The War in the Ukraine

tankphobia said:

I don't think Chechens can actually replace Wagner anyhow, to achieve what they had in Bakhmut so far they had to massively expand Wagner to a force of 40-50k. Chechen forces in Ukraine are not even 10k. Most of the slack will be picked up by RU armed forces while Kadyrov gets credit.

Click to expand...

Definitely not. Wagner, from the looks of it, truly developed into a combined arms unit while the Chechens are still basically pure infantry.

baykalov said:

What do you think of this speculation?

Personally, I have also long been under the impression from what I have read on several of the popular Russian military Telegram channels that there is internal friction over how to conduct the special military operation. On one side are Shoigu and Gerasimov, on the other Prigozhin, Kadyrov and Surovikin.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1654484418960957445

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1654484422891110401

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1654484427248943104

Click to expand...

I don't know if this is some 6D chess move by the Russians to get the Ukrainians to stay in Bahkmut or if this is an internal squabble that may deal an operational blow to the Russians. If we factor in the information from Perun (an Australian YouTuber who has been using osint to deliver his take on certain aspects on the conflict) about Russian internal politics and previous altercations between the MoD and Wagner+Chechens, the latter scenario is very much probable. However, Prigozhin previously stated that the Russians' military objective is to grind away all of Ukraine's military, and Ukraine has recently been retreating from Bahkmut in a deliberate manner while delaying the Russians' advance. For all we know, this could be a deception for Ukraine to fall for and think that they still have a shot at Bahkmut. All I can say is we have to wait and see and avoid speculating until more information comes to light.

siegecrossbow said:

Kinzhal is not really a hypersonic missile if you are strict about the definition. It is an airborne ballistic missile with relatively limited maneuvering capabilities. If Kinzhal counts as hypersonic then DF-15 should as well.

Click to expand...

No. The definition of hypersonic is that something is hypersonic. i.e. it travels at Mach 5 or greater. Which it does.

Kinzhal is over 2x faster than older Soviet era air launched land attack missiles like the Kh-22. It also has more range than the Kh-22. The idea being insinuated, that Kinzhal brings no new capability, is bollocks. It has over twice the speed and nearly triple the range of the Kh-22.

Just the fact you are air launching it means it will have much higher terminal velocity and range than a ground launched Iskander or DF-15.

gelgoog said:

No. The definition of hypersonic is that something is hypersonic. i.e. it travels at Mach 5 or greater. Which it does.

Kinzhal is over 2x faster than older Soviet era air launched land attack missiles like the Kh-22. It also has more range than the Kh-22. The idea being insinuated, that Kinzhal brings no new capability, is bollocks. It has over twice the speed and nearly triple the range of the Kh-22.

Just the fact you are air launching it means it will have much higher terminal velocity and range than a ground launched Iskander or DF-15.

Click to expand...

Nope, to qualify being a hypersonic weapon it has to have maneuverability in its flight path.

No it does not. That is just US revisionism on what being hypersonic is. Just check a dictionary.
It is just an attempt to undermine Russian achievements in hypersonics. When the fact is the US is behind, be it in air launched "ballistic" missiles (Kinzhal), hypersonic glide vehicles (Avangard), or hypersonic cruise missiles (Zircon).

I say "ballistic" because Iskander does not have a 100% ballistic trajectory, nor does Kinzhal. Iskander and Kinzhal can change the trajectory close to the target and launch decoys to make themselves harder to intercept.

gelgoog said:

No it does not. That is just US revisionism on what being hypersonic is. Just check a dictionary.
It is just an attempt to undermine Russian achievements in hypersonics. When the fact is the US is behind, be it in air launched "ballistic" missiles (Kinzhal), hypersonic glide vehicles (Avangard), or hypersonic cruise missiles (Zircon).

I say "ballistic" because Iskander does not have a 100% ballistic trajectory, nor does Kinzhal. Iskander and Kinzhal can change the trajectory close to the target and launch decoys to make themselves harder to intercept.

Click to expand...

The US had the Pershing and didn’t consider it hypersonic, despite having a similar “non-ballistic” maneuvering warhead.

The Pershing II was also hypersonic. And you would be mistaken if you think there is no such thing as loss of technology. Just because we could do something in the 1960s or 1970s does not mean you can do it now. Where is the modern equivalent of the Concorde or SR-71?
The US MIC would likely be hard pressed to do a Pershing II missile right now if they wanted to. In the 1960s, the US had companies like Marquardt who were pioneers in ramjet technology. Today they cannot make an equivalent of the P-800 Oniks, let alone the Zircon.

For those questioning why the US never delivered ATACMS missiles to Ukraine, for example, they answer is quite simple. Rather than any desire not to give them any capability to strike Russian territory. the truth is the US has not manufactured any new ATACMS missiles since at least 2007.

I would avoid mentioning any sort of numbers when it comes to manpower. They are a poor indicator of battlefield potential.

baykalov said:

What do you think of this speculation?

Personally, I have also long been under the impression from what I have read on several of the popular Russian military Telegram channels that there is internal friction over how to conduct the special military operation. On one side are Shoigu and Gerasimov, on the other Prigozhin, Kadyrov and Surovikin.

Click to expand...

That makes sense, although I don't know if that would be true. Russia has shown that it can surprise everyone, demoting competent generals (Surovikin) and rewarding the incompetent ones (Shoigu/Lapin and the list goes on), most countries do the opposite.

Shoigu and Gerasimov are incompetent as they come. Just look at the foolish initial strategy in the first couple of months. They didn’t target the critical infrastructure. Sadly they have far too much influence on Putin for them to be replaced. It took Surovikin to finally hit the critical infrastructure. Surovikin was doing a good job until he was demoted.

baykalov said:

What do you think of this speculation?

Personally, I have also long been under the impression from what I have read on several of the popular Russian military Telegram channels that there is internal friction over how to conduct the special military operation. On one side are Shoigu and Gerasimov, on the other Prigozhin, Kadyrov and Surovikin.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1654484418960957445

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1654484422891110401

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1654484427248943104

Click to expand...

Not sure where Gerasimov falls into. Plus he's pretty competent, see Gerasimov Doctrine. Implementation of this Doctrine meant that Russia has been planning this war for years including preparing its economy for it. Which it did, and enabled it to survive sanctions.


Surovikin's "demotion" was understood at the beginning that his 'promotion' was both conditional (allowed to retreat from Kherson) and temporary. In terms of what he actually does, the demotion changed nothing since he continued to run the campaign. One has to put context that Surovikin is the General of the Air Force, not the Army.

There's something about Slavic military culture that you cannot lead when you lose the respect of your men. Hence what happened to Lapin after Izyium despite he led the campaign on Lysychansk and Severodonestk. Same thing happened to the O group general after the debacle at Ugledar. This is also why Teplinsky was reinstated after getting fired, he is known as a soldier's general. This explains why politicos have to visit the front so often, such as Zelensky and why he dresses like that. It's all for show to the troops but it's an important show. This is why Prigozhin visits his troops and Denis Pushilin visits his DPR troops. The fact that Pushilin visited Bakhmut recently tells me there is DPR troops now involved. Lately even Shoigu has been visiting the front too as it suggests he needs to shore up support within ths Russian military. One of the criticisms laid on Lapin was that during the fighting in Izyium, he was back in his offices in Moscow, and no less than Kadyrov pointed this out. Of course there is a drawback to this as it gets some generals killed like the head of the Ukrainian Territorial Defense Forces who got artillery ambushed on his way to visit his men in Bakhmut from Chasiv Yar.

Mizintsev no doubt would not be in his new position as deputy commander of Wagner if he doesn't have respect of the troops.