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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rroff said:
It is people not really understanding the information and I'm not saying there were no elite units at all as for some reason people seem to think when I say this - obviously you can't drag someone off the street given them a few weeks training and have them out there operating helicopters, tanks, air-defences, etc. - for instance a large part of the 4th guards in Ukraine got decimated - but that was only about 10-15% of the division committed to Ukraine supported by less experienced units.
Click to expand...

OK so what are you saying then? What is this overall claim of Russia seemingly holding back based on? That division had the colonel commit suicide and apparently issues with corruption and vehicles not in a fit state etc..

Russia is currently desperate for manpower, this idea just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
 
Firestar_3x said:
Perun covered this a month ago and basically showed it as a total myth, Russia are using a mix of forces (clearly), but they ARE using the best they have, why wouldn't they!
Click to expand...

Mentioned it in my reply above but Perun is using a few flawed premises - his loss ratios for good stuff vs old hardware neither fit a situation where Russia was using a composition that reflected a cross-section of their existing main armed forces or where they'd drawn more heavily from their best stuff where you'd expect to see the better stuff factor more heavily in losses.
 
Rroff said:
Mentioned it in my reply above but Perun is using a few flawed premises - his loss ratios for good stuff vs old hardware neither fit a situation where Russia was using a composition that reflected a cross-section of their existing main armed forces or where they'd drawn more heavily from their best stuff where you'd expect to see the better stuff factor more heavily in losses.
Click to expand...

So where is all this better stuff then? Why are they struggling for man power when apparently there are all these units that are the cream of the armed forces just hanging around in Russia?
 
dowie said:
So where is all this better stuff then? Why are they struggling for man power when apparently there are all these units that are the cream of the armed forces just hanging around in Russia?
Click to expand...
To be fair they haven't deployed any of the current/next gen stuff like Armata or Bumerang, everything that has been sent into Ukraine is 80's and prior tech just with some updates
 
dowie said:
So where is all this better stuff then? Why are they struggling for man power when apparently there are all these units that are the cream of the armed forces just hanging around in Russia?
Click to expand...

As Woppy said they have to be careful they don't leave themselves vulnerable in other areas and commitments and Putin seems to have a paranoia of committing too heavily from their more experienced forces.

The amount of manpower committed to Ukraine is a relatively small amount of their existing armed forces especially if it is bulked out from new draft, conscripts, contractors and militia/mercenary forces pulled from Chechnya, etc. Perun's ratios also work and in fact work better if the forces deployed to Ukraine is around 30-40% experienced forces and the rest bulked out from new and less regular forces (and same for hardware).
 
Rroff said:
Mentioned it in my reply above but Perun is using a few flawed premises - his loss ratios for good stuff vs old hardware neither fit a situation where Russia was using a composition that reflected a cross-section of their existing main armed forces or where they'd drawn more heavily from their best stuff where you'd expect to see the better stuff factor more heavily in losses.
Click to expand...

You appear to be making the assumption that Russia has equal quantities of old / new or enough of the new to throw at this conflict in large numbers, Russia has been talking **** long before the start of this conflict, i have 0 confidence in any number they have punted out for whatever "newer" gear they have.

As we know Perun used "oryx" to get confirmed numbers of what has been lost by Russia, lots of good gear, given all his prior and subsequent presentations i give good credit to his analysis, i do not give good credit to vague "OSINT sources".

Minusorange said:
To be fair they haven't deployed any of the current/next gen stuff like Armata or Bumerang, everything that has been sent into Ukraine is 80's and prior tech just with some updates
Click to expand...

How many of those has Russia built and have deployed in any units in Russia?

As has been said many times, Russia's military budget simply does not fit what they apparently have / had,
 
Minusorange said:
To be fair they haven't deployed any of the current/next gen stuff like Armata or Bumerang, everything that has been sent into Ukraine is 80's and prior tech just with some updates
Click to expand...

LOL come on, how many of their supposedly next-generation T-14 tanks do they have? Does it even work property? In reality, they've deployed plenty of their most modern tanks - for example, they've lost plenty of the upgraded T-72B3s 2011 and 2016. 107 of these have been lost according to Oryx.

Rroff said:
As Woppy said they have to be careful they don't leave themselves vulnerable in other areas and commitments and Putin seems to have a paranoia of committing too heavily from their more experienced forces.
Click to expand...
What is this based on?
Rroff said:
The amount of manpower committed to Ukraine is a relatively small amount of their existing armed forces especially if it is bulked out from new draft, conscripts, contractors and militia/mercenary forces pulled from Chechnya, etc. Perun's ratios also work and in fact work better if the forces deployed to Ukraine is around 30-40% experienced forces and the rest bulked out from new and less regular forces (and same for hardware).
Click to expand...

No, it isn't, it's a huge commitment for them, and they're struggling with manpower, this notion that they're somehow holding back or haven't committed the "cream" of their forces is just flat out wrong - plenty of guards units, VDV, Spetsnatx have been deployed.
 
Firestar_3x said:
i do not give good credit to vague "OSINT sources".
Click to expand...

I've drawn from them heavily in the build up to this invasion - can go back through the thread and see - and most of it has been proved correct since things kicked off. Even when it has gone against conventional wisdom such as the reliance Russia has on railways for military action of this nature.

dowie said:
No, it isn't, it's a huge commitment for them, and they're struggling with manpower, this notion that they're somehow holding back or haven't committed the "cream" of their forces is just flat out wrong - plenty of guards units, VDV, Spetsnatx have been deployed.
Click to expand...

Nowhere have I said they haven't used VDV, etc. or committed from their elite forces. But they've rarely committed fully from the divisions, etc. that are represented - 4th guards for instance only about 20% of the division was used in Ukraine (of which they lost about 90% of the tanks fielded losing about 50% of the tank crews as fatalities, and about 50% from the rest of the equipment was lost such as IFVs) - 30% of the division was already committed to the Georgian region and about half the division it turns out wasn't combat ready despite the claimed 80% standing readiness.
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
Mentioned it in my reply above but Perun is using a few flawed premises - his loss ratios for good stuff vs old hardware neither fit a situation where Russia was using a composition that reflected a cross-section of their existing main armed forces or where they'd drawn more heavily from their best stuff where you'd expect to see the better stuff factor more heavily in losses.
Click to expand...
Your saying someone is wrong( who is backing up what he is saying) yet you are giving no evidence to back up your own statements saying he is wrong, can you please back up your statements that Russia is not sending it best stuff or stop saying it as fact
 
woppy101 said:
And 14 would become 0 if they actually deployed them
Click to expand...
Whilst going on the performance of the Russians vs the Ukrainians, the Ukrainians would probably end up with 7 in working condition (just add fuel/pull them out of the mud/field repairs), 3 that might be repairable, and 4 that can be used as cover.
 
There is some truth to the Russia is holding back narrative. It is holding back considerable amounts of its best forces, equipment, and plenty of shells, missiles, bombs, and ammo. Of course Russia is: for Ukraine this is an existential crisis, a loss is the end of the country, for Russia this is a foreign campaign. A loss is an embarrassment but leaves Mother Russia unscathed; committing those forces and losing them (or even just having them tied up for months) leaves mother Russia undefended and unable to protect her interests abroad, as well as lacking the military needed to maintain order within the federation itself.
 
woppy101 said:
Your saying someone is wrong( who is backing up what he is saying) yet you are giving no evidence to back up your own statements saying he is wrong, can you please back up your statements that Russia is not sending it best stuff or stop saying it as fact
Click to expand...

I'm not saying Russia isn't sending their best stuff... as Dowie keeps misrepresenting - I'm saying this isn't a best effort from the cream of the Russian armed forces - many of their elite units are only represented by elements of and a large part of the forces involved are bulked out from new draft, conscripts, contractors, militia forces and so on and the same for hardware used - Russia has spent the last few years pulling a lot of old hardware out of mothballed stock and putting it into service such as ~3000 T-80s - some of which has been used to cycle out older T-72s, etc. from other regions to use in Ukraine and some has been sent to Ukraine.

If this was a best effort from the Russian forces, at least on paper, losses of the latest incarnations of their tanks for instance would be well above 30-40% representation.
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
I'm not saying Russia isn't sending their best stuff... as Dowie keeps misrepresenting - I'm saying this isn't a best effort from the cream of the Russian armed forces - many of their elite units are only represented by elements of
Click to expand...

It's not really clear what you're saying, you say I'm misrepresenting you then you trot out the same claim that was rubbished weeks back re: Russia supposedly not committing the "cream of the Russian armed forces"|

Again what is that claim based on? Any links you'd care to share to support it perhaps? Since you're claiming you're being misrepresented then perhaps cite what you're referring to?
 
dowie said:
It's not really clear what you're saying, you say I'm misrepresenting you then you trot out the same claim that was rubbished weeks back re: Russia supposedly not committing the "cream of the Russian armed forces"|

Again what is that claim based on? Any links you'd care to share to support it perhaps? Since you're claiming you're being misrepresented then perhaps cite what you're referring to?
Click to expand...

Please pay attention, Rroff has previously stated - he has 'reliable sources'... and don't forget his dad and somebody his uncle's friend knows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom