:

The night attack on the Crimean Bridge was a special operation of the naval forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the Security Service of Ukraine. This was reported to RBC-Ukraine by sources in the SBU.


According to the Security Service, the SBU and the Naval Forces of Ukraine were involved in the night bombing of the Crimean Bridge.

"The bridge was attacked with surface drones. It was difficult to get to the bridge, but in the end it was possible to do it," the source said.

From: Атака на Крымский мост является спецоперацией СБУ и ВМС, - источники
 
Last edited:

vikingatespam

Well-Known Member
The damage is quite small and specific, with one of the concrete arm supports removed (about 10 second left in the movie). How UKR managed to get something into place to do that is beyond me.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
The damage is quite small and specific, with one of the concrete arm supports removed (about 10 second left in the movie). How UKR managed to get something into place to do that is beyond me.
Allegedly unmanned boats. Russia is claiming they will have it repaired within a month. In the meantime truck traffic is re-routed through Kherson region where additional road paving efforts have been underway even before this incident. VMF BDKs are being used as ferries, and additional trains are being run on the railbridge portion.

It's significant that Ukrainian unmanned drone attacks on Sevastopol' have generally been repulsed. In other words it's not some threat that can't be countered. And it's not a fundamental inability of Russia to deal with it. Russia has dealt with these types of attacks successfully. This is a failure of the security set up around the Crimean bridge itself.

This attack of course come as Russia exits the grain deal.


EDIT: More images/video of the damage.


EDIT2: More realistic repair estimates. Allegedly the less damaged section will be replaced and re-opened in September, the more damaged in November. A satellite image of the damage.

 
Last edited:

Larry_L

Active Member
What I am trying to understand about the bridge attack is why the road bridge was struck rather than the rail bridge. The rail bridge would have had a much bigger impact on logistics. I can only speculate that either, the rail bridge was thought to be harder to damage, or the intent was to attack Putin's credibility which has already sustained damage recently.
 

vikingatespam

Well-Known Member
What I am trying to understand about the bridge attack is why the road bridge was struck rather than the rail bridge. The rail bridge would have had a much bigger impact on logistics. I can only speculate that either, the rail bridge was thought to be harder to damage, or the intent was to attack Putin's credibility which has already sustained damage recently.
It appears that the rail bridge is thinner and therefore would not "collect" as much of the upwards gas expansion. I suspect the rail bridge is also more structurally tough in order to carry more weigh from trains ?
 

King Wally

Active Member
What I am trying to understand about the bridge attack is why the road bridge was struck rather than the rail bridge. The rail bridge would have had a much bigger impact on logistics. I can only speculate that either, the rail bridge was thought to be harder to damage, or the intent was to attack Putin's credibility which has already sustained damage recently.
Anders Puck Nielsen provides a good explanation of how difficult it is going to be for Putin to negotiate a peace deal with Ukraine. He's backed himself into a corner that's going to be a roadblock toward ending this war. You can see how given such an analysis just how important it may actually be to help publicly shake Putin's credibility within his domestic audience. Keeping in mind the recent Wagner mutiny and I can actually see why the road bridge may have been a preference.

 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Anders Puck Nielsen provides a good explanation of how difficult it is going to be for Putin to negotiate a peace deal with Ukraine. He's backed himself into a corner that's going to be a roadblock toward ending this war. You can see how given such an analysis just how important it may actually be to help publicly shake Putin's credibility within his domestic audience. Keeping in mind the recent Wagner mutiny and I can actually see why the road bridge may have been a preference.

I think this is incorrect. I suspect Russia will accept peace without recapturing Kherson and without taking Zaporozhye. I also suspect reparations are probably the easiest thing. I think Putin will not accept something called reparations. But if you couch it in some other terms, this is probably the easiest one. If in exchange he gets recognition of Russian annexation of Donetsk, Lugansk, and the current controlled areas of Zaporozhye and Kherson. There can probably be some back and forth about the current areas of Donetsk region since there is a big chunk outside of Russia's control. As for hoping that Putin leaving will open the door to piece, this is theoretically possible. There are economic interests within Russia that would prefer the war to end under almost any terms as long as sanctions are lifted. But as the Wagner mutiny showed, there is a real chance for something worse then Putin to end up in power. People throw the term fascism around pretty casually in this conflict, but consider the implications of a real fascist dictatorship, propped up by angry combat veterans, in a nuclear power.

But I suspect Ukraine won't accept any peace that lets Russia keep captured lands or legitimizes the annexation of anything. And from a US perspective, this war is great. Russia is bogged down, burning through massive resources, and not gaining much of anything. With Ukraine's position and US backing, there's no negotiations that don't look like a massive defeat for Russia. And obviously Russia won't accept those. Russia hasn't really been defeated.
 

rsemmes

Member

I cannot provide a link because I don't know if they were facts or an interpretation, but I read that during the Ankara negotiations Russia was willing to give back the land corridor for a Crimea/Donbas/no-NATO peace agreement; Boris told Zelensky no.
Russia should be interested in peace, Ukraine should be interested in peace. I wonder if someone is telling Zelensky that he can get "victory" instead, I also wonder what that "victory" will look like and at what price.

Opinion:
War is great!
Russia killing Ukrainians is great news, Ukrainians killing Russians is even better; they are our competitors!
We don't need others, these are our principles.
That Industrial-Military Complex Eisenhower mentioned (the same Ike who was that happy to let and support France taking back his colony through blood and fire; the Atlantic Charter being such a beautiful piece of useless paper) is in ecstasy; instead of £1 million, the will give themselves a £3 million bonus.
Great news!
 

swerve

Super Moderator
I cannot provide a link because I don't know if they were facts or an interpretation, but I read that during the Ankara negotiations Russia was willing to give back the land corridor for a Crimea/Donbas/no-NATO peace agreement; Boris told Zelensky no.
Russia should be interested in peace, Ukraine should be interested in peace. I wonder if someone is telling Zelensky that he can get "victory" instead, I also wonder what that "victory" will look like and at what price.
Putin is a serial treaty-breaker. He can't be trusted to keep any promise. Russia was formally committed to not only recognising the pre-2014 borders of Ukraine, but protecting them. Putin broke that agreement, because he could. Any treaty which rewards Putin for invading Ukraine merely stores up trouble for the future.

"Russia should be interested in peace" - I think you've forgotten who invaded who. Putin doesn't want peace: he wants victory, or at least something he can present as victory, so he can keep power, & prepare for next time. He's proved that by his behaviour. If he wanted peace he wouldn't have started the war.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Putin is a serial treaty-breaker. He can't be trusted to keep any promise. Russia was formally committed to not only recognising the pre-2014 borders of Ukraine, but protecting them. Putin broke that agreement, because he could. Any treaty which rewards Putin for invading Ukraine merely stores up trouble for the future.

"Russia should be interested in peace" - I think you've forgotten who invaded who. Putin doesn't want peace: he wants victory, or at least something he can present as victory, so he can keep power, & prepare for next time. He's proved that by his behaviour. If he wanted peace he wouldn't have started the war.
This goes both ways. The west committed to NATO non-expansion. We now know that was a lie. Minsk Accords 1 and 2 were lies. The grain deal that Russia just ended was also a lie. The real issue is that the gap in the positions of the sides is such that no real negotiations are possible.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
This goes both ways. The west committed to NATO non-expansion. We now know that was a lie. Minsk Accords 1 and 2 were lies. The grain deal that Russia just ended was also a lie. The real issue is that the gap in the positions of the sides is such that no real negotiations are possible.
When did "The west" commit to NATO non-expansion? The claim is that there was an oral promise, but that's not supported by any government statement, or any written agreement, or written promise. Hans-Dietrich Genscher said the west should make such a commitment: he didn't say it had. He didn't have the authority to commit even Germany to it, & his boss didn't agree. James Baker agreed with Genscher, but again, his head of government didn't commit to it.

What we're talking about is the foreign ministers of two NATO countries saying things in speeches during but outside the process of discussions on the unification of Germany, while the USSR was still in existence. No formal commitment by heads of government, or by any other countries, or by NATO . . . .

Personally, I think the Minsk agreements are meaningless. They happened only because Russia had broken its written promises.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
When did "The west" commit to NATO non-expansion? The claim is that there was an oral promise, but that's not supported by any government statement, or any written agreement, or written promise. Hans-Dietrich Genscher said the west should make such a commitment: he didn't say it had. He didn't have the authority to commit even Germany to it, & his boss didn't agree. James Baker agreed with Genscher, but again, his head of government didn't commit to it.

What we're talking about is the foreign ministers of two NATO countries saying things in speeches during but outside the process of discussions on the unification of Germany, while the USSR was still in existence. No formal commitment by heads of government, or by any other countries, or by NATO . . . .
There were more statements then just that, but I don't think it matters. Whether the west cleverly tricked Soviet leadership by implying this without actually promising, and then simply turned around and ignored all that, or whether there was in fact an agreement, it creates a problem of trust. Whether you're technically correct or just lied doesn't make the other side any more willing to trust you or play by your rules.

Personally, I think the Minsk agreements are meaningless. They happened because Russia had broken its written promises.
At the end of the day the Minsk Accords happened because Ukraine signed them. If Ukraine had no intention of following them and signed them anyway then Ukraine negotiated in bad faith. France and Germany signed them. Did they also negotiate in bad faith? The answer appears to be yes. Putin's signature isn't worth anything. Ok sure. But what's the signature of western heads of state worth? At the end of the day the current war is a product of that same original break of promise by Russia. So following your logic the west and Ukraine are justified in signing any treaty, then arbitrarily breaking it when they feel like it. From where I sit it doesn't work like that. If you want to negotiate, you are accountable for the documents you signed. Germany, France, and Ukraine, lied and negotiated in bad faith when they signed the Minsk Accords. Their signature is worth as little as Putin's. Which again brings us back to the question, how can any new deal be trusted? What are any new promises worth? From where I sit, nothing. And the grain deal is a perfect example of that. No negotiations are possible because the word of Ukraine or its western backers is worthless.
 
Top