The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[ngatimozart]

Allow me to distract us from the current arguments....

I find it curious that UKR seems to be concentration its anti-naval campaign against RU amphibious shipping and transport units. There is no danger of a RU amphib strike. I would see the wisdom in these targets if the Kerch bridge was out of commission, but there hasnt been a serious attempt on the bridge in some time.

The Amphibs are being used to transport stores, troops, weapons etc., so are part of the Russian logistics chain.

I would see the wisdom in these targets if the Kerch bridge was out of commission, but there hasnt been a serious attempt on the bridge in some time.

They are saving it up for an auspicious occasion.

Unless there were valid military targets, striking Belgorod is a waste of resources. Putin couldnt give a crap about damage to Belgorod.

That's rubbish. The attacks are on the soil of the holy Russian motherland; Putin would ignore such at his peril and he knows it.

The Kerch bridge has always been top of the list of strategic targets for the Ukrainians. They did two major attacks on it. Once with a truck loaded with explosives, and another with a mix of drones and missiles, with mixed results. But this is perhaps the most protected site in the entire region. For the Russians and Putin, personally, it's very important symbolically, as well as logistically.
I have heard that the bridge is operating at limited capacity because structural damages have not been repaired yet. And this is already a big problem for them.
The big landing ship was used to move military equipment and ammunitions to the Kherson region via Crimea. That's why it exploded so well. This completed the logistic hindrance.
I the Ukes don't try to bombard the Kerch bridge anymore, it's because they know their missiles won't cross air defences. Russians are quiet effective in intercepting various types of missiles, including Storm Shadows. They can't afford to send volleys of missiles to get only one or two hit its target, because their missiles are counted and they need them in more urgent places. They won't waste 10 Storm Shadows or equivalent just on an attempt on the Kerch Bridge which may fail while they could hit 5 or 6 other important, albeit less fortified, targets.
But I'm sure, they will try again as soon as they get a chance.

The UKR missiles have successfully crossed Crimea and hit well protected Russian targets. Just ask the VMF why they are moving their fleet and fleet HQ out of Crimea. UKR could use the likes of Storm Shadow / SCALP on the Kersh bridge as long as they targeted the half of the bridge on the Crimea side of the Kerch Strait. It would be worth the expenditure of 10 Storm Shadow / SCALP missiles to destroy the bridge.

 

[Ananda]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1743988020699603076

Look at this way, If Turkiye not block that minesweepers, Russia will have base to demand Turkiye to open Bosporus for their Frigates and larger Amphibious. Something that can't be move by Russia through their inland canals.

Turkey must stop blocking Ukraine minehunters, ex-NATO supreme commander warns

Ankara insists it cannot allow the British vessels into the Black Sea under the Montreux Convention.

www.politico.eu

This kind of comment, is nothing more then some in Nato and West trying to push Turkiye and Erdogan. Negative sentiment from some in Euro against Turkiye.

 

[vikingatespam]

The Amphibs are being used to transport stores, troops, weapons etc., so are part of the Russian logistics chain.

We know they are using these ships for logistics, but as long as the Kerch bridge and the overland routes are available, these ships are not a vital target. That leads me to believe the ships are target of convenience, or there is a strike on the Kerch bridge in the planning. Yet, without severing the Tokmak rail line, the UKR wont be able to isolate the RU forces near Kherson.

That's rubbish. The attacks are on the soil of the holy Russian motherland; Putin would ignore such at his peril and he knows it.

Meh. If Putin cared, he would of stationed more AD there. Its in his interests to let the UKR waste their efforts on targets without particular military importance.

 

[Feanor]

Meh. If Putin cared, he would of stationed more AD there. Its in his interests to let the UKR waste their efforts on targets without particular military importance.

You can't station more everywhere. That's not how it works. More in one place means less in another. And Russia's supply of top of the line systems is more limited. Every Pantsyr protecting Crimea is a Pantsyr not protecting Russian forces on the ground, not protecting Belgorod from Ukrainian strikes, etc, Putin prioritizes and Ukraine strikes what they can considering their own priorities, and available targets. In the middle of those is the battlefield reality that Russia can't stop all Ukrainian strikes, and Ukraine can't just strike any target any time at will.

 

[seaspear]

There was some speculation that the amphib attacked and destroyed was full of drones and missiles producing a very large explosion when hit

 

[Feanor]

That's rubbish. The attacks are on the soil of the holy Russian motherland; Putin would ignore such at his peril and he knows it.

Spot on. Russia was so outraged by the strike they called a UN Security Council meeting about it, and likely had to rush air defenses there. Putin definitely can't ignore an event like that.

The UKR missiles have successfully crossed Crimea and hit well protected Russian targets. Just ask the VMF why they are moving their fleet and fleet HQ out of Crimea.

Do you have any info on this? I haven't seen anything myself. I know Russia moved ships out of Sevastopol' to Feodosiya but this is still inside Crimea, just on the eastern coast.

UKR could use the likes of Storm Shadow / SCALP on the Kersh bridge as long as they targeted the half of the bridge on the Crimea side of the Kerch Strait. It would be worth the expenditure of 10 Storm Shadow / SCALP missiles to destroy the bridge.

Would 10 missiles destroy the bridge? Or just damage it in a repairable fashion? And are we talking 10 missile impacts? Or 10 total expended? The totals expended, including ones shot down en route is the more relevant figure in my mind, since that's the resource cost.

There was some speculation that the amphib attacked and destroyed was full of drones and missiles producing a very large explosion when hit

It almost certainly had munitions. Whether drones or something else is unclear.

 

[vonnoobie]

Realistically, Kerch bridge while knocking it out would help around Kherson is but one bridge of many supplying forces in the south. Quick look on google maps and some rough counting gives of about a dozen or so bridges (Some bridges being single sections, others multiple sections) along the Siverskyi Donets/Don river system that if taken out would deny any meaningful supply line to Russian ground forces in Donetsk let alone anything that from there heads into Zaporizhzhia regions.

If you want to make things a bit easier for your self, and bit harder for Russians take out Kerch bridge, want to actually get a decent chance of victory in that region they need to take out all of the bridges.

 

[Redshift]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1743988020699603076

Look at this way, If Turkiye not block that minesweepers, Russia will have base to demand Turkiye to open Bosporus for their Frigates and larger Amphibious. Something that can't be move by Russia through their inland canals.

Turkey must stop blocking Ukraine minehunters, ex-NATO supreme commander warns

Ankara insists it cannot allow the British vessels into the Black Sea under the Montreux Convention.

www.politico.eu

This kind of comment, is nothing more then some in Nato and West trying to push Turkiye and Erdogan. Negative sentiment from some in Euro against Turkiye.

Very few people in "the West" or NATO (at least not that I have heard voice an opinion) think that Turkiye should break it's treaty obligations under the Montreux convention, that said you will always get someone saying the opposite and getting airtime, that is the very nature of "the West", competing opinions get airtime even when they are complete rubbish.

To be honest I prefer it this way over the authoritarian approach in Russia and China where speaking out of turn gets you "disappeared" or you "fall out of a window" or just spend time in a "reeducation centre" or have novichok smeared on your door handles or drink a cup of polonium laced tea or have a poison tipped umbrella poked into you until you learn to toe the line.

James Stavridis is a retired US admiral, no longer anything to do with NATO and is most definitely not a spokesman for NATO or ,"the West" he is an influential individual with a platform which he is using to promote his thoughts and beliefs.

 

[Redshift]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1743988020699603076

Look at this way, If Turkiye not block that minesweepers, Russia will have base to demand Turkiye to open Bosporus for their Frigates and larger Amphibious. Something that can't be move by Russia through their inland canals.

Turkey must stop blocking Ukraine minehunters, ex-NATO supreme commander warns

Ankara insists it cannot allow the British vessels into the Black Sea under the Montreux Convention.

www.politico.eu

This kind of comment, is nothing more then some in Nato and West trying to push Turkiye and Erdogan. Negative sentiment from some in Euro against Turkiye.

The guy is a retired American Admiral.

He does not speak for "the West" and he certainly does not speak for Europe.

 

[Ananda]

HI Sutton clearly state the lots emotion touch the nerve on Turkiye decision. Did I say that the poltico article is Western official position ? You can have your own opinion, others can see otherwise.

 

[Feanor]

Realistically, Kerch bridge while knocking it out would help around Kherson is but one bridge of many supplying forces in the south. Quick look on google maps and some rough counting gives of about a dozen or so bridges (Some bridges being single sections, others multiple sections) along the Siverskyi Donets/Don river system that if taken out would deny any meaningful supply line to Russian ground forces in Donetsk let alone anything that from there heads into Zaporizhzhia regions.

If you want to make things a bit easier for your self, and bit harder for Russians take out Kerch bridge, want to actually get a decent chance of victory in that region they need to take out all of the bridges.

I don't think this is true. In Kherson region the situation was extreme, a very large river, and only two crossing points both easy to strike. Russia pummeled Ukrainian crossings across the Oskol yet we don't have a similar effect. In fact Ukraine tends to repair the crossings or set up improvised crossings fairly quickly. And this shouldn't be a surprise. Russia successfully struck Ukraine's crossing over the Ingulets river in Kherson region repeatedly, yet Ukraine just replaced the damaged crossing sections and kept operating it. Even Russia's two limited crossings across the Dnepr were repaired many time and supplemented by a pontoon-ferry system, and eventually by a full size pontoon bridge, hidden in the shadow of the read bridge. Striking bridges only works well if you can do it many times, nullifying repair efforts, and taking out attempts to set up improvised crossings. If Russia had enough Kh-38Ms to hit Ukrainian crossings every week, the Oskol Front would look very different. If Ukraine had the missiles to hit Russian bridges over and over and over again, this would also look very different. Neither side has that ability.

 

[Fredled]

According to this wiki page (yes, not really a source one should normally use), the number of MBT’s donated post 2022 invasion sits at over 700 (no, I didn’t add every single tank mentioned, so according to that page, the number is likely over 750-800).

According to the WP article that talked about the recent offensive I cited a few weeks ago, Zaluzhny requested 1,000 armoured vehicles for the offensive and the US delivered 1,500. In the context of the article, that was just for the latest offensive and by the US alone. There was no indication of what exactly that 1,500 was comprised of.

This Statista page (again, not the source one should normally use) indicates that the disclosed number of artillery, mortar, and MLRS donated to Ukraine sits at well over 600 units (no, I didn’t make the exact count).

The actual number of donated equipment, in my opinion, is significantly higher.

The numbers are definitely large. But the data are not detailed. Is a Humvee considered an armoured vehicle? Is a mortar considered a piece of artillery?...

 

[Feanor]

The numbers are definitely large. But the data are not detailed. Is a Humvee considered an armoured vehicle? Is a mortar considered a piece of artillery?...

An armored Humvee would be an armored vehicle. Just like a Russian Tigr armored car is an armored vehicle. A mortar is generally considered separate from artillery in western literature though Soviet literature will often list mortars and artillery together. Technically most SP Howitzers are also armored vehicles, as are armored SAMs (Strela-10 anyone?). I would also consider the battlefield roles played here. We've seen Ukrainian forces using various light armor vehicles in the role of essentially an APC including armored trucks, MRAPs, and armored Humvees. A Ukrainian unit riding M113s and armored Humvees would have the two filling very similar roles too. As would a Russian unit riding something similar (55th Motor-Rifles anyone?). They're clearly not the same thing, but they're not as far apart as one would think. They all certainly fall under armored vehicles as a category.

 

[Fredled]

That's rubbish. The attacks are on the soil of the holy Russian motherland; Putin would ignore such at his peril and he knows it.

Spot on. Russia was so outraged by the strike they called a UN Security Council meeting about it, and likely had to rush air defenses there. Putin definitely can't ignore an event like that.

I start to think that Ukraine targeted civilians in Belgorod by purpose. Not because of the evidence provided, but because it created an event.
And that's precisely what the Ukes are trying to do: Bring the war to Russia, make the Russians feel their own medicine, shake the public opinion.

Once again, I'm not accusing without clear evidence. I just say it makes sens.
By "making sens", I don't mean that it's not a war crime. Just that, in the Ukrainian logic, they could do it.

The UKR missiles have successfully crossed Crimea and hit well protected Russian targets. Just ask the VMF why they are moving their fleet and fleet HQ out of Crimea.

Do you have any info on this? I haven't seen anything myself. I know Russia moved ships out of Sevastopol' to Feodosiya but this is still inside Crimea, just on the eastern coast.

No, It's the Ukrainians who brag about kicking the Russian Fleet back to Russian shores. The truth is of course different.
Russians did move several vessels to safer location further away, but they still threaten Ukraine with their fleet.
Ukrainian success, while sometimes remarkable, are a far cry of what should be needed to regain control of the sea.

UKR could use the likes of Storm Shadow / SCALP on the Kersh bridge as long as they targeted the half of the bridge on the Crimea side of the Kerch Strait. It would be worth the expenditure of 10 Storm Shadow / SCALP missiles to destroy the bridge.

Would 10 missiles destroy the bridge? Or just damage it in a repairable fashion? And are we talking 10 missile impacts? Or 10 total expended? The totals expended, including ones shot down en route is the more relevant figure in my mind, since that's the resource cost.

10 storm shadows hitting the Kerch Bridge's structure will certainly turn it beyond repair. 3 or 4 would, if they strike the same point. And this is feasible.
But that would require at least 10 Storm/Scalp missiles to make sure it succeeds.

Ukrainians don't have this type of ammunition in such numbers, that they can use 10 on a single target. They are lucky if they have 10 of them in total at any given time.

There was some speculation that the amphib attacked and destroyed was full of drones and missiles producing a very large explosion when hit

It almost certainly had munitions. Whether drones or something else is unclear.

Ukes made clear they had intelligence about the load on the ship. They used the visually massive blast to corroborate their claim.
Whether they are right or full of hubbub remains to be seen.
Yet that would make sens since other boats present in the port were not targeted.

 

[Fredled]

Rumors on Gerasimov's death
It seems that the rumour was not founded since nobody is talking about it anymore.
Some rumours spread quickly that he was killed in an Ukrainian attack on Crimea. But even the Ukrainian intelligence directorate had no information about that.

How long can the Russian keep it secret if it actually happened?

Have some of you seen him alive since?

 

[Feanor]

I start to think that Ukraine targeted civilians in Belgorod by purpose. Not because of the evidence provided, but because it created an event.
And that's precisely what the Ukes are trying to do: Bring the war to Russia, make the Russians feel their own medicine, shake the public opinion.

Once again, I'm not accusing without clear evidence. I just say it makes sens.
By "making sens", I don't mean that it's not a war crime. Just that, in the Ukrainian logic, they could do it.

It made sense to me from the start, and using a strike against a city to draw out Russian air defenses to them strike them was completely logical. Russia did the same stuff with their own strikes, using cheap Shaheds to attack static targets, and then use faster missiles to hit the SAMs that reveal themselves. The difference being the target choice.

No, It's the Ukrainians who brag about kicking the Russian Fleet back to Russian shores. The truth is of course different.
Russians did move several vessels to safer location further away, but they still threaten Ukraine with their fleet.
Ukrainian success, while sometimes remarkable, are a far cry of what should be needed to regain control of the sea.

I trust ngati a lot more then I trust Ukrainian claims. That having been said there's a big difference between forcing ships to move especially in war time, and actually having Russia move the HQ out of Crimea.

10 storm shadows hitting the Kerch Bridge's structure will certainly turn it beyond repair. 3 or 4 would, if they strike the same point. And this is feasible.
But that would require at least 10 Storm/Scalp missiles to make sure it succeeds.

Define beyond repair. Because Russia built the entire bridge from scratch. They can build another bridge if they have to. if they strike the same point they could destroy a bridge support completely requiring Russia to put in a whole new one, presumably after removing the old one. But this can't be impossible.

 

[ngatimozart]

Do you have any info on this? I haven't seen anything myself. I know Russia moved ships out of Sevastopol' to Feodosiya but this is still inside Crimea, just on the eastern coast.

MSM reported this late last year, but the source info is UKR MOD, so I treat it with some caution. Also various
Russia relocates Black Sea Fleet ships from Sevastopol to other ports in Crimea (msn.com)
I did read somewhere that Novorossiysk is now the port of choice for the VMF because of attacks on both Sevastopol and Feodosia. However, it was before Xmas and can't remember the source.

Would 10 missiles destroy the bridge? Or just damage it in a repairable fashion? And are we talking 10 missile impacts? Or 10 total expended? The totals expended, including ones shot down en route is the more relevant figure in my mind, since that's the resource cost.

At least 10 hits in close proximity. The Storm Shadow / SCALP missile uses the BROACH warhead and the only warhead weight I could find for it was on Wikipedia at 450kg / 990lb of explosives. Think Defence have an in-depth article on it, and that explains the BROACH warhead. I think that the cost would be far outweighed by the benefits of such a strike.

I trust ngati a lot more then I trust Ukrainian claims. That having been said there's a big difference between forcing ships to move especially in war time, and actually having Russia move the HQ out of Crimea.

Thank you.

 

[Vivendi]

Ukraine receives the first Skynex systems. Looks like a very useful system, however, the number of systems being transferred is too low to have any meaningful impact. Again, the West is providing high quality hardware but too little and too late.

Analysis: Skynex – The New Air Defense System Protecting Ukrainian Skies, Courtesy of Germany (kyivpost.com)

Japan is shipping Patriot missiles to the US, this will allow the US to ship more of it's own missiles to Ukraine. Japan to send Patriot missiles to US which may aid Ukraine - BBC News

Is there any information about the French/Italian SAMP/T systems in Ukraine? Some blogs claim they have been deployed, but details are scarce.

France confirms SAMP/T air defense system delivery to Ukraine (defence-blog.com)

Norway announced in December that they will provide more NASAMS to Ukraine: Norway to provide more air defense systems to Ukraine (defensenews.com)

Great news of course however Ukraine definitely would benefit greatly for more long-range SAMs like Patriot, SAMP/T.

 

[Feanor]

Ukraine receives the first Skynex systems. Looks like a very useful system, however, the number of systems being transferred is too low to have any meaningful impact. Again, the West is providing high quality hardware but too little and too late.

Analysis: Skynex – The New Air Defense System Protecting Ukrainian Skies, Courtesy of Germany (kyivpost.com)

Japan is shipping Patriot missiles to the US, this will allow the US to ship more of it's own missiles to Ukraine. Japan to send Patriot missiles to US which may aid Ukraine - BBC News

Is there any information about the French/Italian SAMP/T systems in Ukraine? Some blogs claim they have been deployed, but details are scarce.

France confirms SAMP/T air defense system delivery to Ukraine (defence-blog.com)

Norway announced in December that they will provide more NASAMS to Ukraine: Norway to provide more air defense systems to Ukraine (defensenews.com)

Great news of course however Ukraine definitely would benefit greatly for more long-range SAMs like Patriot, SAMP/T.

I actually think Skynex is far closer to what Ukraine really needs. Trying to match Russia's bottomless bucket of Shaheds with expensive long range SAMs is a recipe for failure. Buckets of modern and relative cheap SHORAD is the way to go. The issue of course is quantity. Ukraine needs hundreds of these, not single digits.

MSM reported this late last year, but the source info is UKR MOD, so I treat it with some caution. Also various
Russia relocates Black Sea Fleet ships from Sevastopol to other ports in Crimea (msn.com)
I did read somewhere that Novorossiysk is now the port of choice for the VMF because of attacks on both Sevastopol and Feodosia. However, it was before Xmas and can't remember the source.

Ok but no actual movement of the fleet HQ?

 

[Fredled]

I actually think Skynex is far closer to what Ukraine really needs. Trying to match Russia's bottomless bucket of Shaheds with expensive long range SAMs is a recipe for failure. Buckets of modern and relative cheap SHORAD is the way to go. The issue of course is quantity. Ukraine needs hundreds of these, not single digits.

I think it's been a while since they tried to shot down drones with long range SAM's, (They did it at least once, at the beginning.)
They got Guepards to that effect. Skynex looks like it complete the Guepards, and is more advanced technologically.
I'm surprised that we learn only about German anti-aircraft guns. As if other countries thought these guns are obsolete, WW2 technique. It turns out that in the new era of drone warfare, they come handy.
Maybe it's because Germany has been bombed so much during WW2?
Ukraine has even received projectors to hunt drones at night.