The War in the Ukraine

sheogorath

Colonel
Registered Member
Ukrainians attacked two airbases deep in Russian territory today - Dyagilevo in Ryazan oblast & Engels in Saratov oblast. They seem to have used modernized Soviet Tu-141/3 UAVs. RU MOD statement:

Seems they aimed them in the correct direction this time instead of hitting Croatia again. And no Ukranian "wunderwaffen" drone, as someone expected, either.

Again the Russians get fucked more over complacency than over actual Ukranian strategic and tactical prowess.
 

baykalov

Senior Member
Registered Member
WSJ is reporting that the U.S. secretly modified the HIMARS systems it sent to Ukraine so they could not strike Russia.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

U.S. Altered Himars Rocket Launchers to Keep Ukraine From Firing Missiles Into Russia​

The U.S. secretly modified the advanced Himars rocket launchers it gave Ukraine so they can’t be used to fire long-range missiles into Russia, U.S. officials said, a precaution the Biden administration says is necessary to reduce the risk of a wider war with Moscow.

The U.S. since June has supplied Ukrainian forces with 20 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System launchers, or Himars, and a large inventory of satellite-guided rockets with a range of almost 50 miles. Those rockets, known as the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System, or GMLRS, have been used to strike Russian ammunition depots, logistics supplies and command centers on Ukrainian territory.

But the Himars launchers have a unique feature intended to prevent them from becoming even more potent battlefield systems. U.S. officials say the Pentagon has modified the launchers so they can’t fire long-range missiles, including the U.S.’s Army Tactical Missile System rockets, or ATACMS, which have a range of nearly 200 miles.

The previously undisclosed modifications show the lengths the Biden administration has gone to balance its support for Ukraine’s forces against the risk of escalation with Moscow. They also reflect apprehensions among administration officials that their Ukrainian partner might stop keeping its promise not to strike Russian territory with U.S.-provided weapons.

The U.S. has refrained from supplying Ukraine with long-range ATACMS missiles. But the modifications ensure that Ukraine couldn’t use the Himars launchers the U.S. has provided to fire ATACMS missiles if Kyiv were to acquire them from other sources, such as foreign nations that have purchased the weapons from the U.S. Nor could Ukraine use those launchers to fire other types of longer-range missiles if Kyiv somehow managed to produce or acquire them, officials say.

The Pentagon declined to comment on the modifications, which U.S. officials said involve their hardware and software.

The Ukrainian military declined to comment.

The Pentagon said in August that it has provided High-speed Anti-Radiation Missiles, or HARM missiles, which Ukraine fires from its Soviet-era fighters to attack Russian radars.

But the White House has moved cautiously, weighing the military benefit to Kyiv against the risk of escalation with Moscow, in a balance that has left Ukraine without long-range U.S. missiles that can strike Russia’s naval headquarters, air force units and logistics in Russian-occupied Crimea or military assets on Russian territory.

The U.S. has declined to provide Gray Eagle MQ-1C drones amid Pentagon concerns that they could be used to strike targets in Russia.
Ukraine’s hopes of acquiring Western aircraft in the near term have also been rebuffed by the Biden administration, though the U.S. hasn’t ruled out supplying them years from now after the Ukraine conflict is resolved.

One major system that the Russians have warned Washington not to provide—privately as well as publicly—are long-range, surface-to-surface missiles such as the ATACMS missiles, which can be fired from Himars launchers and could strike well into Russia territory.

The Russian demand not to provide ATACMS to Kyiv comes as debate has grown among current and former U.S. and European officials about whether the Biden administration has been too cautious in providing military support to Ukraine.

On one side of the debate are experts such as Charles Kupchan, the top National Security Council official for Europe during the Obama administration, who argues that the U.S. should continue to limit the range and sophistication of the weapons provided to Ukraine, to contain the risk of broader conflict with Russia.

“The United States should avoid encouraging or facilitating a Ukrainian effort to fully expel Russian forces from all of its territory, including Crimea, a war aim that would run too high a risk of prompting [Russian President Vladimir] Putin to undertake even more reckless actions, including the possible use of nuclear weapons,” Mr. Kupchan said.

The other side includes some former alliance officials. By denying Ukraine long-range missiles and launchers that can fire them, they say, the West has, in effect, given Russia a free hand to fire cruise and ballistic missiles into Ukraine from Crimea and its own territory mount drone attacks, without fear that Kyiv might strike back.

“Since the 10th of October, Putin has changed strategy,” Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the former Danish prime minister who served as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s secretary-general from 2009 to 2014, told The Wall Street Journal. “He has accelerated the war by targeting civilian infrastructure, including the energy grid. Potentially we are now facing a humanitarian catastrophe in Ukraine, and we have not adapted.”

“If you are to stop Putin then you have to deter by delivering, for instance, long-range missiles,” he added.
 

FriedButter

Brigadier
Registered Member
Again the Russians get fucked more over complacency than over actual Ukranian strategic and tactical prowess.

Russians are claiming they were shot down by air defences but it never said how many or if all of them were shot down.

It may answer @Deino question about the size of the explosion earlier. The debris landed on the airfield + maybe other drones since it didn't exactly say all of them were shot down.

A number of “Soviet-made” jet drones, flying at low altitude, targeted the long-range strategic aviation assets at the Dyagilevo airfield in Ryazan Region and Engels airfield in Saratov Region, the ministry said. While they were detected and shot down by air defenses, the debris impacted the airfields “slightly” damaging two aircraft.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Stealthflanker

Senior Member
Registered Member
Russians are claiming they were shot down by air defences but it never said how many or if all of them were shot down.

Yeah, kinda curious how many was launched. Could be all were shot down but one was downed way too close to the airbase.

Also if it's Tu-141 tho i would expect some crater maybe as one that crashed in Zagreb actually carried 100Kg bomb inside it. and the Tu-22M3 there would have been Lost considerable portion of it's tail.


Damage in Dyaghilevo.

 

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
Yeah, kinda curious how many was launched. Could be all were shot down but one was downed way too close to the airbase.

Also if it's Tu-141 tho i would expect some crater maybe as one that crashed in Zagreb actually carried 100Kg bomb inside it. and the Tu-22M3 there would have been Lost considerable portion of it's tail.


Damage in Dyaghilevo.

That Tu-22m3 will probably be scrapped, maybe they will bring some more air defences on the border and keep aircraft in armored hangar ??? Keeping aircraft with good look-down/shoot-down radar in patrol to shield these airports would be probably the best. In the present situation would be stupid to not have non stop air asset at the border.
 

baykalov

Senior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

PRAGUE, Dec 5 (Reuters) - It will take 10-15 years to refill Western stocks of artillery ammunition depleted to support Ukraine’s army as it battles Russia’s invasion, according to the owner of major arms manufacturer Czechoslovak Group.

Despite the flow of ammo to Ukraine, CSG owner Michal Strnad said Ukrainian forces were experiencing shortfalls as Western governments were running down their arsenals amid limits on production capacity.

Strnad told Reuters his firm was now responsible for about 25-30% of European output of NATO-standard 155mm artillery.

“Artillery ammunition are very scarce goods today,” he said in an interview. “I estimate it will take 10-15 years to refill (Western armies’) stocks” as a result of the war in Ukraine.

Strnad said CSG now had capacity of 80,000-100,000 of artillery shells per year, a significant chunk of the annual capacity in Europe which he put at 270,000-300,000.

The firm is hiring 250-300 more people to expand production, he said, aiming to raise capacity to 150,000, but this would take about two years to set up due to lengthy delivery times of production equipment.

European governments have significantly drawn on their arsenals to support Ukraine, which Strnad said was firing 40,000 shells per week from several hundred, Western-supplied howitzers against Russian invaders.

“Really a lot has been delivered to Ukraine,” he said. “But the fact is that today the Ukrainians are shooting less than they could because they do not have enough ammunition.”

CSG has been a major supplier of upgraded Soviet-era weapons to Ukraine, including tanks, artillery pieces, multiple rocket launchers and infantry fighting vehicles.

Its supplies include 90 modernised T-72 tanks, paid for by the United States and Netherlands, a process now underway.

But CSG’s stocks of Soviet-era weaponry have also dwindled and there is little left on the market that could be quickly modernised and send on to Ukraine, Strnad said.
 

solarz

Brigadier
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

PRAGUE, Dec 5 (Reuters) - It will take 10-15 years to refill Western stocks of artillery ammunition depleted to support Ukraine’s army as it battles Russia’s invasion, according to the owner of major arms manufacturer Czechoslovak Group.

Despite the flow of ammo to Ukraine, CSG owner Michal Strnad said Ukrainian forces were experiencing shortfalls as Western governments were running down their arsenals amid limits on production capacity.

Strnad told Reuters his firm was now responsible for about 25-30% of European output of NATO-standard 155mm artillery.

“Artillery ammunition are very scarce goods today,” he said in an interview. “I estimate it will take 10-15 years to refill (Western armies’) stocks” as a result of the war in Ukraine.

Strnad said CSG now had capacity of 80,000-100,000 of artillery shells per year, a significant chunk of the annual capacity in Europe which he put at 270,000-300,000.

The firm is hiring 250-300 more people to expand production, he said, aiming to raise capacity to 150,000, but this would take about two years to set up due to lengthy delivery times of production equipment.

European governments have significantly drawn on their arsenals to support Ukraine, which Strnad said was firing 40,000 shells per week from several hundred, Western-supplied howitzers against Russian invaders.

“Really a lot has been delivered to Ukraine,” he said. “But the fact is that today the Ukrainians are shooting less than they could because they do not have enough ammunition.”

CSG has been a major supplier of upgraded Soviet-era weapons to Ukraine, including tanks, artillery pieces, multiple rocket launchers and infantry fighting vehicles.

Its supplies include 90 modernised T-72 tanks, paid for by the United States and Netherlands, a process now underway.

But CSG’s stocks of Soviet-era weaponry have also dwindled and there is little left on the market that could be quickly modernised and send on to Ukraine, Strnad said.

I think it was said somewhere that Russia outshoots Ukraine 10:1 on artillery, and now this article says Ukraine is being limited not by the amount of artillery pieces it has, but by the amount of ammunition that the West can supply it?

Assuming that is true, this means Russia can outproduce NATO, if not by 10 to 1, at least 2 or 3 to 1.
 
Top