The War in the Ukraine

Skye_ZTZ_113

Junior Member
Registered Member
All Russian Telegram channels write that official statements about Kherson are expected tonight, namely that Russian troops are leaving Kherson. 80,000 civilians from Kherson have already been evacuated.

I don't buy it (cue me being shown badly wrong by tomorrow). Kherson is a heavily fortified position with exposed approaches from the West direction. It doesn't pass the smell test. There's no chance of being cut off and/or surrounded. The region has been a giant killbox for the past months for the Ukrainians and recent reconnaissance in force has been a complete disaster.

Reminder that Kherson is now part of Russia. It would be unthinkable to now abandon it to an enemy. I speculate that this withdrawal talk is either a) more bad PR by the Russian military (which is fine, they're fighting a war not stomping out rumourmongering) or b) another trap.
 

Surpluswarrior

Junior Member
VIP Professional
I am sick today, and I don't know what's going on in Kherson.

But I thought I'd provide a resource on T-72 armour:


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


This website, 'Tankograd,' is great. It contains unmatched information about common Soviet tanks like the T-62 and 72. People who have questions about these vehicles could benefit immensely from reading those sections.

The section I linked contains information about the T-72 armour in the context of the Cold War, e.g. vs. L7 and developments of the 105mm. Going from memory, it's my understanding [and covered somewhere on this website] that the T-72A was put into service specifically because of advancements in NATO 105mm ammunition, which increased the vulnerability of T-72. Hence the increased 'Dolly Parton' cheek armour.

In fact, here it is [EDIT: concerning the improvement of T-72A, anyway]:


In the book "T-72/T-90: Опыт создания отечественных основных боевых танков" published by the Uralvagonzavod corporation in 2013, it is stated that immediately after finalizing the improved 60-105-50 armour design and a new turret with a "Kvartz" ceramic filler, the UKBTM design bureau began the development of new armour solutions, catalyzed by the emergence of APFSDS ammunition among NATO member countries in the second half of the 1970's. The main impetus was new information about the 105mm M735 round and the 120mm Rheinmetall smoothbore gun which was reaching maturity at the time. In fact, detailed drawings of the M735 round were available in the article "A Bigger Foot Print" published in the September-October 1978 issue of the "Armor" magazine, and it was assumed that the German DM23 round was M735 produced under licence. The threat was overestimated, as the advertised capabilities of M735 were only true under the assumption that the upper glacis armour of the T-72 was a 100mm RHA plate sloped at 70 degrees - it was not known in the U.S that the T-72 already had composite armour.​

However, these claims were evidently taken at face value and M735 was assumed to have been specially designed to defeat the first generation of composite armour used in Soviet MBTs, while the APFSDS ammunition of the new 120mm smoothbore gun was perceived to represent the future reference threat.​

In April 1980, preparations for the production of 172.10.077SB turrets with new composite armour began, and in September 1982, it entered low rate production. Mass production began in 1983. The new hull armour entered mass production in early 1983. According to the book "T-72/T-90: Опыт создания отечественных основных боевых танков", all tanks produced at Uralvagonzavod for delivery to the Soviet Army had new turret and hull armour since January 1, 1984. There appears to be no way of distinguishing between "Improved T-72A" tanks built in 1983 and those built in 1984.​

The research and design work on the further improvement of T-72A tanks was done under the research topic of "Совершенствование Т-72А" ("Improved T-72A"). The tanks created in 1983 and 1984 are therefore most accurately referred to as "Improved T-72A" tanks. This term is used in several Russian articles, and the tanks are referred to as such by N.A. Molodnyakov in the collection of memoirs "Life Given to Tanks" dedicated to the UKBTM chief designer V.N Venediktov, published in 2010.​

These tanks received the product code "Object 184". While it is certainly quite confusing for one model of tank to have two product codes, this was not unprecedented. The T-72A was accepted into service in 1979 under the product code of Object 172M-1, but the code Object 176 was also used despite the fact that the actual Object 176 was merely an experimental tank used as a testbed for various technologies that were eventually implemented in the T-72 series. In particular, the T-72AV was given the code Object 176V; there is no Object 172M-1V.​

"Improved T-72A" tanks appeared in the 1986 parade in honour of the 69th anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution and the turret was given the nickname "Super Dolly Parton" by CIA observers. The new upper glacis armour was visually imperceptible from the exterior of the tank.​

 
Last edited:

Jiang ZeminFanboy

Senior Member
Registered Member
I don't buy it (cue me being shown badly wrong by tomorrow). Kherson is a heavily fortified position with exposed approaches from the West direction. It doesn't pass the smell test. There's no chance of being cut off and/or surrounded. The region has been a giant killbox for the past months for the Ukrainians and recent reconnaissance in force has been a complete disaster.

Reminder that Kherson is now part of Russia. It would be unthinkable to now abandon it to an enemy. I speculate that this withdrawal talk is either a) more bad PR by the Russian military (which is fine, they're fighting a war not stomping out rumourmongering) or b) another trap.
I didn't believe it and yet it happened

 

FriedButter

Brigadier
Registered Member

One only wonders why Russia is stubbornly handling this issue with kiddie gloves.

Given that nothing really has happened in Kherson yet. I wonder if the Mid Terms had a role in this decision. Still baffling as to why they insist on continuing to fight this conflict in this strange way.

Russian Army will position and withdraw on the left side of the Dniper River in Kherson direction - Surovikin

Shoigu approved all the necessary measures to be taken for that

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Phead128

Major
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Like I predicted in June, Russia is likely ceding Kherson as a "goodwill gesture" for peace negotiations in exchange for formal recognition of Crimea/DPR/LNR etc...
[June 15, 2022] However, I can see Kherson being traded/leveraged as a bargaining chip to get formal recognition of DNR/LNR/Crimea. In any negotiation, you have to trade/compromise. Since Russia isn't going for full-conquest, it has to give Ukraine a face-saving "win" somewhere during peace negotiations.
This is not a strategic loss for Russia. So I wouldn't say it's a defeat for Russia, Russia captured Kherson at little-to-zero cost on day 8 or invasion because it was lightly defended, so giving it up as a bargaining chip is very smart, particular since it's very difficult to defend (West bank of Dniper river), and Russia extracted what essential human talent that matters. Remember, it's 80K new tax-payers in Russia, human talent is what matters, not land or territory (which is already bountiful in Russia proper), and Kherson is a useful bargaining chip for peace negotiations to gain Paper neutrality and recognition of DNR/LNR/Crimea.
 

Pmichael

Junior Member
Like I predicted in June, Russia is likely ceding Kherson as a "goodwill gesture" for peace negotiations in exchange for formal recognition of Crimea/DPR/LNR etc...

This is not a strategic loss for Russia. So I wouldn't say it's a defeat for Russia, Russia captured Kherson at little-to-zero cost on day 8 or invasion because it was lightly defended, so giving it up as a bargaining chip is very smart, particular since it's very difficult to defend (West bank of Dniper river), and Russia extracted what essential human talent that matters. Remember, it's 80K new tax-payers in Russia, human talent is what matters, not land or territory (which is already bountiful in Russia proper), and Kherson is a useful bargaining chip for peace negotiations to gain Paper neutrality and recognition of DNR/LNR/Crimea.

Kherson is now not part of any negotiation mass for Russia. This is a strategical loss for Russia and the loss of material and men will be costly for Russia. I am also surprised that is it okay for the war declaring nation to lose ground, the dynamic and initiative of this war couldn’t be more against Russia.
 

baykalov

Senior Member
Registered Member
Surovikin:

- Russia does not think it necessary nor wise to continue fighting in this region of Kherson. According to Surovikin, Kherson and adjacent settlements cannot be fully supplied & function, & people's lives are constantly in danger. It is proposed to take up defense along the left bank of the Dnieper. Keeping a grouping of troops on the right bank is futile. The City of Kherson and adjoining communities are unable to supply and function. The implementation of the enemy's plans to create a flood zone below the Kakhovska HPP may lead to dangerous consequences. The most feasible option is to organize defense along the barrier line of the Dnieper River. The freed forces will be used for offensive operations.

- Around 115,000 people have been evacuated & remaining troops will go to the left bank of the Dnieper. The withdrawal of troops & remaining civilian population will be carried out ASAP. In the next few days, Kherson will come under the control of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

- This is a clear military decision rather than political surrender. The west will of course twist it in this way. But Russia has always valued life over mostly everything.

- In October, the Ukrainian army lost over 12,000 soldiers. Our losses are 7-8 times less than the enemy's losses.
 

Pmichael

Junior Member
Surovikin:

- Russia does not think it necessary nor wise to continue fighting in this region of Kherson. According to Surovikin, Kherson and adjacent settlements cannot be fully supplied & function, & people's lives are constantly in danger. It is proposed to take up defense along the left bank of the Dnieper. Keeping a grouping of troops on the right bank is futile. The City of Kherson and adjoining communities are unable to supply and function. The implementation of the enemy's plans to create a flood zone below the Kakhovska HPP may lead to dangerous consequences. The most feasible option is to organize defense along the barrier line of the Dnieper River. The freed forces will be used for offensive operations.

- Around 115,000 people have been evacuated & remaining troops will go to the left bank of the Dnieper. The withdrawal of troops & remaining civilian population will be carried out ASAP. In the next few days, Kherson will come under the control of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

- This is a clear military decision rather than political surrender. The west will of course twist it in this way. But Russia has always valued life over mostly everything.

- In October, the Ukrainian army lost over 12,000 soldiers. Our losses are 7-8 times less than the enemy's losses.
Those troops are literally retreating from Russian recognized ground. How is this not a massive loss?
 
Top