Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Florida Man for Crime]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/20/world/europe/ukraine-war-zelensky-sweden.html

"Zelensky Pushes Sweden to Give Ukraine Its Gripen Fighter Jets"

Even if he is successful this does not sound like a good idea.  There are already going to be issues trying to integrate F-16 in terms of training, logistics, parts, repairs, doctrine consistency, runway compatibility, etc.  Now Ukraine is going to add yet another type of fighter?  

Diversity in military hardware, just like almost everything else in live, is a clear weakness and not a strength.

This is sheer ignorance.

However, as such it serves a purpose - namely it provides a useful reminder of why readers ought not to take your ramblings too seriously. As someone who posts frequently in this thread, you should already know what I will post below. It has been discussed extensively in the media and on twitter for well more than a year by this point.

The Gripen is very likely the best (non-stealth) fighter for Ukraine's needs out of all possible options. The reason for this is that Sweden designed it to fight in exactly the sort of conflict Ukraine is fighting now. Sweden designed it for a smaller country (Sweden) to use defending against a larger country (specifically Russia) and was designed to work in difficult conditions. As such, it is much more flexible than the F-16, and whereas the F-16 requires long runways which are in perfect condition, the Gripen can take off from basically anywhere and is also comparatively easy to service logistically. The Gripen is basically expressly designed to be used by a "guerrilla air force" against a larger (specifically Russian) air force, whereas the F-16 was designed for use by a superpower which was assumed to be more or less dominant in the air.

Here for example is an article from nearly a year ago:

An often overlooked Swedish fighter may be the jet Ukraine needs to take on Russia now, experts say

As Russia's beleaguered air force continues to launch attacks in Ukraine, Kyiv finds itself in need of air assets, including new fighter aircraft.

The best jet for Ukraine is the Gripen, a 4.5th-generation multirole fighter jet built by Sweden's Saab and which is "by far the most suitable candidate in terms of operational requirements," according to Justin Bronk, Nick Reynolds, and Jack Watling of the Royal United Services Institute, a British think tank.

Ukraine needs a fighter with missiles that offer "the greatest possible effective range under low-altitude, subsonic launch conditions" in order to bypass Russian air defenses, including its S-400 missile system, which can target Ukrainian jets at higher altitudes, the three experts said in a recent report.

...

Additionally, as Ukrainian airstrips and airbases remain under threat from Russian long-range missiles, Kyiv needs a jet that can operate from shorter, more rudimentary airstrips and from basic airbases with smaller ground crews in order to minimize the risk of the jets being detected and destroyed on the ground.

The Gripen was "designed from the outset for ease of maintenance" and for operating from secondary or improvised airfields, according to the report, which noted that the Gripen can be refueled, "re-armed and given basic maintenance by teams of just six ground crew using two vehicles on small airbases or highways in cold weather."

Only one member of that crew needs to be highly trained, which would ease the strain on Ukraine's already overstretched air force, while most US fighter jets require extensive ground support equipment, which "would be difficult to build without being observed and hit" by Russian strikes, the report adds.

So if anything, Ukraine would be much better off with lots of Gripens instead of F-16s. The only reason that has not happened is that Sweden itself only has a limited number of them, and understandably (especially since their accession to NATO was delayed by the scum in Hungary and Turkey) were reluctant to give their entire air force over to Ukraine. Whereas there are lots of old F-16s around that we don't need anymore, and which are being replaced by F-35s anyway. That is the only reason why Ukraine will (maybe) FINALLY get a handful of F-16s, despite the absurd footdragging by western countries.

Anyway, so thanks for providing a clear example of how uninformed you are for everyone.

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

Drone attack targets Russian air base, damages strategic bomber
2 hours ago
AEROTIME HUB

An unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) targeted a Russian air base in the Novgorod region. The incident occurred at approximately 10:00 Moscow time on August 19, 2023.
...
According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, the “copter-type” drone was fired upon with small arms in an attempt to shoot it down. The attack resulted in a significant fire breaking out on the airfield’s apron. One aircraft sustained damage due to the incident, the ministry confirmed. There were no reported casualties among military personnel or civilians.

RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, AUGUST 19, 2023
Aug 19, 2023
ISW

Russian sources claimed that Ukrainian forces conducted a drone strike on Soltsy airbase in Novgorod Oblast and reportedly damaged strategic aircraft on August 19.[12] Geolocated images published on August 19 show smoke rising from the Soltsy airbase.[13] The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and other Russian sources claimed that Russian forces shot down a Ukrainian drone using small arms and that a fire damaged one aircraft.[14] A Russian insider source claimed that the fire damaged at least two aircraft and that the Soltsy airbase housed an unspecified number of Tu-22M3 (NATO reporting name Backfire-C) long-range supersonic bombers.[15] The source also claimed that Russian forces moved the undamaged aircraft to Olenya air base, Murmask Oblast.[16]

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1693246782799585366?s=20
https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1693249764010197299?s=20
Denmark and Netherlands alone may be pledging 72 f16s!

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

How I wish such transfers were treated as military secrets and publications about their preparation were in fact a hidden confirmation that the things transferred were already being used in combat.

[Florida Man for Crime]

https://www.welt.de/kultur/plus246979744/Ukraine-Krieg-Nur-eine-Art-der-Kriegsfuehrung-hat-jetzt-noch-Aussicht-auf-Erfolg.html

"Only one type of warfare has any chance of success for Ukraine now"

Welt argues that only a total mobilization of Ukraine's population into an army of 3 million (10% of the 30 million population) and a total war of attrition with massive manpower and missiles

I am not sure about that 30 million given there has been no Ukraine census for a couple of decades and we know there have been a lot of refugees plus the parts of Ukraine that have been occupied by Russia.

Thank you for providing yet another clear example of your ignorance.

First of all, that is NOT what the article says at all. It does not even mention Ukraine's population other than in one sentence at the end, and does not say that Ukraine NEEDS an army of 3 million soldiers, but merely says that it COULD support an army that large.

All it says is that is in any way related to your point is that maneuver warfare requires the element of surprise to be successful and that this is more difficult when there is real time tactical intelligence of the battlefield from drones etc.

The article argues that because of this, Ukraine's reserve units have been useless, sitting around in the rear waiting for an opportunity to conduct maneuver warfare.

TBH, I am quite sympathetic with that actual argument made in the article, but it has absolutely nothing to do with your argument. If anything, it suggests the OPPOSITE of your argument.

What Ukraine needs, and what is required for modern conventional warfare under these circumstances, is not so much manpower, but equipment and ammunition, in particular equipment and ammo for long ranged precision fire (high quality self-propelled artillery, MLRS/HIMARS, drones, and ideally air power).

The way that defense has been working in this war is you wait for the enemy to advance into open territory, and you use the abundant real time intelligence available to be able to tell exactly where they are. Then you call in precision (or if you are Russian, not-so-precision) artillery strikes on them and this blows them up into thousands of tiny pieces of goo and scrap metal. Or if you are Russian and are losing all your artillery in this way, maybe you call in your KA-52 helicopters for this role until the last 20-30 of them which are left (roughly the current situation).

Meanwhile, the way that attacking works is similar. You first of all before moving try to identify any targets (in particular artillery) which you can blow up from afar, and you do that. If you can't find any, then you send small groups of men forward to recon. Their purpose is first of all to directly identify targets which can be blown up from afar by your precision artillery/drones, or alternatively they may draw enemy fire. Since the enemy defends by identifying units that are advancing and then calling in artillery strikes on them, this means that when you are attacking, your recon groups will likely draw artillery fire. So the attacker then tries to use counter-battery radar to detect where the enemy artillery is firing from. When the coordinates of enemy artillery firing at your recon groups has been determined, if you are Ukraine, you pass those coordinates on to your own precision artillery, which then blows the enemy artillery into thousands of tiny bits.

This is the reason why artillery counter-battery fire and artillery ammo availability are pretty much the most important aspects of the war currently. If you can win the counter-battery war, and in particular if you can establish qualitative superiority where your artillery kills enemy artillery while the enemy artillery cannot kill your own artillery, over time you win a war of equipment attrition.

Over time, in this way, you attrition down the enemy artillery (and other sources of long range firepower). If ever you can get to the point where the enemy doesn't have artillery left, or doesn't have much left, and only has unsupported infantry left to attack with, then at that point it will become much easier to attack.

This is one of those "slowly, then suddenly" things.

Under these circumstances, more Ukrainian soldiers sitting around with rifles in their hands and maybe some ATGM are not really needed to attack, and are certainly not needed to defensively hold territory (if they were, Ukraine would be losing territory due to the line being too thinly manned, but that is manifestly not the case).

All that having more troops does is mean that your soldiers are more concentrated form larger targets, and hence that you can take more casualties from enemy artillery fire. By contrast you take fewer losses if your soldiers are spread out over greater distances (which also means you need fewer soldiers).

So anyway, thanks for providing another clear example of your ignorance so that readers can know not to take your ramblings too seriously.

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/Militarylandnet/status/1693280449638838698?s=20

[Florida Man for Crime]

So, following up on my previous post, how is the artillery counter-battery war going? This is really the crucial aspect in determining how the war goes, for the reasons I explained above.

The answer seems to be that it is going pretty well for Ukraine, and that Ukraine has established qualitative superiority in long range fires. And qualitative superiority is so important because if you have qualitative superiority, you can inflict high losses on the enemy while taking very low losses yourself.



Here is how things are going from the Russian perspective:

https://t.me/shouvalov/20

TLDR, "our situation with counter-battery warfare is a bit worse than catastrophic, with a trend towards deterioration"

First of all, any munition needs a carrier. And our situation with counter-battery warfare is a bit worse than catastrophic, with a trend towards deterioration. To this day, there is no systemic solution, while the generals and officers who raised this issue have been exiled to the very edge of the frontiers or to Syria.

Secondly, the parity of losses from the use of cluster munitions by both sides. I do not want to please the enemy by giving exact data with reference to different parts of the front, but so far the ratio of "cluster warfare" is between 1:4 and 1:7. And this is not in our favor. Taking into account the fact that the equipment is also being knocked out, the ratio will grow in an even worse direction for us.

Thirdly, we must separately consider a strategy for the integrated use of these munitions. The enemy is not just attacking - he is initially cutting off the supply and retreat routes of our units with such shelling. Without a comprehensive solution (space reconnaissance, aerial reconnaissance on the ground, availability of operational reserves and evacuation mechanisms) we cannot respond normally.

Fourth, there is no shame in recognizing that there is a problem and starting to solve it. If only because until the problem is recognized, its solution cannot be decomposed for an administrative-command structure of solutions.

Fifth, it is foolish to hope that munitions, although excellent for their time, but today considerably outdated morally (and technically) can compete on equal terms with modern foreign designs. The enemy side has significant dominance in both munition and carrier levels. No one is talking about panic, but under these conditions we are about to hit a qualitative shift in force parity. Are we willing to pay for one enemy destroyed with 25-30 of our own guys? The answer is obvious, right? So why are we doing everything we can to get to that parity? Or rather, why are we doing nothing to prevent such parity?

Sixth, if we continue to gloss over the problem, the enemy will take over. As a result, in addition to problems with losses, we will get a powerful demoralizing factor at the front. And then we can arrest 10 or 100 generals, or shoot colonels in total - it won't get better.

Guys, the problem must be solved. So far we have a local catastrophe with parity in the use of cluster munitions. If we don't react, the catastrophe will not go away, but will become global.

What is responsible for this?

In particular, the cream of the crop of precision-fire self-propelled artillery systems Ukraine has received includes 49 Caesar's from France and Denmark, 28 Panzerhaubitze 2000 from Germany, Netherlands, and Italy, and 38 HIMARS from USA. That's a total of 115. Source:

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/04/answering-call-heavy-weaponry-supplied.html

Meanwhile, the losses of these have been very low. Only 1 single Panzerhuabitze 2000 has even been damaged (not even destroyed). 1 Caesar has been damaged and 2 destroyed. And 0 HIMARS have been destroyed or damaged.

Source:

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-ukrainian.html

So that is 4 losses out of 115, even counting "damaged" as a loss. And how many Russian systems have they destroyed? God only knows, but it has to be... a lot more than that...



Basically what these things have been doing is sniping away at Russian artillery, hitting and destroying them with high accuracy, and as soon as they have fired they can move, and thus before the Russians can hit them with counter-battery fire, they are long gone. These are "scoot and shoot" tactics. The reason they are so good is that the Russian losses keep piling up, whereas you can count the Ukrainian losses on one finger in Oryx's data.

Over time, that is unsustainable for Russia.


The main problem here is that NATO countries have given Ukraine comparatively few of these qualitatively superior long range systems, that they need to identify a target before they can fire at it, and that they are chronically short on ammo. And here, the article on ammunition that jaichind posted is actually useful (which does show that while jaichind's own analysis is usually junky garbage, jaichind does sometimes post sources which are worth a look - often they also say something different than what jaichind says).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/08/19/artillery-ammunition-ukraine-pentagon/

Western countries should be focusing on giving Ukraine more of these systems, on improving Ukrainian real time battlefield intelligence (and disrupting that for the Russians), and on ramping up ammo production more quickly. Ideally, the goal should be for Ukrainian troops to be able to sit back in relative safety with qualitatively superior equipment and just pound the sh**t out of the Russians until they have nothing left. The goal should be to help Ukraine take as few losses as possible while Russia takes as many as possible. Ideally every Caesar/PzH/HIMARS/etc should destroy at least 100 Russian artillery systems for each one that Ukraine loses. Eventually, with lopsided losses, Russia should collapse.

Things are heading gradually in that direction, but Ukraine needs ammo and continued support for that to happen.

And btw, while this sort of combat may seem superficially similar to WW1, in reality it is not similar at all. The reason is that in WW1, there was no such qualitative superiority on either side.

[jaichind]

https://www.economist.com/europe/2023/08/20/ukraines-sluggish-counter-offensive-is-souring-the-public-mood

"Ukraine’s sluggish counter-offensive is souring the public mood"

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://twitter.com/flash_news_ua/status/1693299888895803481?s=12
Lol what a awesome response

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://twitter.com/flash_news_ua/status/1693299888895803481?s=12
Lol what a awesome response

Even if it was good for Ukraine to give up land for NATO membership anyway, it probably would not be wise for Zelensky to say so publicly.
This is the best response he could have given because it broadcasts confidence and helps morale, if it has any impact at all.

[Hindsight was 2020]

NYT: “On the Front Line, Ukrainian Commanders Are Buoyed to Be on the Offensive”

Despite grueling fighting, Ukrainian forces along much of the 600-mile front are moving forward, and commanders and veteran soldiers say they are in better shape now than six or 12 months ago.
“If a year ago we were conducting defensive operations and we had the task of holding back the enemy, now we have the ability to attack,” Col. Dmytro Lysiuk, commander of the 128th Mountain Assault Brigade, said in an interview in his frontline bunker last week.
Ukrainian officers are almost invariably upbeat in interviews. Even if the counteroffensive has yielded only mixed results so far, with Ukrainian troops slowed by dense Russian minefields and sustained firepower, they describe previous periods as being tougher than this one.

A different tone than most recent NYT doom article
https://archive.li/DAiLp

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

NYT: “On the Front Line, Ukrainian Commanders Are Buoyed to Be on the Offensive”

Despite grueling fighting, Ukrainian forces along much of the 600-mile front are moving forward, and commanders and veteran soldiers say they are in better shape now than six or 12 months ago.
“If a year ago we were conducting defensive operations and we had the task of holding back the enemy, now we have the ability to attack,” Col. Dmytro Lysiuk, commander of the 128th Mountain Assault Brigade, said in an interview in his frontline bunker last week.
Ukrainian officers are almost invariably upbeat in interviews. Even if the counteroffensive has yielded only mixed results so far, with Ukrainian troops slowed by dense Russian minefields and sustained firepower, they describe previous periods as being tougher than this one.

A different tone than most recent NYT doom article
https://archive.li/DAiLp

So uh, the NYT seems to be all over the place on this, no? Where on the doomer-optimist scale does the NYT lay as a whole?

[Hindsight was 2020]

NYT: “On the Front Line, Ukrainian Commanders Are Buoyed to Be on the Offensive”

Despite grueling fighting, Ukrainian forces along much of the 600-mile front are moving forward, and commanders and veteran soldiers say they are in better shape now than six or 12 months ago.
“If a year ago we were conducting defensive operations and we had the task of holding back the enemy, now we have the ability to attack,” Col. Dmytro Lysiuk, commander of the 128th Mountain Assault Brigade, said in an interview in his frontline bunker last week.
Ukrainian officers are almost invariably upbeat in interviews. Even if the counteroffensive has yielded only mixed results so far, with Ukrainian troops slowed by dense Russian minefields and sustained firepower, they describe previous periods as being tougher than this one.

A different tone than most recent NYT doom article
https://archive.li/DAiLp

So uh, the NYT seems to be all over the place on this, no? Where on the doomer-optimist scale does the NYT lay as a whole?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

NYT: “On the Front Line, Ukrainian Commanders Are Buoyed to Be on the Offensive”

Despite grueling fighting, Ukrainian forces along much of the 600-mile front are moving forward, and commanders and veteran soldiers say they are in better shape now than six or 12 months ago.
“If a year ago we were conducting defensive operations and we had the task of holding back the enemy, now we have the ability to attack,” Col. Dmytro Lysiuk, commander of the 128th Mountain Assault Brigade, said in an interview in his frontline bunker last week.
Ukrainian officers are almost invariably upbeat in interviews. Even if the counteroffensive has yielded only mixed results so far, with Ukrainian troops slowed by dense Russian minefields and sustained firepower, they describe previous periods as being tougher than this one.

A different tone than most recent NYT doom article
https://archive.li/DAiLp

So uh, the NYT seems to be all over the place on this, no? Where on the doomer-optimist scale does the NYT lay as a whole?

So basically it can be everywhere. Literally anywhere.
I guess that's logical, considering they are very consistent in wanting clicks and ratings. That's where their North Star lies.

[Hindsight was 2020]

NYT: “On the Front Line, Ukrainian Commanders Are Buoyed to Be on the Offensive”

Despite grueling fighting, Ukrainian forces along much of the 600-mile front are moving forward, and commanders and veteran soldiers say they are in better shape now than six or 12 months ago.
“If a year ago we were conducting defensive operations and we had the task of holding back the enemy, now we have the ability to attack,” Col. Dmytro Lysiuk, commander of the 128th Mountain Assault Brigade, said in an interview in his frontline bunker last week.
Ukrainian officers are almost invariably upbeat in interviews. Even if the counteroffensive has yielded only mixed results so far, with Ukrainian troops slowed by dense Russian minefields and sustained firepower, they describe previous periods as being tougher than this one.

A different tone than most recent NYT doom article
https://archive.li/DAiLp

So uh, the NYT seems to be all over the place on this, no? Where on the doomer-optimist scale does the NYT lay as a whole?

So basically it can be everywhere. Literally anywhere.
I guess that's logical, considering they are very consistent in wanting clicks and ratings. That's where their North Star lies.

You should join the Ukrainian discord I did and you’ll better appreciate the image lol

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://twitter.com/jimmysecuk/status/1693362411384824285?s=46&t=ZHeS7rMUpmB...
47,050 fascist orcs 😡

[jaichind]

https://m.timesofindia.com/city/bhopal/go-back-indian-students-face-anger-in-ukraine-as-war-drags-on/articleshow/102869353.cms

"Go back': Indian students face anger in Ukraine as war drags on"

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

https://twitter.com/jimmysecuk/status/1693362411384824285?s=46&t=ZHeS7rMUpmB...
47,050 fascist orcs 😡

It's generally humor of the far right, very recognizable.

[CanadianDemocrat]

https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1693246782799585366?s=20
https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1693249764010197299?s=20
Denmark and Netherlands alone may be pledging 72 f16s!

Australia has already retired their F/A-18s, they are debating whether to send them Ukraine. It would cost money to retire the jets, so they have nothing to lose by sending them to Ukraine.

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1693246782799585366?s=20
https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1693249764010197299?s=20
Denmark and Netherlands alone may be pledging 72 f16s!

Good news!

But it's important to remember:

https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1693250721045463264?s=20

[Storr]

It's a couple of days old, but I liked this take:

https://twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1692601815152369672?s=20

[jaichind]

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/usafe-boss-ukraine-f-16-2024-proficiency/

"USAFE Boss: Ukraine Won’t Get the F-16 Until 2024—And Proficiency Will Take Years"

“To get proficient in the F-16, that’s not going to happen overnight. You can get proficient on some weapons systems fairly quickly. But ones like F-16s, it takes a while to build … a couple squadrons of F-16s, and to get their readiness high enough, and their proficiency high enough. I mean, you’re talking, this could be four or five years down the road.”

[Florida Man for Crime]

According to Russian rumors, Robotyne has either fallen or is in the process of falling.

The "collapse" of the front is "continuing." Must be tough for them. However, we shouldn't feel too bad for them, because if they want the pain to stop, they can always surrender and then it will be over:

https://t.me/apwagner/11627

Rabotino is surrendered. As I wrote earlier - the collapse of our front in the Zaporizhzhya direction continues.

[Woody]

According to Russian rumors, Robotyne has either fallen or is in the process of falling.

The "collapse" of the front is "continuing." Must be tough for them. However, we shouldn't feel too bad for them, because if they want the pain to stop, they can always surrender and then it will be over:

https://t.me/apwagner/11627

Rabotino is surrendered. As I wrote earlier - the collapse of our front in the Zaporizhzhya direction continues.

Seeing as Rabotino is only a small village standing between the first line of defense behind Novoprokovka, this isn't a "collapse".

Feel bad for the conscripts who have to attack those trenches and mines. If it took 3 months to take Rabotino, imagine the hell they have to face when they reach the main defenses.

[Woody]

Kupiansk

https://twitter.com/djuric_zlatko/status/1693569559242895376