(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
https://twitter.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1716492677875748978 Similar to the Ukranian offensive, mines played a huge role in thinning out Russian vehicles: https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1716484970410131892 Scale of the losses looks staggering, and the Russians are still committing infantry to the attack.
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
In the most recent War on the Rocks podcast, there was a discussion on what to glean from Avdiivka. https://warontherocks.com/2023/10/looking-beyond-the-offensive-in-ukraine/ Yes, it seems to be a major loss of personnel and equipment, but Kofman pointedly observes that the fact that Russia is able to gather so many resources in a push like this despite also defending against Ukraine's offensive is not necessarily a great sign. Russia seems to still have resources and productive capacity while Ukraine's support from the west look increasingly under stress. This winter is going to be hard when Russia starts sending refreshed missiles and drones after civilian infrastructure and Ukraine is going to have to be very careful about how it allocates its air defense resources. It's not like they're going to get new rockets for the S-300s anytime soon and having enough ammunition always seems like a big concern. Israel's situation is also a big potential hampering factor too since they have their own military support relationships with the west to call on. Kofman generally tries to be a little more grounded in what he says to counteract how many others get carried away with visions of a Russian defeat. Still, I felt pretty downcast after listening to it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
I really do wonder what the F16's are going to do once they arrive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 18:31
|
|
|
Report saying Ukraine pulled back from the mound due to Russians targeting firing positions https://youtu.be/5tJRSYjql70?si=SJkkN4imq4q6e_jL
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 18:33
|
|
|
Mostly F-16s they would relieve some stress on air defense. Sending the ground-launched Small Diameter Bomb rockets would drop more bombs than F-16s ever could.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 18:33
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:Kofman generally tries to be a little more grounded in what he says to counteract how many others get carried away with visions of a Russian defeat. Still, I felt pretty downcast after listening to it. All true. However, at some point, equipment like IFVs and tanks will "run out" to the point where they would only be able to muster very few of them, if any at all, for offensives. Recent videos already show them beginning to switch from IFV/APCs to regular army trucks for front-line troop transport. It's the same for lost jets and helicopters, which are only replaceable for Russia on a decade+ timeline. I think Ukraine needs to hold the line longer (another year?). If the recent offensives showed modern, fresh off-the-line tanks and IFVs rolling with well-equipped troops, it would be a serious concern for Ukraine. However, that's not what is happening. Regarding manpower, artillery shells, and most missile types, it's true Russia will never realistically run out when fighting a single smaller country like this with a limited frontline that they need to cover. I'll also add unlimited drones to that, given supplies from Iran and recently reported conversions of existing factories in Russia for drone production. It looks like they have a good supply chain of parts from China to make unlimited drones. Rad Russian fucked around with this message at 19:28 on Oct 23, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 19:18
|
|
|
Russia will not run out of ammunition because they have reliable backers like Iran and North Korea (unlike Ukraine relying on US, which will have noticeable quantities of ammunition ready by 2025), not because the front line is short.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 19:24
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:Russia will not run out of ammunition because they have reliable backers like Iran and North Korea (unlike Ukraine relying on US, which will have noticeable quantities of ammunition ready by 2025), not because the front line is short. Iran and North Korea aren't reliable backers either, I'd not want to trust them long-term, considering they have their own enemies closer at home. The EU alone can outproduce Russia, Iran and NK combined.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 20:33
|
|
|
They can, the problem seems to be if they're willing to. Watching that song and dance unfold in the media has been cringeworthy to say the least.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 20:48
|
|
|
Europe is a morass in a quagmire of a Kafkaesque tarpit of bureaucracy. It takes aaaaages to get anything done.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 20:53
|
|
|
Wibla posted:They can, the problem seems to be if they're willing to. Watching that song and dance unfold in the media has been cringeworthy to say the least. Germany seems determined to find any justification it can not to do anything. I'm pretty scared about how anything stupid happening in the US in 2024 (which is pretty much guaranteed) is going to affect things for Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 20:54
|
|
|
It is not, in any way, "guaranteed."
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 20:59
|
|
|
Moon Slayer posted:It is not, in any way, "guaranteed." It is however, ga-ron-teed
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:Germany seems determined to find any justification it can not to do anything. I'm pretty scared about how anything stupid happening in the US in 2024 (which is pretty much guaranteed) is going to affect things for Ukraine. Funnily despite all that Germany actually helped a great deal. Scholtz just says dumb stuff while doing it Meanwhile for artillery procurement in EU, it was held up by French wanting more domestic production, and in US they just don't seem to be in a hurry, even though it's a tiny portion of total aid budget and arguably needed for national security anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
I just heard through a Ukrainian friend whose friend has been in the Ukrainian military that they’re seeing 40 Russian tanks per day coming offensively into Avdiivka. They said it’s hard for them to destroy all of them. On top of that, the Russian soldiers are drugged up and walking into gun fire, much like Bakhmut apparently. The amount of artillery seems to be especially high as well. I’ll try to get more info in the coming days.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
Rad Russian posted:All true. However, at some point, equipment like IFVs and tanks will "run out" to the point where they would only be able to muster very few of them, if any at all, for offensives. Recent videos already show them beginning to switch from IFV/APCs to regular army trucks for front-line troop transport. It's the same for lost jets and helicopters, which are only replaceable for Russia on a decade+ timeline. I think Ukraine needs to hold the line longer (another year?). If the recent offensives showed modern, fresh off-the-line tanks and IFVs rolling with well-equipped troops, it would be a serious concern for Ukraine. However, that's not what is happening. The big question overhanging Russia's combat performance is, are we seeing them deploying makeshift relics because they ran out of the good stuff or are they deploying them to conserve the good stuff for later assaults when Ukraine might be running lower on ammo as deliveries dry up and stockpiles get expended blowing up antique trucks? They say to never underestimate your enemy, but I'm not sure whether it would be underestimating them more to assume that this is the best they can come up with or that they could do better and deliberately choose not to. Pretty Boy Floyd posted:I just heard through a Ukrainian friend whose friend has been in the Ukrainian military that they’re seeing 40 Russian tanks per day coming offensively into Avdiivka. They said it’s hard for them to destroy all of them. On top of that, the Russian soldiers are drugged up and walking into gun fire, much like Bakhmut apparently. The amount of artillery seems to be especially high as well. I’ll try to get more info in the coming days. This has been more or less confirmed--Ukraine was forced to retreat from the Terrikon after the latest giant wave attack breached their defenses, although it's still unclear if Russia has managed to occupy it themselves (the attack that made the breach was repulsed in the end, but the defense was too compromised to continue holding there.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 21:15
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:Russia will not run out of ammunition because they have reliable backers like Iran and North Korea (unlike Ukraine relying on US, which will have noticeable quantities of ammunition ready by 2025), not because the front line is short. It might be ready, but president-for-life trump may also decide that it's no longer going.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 21:18
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:Turkiye submitted Sweden's NATO bid to parliament for ratification. That only leaves Hungry now. eh, we shall see the sultan could still stop it and invent some stuff that sweden needs to do. or he could command the parliament to start stalling
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
So, what's the goal to entice hungary? I have to assume that Putin is willing to pay a monstrously large bribe to Orban to prevent this, at the very least.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 22:24
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:So, what's the goal to entice hungary? I have to assume that Putin is willing to pay a monstrously large bribe to Orban to prevent this, at the very least.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 22:28
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:Considering Putin and Orban had a very public photo op of them shaking hands in Beijing a few days ago at a Belt and Road event, I don't know if there's much that the West can do. It is what it is, but Orban cannot just turn back on EU and NATO as a whole, so it will be interesting to see what the balancing act will be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 22:40
|
|
|
my guess is that orban wants to have cheap russian gas for this winter at least
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 22:45
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:So, what's the goal to entice hungary? I have to assume that Putin is willing to pay a monstrously large bribe to Orban to prevent this, at the very least. Don’t sell him short, he’s perfectly capable of taking bribes from both!
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 23:06
|
|
|
Icon Of Sin posted:Don’t sell him short, he’s perfectly capable of taking bribes from both! Orban will get something he can show off to the people back home, but will eventually comply
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 03:33
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:It is what it is, but Orban cannot just turn back on EU and NATO as a whole, so it will be interesting to see what the balancing act will be. Can Hungary actually be kicked out of the EU? Or NATO?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 04:43
|
|
|
Poland will come to their rescue and vice versa.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 05:34
|
|
|
It'll be interesting to see what happens when the new Polish government gets into power. Will they keep protecting Hungary? Will Slovakia take its place now that they voted in Fico?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 05:39
|
|
|
Freudian slippers posted:Poland will come to their rescue and vice versa. Well, the new government will be much more pro-EU so that obstacle is out. Slovakia might slide in Poland's place though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 07:06
|
|
|
Freudian slippers posted:Poland will come to their rescue and vice versa. I know you guys are used to "Poland bad" rhetoric, but pro-Orban government just got kicked and replaced with pro-EU one. Tusk government has exactly zero interest in protecting Orban.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 07:47
|
|
|
As far as I'm aware the coalition hasn't formed yet in Poland so let's not count our pierogies before they, uh, boil?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 07:53
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Good luck with that. Moving Ka-52 bases out to 150km from the front means moving them to the edge of their combat range. They could make the flight there and back, but they wouldn't have much time on station. The Ka-52 combat range is 460km. https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asset/Ka-52_Alligator_(Hokum_B)_Russian_Attack_Helicopter
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 08:36
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:As far as I'm aware the coalition hasn't formed yet in Poland so let's not count our pierogies before they, uh, boil? Indeed. The Russia-German Axis may have a majority together, but it's still the old government.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 08:44
|
|
|
knox_harrington posted:The Ka-52 combat range is 460km.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 09:12
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Max combat range means going that far, lobbing some rockets and then immediately turning and coming back to base, right? Part of the point of helicopters I think is their ability to loiter at the front for a while supporting infantry and ground vehicles, the less time you can spend at the front (because the base you came from is further away) the less effective they'll be. Sure but it is not a big deal to stop in a clearing for 15 minutes to dump in a m3 or two of fuel. Dispersing a few hundred fuel trucks (with a smart phone to ensure accurate locating) across the length of the front (back 50 km from the LOC) to ensure as many fueling options as required doesn't seem that big a stretch compared to many other hurdles Russia faces.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 10:40
|
|
|
Electric Wrigglies posted:Just tempt the HIMARS of fate, nothing bad will happen. There is a reason that russian ammo dumps are even further away than 50km from the front. Groggy nard fucked around with this message at 10:46 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 10:43
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:So, what's the goal to entice hungary? I have to assume that Putin is willing to pay a monstrously large bribe to Orban to prevent this, at the very least. Hungary is currently negotiating with the EU about receiving billions in EU funds that were frozen over rule of law concerns (similar to Poland). Allowing Sweden to join NATO will probably earn them some brownie points
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 10:46
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Max combat range means going that far, lobbing some rockets and then immediately turning and coming back to base, right? Part of the point of helicopters I think is their ability to loiter at the front for a while supporting infantry and ground vehicles, the less time you can spend at the front (because the base you came from is further away) the less effective they'll be. It has to do a particular mission at that range so no. I'm not sure what the considerations are, but ferry range is listed as 1100km so clearly not just a there-and-back. Even then, the point is that ATACMS range is nominally 300km so the ka-52s have some to spare, contrary to what people were posted upthread. An attack heli with 150km range would not be much use!
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 11:12
|
|
|
knox_harrington posted:It has to do a particular mission at that range so no. I'm not sure what the considerations are, but ferry range is listed as 1100km so clearly not just a there-and-back.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 11:46
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Ferry is one way, no payload. If it’s gotta fly 300k each way it’s gonna have precious little weight budget left over, even with little contingency fuel. No again the combat radius is 460km so it will have either payload or fuel to spare
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 11:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
knox_harrington posted:It has to do a particular mission at that range so no. I'm not sure what the considerations are, but ferry range is listed as 1100km so clearly not just a there-and-back. First off, ferry range means no weapons. Weapons and ammunition add weight and drag, reducing the range. It also assumes a one way trip in a straight line at optimal speed/altitude. Depending on the helicopter and conditions that number was generated by it may also assume additional fuel tanks on the pylons in place of weapons - and the Ka-52 as it happens has fuel tanks to fit on the pylons to increase ferry range. It's a useful figure to determine the maximum possible range of the platform relocating between bases, not much else. The 470km figure is the combat range (distance it can travel combat loaded while keeping a small fuel reserve), not combat radius (distance from the airbase it could be expected to conduct combat operations). Both combat range and ferry ranges assume one way trips in this case, but the combat range is significantly shorter because it assumes carrying weapons/ammo and no additional fuel tanks meaning a lot less gas on board. So at 150km from the front you're already shaving off 300km from a 470km combat range just to get there and back. So you have a third of a tank to do stuff near the front lines. Throw in maneuvers and less-than-optimal speed while near/at the front to avoid getting shot down or to find targets and you further reduce the distance and time on target available. No matter how you look at it, pushing the base back 50km means adding 100km to every flight - which for a helicopter with a 470km range implies a substantial reduction in time spent at the front. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 12:27 on Oct 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 11:56
|
|
