The War in the Ukraine

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
The recent proliferation of guided bombs shows Ukrainian anti-air network has finally been worn down. There seems to be no shot down yet compared to previous attempt. The new guidance kit has some reliability issues but war is the quickest way to improve weapons. With VKS finally able to function properly tide should begin to turn in Russian favor. Ukrainian counter attack without anti-air network would be suicide.

On the Russian side the status quo is favorable. If this continues it would be a favourable trade to eventually exhaust Ukrainian military and western economy. Not much else needs to be said.

On the Ukrainian side western arsenal is running out of vital supplies, they must expand the scope of support if they want Ukraine to stay in the fight. Some people said South Korean artillery shells which could be a game changer. Otherwise US needs to expand scope of their involvement by providing weapons like F-16, and possibly get Israel on board as part of supply chain. All of those plans have costs. It would weaken American might in Asia and Middle East, and possibly escalate response from Russian side.

On the American side they need to rethink their strategy. The idea of out trading Russia by pitting Ukraine against them paid off at first. Russian took a lot of sanctions, and US was harmed less. Even if they minimized support after 3 month the outcome would be a favorable trade. However politically giving up Ukraine just is not viable, so the support needs extension. First Europeans paid the cost and managed to keep Ukraine in the first for another year. The trade was not as favorable as before. Now Europeans ran out of old stocks American face a harsh decision. Either give up and accept the damage was inflicted enough, or go in even further long past the favorable trade. Harvesting South Korea and Israel stockpile is the last low hanging fruit. Any further would be buying new weapons and paying full price for Ukraine and it will quickly become unaffordable.
 

KYli

Brigadier
If the US and the West are fully committed to support Ukraine, then we would have seemed a ramp up of weapons production in a massive scale. We haven't seemed any indication of such actions from the West. In my conclusion, the US is only half-hearted in supporting Ukraine.

If Ukraine couldn't achieve significant victories in the next few months, the US would slow down its delivery of weapons and other EU countries would be even less enthusiastic. And any military assistance would be aimed to sustain and strengthen Ukraine in defensive positions.

Instead, further sanctions and other restrictions might be used and weaponized to cripple Russian economy. Western powers might also try to intimidate other countries from trading with Russia. But the West would focus in fighting in the economy front as they won't further invest in achieving a military victory if the Summer offensive failed.

So no, Ukraine needs to make huge progressive in the few months or else it would be left with by itself to fend off Russia. As economy and military aids would be evaporated.
 

phrozenflame

Junior Member
Registered Member
A theory of Russian strategy is gaining traction
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Rather than letting the Americans, et al know they were onto that intent by preparing defenses of Crimea, the Russians preempted as follows:

And here we are...
There is always one or another theory of the month trying to salvage nothing less than an utter disaster of first few weeks from Russian PoV. If they focus more on reforms and less on excuse mongering post-facto, they may perhaps fare better.
 

drowingfish

Junior Member
Registered Member
The recent proliferation of guided bombs shows Ukrainian anti-air network has finally been worn down. There seems to be no shot down yet compared to previous attempt. The new guidance kit has some reliability issues but war is the quickest way to improve weapons. With VKS finally able to function properly tide should begin to turn in Russian favor. Ukrainian counter attack without anti-air network would be suicide.

On the Russian side the status quo is favorable. If this continues it would be a favourable trade to eventually exhaust Ukrainian military and western economy. Not much else needs to be said.

On the Ukrainian side western arsenal is running out of vital supplies, they must expand the scope of support if they want Ukraine to stay in the fight. Some people said South Korean artillery shells which could be a game changer. Otherwise US needs to expand scope of their involvement by providing weapons like F-16, and possibly get Israel on board as part of supply chain. All of those plans have costs. It would weaken American might in Asia and Middle East, and possibly escalate response from Russian side.

On the American side they need to rethink their strategy. The idea of out trading Russia by pitting Ukraine against them paid off at first. Russian took a lot of sanctions, and US was harmed less. Even if they minimized support after 3 month the outcome would be a favorable trade. However politically giving up Ukraine just is not viable, so the support needs extension. First Europeans paid the cost and managed to keep Ukraine in the first for another year. The trade was not as favorable as before. Now Europeans ran out of old stocks American face a harsh decision. Either give up and accept the damage was inflicted enough, or go in even further long past the favorable trade. Harvesting South Korea and Israel stockpile is the last low hanging fruit. Any further would be buying new weapons and paying full price for Ukraine and it will quickly become unaffordable.
agreed, offensive action will require a concentration of forces and resources. if ukraine does not improve its AD then its offensive cannot be successful. problem is i imagine it is easier to build these glide bombs than anti-air missiles.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
I think the Russians would be bartering ammunition for oil with North Korea. Not because Russia needs more ammo than they can produce but we expect every additional shell helps. But it's also of North Korea needing the oil more and Russia helping their ally. Cold War era artillery might be of interest too.


The smart gliding FAB-500 has a formal technical designation of FAB500M62. The total cost of each, bomb plus kit is about $24,000.


Lancet takes out MSTA-B.

 

RobertC

Junior Member
Registered Member

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
From othe part of equation, reason why Russia said that IF Seoul supply shells the USA , then they will supply NK with weapons - maybe second front in the Koreasn pensitula, to liberate the south territories of Korea?
Prigozhin's math means if Seoul give up its artillery shells then they will be easy ride for the Koreans.
One thing that Russia could do, if they wanted to, would be to export modern conventional submarines to North Korea. North Korea is still operating dozens of WWII era submarines. Over 60 of them. Imagine if those were instead modernized Kilo or Lada class submarines. Right now, Russia has modernized most of their conventional Kilo submarines. And their conventional submarine shipyards have plenty of slack capacity. Add new torpedos and the Kalibr to the sale, and you basically have tied down a huge chunk of the South Korean and Japanese navies.
Another thing they could do would be to provide North Korea with modernized MiG-29 and Su-27 aircraft from old stocks plus more modern air defense. Imagine an upgraded S-300 or even S-400 system in North Korea. The peninsula is so small you could basically cover South Korea from the North. You sell the North Koreans the Rezonans radar, and the coverage goes over Seoul.

Anyway, I am still waiting for the mud to dry up in Ukraine so the supposed offensive can begin. Right now the Ukrainians are only making failed probing attacks on the south.
 
Last edited:

FriedButter

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

German tanks pose problems for Ukraine – Foreign Policy​

Ukraine will likely have to procure a range of different munitions, rather than a single type, for German-made Leopard tanks, supplied by some of its western backers, Foreign Policy has reported.
On Thursday, the media outlet claimed that the vehicles provided to Kiev, by eight countries, are not uniform in terms of the shells they fire. The article also highlighted the supposed inadequacy of air defences that have already been supplied.

Rather surprising that the leopard tanks require different sizes of shells despite being the same tanks. Talk about a logistical nightmare.
 

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



Rather surprising that the leopard tanks require different sizes of shells despite being the same tanks. Talk about a logistical nightmare.


Technically I cannot say anything about this claim, but a report from RT is IMO not the most credible one at first sight!
 
Top