The War in the Ukraine

S

Soldier30

Senior Member
Registered Member
A 240-mm M-240 towed mortar of the 1950 model, existing in several copies in Ukraine, was hit by a kamikaze drone Lancet. The mortar was supposedly in the museum, but it was decided to use it in the fighting, judging by the impact, the mortar received light damage.


Exit from Bakhmut by separate units of the Ukrainian army. Ukrainian troops began to leave Bakhmut, it is not yet clear whether this is the withdrawal of all troops or the withdrawal of individual units. The video shows some Ukrainian servicemen leaving Bakhmut (Artyomovsk).


Wagner appreciated the self-propelled anti-tank complex "Shturm-S" of Russia. Earlier we talked about the 9P149 combat vehicle, detailed technical information about it is in the link to the video in the comments of the video. The vehicle has an ammunition capacity of 12 Shturm missiles and works well from ambushes against armored vehicles.

 
T

tamsen_ikard

Junior Member
Registered Member
Aegis21 said:
If they had left the right bank of Kherson sometime between March and September they wouldn't have lost the Kharkov territories. After the dash to Voznesensk failed, it didn't really make sense to keep that part of Kherson. Russia couldn't advance towards Nikolaev or Krivoy Rog, and they probably knew that. I don’t know why they kept those areas apart from a PR issue since they left all the Northern areas way before.

Had they left Kherson earlier the VDV coming from there could’ve held the line in Kharkov since there weren’t any existential supply issues like Kherson, which was in the other side of the Dnieper. Anyway, there will probably be a second round of battles for Kupyansk, Izyum, Liman, etc. in the late Spring/Summer time. Those territories need to be returned for a pincer on Kramatorsk-Slavyansk.
Click to expand...

If its a question of what should have happened, then Russians shouldn't have invaded with just 200K army in the first place. That was the biggest blunder of them all. Although, at that time, it did look like a solid and less costly move without a big mobilization and Russia hoped their Ukraine would fall apart.

Or perhaps Russia shouldn't have reduced their land forces to just 280K total for such a huge land border to defend.

Russia has made so many strategic miscalculations in this war that its just too many to count.

They can still salvage this if they mobilize in a big way and fight this war seriously. But most likely it will be a slow and steady grind like this with Russia drip feeding troops. Lets see if this strategy wins in the end.
 
S

SolarWarden

Junior Member
Registered Member
tamsen_ikard said:
If its a question of what should have happened, then Russians shouldn't have invaded with just 200K army in the first place. That was the biggest blunder of them all. Although, at that time, it did look like a solid and less costly move without a big mobilization and Russia hoped their Ukraine would fall apart.

Or perhaps Russia shouldn't have reduced their land forces to just 280K total for such a huge land border to defend.

Russia has made so many strategic miscalculations in this war that its just too many to count.

They can still salvage this if they mobilize in a big way and fight this war seriously. But most likely it will be a slow and steady grind like this with Russia drip feeding troops. Lets see if this strategy wins in the end.
Click to expand...
It looks like Ukraine are smartly going to use their western supplied armored vehicles in one go and not sprinkled all over the frontline which I think would be dumb. This is it for Ukraine come late spring if they fail in their western supplied offensive, including 50-60k Ukrainian NATO trained troops that will be the spearhead of this offensive, it's over. The west will start to cut off Ukraine in money and supplies and this war could remain stagnant which will be a win for Russia because now Russia can force Ukraine into a peace deal favorable to Russia. However I don't think that will be the outcome I think Ukraine is going to make huge gains when they go on the offensive late spring.
 
Z

Zichan

Junior Member
Registered Member
Phead128 said:
Mr. Koffman visited Kherson frontlines too when it was still Russian-occupied. He said he did not believe Russia would leave Kherson without being forcibly evicted by force (i.e., Russia won't give up without a fight). He ended up very wrong...
Click to expand...
Actually, he said that it makes no military sense for Russia to hold the west bank of Dnieper in Kherson. He said that well before the Ukrainians launched an offensive there. The fact that Russia withdrew from that area validated his assertion.

I think he provides important insight on the operational level. His impression after visiting the frontline in Kherson was that there is no evidence that HIMARS has significantly degraded Russian forces ability to keep themselves supplied. The intensity of Russian fires 10 days before they withdrew exceeded the Ukrainian. The Russians withdrew in good order, unlike in Kharkiv area.

He is also quite objective in his assessment of the Ukrainian army when he dismisses the media narratives that the key to their success is their post Soviet innovation and NCOs which allow them to operate on a much more flexible and creative way than the Russians. After visiting Kherson, he reported that he saw very little to support that thesis.

He understands the Russian army organization and structure very well: in the summer of last year he gave a very educational podcast on the Russian BTGs and why they failed so badly in Ukraine.

As for predicting the course of the war: I don’t think anyone can do that. War is inherently unpredictable. Look no further than the unrealistic plans Russia started the war in Feb 2022. I don’t take his nor anyone else’s predictions too seriously.

Perhaps only on a strategic level one could
make predictions with any degree of certainty: like Mearsheimer who in 2014 warned that unless we change course we are on a collision course with Russia and that Ukraine will pay the highest price.
 
A

aqh

Junior Member
Registered Member
He understands the Russian army organization and structure very well: in the summer of last year he gave a very educational podcast on the Russian BTGs and why they failed so badly in Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Which podcast?
 
D

drowingfish

Junior Member
Registered Member
Zichan said:
Actually, he said that it makes no military sense for Russia to hold the west bank of Dnieper in Kherson. He said that well before the Ukrainians launched an offensive there. The fact that Russia withdrew from that area validated his assertion.

I think he provides important insight on the operational level. His impression after visiting the frontline in Kherson was that there is no evidence that HIMARS has significantly degraded Russian forces ability to keep themselves supplied. The intensity of Russian fires 10 days before they withdrew exceeded the Ukrainian. The Russians withdrew in good order, unlike in Kharkiv area.

He is also quite objective in his assessment of the Ukrainian army when he dismisses the media narratives that the key to their success is their post Soviet innovation and NCOs which allow them to operate on a much more flexible and creative way than the Russians. After visiting Kherson, he reported that he saw very little to support that thesis.

He understands the Russian army organization and structure very well: in the summer of last year he gave a very educational podcast on the Russian BTGs and why they failed so badly in Ukraine.

As for predicting the course of the war: I don’t think anyone can do that. War is inherently unpredictable. Look no further than the unrealistic plans Russia started the war in Feb 2022. I don’t take his nor anyone else’s predictions too seriously.

Perhaps only on a strategic level one could
make predictions with any degree of certainty: like Mearsheimer who in 2014 warned that unless we change course we are on a collision course with Russia and that Ukraine will pay the highest price.
Click to expand...
"Actually, he said that it makes no military sense for Russia to hold the west bank of Dnieper in Kherson. He said that well before the Ukrainians launched an offensive there. The fact that Russia withdrew from that area validated his assertion."

blowing up the bridge behind russian troops in kherson then attack them isolated was the most obvious move to pretty much anyone with the ability to read a map. there was nothing impressive with making that call.
 
Sinnavuuty

Sinnavuuty

Senior Member
Registered Member
Temstar said:
Oh this is new:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634911338991599617

FAB-500 with wing kits now in use by VKS. Those must be guided right? You wouldn't make a dumb wing kit?
Right after that JDAM ER announcement too.
Click to expand...
It is a slider pump named UMPK/УМПК. It's a FAB-500 bomb (500kg class dumb bomb) with wings added so it lands farther when thrown to increase range. It appears to be more of an SDB equivalent than a JDAM, but it's still unclear if it's guided. This is already a better option than flying over targets dropping dumb bombs like with a CCIP.
 
Phead128

Phead128

Captain
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
RottenPanzer said:
He said "forcibly evicted"

The Kherson situation was quite a hindrance for Russia due constant targeting of the bridge by HIMARS and supplying getting a lot harder. On this situation, i think it safe to assume that they were forcibly evicted there
Click to expand...

There isn't any ambiguity on what "forcibly evicted" means....it means putting up a real fight before leaving Kherson.

Screenshot_2023-03-12-12-06-51-00_0b2fce7a16bf2b728d6ffa28c8d60efb.jpg

He is skeptical Russia would abandon all positions without a fight.... yet no major combat and Russian retreat was largely absent of Ukrainian harassment across Dnieper river. It was almost like there was a negotiated retreat behind the scenes.

His predictions basically as good as a coin flip and his insights are quite obvious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top