The War in the Ukraine

D

drowingfish

Junior Member
Registered Member
Cult Icon said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Very big and Interesting series of claims from Shoigu and Putin this past week. They have become bold due to the success of the Russian defense so far. Putin claimed that Russia will launch an offensive after the Ukrainian counteroffensive burns out.

Shoigu claimed that Russia recruited 114,000 new contractors and 52,000 new volunteers in 2023 Jan-June (166,000 men). They currently receive 1,336 new recruits and 112 new units of equipment every day.

5 new regiments (presumably infantry?) added to the 1st Guards Tank Army and the 20th Guards Combined Arms Army.

One new reserve Army and new Army corps will be completed at the end of June 2023 with 3,700 units of equipment.

The new reserve army is the 25th Combined Arms Army and the new corps is the 40th Army Corps.

There are over 40 volunteer formations currently active.
Click to expand...
if this number is on top of the 300k draftees then it is quite significant. i think the draftees still has a few more months to serve before they are done, it will pretty much cover russian defense until the ground softens again in the fall. these volunteers will need extensive training before they can conduct offensive actions, dont expect to see them in battle until the winter at least.

if ukraine will do what russia did all spring and build its own network of defenses, it should be able to hold the line against a potential russian counteroffensive. the key here is not to waste any more men and machines on the counteroffensive in zaporozhia.
 
C

Cult Icon

Junior Member
Registered Member
Ukraine does have its own network of defenses-it's the Zelensky line/the Donbass.

I agree with most of what Mikael said in the twitter post. They could either double down and suffer tremendous losses or they could withdraw and fix the problems with their troops, and more economically use them in the defense. The Ukrainian failure was to be expected given all their problems leading up to June 4th. Their pre-war professional forces, let alone brigades newly formed- were not great in the attack either in 2022. The subsequent Russian 'offensive' could be just an intensification of positional warfare with limited goals & a slow creep forward. No more 50 mile columns of vehicles or outpacing the placement of their air defense and electronic warfare infrastructure for Ukrainian gunners to target.

The Russians could clear out the annexed regions in 2024 or even 2025 and never bother with any more advances.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian air defense and munitions availability continually decline despite an overall increase in Western AFVs due to production failures in the West. Also their economic, financial, and political problems worsen. A recent UK economist article estimated that Russia is spending only 3% of GDP on the war in Ukraine (the rest is just on the force). Shoigu's 12 new maneuver divisions' deadline is 2026. It's looking like a long war of attrition until Ukraine accepts a peace deal. And it's operating on a budget.

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

pmc

Major
Registered Member
Stealthflanker said:
Yeah but you are facing low RCS target and flies low enough that ground based radars have problem. and Pantsyr can only do so much.

It still need its own target tracking radar to lock the target and guide the missile on it. it's a command guided missile and it cannot really receive 3rd party guidance or illumination.
Click to expand...
MIG-31 practice against modern coastal cruise missiles. it is lack of persistence air coverage that allow drones and missile to pass.
I think the size of air force need to increase. All those previous claims will be put to test in this Ukraine war.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
As Izvestia already wrote, these fighters receive new tasks. Now their crews will regularly practice shooting at ballistic missiles . The military department also reported that MiG-31 pilots from a regiment in Kamchatka last year intercepted for the first time a cruise missile fired by a modern coastal anti-ship system.
The R-74M is capable of not only fighting enemy aircraft, but can also be used against cruise missiles and drones with a small reflective surface, and this is very important for the MiG-31 and increases their capabilities several times, the Hero of Russia, former commander, told Izvestia 4th Air Force of the Air Force and Air Defense, Lieutenant General Valery Gorbenko.
The maximum launch range has increased from 30 to 40 km. But if necessary, you can shoot it “point-blank”, from a minimum distance to the object of three hundred meters. The homing head can capture the target after launch and switch from one to the other in flight.
There is a variant of the R-74M, designed for use from the internal compartments of the fifth generation Su-57 fighters. Attack aircraft and combat helicopters can also be equipped with new ammunition. They are already armed with the latest Mi-28NM helicopters.
Click to expand...
 
S

Stealthflanker

Senior Member
Registered Member
pmc said:
MIG-31 practice against modern coastal cruise missiles. it is lack of persistence air coverage that allow drones and missile to pass.
I think the size of air force need to increase. All those previous claims will be put to test in this Ukraine war.
Click to expand...

These MiG's and Sukhois have air refuelling probe. Il-78 can loft around Azov or Black Sea to provide refuelling for the patrol.

One concern however is where they should be based as Crimean based airbase might be already vulnerable.
 
T

Tootensky

Junior Member
Registered Member
Cult Icon said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Very big and Interesting series of claims from Shoigu and Putin this past week. They have become bold due to the success of the Russian defense so far. Putin claimed that Russia will launch an offensive after the Ukrainian counteroffensive burns out.

Shoigu claimed that Russia recruited 114,000 new contractors and 52,000 new volunteers in 2023 Jan-June (166,000 men). They currently receive 1,336 new recruits and 112 new units of equipment every day.

5 new regiments (presumably infantry?) added to the 1st Guards Tank Army and the 20th Guards Combined Arms Army.

One new reserve Army and new Army corps will be completed at the end of June 2023 with 3,700 units of equipment.

The new reserve army is the 25th Combined Arms Army and the new corps is the 40th Army Corps.

There are over 40 volunteer formations currently active.
Click to expand...
If true, it would mean that the Russian gamble with not calling up any more reserves and banking on playing it more defensively paid off. They managed to siphon off 300 thousand reservists and make the operation attractive enough for volunteers, they still get an influx of however many new recruits enter the system every year, they've increased their rate of military production, and they did all of that while managing not to club their economy on the head at the same time. Impressive.

Cult Icon said:
The Russians could clear out the annexed regions in 2024 or even 2025 and never bother with any more advances.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian air defense and munitions availability continually decline despite an overall increase in Western AFVs due to production failures in the West. Also their economic, financial, and political problems worsen. A recent UK economist article estimated that Russia is spending only 3% of GDP on the war in Ukraine (the rest is just on the force). Shoigu's 12 new maneuver divisions' deadline is 2026. It's looking like a long war of attrition until Ukraine accepts a peace deal. And it's operating on a budget.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
I'm still of the opinion, that for Russia, anything short of complete victory is going to be a strategic loss. The main reason behind this war was physically pushing away NATO sphere of influence. If Russia pushes it only to, say, the Dnieper river, while leaving western Ukraine be, sooner or later whatever remained of Ukraine will become a heavily militarized thorn in Russia's side, and will enter NATO anyway. At the same time, any Russian bases in Belarus will be literally surounded by NATO forces. That, to me, is a strategic defeat. At this moment, in my opinion Russia should stay far away from the peace table, and aim for what probably was the initial aim of the whole operation - occupy eastern territories and either force a regime change in what remains of the country, or, if no other solution can be found, occupy all of it (at the cost of long-term insurgency, yes). It could only be achieved years and years down the line, but there is no other way for Russia to truly achieve its original aim - neutralization of Ukraine and creating a thick buffer for a future conflict. As a side benefit for Russia, a percolating conflict like this hurts NATO countries a lot more and doesn't give them any respite. If Russia can't catch up to the NATO countries on its own merits, it can at least drag them down. As the saying goes, there is noone taller than the last man standing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tankphobia

tankphobia

Senior Member
Registered Member
Tootensky said:
If true, it would mean that the Russian gamble with not calling up any more reserves and banking on playing it more defensively paid off. They managed to siphon off 300 thousand reservists and make the operation attractive enough for volunteers, they still get an influx of however many new recruits enter the system every year, they've increased their rate of military production, and they did all of that while managing not to club their economy on the head at the same time. Impressive.


I'm still of the opinion, that for Russia, anything short of complete victory is going to be a strategic loss. The main reason behind this war was physically pushing away NATO sphere of influence. If Russia pushes it only to, say, the Dnieper river, while leaving western Ukraine be, sooner or later whatever remained of Ukraine will become a heavily militarized thorn in Russia's side, and will enter NATO anyway. At the same time, any Russian bases in Belarus will be literally surounded by NATO forces. That, to me, is a strategic defeat. At this moment, in my opinion Russia should stay far away from the peace table, and aim for what probably was the initial aim of the whole operation - occupy eastern territories and either force a regime change in what remains of the country, or, if no other solution can be found, occupy all of it (at the cost of long-term insurgency, yes). It could only be achieved years and years down the line, but there is no other way for Russia to truly achieve its original aim - neutralization of Ukraine and creating a thick buffer for a future conflict. As a side benefit for Russia, a percolating conflict like this hurts NATO countries a lot more and doesn't give them any respite. If Russia can't catch up to the NATO countries on its own merits, it can at least drag them down. As the saying goes, there is noone taller than the last man standing.
Click to expand...
A return to offensive action would be very costly at this time, even if the Ukranian armored corps are exhausted from the current offensive, NATO has spun up enough anti air and artillery production such that I'm not sure Russia will have a decisive artillery advantage. Currently combined western production of 155mm shell is ~150k/month and will only increase from here as contracts are drawn up and plants committed.

Best case for Russia will be a frozen conflict imo.
 
D

Deleted member 24525

Guest
tankphobia said:
A return to offensive action would be very costly at this time, even if the Ukranian armored corps are exhausted from the current offensive, NATO has spun up enough anti air and artillery production such that I'm not sure Russia will have a decisive artillery advantage. Currently combined western production of 155mm shell is ~150k/month and will only increase from here as contracts are drawn up and plants committed.

Best case for Russia will be a frozen conflict imo.
Click to expand...
Honestly I think it's just a psyop to try and get the Ukrainians to divert their forces. And where did you get that artillery figure? US production is like 25k per month. Does Europe really produce five times that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top