Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
mcast123 said:
No one ever talks about Ukraine losses, I'm curious if they have the manpower to last a couple of years?
Click to expand...

Numbers are even vaguer for Ukraine military losses - official numbers would put it just under 12K dead now but I doubt that is accurate. In theory they can mobilise 7-8 times current level man power wise but a lot of that would be tied up in other stuff like running services, etc. unlike Russia though they've not expended a large percentage of their more experienced soldiers, helped by their territorial forces being a capable force against what Russia can throw at them - though some units have been hit hard, others haven't taken too many losses from their most experienced.

I saw a pretty grim video from near Kharkiv from the perspective of a medic returning down a long road from the furthest extent of a push - mile after mile everything smashed - many many pulverised Russians, loads of dead or seriously wounded/dying Ukrainian soldiers - I suspect their death toll is closer to twice the sort of official numbers.
 
What is mind boggling about this war - seeing so many video clips from actual combat of stuff you'd normally only see in Battlefield 4 showboating reels... I'm just waiting for someone to eject from their plane, take out another with an anti-tank weapon mid-air, then land back in the seat again...

EDIT: What is also mind boggling is seeing a farmer trying to tend his fields with a load of cows grazing while a few 100 metres each direction are people shooting at each other...
 
Last edited:
Ff5INyDXgAAynEq


www.reuters.com

Exclusive: U.S. considers HAWK air defense equipment for Ukraine

The United States is considering sending older HAWK air defense equipment from storage to Ukraine to help it defend against Russian drone and cruise missile attacks, two U.S. officials told Reuters.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
 
Last edited:
Turn said:
Ff5INyDXgAAynEq


www.reuters.com

Exclusive: U.S. considers HAWK air defense equipment for Ukraine

The United States is considering sending older HAWK air defense equipment from storage to Ukraine to help it defend against Russian drone and cruise missile attacks, two U.S. officials told Reuters.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
Click to expand...

Loads of those helis never stood a chance - dunno what the ratio is currently but in the early weeks around half of the losses which were somewhat intact were basically as per they'd have rolled out the factory in 1970s without modernisation.
 
The biggest lesson I've learned in all of this is that, generally I have no time for people with "Asset Manager" as a job title - but my god, military asset management is absolutely badasss. The fact that (either side) we can roll out gear from so long ago. TBC on the Russian Asset Manager who clearly didn't go any maintenance, but you get my point :D
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
That should make travelling abroad very difficult for any of them. Lets hope some end up in the Hague for a few years.
Click to expand...
Do they program in the coordinates of what they hit, or make/design the missiles. If it's the former, throw away the key. If it's the latter then how is that different to say people who make the guns for people to use?
 
dLockers said:
The biggest lesson I've learned in all of this is that, generally I have no time for people with "Asset Manager" as a job title - but my god, military asset management is absolutely badasss. The fact that (either side) we can roll out gear from so long ago. TBC on the Russian Asset Manager who clearly didn't go any maintenance, but you get my point :D
Click to expand...

At its best (sadly not always the case) the US/UK military logistic and maintenance abilities are truly impressive - the pull out of Afghanistan would have been a complete and utter farce if not for that - watching it unfold on flight radar with coordinating efforts literally globe wide, 100s of aircraft and destinations, refuelling, dealing with air-routes and normal traffic, considerations like the use of Pakistani airspace, etc. etc. was quite something.
 
mcast123 said:
No one ever talks about Ukraine losses, I'm curious if they have the manpower to last a couple of years?
Click to expand...
Someone did post a ratio of Ukrainian deaths to Russian deaths and it was something like 4 to 1 in favour of Ukraine which isn't that unrealistic if you believe the attackers which until recently has been Russia takes more causalities then the defender. If you put the total number of Russian deaths at 50k then 12k/13k dead Ukrainians is probably correct using that ratio. It's all assumptions of guesstimates though, I doubt we will ever know the true number, the Ukrainian government doesn't want to broadcast those numbers for obvious reasons.

As for manpower there is no danger of a shortage anytime soon, you would need WW1 levels of caustiles for years before it became problematic. Besides so long as Ukraine can maintain a 4:1 advantage Russia will run of manpower long before Ukraine does.
 
Freddie1980 said:
Someone did post a ratio of Ukrainian deaths to Russian deaths and it was something like 4 to 1 in favour of Ukraine which isn't that unrealistic if you believe the attackers which until recently has been Russia takes more causalities then the defender. If you put the total number of Russian deaths at 50k then 12k/13k dead Ukrainians is probably correct using that ratio. It's all assumptions of guesstimates though, I doubt we will ever know the true number, the Ukrainian government doesn't want to broadcast those numbers for obvious reasons.

As for manpower there is no danger of a shortage anytime soon, you would need WW1 levels of caustiles for years before it became problematic. Besides so long as Ukraine can maintain a 4:1 advantage Russia will run of manpower long before Ukraine does.
Click to expand...
If you have a spare morning. These are very very, very worth the time


 
Thank you @nsmalley, I've seen a few of Perun video's before and I've wanted to see the one he did with Ben Hodges just haven't had the time but I might catch it on the train home from work.

CNN reporters were in a city suburb that they said was struck by S300 missiles, one landed in the middle of a children's playground an left a huge crater, another one hit a high rise tower block devastating multiple floors and blowing out windows across the whole area. Now forgive my ignorance but either the news reporters are being lazy and are calling any missile blows things up an S300 missile or has Russia done something to the warhead on these systems in change the blast yield? Looking at the damage these things are doing to concreate and metal they look a bit overkill for something that was designed to down fighter jets.
 
Freddie1980 said:
Looking at the damage these things are doing to concreate and metal they look a bit overkill for something that was designed to down fighter jets.
Click to expand...
That's seeing a direct impact though. Anti-aircraft missiles are (unless lucky) proximity devices, damage goes down pretty quickly with distance, and military aircraft are designed to resist damage. An incoming B-52 loaded with cruises missiles probably takes quite a bit of knocking out of the skies.
 
Freddie1980 said:
Thank you @nsmalley, I've seen a few of Perun video's before and I've wanted to see the one he did with Ben Hodges just haven't had the time but I might catch it on the train home from work.

CNN reporters were in a city suburb that they said was struck by S300 missiles, one landed in the middle of a children's playground an left a huge crater, another one hit a high rise tower block devastating multiple floors and blowing out windows across the whole area. Now forgive my ignorance but either the news reporters are being lazy and are calling any missile blows things up an S300 missile or has Russia done something to the warhead on these systems in change the blast yield? Looking at the damage these things are doing to concreate and metal they look a bit overkill for something that was designed to down fighter jets.
Click to expand...

There have been instances of S-300 complexes used for ground to ground - but several craters the media or others have ascribed to S-300 hits no ifs or buts would have to have been a minimum of 500kg warheads and AFAIK the S-300 doesn't have the capability.

On a kind of related note - not sure if it is just how poor the manufacturing quality is of Russian tanks but always puzzled me a bit seeing some of the tank destruction early in the war - some of the Russian tanks came apart like they'd been hit by 500kg of explosives (not just their internal ammo detonating) but the surrounding environment was still relatively intact which wouldn't happen with a 500kg warhead detonating - those things were literally just scraps of metal spread over a wide area.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom