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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rroff said:
The way military hardware seems to be being pulled out of Belarus I think Russia may have given up on getting Belarus into the fight, maybe, and decided to raid them of what they can instead to use themselves.

Belarus increasingly seems to be being used to repair and maintain Russian armour as well.
Click to expand...

And train/house troops on top I reckon. The sending of troops to Belarus and the "joint exercises" seem like more of a smoke and mirrors game to me.
 
Senior NATO Official:
- I Would Say Russian Nuclear Threats Are Primarily Made to Avoid a Direct Conflict With NATO and Other Countries
- Our Channels Are Open, It’s the Russians That Have Walked Away From Speaking With Us
- I Don’t See Any Signs That Putin Has Walked Away From His Strategic Objectives in the War
- Any Use of Nuclear Weapons by Russia Would Change the Course of the Conflict, and It Would Have Unprecedented Consequences for Russia
- It Would Almost Certainly Draw a Physical Response From Many Allies, and Potentially From NATO Itself

Kremlin Aide on Putin Attending G20 Summit in Nov: There Is Still Plenty of Time, We’ll See
Kremlin Aide on Biden Comments of No Point in Meeting Putin: Russia Never Refuses Negotiations or Any Useful International Contacts
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
Interestingly a lot of the most decrepit vehicles in their tank/armour storage seem to have disappeared from satellite imagery since this war started - they aren't exactly well known for tidying things up in that regard. It seems they've managed to get 1 working T-62 out of several hulks and sent them to the front lines - where most apparently end up as static gun emplacements due to lacking maintenance and lack of fuel then abandoned when the position becomes untenable.
Click to expand...
I wonder how many broken tanks have the same issues - a design weakness that makes for a common failure, that will have eaten spare parts quickly and fueled the canabalsation of many vehicles; especially as this common cause of failure might have value to corrupt officials who control the stock and sell it to overseas operators.

It would also be interesting to know how much ammunition exists for guns that haven't been built for many years - no point deploying T-62's with 115mm if you don't have the ammo any more - even if you do it just adds to the logistic headache of having another ammo type.
 
Last edited:
I_M_Weasel said:
I wonder how many broken tanks have the same issues - a design weakness that makes for a common failure, that will have eaten spare parts quickly and fueled the canabalsation of many vehicles; especially as this common cause of failure might have value to corrupt officials who control the stock and sell it to overseas operators.

It would also be interesting to know how much ammunition exists for guns that haven't been built for many years - no point deploying T-62's with 115mm if you don't have the ammo any more - even if you do it just adds to the logistic headache of having another ammo type.
Click to expand...
Apparantly, their tanks have a pump on top of the fuel tank. Therefore, they have a reserve of 180ltrs that it cannot reach. So when they were running away they took any other vehicle, but the tank due to its range. This was with one of the POW interviews with Volodymyr Zolkin.
 
I_M_Weasel said:
It would also be interesting to know how much ammunition exists for guns that haven't been built for many years - no point deploying T-62's with 115mm if you don't have the ammo any more - even if you do it just adds to the logistic headache of having another ammo type.
Click to expand...

Interesting point, not really been looking for it but not seen any 115mm in the ammo dumps that Ukraine has taken in the recent offensives (not much 125mm either) - plenty of 152mm and small arms though.
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
It is an interesting question how far Russia would escalate (nuclear) over Crimea - the loss of Crimea is going to be the biggest factor Putin can't ignore (or hardest to ignore) by a long way - the loss of the port facilities and ability to use it as a staging area for any current or future military action against Ukraine would be a huge blow along with many of Putin's vanity projects like the bridge.
Click to expand...

Its possibly moot rumour says the West would be willing to let russia keep Crimea in return for an end to war and return of the other captured territories to Ukraine. Crimea was a russian possession for centures before Krushchev mysteriously handed it to Ukraine. Ukraine won't like it of course but it lets Putin save face and state he's had a "victory" over terrorists and nazis and driven them out of ukraine - totalitarian regimes don't react well to humiliation. The West would rather see him than a potentially even worse replacement, better the devil you know etc and the west's strategy appears to be containment rather than outright confrontation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: B&W
Blackjack Davy said:
Its possibly moot rumour says the West would be willing to let russia keep Crimea in return for an end to war and return of the other captured territories to Ukraine. Crimea was a russian possession for centures before Krushchev mysteriously handed it to Ukraine. Ukraine won't like it of course but it lets Putin save face and state he's had a "victory" over terrorists and nazis and driven them out of ukraine - totalitarian regimes don't react well to humiliation. The West would rather see him than a potentially even worse replacement, better the devil you know etc the west's strategy seems to be containment rather than outright confrontation.
Click to expand...
Is this from your crystal ball?
 
Blackjack Davy said:
Its possibly moot rumour says the West would be willing to let russia keep Crimea in return for an end to war and return of the other captured territories to Ukraine. Crimea was a russian possession for centures before Krushchev mysteriously handed it to Ukraine. Ukraine won't like it of course but it lets Putin save face and state he's had a "victory" over terrorists and nazis and driven them out of ukraine - totalitarian regimes don't react well to humiliation. The West would rather see him than a potentially even worse replacement, better the devil you know etc. The west's strategy seems to be containment rather than outright confrontation.
Click to expand...

Rubbish, it's not for the west to decide.
 
This whole "Let Putin take what he wants, just to save face" coming from berks like Musk, is a load of stupid nonsense.

When you're fighting a war and you gain the upper hand (Like Ukraine have) the last thing you do is ramp down, stop or start to bargain, you batter the enemy show no mercy and take advantage of their weakness and beat them into submission at absolutely every possible opportunity.

If the boot were on the other foot, and Ukraine had caved, Russia would have taken the entire country, killed Zelensky and everyone near him.
 
*seven said:
Senior NATO Official:
- Russia Has Depleted a Significant Portion of Its Precision Guided Ammunition
Click to expand...


Personally tend to agree with OSINTdefender here - people were saying Russia had used up its stocks of cruise missiles by the end of March and here we are... the rate they are using them though, and using other stuff like apparent ground attacks with the S-300, I'd suspect they've probably used around half their existing stock and only producing a few dozen or less a month.

On another note not sure what FORTE10 is up to but doing somewhat less usual patterns in the Black Sea and the Russian's don't seem to be happy with it - sending up a bunch of AEW aircraft, etc. obviously something the US is keeping an eye on and Russia would rather they didn't.
 
Rroff said:
Personally tend to agree with OSINTdefender here - people were saying Russia had used up its stocks of cruise missiles by the end of March and here we are... the rate they are using them though, and using other stuff like apparent ground attacks with the S-300, I'd suspect they've probably used around half their existing stock and only producing a few dozen or less a month.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the same sources were claiming they'd used them all up though, and like you say they're not able to produce them quickly.

The telling thing perhaps is they wanted to strike infrastructure, they've had that little display of missile launches but it's not been sustained, if they had plenty of missiles then we'd perhaps see a week or two of continual bombardment, in reality, they have quite limited capacity so we've seen a few dozen launched in some apparently pre-planned attack and it's not been particularly effective.
 
dowie said:
I'm not sure the same sources were claiming they'd used them all up though, and like you say they're not able to produce them quickly.

The telling thing perhaps is they wanted to strike infrastructure, they've had that little display of missile launches but it's not been sustained, if they had plenty of missiles then we'd perhaps see a week or two of continual bombardment, in reality, they have quite limited capacity so we've seen a few dozen launched in some apparently pre-planned attack and it's not been particularly effective.
Click to expand...

Roughly 70 or so of that kind of missile used in widespread strikes is quite pitiful, the US launches like 100 against one target :s they'd almost certainly use more if they had the capacity.

EDIT: The way people even officials talk is as if they are completely done and depleted - I think we'll still see probably monthly rounds of precision missile use by Russia like recent strikes.
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
I'm not sure the same sources were claiming they'd used them all up though, and like you say they're not able to produce them quickly.

The telling thing perhaps is they wanted to strike infrastructure, they've had that little display of missile launches but it's not been sustained, if they had plenty of missiles then we'd perhaps see a week or two of continual bombardment, in reality, they have quite limited capacity so we've seen a few dozen launched in some apparently pre-planned attack and it's not been particularly effective.
Click to expand...

Hitting infrastructure with precision missiles is what you do in the opening stages of a land invasion, not hit a few apartment blocks and playgrounds here and there. One way to galvanise resistance is to randomly kill civilians. Russian conscripts and even their regulars don't want to be there, the Ukrainians are fighting for their lives, their family and their land. Russian men of fighting age are running from their homes, Ukraine can't take all their volunteers, there were/are too many. From my armchair I reckon Russia lost in the first week of the Special Operation. Winter will be brutal for everyone, doubly so for invaders as inept as Russia has shown itself to be
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom