The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

GermanHerman

Active Member
The skull was first used during the time of Frederick The Great. It was a Prussian insignia used by a number of units including the Hussars. Was worn by a number of units in WW1 [if I'm not mistaken the Sturmtruppen used it] and also later by some Freikorps units [some of which were former Sturmtruppen]. When the Panzerwaffe was formed in the 1930's the skull became part of its insignia and was only adopted by the SS at a later stage prior to the outbreak of war. There was also a non Panzerwaffe Heer unit [I forgot which] which had the skull as authorised insignia on visor caps.
This is all right but the difference is in the shape of the shield which is specific for different divisions. The combination of that shield and the skull is only used by the 3. SS Panzerdivision Totenkopf.

The thing is that you will find people who follow right wing / nazi ideology pretty much everywhere. That dosnt proof there is as systematic problem in Ukraine or that it's worse in Ukraine then in other places.
 
Last edited:

STURM

Well-Known Member
This is all right but the difference is in the shape of the shield which is specific for different divisions and the combination of that shield and the skull is only used by
Totenkopf? As far as I'm aware that was the only unit which had a skull of a shield as a divisional insignia. The rest - Heer units included - had skulls as cap and collar badges [metal and cloth] without a shield.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Here's a pile of photos from Ukrainian military personnel, facilities, and positions.

Here's a Ukrainian SBU service member with the SS Galitsiya division emblem. Note, he's wearing it not just in general, in combat, but in a filmed event with clear publicity intended. The priest is saying a prayer for those that died at Borodyanka.


Here's a Ukrainian soldier with the Totenkopf patch, photo is from 2021.


Here's a Ukrainian soldier with the Totenkopf patch more recently.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/tnlcwj
Here's a group of Latvian volunteers heading to Ukraine. Note the emblems.


Here's a pre-war photo (note the second one) which shows what is presumably Azov holding a very special flag. Note the emblems. Same as above.


And here are Azov fighters surrendering from Azovstal'. Does the patch look familiar? Probably just Darth Vader's helmet. :rolleyes:


Good thing they got tattoos. Otherwise we might mistake them for Star Wars fans.


Note an AK-47 apparently captured at Azovstal'.


And photos from inside a Ukrainian military barracks, near Mariupol'.


And photos from a Ukrainian army staging area, 81st Airmobile Bde.


Ukrainian soldier with the SS symbol. This is from (I believe) 2014.


And this, also more recent. He's wearing the SS logo, the word "electrician" in Russian, and the word einsatzgruppen in German, which I hope needs no explanation.


There's buckets more where this came from. Let me bottom line this. Ukraine has a neo-nazi problem. They were a useful tool in the '14-'15 campaign but this gave them center stage in the thoroughly undemocratic though occasionally populist politics of Ukraine, and they've managed to preserve undue and disproportionate influence in Ukraine ever since. They've used this influence to try and get themselves mainstreamed, obtain funds from the government, and recruit (including children). This is real. Ukraine currently has a much bigger problem then any current right-wing extremists. Ukraine has somewhere around 200k Russian troops and assorted irregulars that have invaded and occupied significant swathes of territory. Ukraine's economy is in free fall, and Russia is still advancing. Western military aid so far does not appear to be keeping up with losses at the front line, and it's multiple territorial defense units have recently been spotted either refusing to fight, or recording public statements regarding their dire circumstances. Ukraine's hasn't lost this war yet, but very well might. And this is a much bigger problem. But it doesn't change the fact that Ukraine's political elites could have quashed and sidelined these extremists tendencies in the years between 2015 and 2022. Instead they let them grow. What happens if Ukraine does lose this war, end up with some sort of ugly and unpleasant compromise peace, and loses territories? How did right wing extremists come to power in the past? The growth of these tendencies is alarming not in the now but in the future. For the time being, if we see a patch that looks like the Totenkopf emblem, it probably is the Totenkopf emblem. Occam's razor.

On a side note, in a sad piece of irony, it's Putin's invasion that has given these right extremists extra legitimacy. Pre-invasion there was a pretty solid consensus in the west that Azov is bad, and Ukraine reaching for right-wing political supporters is to be condemned, if not actually punished or deterred. Now they're once again valuable in the fight. Unless Russia occupies all of Ukraine, these movements will be stronger, not weaker. They're almost better off with Ukraine losing the war, since that undermines the credibility of the already fairly unpopular elites.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
An interesting take on things. We've heard a lot about arms deliveries and assume that the Ukrainians will be able to effectively absorb what they've been given into service with minimum delays and difficulties ; the problem is training people to operate ATGWs and other type of weapons are far simpler than with arty and other things.


''Tanks and armoured vehicles need an initial stage of personal training and team training for the driver, gunner, reloader and commander,” said Lt-Gen Konstantinos Loukopoulos, who has taught tank warfare at military academies in Kyiv and Moscow. They need tactical training, including test firing and exercises, which cannot be done in a few weeks. The training cycle is at least six months, and that doesn’t change in wartime,” he said. After [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s illusions about winning the war in 96 hours, the illusions began on the Western side,” he added. The United States, United Kingdom, Canada, France, Germany and the Czech Republic are among those who have pledged various types of armour and artillery, and that complicates matters, Loukopoulos said. For instance, out of 90 howitzer M777 artillery pieces sent by the US to Ukraine, about 18 have been absorbed, he said, adding that it is unknown how many of the 12 or 14 César self-propelled howitzers sent by France are in use. For Ukraine to absorb the weapons from the West and make them operational, form the right units, and train them, it needs eight, nine months. It can’t pull active units from the front to train them,” Loukopoulos said. That is the timeframe, he believes, within which Putin must win the war on the ground and reach a negotiated settlement.''

Under the present balance of forces, the general trend is in favour of the Russians. Right now nothing can change that,” he said. After a few months, with training of reserve units, there could be a [Ukrainian] strategic counteroffensive that could throw the Russians out. Loukopoulos believes this could likely be done by Ukraine seizing Russian territory that it could exchange for its own territory in negotiations. Can the Ukrainians create a fact on the ground to counter Russian gains? Right now they cannot,” he said. Whether we like it or not, Russia has the political and military initiative. The West is reacting to what Putin is doing.”
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
If people want to go down the Ukrainian neo Nazi road then they maybe they can explain Russia's neo Nazi problem as well, just to be fair. I am all for a balanced view but this is a side track and playing to Putin's propaganda.

Putin’s fascists: the Russian state's long history of cultivating homegrown neo-Nazis (theconversation.com)

Russia’s support to the transnational far right remains a key enabler of the global movement. In 2020, the U.S. State Department named the Russian Imperial Movement as a “specially designated global terrorist” group — the first time that the U.S. government has taken such measures against a far-right extremist group. The Russian Imperial Movement has served as a catalyst for politically motivated violence from St. Petersburg to Stockholm and beyond. With the Kremlin’s tacit approval, the group has efficiently built an infrastructure that has allowed it to expand its network and train terrorist operatives, as well as facilitate the Kremlin’s war in eastern Ukraine. Russia’s Wagner Group has long played a role in Russia’s hostilities in Ukraine, including alongside Russian Imperial Movement members, and Wagner-linked mercenaries have engaged in conflicts beyond Europe, including in sub-Saharan Africa, the Levant, South America, and the Maghreb. Wagner Group leaders and mercenaries have long shown signs of supporting and following neo-Nazi ideology, including the use of Nazi and other hate symbols on their clothing, on their military vehicles, and in markings left following their operations.
American neo-Nazis and ideologues have also found support for their cause from Russia. The Base is one such. It is a U.S.-based neo-Nazi militant organization with chapters across the world — it has been listed as a terrorist group by several countries, including the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, and has found a home in Russia. Since 2020, the American founder of the group, Rinaldo Nazzaro, has been directing the group from St. Petersburg, where the Russian government has turned a blind eye to his activities on their soil. (Chatter on extremist online channels suggests that Nazzaro may have stepped down from this role since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.)

And a report from the RUSI:
Pro-Putin far-right groups in Russia have gained particular significance in the years following the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula and the subsequent war in Donbas. A mixture of Russian monarchists, neo-Nazis, Orthodox nationalists, Stalinists, and semi-criminal Cossack groups came together as the anti-Maidan coalition, acting in direct support of the Kremlin’s goals and capitalising on its close proximity to the regime. While Russia did not officially send troops to Donbas and other Russian-speaking parts of Ukraine, it did support and encourage pro-Russian ‘insurgents’ in Ukraine – many of whom were part of the Russian far right and the anti-Maidan coalition. Russian far-right foreign fighters in eastern Ukraine were also joined by members of far-right groups from Europe and elsewhere. For example, between 70 and 300 Serbs, most of whom were linked to far-right and ultranationalist groups, joined the conflict in Ukraine on the Russian side from 2014 onwards.
Overall, far-right actors – recruited both from Russian far-right groups and from groups around the world – played a much more significant role on the Russian side of the conflict than on the Ukrainian side, even though international media rarely picked up on this trend. While the situation in the current conflict is likely different, with lower numbers of foreign far-right volunteers joining the Russian side of the war, mercenary groups such as the Wagner Group – which itself has links to the far-right – are active in the war in support of Russia.

So there is plenty of evidence to suggest that Russia actually has a greater Nazi problem than Ukraine and Putin is more than happy to fund and use far right and neo Nazi groups to further his aims.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
ISW RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, MAY 26
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, May 26 | Institute for the Study of War (understandingwar.org)

1653643580905.png

Key Takeaways
  • Russian forces unsuccessfully attempted to advance southeast of Izyum near the Kharkiv-Donetsk Oblast border.
  • Russian forces continued steady advances around Severodonetsk and likely seek to completely encircle the Severodonetsk-Lysychansk area in the coming days.
  • Russian forces continued to make persistent advances south and west of Popasna toward Bakhmut, but the Russian pace of advance will likely slow as they approach the town itself.
  • Russian forces in occupied areas of the Southern Axis are reportedly preparing a “third line of defense” to consolidate long-term control over the region and in preparation to repel likely future Ukrainian counteroffensives.
Russian forces have made steady, incremental gains in heavy fighting in eastern Ukraine in the past several days, though Ukrainian defenses remain effective overall. Deputy Ukrainian Defense Minister Hanna Malyar stated that the fighting is currently at its "maximum intensity” compared to previous Russian assaults and will likely continue to escalate.[1] Spokesperson for the Ukrainian Defense Ministry Oleksandr Motuzyanyk characterized Russian gains as “temporary success” and stated that Ukrainian forces are using a maneuver defense to put pressure on Russian advances in key areas.[2] Russian forces have now taken control of over 95% of Luhansk Oblast and will likely continue efforts to complete the capture of Severodonetsk in the coming days.[3] Russian forces have made several gains in the past week, but their offensive operations remain slow. Russian forces are heavily degraded and will struggle to replace further losses.

SW has updated its assessment of the four primary efforts Russian forces are engaged in at this time. We have stopped coverage of Mariupol as a separate effort since the city’s fall. We have added a new section on activities in Russian-occupied areas:

  • Main effort—Eastern Ukraine (comprised of one subordinate and three supporting efforts);
  • Subordinate main effort—Encirclement of Ukrainian troops in the cauldron between Izyum and Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts
  • Supporting effort 1—Kharkiv City
  • Supporting effort 2—Southern axis
  • Activities in Russian-occupied areas
The full report including sources, is at the link above.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
...
Note that photo is quite old but shows then president Poroshenko visiting a Ukrainian airmobile unit. I haven't been posting various materials related to Ukrainian service members sporting right wing extremist symbols, because frankly I didn't see the value in it and assumed that it was generally understood that this is an issue. But since there seems to be doubt I'll take some time this week and dig up as much as I reasonably can.
Current British army cap badge -
Cap_badge_of_The_Queen's_Royal_Lancers.jpg

The skull & crossbones are from the cap badge of the 17th Lancers, founded in 1759.

It's been used as an emblem by regiments of quite a few armies, since long before there was any such thing as a Nazi.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
It's been used as an emblem by regiments of quite a few armies, since long before there was any such thing as a Nazi.
Was also - as is well known - adopted by pirates/buccaneers and I'm sure there's an interesting story behind that.

And I'm pretty sure this fellow from 1917 pre-dated the Waffen SS and trdhe Nazis
The skulls [totenkopf] were originally a Prussian insignia then over the years were adopted by other units including or mainly the Sturmtuppen and later the Freikorps. In the 1930's it was adopted by the Panzerwaffe and later the Allgemeine SS. Their skull was slightly different to the one adopted by the Heer. The skulls on shield was the insignia of the 3rd Totenkopf division.
 
Last edited:

STURM

Well-Known Member
A lot we still don't know about given that its early days. Did Russia originally intent on seizing most of the Ukraine [with a large hostile population] up to the Dnieper? Was the thrust on Kiev [the Russians never had the resources needed for a city of that size] really intended to seize it or to draw attention away from the south?

One thing's for sure; Russia is making slow but steady progress in the south and the Ukraine too is under a lot of strain despite its successes and high morale.



''While many in the West seem to think that Putin aims to occupy the whole of Ukraine, Russia’s territorial expansion goals officially declared at the start of the operation are not nearly as ambitious. They boil down to establishing control over the entire territories of Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine, which Russian-backed separatists have only partially controlled since 2014.''

''For now, all we know is that the first stage of the war included an ill-fated march on Kyiv and a failed attempt to encircle Ukraine’s second-largest city, Kharkiv. Was it a part of the plan for a broad occupation or a way of distracting Ukrainian forces while Russia was establishing the land corridor to Crimea?'''

''It may well be an example of what British political scientist Mark Galeotti once dubbed the Kremlin’s “adhocracy”. Perhaps there was not much of a plan – just a desire to punish Ukraine for refusing to implement the Minsk agreements, which ended the first war in Donbas in 2014-15 and envisaged autonomy for the Russian-backed parts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions within Ukraine. A week before Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine, President Zelenskyy had called the Minsk agreements “vapid” and designed to turn Ukraine into a losing side.''

''In that respect, the attack on Kyiv could have been more of a punitive raid than an attempt to seize territory. The atrocities exposed after the Russian army retreated from northern Ukraine suggest that they were not exactly fighting for hearts and minds in this part of the country.''

''If this is indeed accurate, what’s crucial for the Kremlin is that at the end of the current war, Ukraine is forced to agree to a truce that will be much more humiliating than what was envisaged by the Minsk agreements. If the war ends with Russia occupying all of Luhansk and Donetsk plus retaining control of the land corridor to Crimea, it will be more than enough for Putin to declare a spotless victory.''
 
Last edited:

Boatteacher

Active Member
A lot we still don't know about given that its early days. Did Russia originally intent on seizing most of the Ukraine [with a large hostile population] up to the Dnieper? Was the thrust on Kiev [the Russians never had the resources needed for a city of that size] really intended to seize it or to draw attention away from the south?
Personally I think we are being naive in thinking Putin's goal wasn't, all along, to incorporate the whole of Ukarine back into Russia.
There was a timely reminder today in Quadrant of the interaction between Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbot and Putin at a G20 meeting shortly after a Russian missle brought down MH17.

"Tony Abbott has almost revived Carl von Clausewitz’s vocabulary from On War. I refer to the well-remembered promise that Abbott made as Prime Minister of Australia—that he would “shirtfront” Mr Putin, the President of Russia. Mr Abbott explains:

Well, after a Russian missile battery shot down MH17 over eastern Ukraine, killing thirty-eight Australians, I promised to “shirtfront” the Russian president—it’s an Australian sporting term for a rough tackle. I had that very robust conversation with him on the sidelines of the APEC summit in Beijing in 2014. With rare intensity, he insisted that Ukraine was really Russian and that their [Ukraine’s] government was fascist or worse—and that provocateurs had brought down the plane.

On the first page of On War, von Clausewitz says:

War is nothing but a duel on a larger scale. Countless duels go to make up a war, but a picture of it … can be formed by imagining a pair of wrestlers. Each tries through physical force to compel the other to do his will; his immediate aim is to throw his opponent in order to make him incapable of further resistance …

Perhaps shirtfronting fits within this wrestling vocabulary. Abbott then writes that Putin charges him with not being a native Australian, and Putin contrasts this with the presumed superiority of his own identity as a native Russian. Perhaps this more than anything shows the nationalist roots of what drives Putin and the significantly different notion of the nation and the state that holds in Australia. Perhaps this difference is due to some of the distinctive tributaries that have flowed into the British experience, from the seventeenth century in particular, and then on into the Australian domain. Mr Abbott continues:

And then he grabbed me with both hands and said something both strange and revealing: “You are not a native Australian,” he said, “but I am a native Russian.” It’s this passion for blood and soil and sacred mission that drives my sense that he’s ready to take big risks, to restore the Russia of his dreams, especially against weakness and vulnerability."

Given the path of the initial attack and Putin's clear obsession witht the issue, there can be little doubt as to what his intention was, whatever the public statements were. The drive on Keiv looked like a decapatiatiion mission; take the capital, eliminate the government and take over the country. Any other explaination neither makes seense nor is consistant with Putin's known ideals.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
A lot we still don't know about given that its early days. Did Russia originally intent on seizing most of the Ukraine [with a large hostile population] up to the Dnieper? Was the thrust on Kiev [the Russians never had the resources needed for a city of that size] really intended to seize it or to draw attention away from the south?

One thing's for sure; Russia is making slow but steady progress in the south and the Ukraine too is under a lot of strain despite its successes and high morale.



''While many in the West seem to think that Putin aims to occupy the whole of Ukraine, Russia’s territorial expansion goals officially declared at the start of the operation are not nearly as ambitious. They boil down to establishing control over the entire territories of Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine, which Russian-backed separatists have only partially controlled since 2014.''

''For now, all we know is that the first stage of the war included an ill-fated march on Kyiv and a failed attempt to encircle Ukraine’s second-largest city, Kharkiv. Was it a part of the plan for a broad occupation or a way of distracting Ukrainian forces while Russia was establishing the land corridor to Crimea?'''

''It may well be an example of what British political scientist Mark Galeotti once dubbed the Kremlin’s “adhocracy”. Perhaps there was not much of a plan – just a desire to punish Ukraine for refusing to implement the Minsk agreements, which ended the first war in Donbas in 2014-15 and envisaged autonomy for the Russian-backed parts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions within Ukraine. A week before Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine, President Zelenskyy had called the Minsk agreements “vapid” and designed to turn Ukraine into a losing side.''

''In that respect, the attack on Kyiv could have been more of a punitive raid than an attempt to seize territory. The atrocities exposed after the Russian army retreated from northern Ukraine suggest that they were not exactly fighting for hearts and minds in this part of the country.''

''If this is indeed accurate, what’s crucial for the Kremlin is that at the end of the current war, Ukraine is forced to agree to a truce that will be much more humiliating than what was envisaged by the Minsk agreements. If the war ends with Russia occupying all of Luhansk and Donetsk plus retaining control of the land corridor to Crimea, it will be more than enough for Putin to declare a spotless victory.''
I think all the "it was a clever ruse all along" theories are nonsense. There are clear mistakes and misapprehensions on Russia's part about Ukraine's ability and willingness to fight. I think Russian leadership genuinely thought the northern front could take Kiev, the north-eastern could take Kharkov and Sumy, and the southern could take Kherson Nikolaev, Odessa, and simultaneously form the land corridor. Phase 2 would then in reality have been a two-sided push both east and west of the Dnepr (note both the northern and southern offensives straddled both sides of the river).
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I think all the "it was a clever ruse all along" theories are nonsense. There are clear mistakes and misapprehensions on Russia's part about Ukraine's ability and willingness to fight. I think Russian leadership genuinely thought the northern front could take Kiev, the north-eastern could take Kharkov and Sumy, and the southern could take Kherson Nikolaev, Odessa, and simultaneously form the land corridor. Phase 2 would then in reality have been a two-sided push both east and west of the Dnepr (note both the northern and southern offensives straddled both sides of the river).
I have to agree. If it had been the old Soviet army it would've been a short war, with a Russian victory. Poland would've had Russian armies sitting on its border yet again. They wouldn't've made the same mistakes as this Russian army has.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
The Soviet army also had the resources to conduct and sustain 3-4 simultaneous drivers on different axis; the operational reserves on hand and the logistics capability. All of these the Russian army lacks. For the past few years Russian planners never thought they'd have to mount a strategic level offensive on this scale.

If we go back tto WW2 the Soviet army at various points also had logistics issues which affected its ability to maintain the momentum. Towards the end of the war it also had manpower issues due to heavy casualties against the Germans who right to the end were still often tactically more proficient.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Update.

Kherson-Nikolaev-Odessa.

Russian cruise missiles launches, Black Sea Fleet.


Zaporozhye-Dnepropetrovsk.

Progress factory in Zaporozhye got hit by a Russian strike.


Motor Sich factory in Zaporozhye got hit. They're a key engine building plant for helos and planes.


Vasil'yevka, Zaporozhye region, allegedly hit by Ukrainian shelling.


Zaporozhye territorial defense using an improvised technical with a Soviet Maxim gun and a DP-27. Some people have wondered why the west supplied M-240s, .50 cals, and Mk 19s to Ukraine. This is why. Ukraine is running low on belt-fed crew served weapons.


We have reports of Russian T-62Ms arriving in Melitopol'.


Kharkov-Sumy.

Russian strike took out a railroad substation in Merefa, Kharkov region.


LDNR Front.

It appears Liman has fallen. We have footage of Ukrainian forces apparently fleeing the town, and of Russian forces raising flags in the center of town.


Russian artillery shelling Krasniy Liman.


First confirmation of Ukrainian POWs at Krasniy Liman. I count 4, though there's probably a couple more past the camera angle. There are still reports of large numbers of POWs but confirmation is lacking.


Some combat footage from Novotoshkovskoe. Rebel forces are assaulting the town.


Allegedly a strike on the HQ of the 10th Mountain Bde near Bakhmut (Artemovsk).


Mar'inka getting hit again.


Destroyed tank, allegedly Ukrainian near Troitskoe, LNR area.


A destroyed group of KrAZ trucks, presumably Ukranian, allegedly a munitions supply column, near Slavyansk.


Destroyed, allegedly Ukrainian, vehicles in Popasnaya. We can see a Kozak armored car, a BMP-1, and a T-64BV.


A flag belonging to presumably Chechen volunteer fighting for Ukraine was found near Popasnaya.


BMPTs in action along side some T-72B3s. This is somewhere near Severodonetsk, possible north-eastward out of Popasnaya.


BMPTs with spent ATGM tubes.


Weapons captured by Russian or rebel forces at Dobryshevo.


Chechen fighters in Toshkovka, LNR area, have found a munitions stockpile inside a school.


Battle damage in Novotoshkovskoe. The town is in rebel hands now.


LNR BMP-1s. Location and context unclear.


A loudspeaker BTR variant flying Victory Flags in Kremennaya.


Rebel forces are in Svetlodarsk.


Russian mercenaries, in Svetlodarsk. The town fell without heavy fighting and is mostly intact.


Some photos from a rebel fighter from Somali btln.


DNR forces learning to use a captured Stugna-P ATGM.

 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Mariupol'.

Captured T-64B1M being taken out of Mariupol', presumably to be returned to service in rebel hands.


Russian EOD clearing the area around the Mariupol' port.


Russia.

More missile launches, Belgorod region.


The Akkerman small gunboat is flying the Russian VMF flag, St. Andrew's cross.


Misc.

English speaking fighters in combat, Ukraine. Location unclear. They're attempting to take out a BTR with rocket launchers.


Russian soldiers allegedly evacuating a Ukrainian wounded POW.


Ukrainian forces launching a Switchblade UAV.


Russian Buk-M3 operating in Ukraine.


M-777s in Ukrainian hands, somewhere on the front line.


Destroyed BS-3, and BM-21. The BS-3 is almost certainly Ukrainian, the BM-21 is unclear.


A BMM-4S (BTR-4 CASEVAC) was captured by Russian forces. Location and context unclear. Based on the intact condition and the V, it might now be used by Russian or rebel forces.


Switchblade UAV captured by Russian or rebel forces. Location and context unclear.


Russian T-72s being upgraded in the field. Note the ERA mounts being put on the back of the turret, akin to the T-72B3mod'16.


A Russian or rebel BTR up-armored with tank tracks.


Toyota Hilux and Land Cruiser, allegedly belonging to Russian SOF.


Russian irregulars, Cossacks from the Don volunteer unit.


Assorted footage, Russian and rebel forces, Ukraine.


More footage of Caesar howtizers in Ukraine. Location and context unclear.


Ukrainian technical, up-armored pickup truck with a Soviet Maxim gun. Location and context unclear but it's likely territorial defense.


Ukrainian formations continue complaining about being left without support, armor, artillery, mortars, or supplies. One interesting complaint is territorial defense units being sent outside their native region.


Allegedly, this is all that remains of the 6th btln 14th brigade. 3 companies worth of soldiers.


We have unconfirmed reports of service members from the Ukrainian 115th Territorial Defense Bde being arrested after refusing to fight, as deserters.


Russian OSINT has created a new resources called War Tears that attempts to track Ukrainian KIA and POWs that are captured or found on the battlefield.


Oleg Kozhemyako, the governor of Primorye, visits Russian troops in Ukraine for the second time. He seems to be visiting units from his region.


NATO/EU & Co.


Romania fished a downed Bayraktar out of the Black Sea. This lends some credibility to Russian claims to down Ukrainian UAVs.


There are reports that 30 NZ service members will be part of a training mission in the UK for Ukrainian service members. They will be training them on the use of 105mm howitzers.


More M-777s arrive in Ukraine, these have their digital fire control system intact.


Italian FH-70s already in Ukrainian hands. Location and context unclear.

 

STURM

Well-Known Member
Italian FH-70s already in Ukrainian hands. Location and context unclear.
I really have to wonder as to how well the Ukrainians are able to absorb the various types of different gear provided to them. Some of the stuff they are getting can be introduced into service fast with rushed minimal training; others will take longer to train crews on. As for arty they already operate various types of Soviet era arty; recently received M-777s and Caesers now have FH-70s.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
I really have to wonder as to how well the Ukrainians are able to absorb the various types of different gear provided to them. Some of the stuff they are getting can be introduced into service fast with rushed minimal training; others will take longer to train crews on. As for arty they already operate various types of Soviet era arty; recently received M-777s and Caesers now have FH-70s.
There are a lot of questions to consider. For example, we know western PMCs are active, and I strongly suspect are acting as mercenaries in this conflict. Is it possible some of the more advanced western equipment hitting the front lines isn't being operated by Ukrainians? How much of the equipment is actually being used in combat? How much is still in training, and will take some time to get integrated for combat? How large are the training missions being done abroad for Ukrainian units? It seems clear to me that territorial defense units have been sent to the front line without armored vehicles, artillery, or even much in the way of mortars. This is likely why we're seeing these public statements from them, as well as large casualties. They are essentially being sacrificed to buy time to bring more units online. Is the scale of the training program and new units being prepared sufficient to halt the Russian advance? Sufficient to counter attack?
 
Top