(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
Paladinus posted:While I lean towards Russia being behind it, that recording hardly proves that. It's just two Russians discussing the incident. The one who insists Russia did it, couldn't even recognise the Russia-appointed Kherson governor Saldo in the video where he tells everything is fine, and calls him a soldier. He also mentions seeing it on telegram, so chances are, this is just something he read on a random channel, like everyone else. Yeah, there's also a chance that the SBU falsify or cherry pick these recordings when they put them out. I think it's more interesting that Ukrainian intelligence are deciding to push the narrative that it was an accident rather than intentional by the Russians. That seems like an unlikely thing to do if they were convinced it was intentional, or even if they suspected that.
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 12:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 08:36 |
|
|
Chalks posted:Yeah, there's also a chance that the SBU falsify or cherry pick these recordings when they put them out. I think it's more interesting that Ukrainian intelligence are deciding to push the narrative that it was an accident rather than intentional by the Russians. That seems like an unlikely thing to do if they were convinced it was intentional, or even if they suspected that. The guy says they wanted to blow it up intentionally, just with less damage, 'to give Ukrainians a scare'. So it's not like it's implied someone dropped an anvil on a mine and it caused a chain reaction, it still was deliberate in this narrative.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 12:06
|
|
|
It looks like the Ukraine counter-offensive is going extremely badly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:02
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:While I lean towards Russia being behind it, that recording hardly proves that. It's just two Russians discussing the incident. The recording does sound a lot like two (drunk?) Russians discussing some rumours they read on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:05
|
|
|
Digiwizzard posted:It looks like the Ukraine counter-offensive is going extremely badly. It would be smart to not make any conclusions based on limited evidence
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:07
|
|
|
Digiwizzard posted:It looks like the Ukraine counter-offensive is going extremely badly. yeah im in tears (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:11
|
|
|
I wouldn't put much stock into the jabbering of random soldiers. The confused reaction from the Russian side is the most convincing evidence in my mind that blowing the dam wasn't planned. It was definitely mined well beforehand, so all it could've taken is some part of the Russian army panicking and convincing themselves that the 3000 green Leopard 2 of Scholz are about to roll across the dam and annihilate their positions. We've already seen that the Russian army seems almost purposefully structured to produce a lack of cohesion, insane infighting, lack of accountability, and general fuckness where one part of the army will let civilians berate them without reacting and another part will go on a months long rape and murder spree. It's just another entry on Russia's my_war_crimes.txt, probably caused by the structure of how Russia is run.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:12
|
|
|
Digiwizzard posted:It looks like the Ukraine counter-offensive is going extremely badly. Define "extremely badly" in a way that actally matters. I don't really think anyone can say anything useful right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:21
|
|
|
SBU keep their stellar (down in the gutter) reputation https://twitter.com/NeilPHauer/status/1666820688496439298?t=H2lcdxuream3iuFysvKa2Q&s=19 Polygraph tests jfc fatherboxx fucked around with this message at 13:25 on Jun 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:22
|
|
|
Digiwizzard posted:It looks like the Ukraine counter-offensive is going extremely badly. What are you basing this on? We are getting some selective Russian footage. The Kherson offensive was going really badly until they took Khakiv and then Kherson.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:28
|
|
|
People on internet shocked to learn that Russian propaganda says Russia doing great.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:33
|
|
|
Digiwizzard posted:It looks like the Ukraine counter-offensive is going extremely badly. They usually do until they don't. It's one of the reasons why good analysts hesitated to assert the failure of Gerasimov's winter offensive until several weeks in. Offensives--both successful and unsuccessful--tend to take heavy casualties at the start, particularly when assaulting prepared positions. By way of comparison, the German conquest of France in 1940 is generally seen to be remarkably successful from the perspective of a military operation. Germany lost around 800 tanks. Whether successful or not, this Ukrainian offensive will result in a lot of Ukrainian casualties. We cannot yet reasonably assess whether it's going well or going poorly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:38
|
|
|
Armor assaults involve putting armor in front of anti-armor defenses. And while I'm no war mans, since a lot of the modern APC equipment the UAF is getting is more than capable of piercing the casted old Russian tanks they're up against, the primary defense is gonna be drones, ranged weapons, mines, and artillery. Even export Abrams armor can't take hits from 40 year old soviet gear; Houthi success against Saudi M1's has definitively proven that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 13:59
|
|
|
I honestly don't know how tanks survive at all on a modern battlefield with all the anti tank weapons available to the defender. Like it seems incredibly easy to hide something like a Fagot missile launcher in a bush and just plink tanks all day from long distance. If the defender has a lot of these weapons (and I'm sure the Russians do) how does an armored assault ever manage to break through? In the opening days of the Yom Kippur war, Israeli armor was totally decimated on the Sinai front by AT3 Sagger missiles. They eventually went on to win the war so I guess they figured out how to get around it though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 15:06
|
|
|
You don't just roll out tanks forward without protection. They also can destroy anything within couple km so It's more likely that your AT team gets one shot off and then finds itself on receiving end of 125mm HE round.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 15:16
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:I honestly don't know how anyone survive at all on a modern battlefield ftfy (the answer is the same as for the last 6000+ years - by good tactics)
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 15:23
|
|
|
Read the latest RUSI report on how Russians are adapting. They bring up tanks/armored and mention that the Russians have largely improved upon not getting blow up by Ukrainian AT teams and in fact are giving them a hell of time. The main factor is them using distance + thermal camo. Unfortunately Russian infantry/Wagner do not get that luxury.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 15:27
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:I honestly don't know how tanks survive at all on a modern battlefield with all the anti tank weapons available to the defender. Like it seems incredibly easy to hide something like a Fagot missile launcher in a bush and just plink tanks all day from long distance. If the defender has a lot of these weapons (and I'm sure the Russians do) how does an armored assault ever manage to break through? In the opening days of the Yom Kippur war, Israeli armor was totally decimated on the Sinai front by AT3 Sagger missiles. They eventually went on to win the war so I guess they figured out how to get around it though. Depends on where the fighting is occurring. My understanding is it's relatively rare an ATGM can utilize its full range somewhere like Ukraine given trees and hills and whatnot. Moving through more covered terrain is an option, suppressing possible/likely ATGM positions with artillery or long range fire is another, spotting them with thermals or the smoke/blast from their launch is a third, etc... A tank shell is a hell of a lot faster than an ATGM so if the tank spots the launcher fairly early it isn't going to go too well for the guy with the missile. That's why throughout the cold war development moved towards things that were more mobile, or what the British did with Swingfire where the controller/sight could be moved to be well away from the launcher.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 15:27
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:ftfy Also some degree of luck. Good tactics and discipline go a very long way to skewing the odds in your favor, but sometimes your number is just up. There's a reason soldiers in combat get a little fatalistic. Partly tanks survive ATGMs in the same way infantry survive against small arms: don't keep yourself exposed for long. Pull up above an intervisibility line (IV line), scan and/or shoot, pull back. Use smoke. Suppress likely locations of ATGM teams with direct and indirect fire while you scurry across open ground. Etc., etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 15:32
|
|
|
Scapegoat posted:What are you basing this on? We are getting some selective Russian footage. The Kherson offensive was going really badly until they took Khakiv and then Kherson. Likely based on this https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1667155713506922496 Not great, but also these are currently mostly only detracked and abandoned. If the territory has been or can be captured they will be recoverable. No bodies visible or other indications of a major battle, just a minefield. When this happens to Russia we get a bunch of footage of drone dropped grenades finishing things off. We'll see if the Russians have the same capabilities here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 15:35
|
|
|
Dick Ripple posted:Read the latest RUSI report on how Russians are adapting. They bring up tanks/armored and mention that the Russians have largely improved upon not getting blow up by Ukrainian AT teams and in fact are giving them a hell of time. The main factor is them using distance + thermal camo. Unfortunately Russian infantry/Wagner do not get that luxury. Yeah, unless you really catch tanks being sitting ducks ATGM are not going to be "one shot, one kill" by any means, and that's assuming you even get a chance to get that shot off. Tanks are nowhere close to invincible but nothing else has the combination of mobility, firepower, and armor that they have; as hostile as the modern battlefield is to tanks, there's not really an alternative that has it any easier, so you just do the best you can with your tanks and accept that losses are inevitable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 15:42
|
|
|
Digiwizzard posted:It looks like the Ukraine counter-offensive is going extremely badly. The only ones who are talking atm are the pro putin ones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:01
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:Define "extremely badly" in a way that actally matters. I don't really think anyone can say anything useful right now. Probably best ignore an account that hasn't posted in more than a year. US spy satellites detected an explosion at the Kakhovka dam right before it burst. Romanian seismic data suggests the same. I don't think anyone still thinks it broke due to pressure from excessive water build up. But they'll need something more substantial than a phone call from two drunken Russian soldiers talking about the stories they heard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:01
|
|
|
Yeah defining "really badly" is going to be pretty nebulous until we see things a few months from now and have the power of retrospective.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:05
|
|
|
Just Another Lurker posted:The only ones who are talking atm are the pro putin ones. russian forces take the decisive lead on claiming they're doing great, yet again
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:07
|
|
|
The lovely thing about Ukraine losing things like Leopards and Bradley's is I don't think they really have that many. Like Russia has been losing tanks left and right but they had thousands to start off with. I think Ukraine had like 100ish Leopards? And probably isn't going to be getting many more. So any losses are really going to hurt.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:12
|
|
|
Yep. Also Ukraine started with like 900ish tanks. Basically no Western European country has a significant number of tanks. Edit: work with Czechia and Poland on reviving and modernizing old T-64 (and T-72?) hulls may be critical.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:13
|
|
|
I mean it's a modern conventional war of course there's going to be losses of valuable equipment like western tanks that's a given. I just hope the western allies have some kind of contingency plan if Ukraine loses a significant amount of equipment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:17
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:The lovely thing about Ukraine losing things like Leopards and Bradley's is I don't think they really have that many. Like Russia has been losing tanks left and right but they had thousands to start off with. I think Ukraine had like 100ish Leopards? And probably isn't going to be getting many more. So any losses are really going to hurt. I mean that would be the case with Ukraine's soviet tanks as well. A big reason for wanting Western tanks (and IFVs) is that there are only so many old Soviet tanks available in the West, and that those are old, Ukraine needs more and more stuff that is in better condition and of better quality. Leopards, Bradleys or Abrams or whatever else finds their way into Ukraine are not superweapons that should be carefully husbanded, they are more weapons for Ukraine to use.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:19
|
|
|
The best thing to do re. the offensive is not to twist your brain trying to build a narrative from tiny fragments of information from uncertain sources. That just leads to doomscrolling.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:21
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/KofmanMichael/status/1667181347331342337?s=20 Basically, this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:26
|
|
|
My hot take on the offensive: from what we know, Ukraine has made more progress in the last few days than Russia did in Bakhmut in months
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:26
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:from what we know, What do we know?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:30
|
|
|
TheRat posted:What do we know? We know there are at least 3 salients/fronts/axes of action. We know that Ukraine has penetrated several KM in each one and has liberated a few towns and is poised to engage some larger cities. Details are sketchy, but those are the broad strokes. Not much, but still--progress.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:36
|
|
|
New US aid package, it's all USAI. https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3422822/biden-administration-announces-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/ Interesting thing is that the Puma was first mentioned I believe in Feb, also USAI - so this is likely just them finalizing and expanding the contract after deciding what to provide. Nothing large of note, so I assume this is just a political thing to emphasize US support after the offensive kicked off. Also interesting tweet from Russian sources on the tactics being employed by Ukrainian infantry: https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1666147234621030404?cxt=HHwWiICw8aGFrJ8uAAAA
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:42
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:We know there are at least 3 salients/fronts/axes of action. We know that Ukraine has penetrated several KM in each one and has liberated a few towns and is poised to engage some larger cities. Yeah, they're pushing all along the front, making incremental gains along it, but the Tokmak axis seems to be getting the most pressure and most depth.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 16:47
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:I honestly don't know how tanks survive at all on a modern battlefield with all the anti tank weapons available to the defender. Like it seems incredibly easy to hide something like a Fagot missile launcher in a bush and just plink tanks all day from long distance. If the defender has a lot of these weapons (and I'm sure the Russians do) how does an armored assault ever manage to break through? In the opening days of the Yom Kippur war, Israeli armor was totally decimated on the Sinai front by AT3 Sagger missiles. They eventually went on to win the war so I guess they figured out how to get around it though. It's worth pointing out that a tank is an operational vehicle. It is mostly meant to attack and advance (though there is more to the varying doctrines- I know, I'm trying to keep this from getting too bloated). It has armament and optics that can identify and engage targets several kilometers away and can maneuver and continuously fire. An ATGM is a defensive emplacement like any other. It can engage over long distances, but it is not a weapon that can support operations in the way a tank can. The talk of an "infantry screen" gets mentioned a lot, but many people don't know what that really means. If you're imagining old footage of soldiers riding tanks or advancing in bundles behind a tank, you're thinking of it wrong (at least for the modern age). For an infantry screen, your infantry are spread out from tanks along a hundred or more meters in depth, creating a fluid point of contact that can locate, identify, and engage a potential anti-tank position. An ATGM can't engage mobile infantry. It also can't really reload under fire. An infantry screen will also not allow an ATGM to advance and deploy against a static tank. ATGMs also carry limited amounts of heavy ammo stored in large containers. An emplaced ATGM is just that- emplaced, and an emplacement can be maneuvered against. An ATGM can basically be easily suppressed by small arms fire and its effectiveness is limited against a sustained assault after its first round is fired. I kind of keeping harping on this, but footage of lone Russian tanks getting sniped by Ukrainian ATGMs shows that something is seriously wrong with the way Russia deployed much of its armor. I've seen other tankers and I think a platoon Lt. contribute to this thread and I think they'd agree that the idea of sending out a single unsupported tank to roam the open countryside or city in a near-peer war is absolutely absurd and shows a serious problem with command. This is a situation that plays entirely into an emplaced position's hands. On the other hand, properly spaced tanks, infantry, and light AFVs all working together with fire support is something that an emplaced anti-tank position has considerably more difficulty working against. There was even footage a few months ago of two Ukrainian tanks assaulting a trench line. The Russian ATGM missed its shot, and when under pressure could not reload, allowing the tanks to wreak havoc on the trench and rout the Russian soldiers. This was all without any infantry. There's a lot more in-depth things to talk about when it comes to tank survivability and deployment, but the idea is that you can't win a war without taking ground, and for taking ground you need something like a tank. If it's worth taking a tank, then it's worth using that tank correctly. When used correctly, a tank is an extremely necessary part of a war.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 17:02
|
|
|
mrfart posted:US spy satellites detected an explosion at the Kakhovka dam right before it burst. Romanian seismic data suggests the same. The competing theory isn't that it broke from excessive pressure from water build-up. It's that the Russians had lost the ability to control the water flow through the dam at some point in the past (for example when they blew up part of the dam structure on Nov 12th). Water had been overtopping the dam for the past month, and this was gradually damaging the dam's foundations. The water levels graph someone posted a while back matches this explanation of events, and people who seem to know about these things say they can see overtopping in the satellite images. At the start of June, we can see from satellite photos that concrete structures had started to break away (not just the road, but the huge concrete columns that supported that part of the road). At some point late at night on the 5th, or early morning 6th, an actual dam breach occurred. My basic understanding is that when this happens, the situation can escalate very quickly. In this case, a record level of water was trying to force its way through. If the hydro plant was in operation at that point, and/or the dam had already been rigged with explosives, then at this point they started going boom. Of the various publications I read, they've all been remarkably equivocal about the causes so far. However it's possible that clear evidence will emerge showing that it was a deliberate act of demolition. Even if the dam was built to withstand bombing, in its early-June condition it may have not needed that much explosive to push it over the edge.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 17:13
|
|
|
WarpedLichen posted:New US aid package, it's all USAI. That's actually very interesting. Ukraine has a lot of light infantry battalions who have limited organic armored transport. I mean, we've sent a lot of MRAPs, but those aren't exactly great off-road. Using IFVs as battle taxis between assembly areas and the edge of urban areas is a really interesting idea. Done right it could let you flood the outskirts with friendly infantry, and then you can use the IFVs to provide additional fire support as you push into the urban area.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 08:36 |
|
|
I’m intrigued by USAI Hawk procurement. I thought those were out of production so I guess it could be buybacks from current operators and refurbishment to more advanced versions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 17:30
|
|
