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

[Enkore]

They have ~70 Buks and ~250 S-300 both of which are capable of downing incoming scuds and rocket artillery.

Since when does Ukraine have 250 S-300 launchers??? Where is this number coming from.

Ukraine – S-300PT, S-300PS, S-300V.[151] Only six systems were kept in working conditions between 2004 and 2014; as a result only 40% of Ukrainian S-300 systems were in good condition prior to 2014.[152] Due to the war with Russia Ukraine started repairing and pushing back to service several armaments included several S-300 batteries,[153] with at least 4 batteries overhauled in the period 2014–15. 34 launchers remained in the Crimea after 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea.[154]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_missile_system

BUK has never been confirmed at actually able to intercept SCUDS.

 

[alchal]

Ukraine is not Afghanistan or Chechnya. It really is not the same. I’m not going to make a joke about world most powerful military in history being reduced to asking their enemy (Taliban) to provide security during fleeing.

Sure our Awacs will help in western Ukraine by flying within EU airspace. How about Kyiv or Kharkhov? Will our Awacs literally fly over Ukraine?

Like I said, all this parroting inspired Ukranians to ditch Minsk Agreements and think they can take chances with Russia.

Then the events after that can end in very sad way. Not just for Ukraine but for whole continent.

So Ukraine is some extra ordinary easy peasy place where the might russian war machine will never get bogged down eh.
Explain how they will steamroll Ukraine yet failed time after time against a few RPGs in Chechnya, explain what has changed.

 

[alchal]

Good common sense from our part.

All UK troops to withdraw from Ukraine as Russia could invade ‘at no notice’
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...a-invasion-uk-troops-withdrawal-b2013668.html

It's not our fight, and the countries in the direct firing like i.e. Germany and France, don't seem that bothered.

I think the US is stirring this situation up by putting NATO equipment along the border of Russia, and also everytime Ukraine is mentioned the Americans keep talking about NATO. Ukraine isn't in NATO.

Yup we are stirring it up, nothing to do with Russia invading countries and those on the border becoming scared and asking for extra NATO reassurance

But yeah, poor Russians.

 

[ubersonic]

Where is this number coming from.

Well not from copy pasting old Wikipedia info like you obviously.

Here's a hint, 2014-2015 was 7-8 years ago. If they rapidly started upgrading units following Crimea then it should be obvious they will have at least 30 more batteries online by now, annoyingly I can't find the article on their current numbers I referenced a few pages back however here's an excerpt from an article on their progress a few years ago:

Today, Ukraine’s defense industry is able to overhaul at least 4 SAM systems per year, significantly contributing to the national air defense capability. In addition to the above-mentioned systems, other actively overhauled SAM systems include 9K35 Strela-10, 9K330 Tor, 2K22 Tunguska surface-to-air missile and gun system (SAMG), S-125, as well as MANPADS, such as Strela-2m, Igla-1, and others.

Ukraine’s defense industry managed to start manufacturing difficult-to-obtain spare parts for the renovation and replacement of components made in Russia; as a result, almost a quarter of the available Buk-M1 SAM systems have been overhauled. The reconstructed systems have a significantly increased range compared to the original version. The kill probabilities using Buk-M1 SAM system are 80–95 percent for enemy fighter aircraft and at least 40 percent for ALCM cruise missiles with the ability to efficiently intercept anti-radiation missiles. Its effective range is up to 35 km to the heights of up to 22 km.

BUK has never been confirmed at actually able to intercept SCUDS.

This statement is completely correct, assuming of course we are in the 1980's, back before they were confirmed to be able to intercept SCUDS and rocket artillery in the early 90's.

 

[Enkore]

Well not from copy pasting old Wikipedia info like you obviously.

Here's a hint, 2014-2015 was 7-8 years ago. If they rapidly started upgrading units following Crimea then it should be obvious they will have at least 30 more batteries online by now, annoyingly I can't find the article on their current numbers I referenced a few pages back however here's an excerpt from an article on their progress a few years ago:

​

This statement is completely correct, assuming of course we are in the 1980's, back before they were confirmed to be able to intercept SCUDS and rocket artillery in the early 90's.

1) Upgraded their S-300? With what, some sticks and stones? Russia controls all manufacturing and upgrades of these SAMS.

There is a reason why Ukranians have been asking for Patriots. They cant even repair them and keep it functioning let alone upgrade it in any meaningful way. Russia has all the parts and technology to S-300

Please provide a verifiable source that Buk is able to intercept Scuds apart from some unconfirmed heresay from 90’s Russia.

 

[ubersonic]

1) Upgraded their S-300? With what, some sticks and stones?

Okay,

I'm starting to get the feeling that your repeated dismissal for Ukraine's abilities/equipment come from a lack of understanding on how important/capable the country actually was/is. To put it in simple perspective, Ukraine was more important to the USSR than Scotland is to the UK. They were the second biggest state and it was their leaving that gave Russia no choice but to dissolve what was left of the USSR.

More perspective, the reason Russia has sold/scrapped all but one of it's Soviet aircraft carriers is because they are Ukrainian carriers it inherited when the USSR dissolved and Russia lacks the expertise to correctly maintain/upgrade them. The reason more than half of Russia's Soviet tanks sit rusting in storage is because they are Ukrainian tanks and they lack the expertise/parts to maintain/upgrade them (all the best tanks were built in Ukraine, Russia just handled the budget T-72 model).

So no, they didn't use sticks to upgrade their S-300, or their Buks, or their T-64s, or their T-80s, they used the expertise and capability that came with having some of the brightest minds and best factories in the former USSR.

NB: I didn't realise until I checked how many T-64/T-80 Russia have rusting away that their active tank force is only on par with Ukraine's, I honestly expected them to have an advantage there, that will certainly make invading extremely difficult if they can't achieve air supremacy as they will be outnumbered as armour goes (as they aren't going to send every tank in Russia).

Please provide a verifiable source that Buk is able to intercept Scuds apart from some unconfirmed heresay from 90’s Russia.

Well that hearsay came from the Wikipedia article you cited, but fine here you go: https://www.asianmilitaryreview.com...incoming-missiles-at-less-than-10m-altitudes/

There's many more examples if you search for them, including Israel complaining that Russia are using Buks to shoot down missiles they fire into Syria.

 

[alchal]

Russia started taking its staff out of its embassy by the back door in the Ukraine apparently

 

[robfosters]

I found the “Russia plan to invade on Wednesday” wording quite amusing.

People plan to visit the doctors on Wednesday, or get their haircut on Wednesday. Never heard of someone planning to invade another country on Wednesday!

 

[Rroff]

Okay,

I'm starting to get the feeling that your repeated dismissal for Ukraine's abilities/equipment come from a lack of understanding on how important/capable the country actually was/is. To put it in simple perspective, Ukraine was more important to the USSR than Scotland is to the UK. They were the second biggest state and it was their leaving that gave Russia no choice but to dissolve what was left of the USSR.

More perspective, the reason Russia has sold/scrapped all but one of it's Soviet aircraft carriers is because they are Ukrainian carriers it inherited when the USSR dissolved and Russia lacks the expertise to correctly maintain/upgrade them. The reason more than half of Russia's Soviet tanks sit rusting in storage is because they are Ukrainian tanks and they lack the expertise/parts to maintain/upgrade them (all the best tanks were built in Ukraine, Russia just handled the budget T-72 model).

So no, they didn't use sticks to upgrade their S-300, or their Buks, or their T-64s, or their T-80s, they used the expertise and capability that came with having some of the brightest minds and best factories in the former USSR.

NB: I didn't realise until I checked how many T-64/T-80 Russia have rusting away that their active tank force is only on par with Ukraine's, I honestly expected them to have an advantage there, that will certainly make invading extremely difficult if they can't achieve air supremacy as they will be outnumbered as armour goes (as they aren't going to send every tank in Russia).



Well that hearsay came from the Wikipedia article you cited, but fine here you go: https://www.asianmilitaryreview.com...incoming-missiles-at-less-than-10m-altitudes/

There's many more examples if you search for them, including Israel complaining that Russia are using Buks to shoot down missiles they fire into Syria.

Enkore does tend to compare best case Russian numbers against worst case opposition... in reality at one point recently they only had single digit numbers of some of their top line fighter jets combat operational, they've mass refit t-80s because of crippling issues with the 90 and 14, etc. they do have a lot of t-72s seemingly built up against Ukraine though and some 80s.

 

[Enkore]

Okay,

I'm starting to get the feeling that your repeated dismissal for Ukraine's abilities/equipment come from a lack of understanding on how important/capable the country actually was/is. To put it in simple perspective, Ukraine was more important to the USSR than Scotland is to the UK. They were the second biggest state and it was their leaving that gave Russia no choice but to dissolve what was left of the USSR.

More perspective, the reason Russia has sold/scrapped all but one of it's Soviet aircraft carriers is because they are Ukrainian carriers it inherited when the USSR dissolved and Russia lacks the expertise to correctly maintain/upgrade them. The reason more than half of Russia's Soviet tanks sit rusting in storage is because they are Ukrainian tanks and they lack the expertise/parts to maintain/upgrade them (all the best tanks were built in Ukraine, Russia just handled the budget T-72 model).

So no, they didn't use sticks to upgrade their S-300, or their Buks, or their T-64s, or their T-80s, they used the expertise and capability that came with having some of the brightest minds and best factories in the former USSR.

NB: I didn't realise until I checked how many T-64/T-80 Russia have rusting away that their active tank force is only on par with Ukraine's, I honestly expected them to have an advantage there, that will certainly make invading extremely difficult if they can't achieve air supremacy as they will be outnumbered as armour goes (as they aren't going to send every tank in Russia).



Well that hearsay came from the Wikipedia article you cited, but fine here you go: https://www.asianmilitaryreview.com...incoming-missiles-at-less-than-10m-altitudes/

There's many more examples if you search for them, including Israel complaining that Russia are using Buks to shoot down missiles they fire into Syria.

How can you write an intro in where you describe just how crucial Ukraine is to Russia, only then to be completely confused why Russia is so angry about western involvement. Not understanding why these stupid Russians are ready to go to war just to make sure Ukraine remains in their sphere of influence.

Also does not wash down well with whole idea that Ukraine was a colony. Imagine putting that much manufacturing capability in a 'represed colony'. But that is irrelevant to the task at hand.

Ukraine has/had zero centers for SAM creation, same way Russians had issues with Tanks and Aircraft Carriers as you said. This is well documented. The BUK you are speaking about is BUK-M3. This was released in 2013 and is only manufactured in Russia. You keep parroting same nonsense, Ukranian Buks are 30-40 years behind BUK-M3.

You keep basically saying that original F-16 and F-16 Block 52 are same thing.

Lastly about Ukranian tanks, I'm so confused what are your sources are once again. Anything in numbers is they have T-80UD 215 of them and about 1K upgraded T-64. These are all ancient tanks quite literally. With that huge amount of force, they struggled to achieve anything in Donbass - a place where there was no air support at all.

 

[Enkore]

in reality at one point recently they only had single digit numbers of some of their top line fighter jets combat operational .

How can you even say this with a straight face I wonder.

This is just of the 'Russian' made stuff in last 10 years or so. And you're telling me that out of these planes there is single digits that are combat operational?

This is even before Mig-29 and SU-27's upgraded versions.

The only single digits are Su-57 and Mig-35's.

 

[bingham67]

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has demanded that the US share intelligence which suggests Russia is planning to invade his country on Wednesday, telling the superpower during a live broadcast on Saturday: 'If you have 100 percent-certain information about a Russian invasion of Ukraine,please share it with us

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...T-Putin-decides-invade-Ukraine-WEDNESDAY.html

Cosidering Ukraine are getting a lot of weapons it seems the President left in the dark over intelligence.

 

[Rroff]

How can you even say this with a straight face I wonder.

This is just of the 'Russian' made stuff in last 10 years or so. And you're telling me that out of these planes there is single digits that are combat operational?

This is even before Mig-29 and SU-27's upgraded versions.

The only single digits are Su-57 and Mig-35's.

I said some of their top line models which includes some of the upgraded SU-27 variants where only 3-8 of some variants out of an on paper 30+ were actually useable for combat.

 

[Enkore]

I said some of their top line models which includes some of the upgraded SU-27 variants where only 3-8 of some variants out of an on paper 30+ were actually useable for combat.

I'm sorry, that still does not make sense. Su-27, even upgraded is not a 'top line fighter jet'. That would be Su-35. As you can see there is plenty of them and are far from single digits.

Even if you still stick to your SU-27 argument, Russia has around two dozen of Su-27 SM3 upgraded. Still not single digits

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...-the-russian-fighter-unit-nato-hates-the-most

Lastly you specifically said

in reality at one point recently they only had single digit numbers of some of their top line fighter jets combat operational

Where is there any mention of models? You are backtracking, you made it sound like Russia has combat operational modern fighters in single digits.

 

[Malevolence]

 

[ubersonic]

Enkore does tend to compare best case Russian numbers against worst case opposition...

Yeah, I'm seeing that

You keep parroting same nonsense, Ukranian Buks are 30-40 years behind BUK-M3.

You keep basically saying that original F-16 and F-16 Block 52 are same thing.

I'm actually a bit unsure how to reply to that as you've effectively countered your own point but I'll try lol.

No, I'm not effectively saying that the original F-16 and F-16 Block 52 are same thing, I'm saying that (using your example) as the F-16 Block 52 is an upgraded version of the original F-16, it is possible to upgrade the original to practically the same standard.

That's the bit you're missing, you're looking at it as "ooh thing A is 30 years older than thing B so it must be 30 years behind technology wise" but you don't factor in that thing A has been modernised as part of a recent upgrade/repair process.

Lastly about Ukranian tanks, I'm so confused what are your sources are once again. Anything in numbers is they have T-80UD 215 of them and about 1K upgraded T-64. These are all ancient tanks quite literally. With that huge amount of force, they struggled to achieve anything in Donbass - a place where there was no air support at all.

Okay, looking at Wikipedia's info (which will be a bit out of date for Ukraine as it doesn't include the refit programmes running over the past few years). They have the following active tanks:

Russia:
T-90: 370
T-80: 450
T:72: ~2000
Total: ~2820

Ukraine:
T-84: ~150
T-80: ~250
T-64: ~800
T-72: ~300
Total: ~1500

On paper Russia has a near 2:1 numbers advantage in tanks, however they are not going to send every tank in the country to invade Ukraine, so lets be kind to them and say they send half of them (again it's very unlikely they would send half of their entire tank inventory but as I said tis comparison favours Russia) that would mean that tank numbers are even between Ukraine/Russia, but Ukraine has the better tanks so all being even the tank battle would skew in Ukraine's favour unless Russia can manage air supremacy.

 

[ubersonic]

in reality at one point recently they only had single digit numbers of some of their top line fighter jets combat operational

How can you even say this with a straight face I wonder.

This is just of the 'Russian' made stuff in last 10 years or so. And you're telling me that out of these planes there is single digits that are combat operational?

xD

 

[Rroff]

I'm sorry, that still does not make sense. Su-27, even upgraded is not a 'top line fighter jet'. That would be Su-35. As you can see there is plenty of them and are far from single digits.

Even if you still stick to your SU-27 argument, Russia has around two dozen of Su-27 SM3 upgraded. Still not single digits

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...-the-russian-fighter-unit-nato-hates-the-most

Lastly you specifically said



Where is there any mention of models? You are backtracking, you made it sound like Russia has combat operational modern fighters in single digits.

:facepalm: not sure if you are purposefully misunderstanding what I said or serious...

(Su-35 is a derivative of the Su-27).

 

[ubersonic]

I'm sorry, that still does not make sense. Su-27, even upgraded is not a 'top line fighter jet'. That would be Su-35.

The Su-35 is an upgraded Su-27. They used to call it the Su-27M until they decided to rename it Su-35 to make it more attractive to customers. You can literally take a 30 year old Su-27 model and upgrade it all the way to Su-35S spec (something the Russians are doing as it's cheaper than building a whole new plane).

 

[StriderX]

I can't wait for Munich Agreement Deux, will it go on the list with the likes of Terminator 2 or Mean Girls 2, guess we'll find out.