Vintage wrote:

GDB wrote:

likely needing the most training for, the Pzh2000's

Not you, but others here and elsewhere make too big of a deal about this IMO.

The training needed in order to use an artillery piece effectively, is 95% in the locating the piece and the locating of the target and then doing the calculations needed to point the howitzer in the right direction (azmuth) and deciding how big of a charge to use, and what elevation to give the shot (range). All this is the same for every howitzer; be they 152mm or 155mm: ballistic trajectory calculations never change.

I would suspect that proper maintenance and keeping it operational for the duration would be the main part of the training.

GDB wrote:

Not all Russians think the same, though not 'thinking the same' of course is dangerous, hence this hosted in a range of Western papers;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... day-russia

Kind of doesn't matter in Moscow.

Yet we get all sorts of mental mileage out of telling the Belarussian Womens Table Tennis team they aren't invited.

Klaus wrote:

Vintage wrote:

GDB wrote:

likely needing the most training for, the Pzh2000's

Not you, but others here and elsewhere make too big of a deal about this IMO.

The training needed in order to use an artillery piece effectively, is 95% in the locating the piece and the locating of the target and then doing the calculations needed to point the howitzer in the right direction (azmuth) and deciding how big of a charge to use, and what elevation to give the shot (range). All this is the same for every howitzer; be they 152mm or 155mm: ballistic trajectory calculations never change.

I would suspect that proper maintenance and keeping it operational for the duration would be the main part of the training.

Sorry Vintage, what are you talking about, M103 Paladin or some russian type modern systems like Mistra S?
Also are you aware, that Germany will not only deliver some PzH 2000, they will additional deliver some up to date systems, fully integrated with the Pzh2000.

T4thH wrote:

Klaus wrote:

Vintage wrote:

Not you, but others here and elsewhere make too big of a deal about this IMO.
The training needed in order to use an artillery piece effectively, is 95% in the locating the piece and the locating of the target and then doing the calculations needed to point the howitzer in the right direction (azmuth) and deciding how big of a charge to use, and what elevation to give the shot (range). All this is the same for every howitzer; be they 152mm or 155mm: ballistic trajectory calculations never change.

I would suspect that proper maintenance and keeping it operational for the duration would be the main part of the training.

Sorry Vintage, what are you talking about, M103 Paladin or some russian type modern systems like Mistra S?
Also are you aware, that Germany will not only deliver some PzH 2000, they will additional deliver some up to date systems, fully integrated with the Pzh2000.

That was just a part of a post, the whole post is here: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1470285&start=5350#p23296181
I wasn't talking about any specific type, in fact I was pointing out that all howitzers operate off the same rules of physics: the ballistics curve is the same for all of them.

The nuances for any Howitzer, such as how you open the breech, how you set elevation or what color the different powder bags or projectiles are can be quickly learned by a crew being cross trained on a new type.

Vintage wrote:

I wasn't talking about any specific type, in fact I was pointing out that all howitzers operate off the same rules of physics: the ballistics curve is the same for all of them.

The nuances for any Howitzer, such as how you open the breech, how you set elevation or what color the different powder bags or projectiles are can be quickly learned by a crew being cross trained on a new type.

How you keep it operational may not be quite as trivial, though, especially if it's a more complex system than just a mechanical cannon by itself.

Klaus wrote:

Vintage wrote:

I wasn't talking about any specific type, in fact I was pointing out that all howitzers operate off the same rules of physics: the ballistics curve is the same for all of them.

The nuances for any Howitzer, such as how you open the breech, how you set elevation or what color the different powder bags or projectiles are can be quickly learned by a crew being cross trained on a new type.

How you keep it operational may not be quite as trivial, though, especially if it's a more complex system than just a mechanical cannon by itself.

Are you referring to the vehicles that the howitzer is mounted on and/or is used to haul it around? That is no more than a diesel truck, whether it has tracks like the German PzH2000 or has rubber tires like a M777 Portee. There is nothing exotic about these vehicles; they use essentially the same engines as over the road civilian trucks which are maintained by diesel mechanics who know about fuel pumps and radiators and such, they have transmissions that have to be depot serviced, differentials which also have to be depot serviced, and tracks or wheels and tires which would not be unfamiliar to a heavy vehicle mechanic. If anybody has any concerns about maintenance of any part of a howitzer or its ammunition or its vehicles, they could include a sat phone for tech support. I have no idea if they do that though.

Vintage wrote:

T4thH wrote:

Klaus wrote:

I would suspect that proper maintenance and keeping it operational for the duration would be the main part of the training.

Sorry Vintage, what are you talking about, M103 Paladin or some russian type modern systems like Mistra S?
Also are you aware, that Germany will not only deliver some PzH 2000, they will additional deliver some up to date systems, fully integrated with the Pzh2000.

That was just a part of a post, the whole post is here: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1470285&start=5350#p23296181
I wasn't talking about any specific type, in fact I was pointing out that all howitzers operate off the same rules of physics: the ballistics curve is the same for all of them.

The nuances for any Howitzer, such as how you open the breech, how you set elevation or what color the different powder bags or projectiles are can be quickly learned by a crew being cross trained on a new type.

Yes and the deploy time of the Pzh2000 is 40 sec and not 40 min, like "your" generation of howitzers. So after move/stop to first shot, is 40 sec, 10 rounds in the first munute, 30 sec after last round till scoot. A well trained crew will all do this in less than two minutes.
Additional Ukraine will get several truck based high end counter artillary radar systems, who are fully integrated with the Pzh2000 system, So while the enemy shell is from the enemy artillary statem is still in the air, the shell of the Pzh2000 is also already on the way to them. Also this system can measure the own granate during the flight and live upgrade the data/aiming, during the flight of the first one, prior impact.

A high end artillary system like the Pzh2000 or the K9 Thunder has not much anymore to do, what you are thinking about.

The whole Russian doctrin is purely based on artillary, and they have high amount of "outdated" systems, still doing the job but also more than enough up to date systems like the Mistra S.
The Russian problem is, the lack of information. So their problem is to find the enemy (lack of reconnacance and up to date drones, as Ukraine has).
And if Ukraine will start a full scale attack with heavy equipment....the artillary will get these data, they need and than you are doomed (as already several times seen now). When Ukraine will attack with their heavy equipment, than they know, were they have to aim.
Russia has more than 3000 artillary guns in Ukraine and the the Belarussian and Russian border.
These have to go.

T4thH wrote:

Yes and the deploy time of the Pzh2000 is 40 sec and not 40 min, like "your" generation of howitzers. So after move/stop to first shot, is 40 sec, 10 rounds in the first munute, 30 sec after last round till scoot. A well trained crew will all do this in less than two minutes.
Additional Ukraine will get several truck based high end counter artillary radar systems, who are fully integrated with the Pzh2000 system, So while the enemy shell is from the enemy artillary statem is still in the air, the shell of the Pzh2000 is also already on the way to them. Also this system can measure the own granate during the flight and live upgrade the data/aiming, during the flight of the first one, prior impact.

A high end artillary system like the Pzh2000 or the K9 Thunder has not much anymore to do, what you are thinking about.

Please explain the "what you are thinking about" question, I'm not sure I understand. Note that my post above wasn't about specific artillery systems, or about fire control radars, but I'll respond to your post anyway:

I'm not at all knocking the PzH2000, but the M777 is a very capable artillery piece. It has a unique advantage of being helicopter transportable, and Ukraine has helicopters capable of doing this, they have been given them by the United states.

The M777 requires three minutes to emplace, and two to three minutes to displace. The maximum rate of fire for the M777 is 4 rounds per minute for up to 2 minutes; the sustained rate of fire is 2 rounds per minute. Indirect fire for the M777A1 and A2 is usually aimed using the digital fire control system. It provides rapid and accurate ballistic computation, navigation, pointing, and self-location capabilities,
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/m777.htm

There are other capable howitzers that have been given to Ukraine. The French CAESAR is a SP artillery piece as is the PzH2000, the CAESER can also be linked to a digital fire control system. Ukraine has been provided with digital fire control radar sets since before the invasion took place, and they have been given more as the war has gone on.

Your post came off as a scathing indictment of US aid, you shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you.

Vintage wrote:

Your post came off as a scathing indictment of US aid, you shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you.

Really? That's where your mind goes just by default?

The actual point was that these systems can be a lot more complex than just a cannon with the various electronic support systems and even the vehicle may be appreciably different than what the crews have been used to.

All the better if they are quick to learn the differences and are then immediately able to fully exploit the new systems as that is what they're for!

But even without knowing all the details myself I would expect that such systems are probably not exactly trivial to operate and maintain even if you have plenty of experience with soviet-era artillery already. Many ukrainians do have of course experience with newer civilian technologies (and western ones in particular), but weapon systems are still not quite the same as that.

Klaus wrote:

Vintage wrote:

Your post came off as a scathing indictment of US aid, you shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you.

Really? That's where your mind goes just by default?

The actual point was that these systems can be a lot more complex than just a cannon with the various electronic support systems and even the vehicle may be appreciably different than what the crews have been used to.

All the better if they are quick to learn the differences and are then immediately able to fully exploit the new systems as that is what they're for!

But even without knowing all the details myself I would expect that such systems are probably not exactly trivial to operate and maintain even if you have plenty of experience with soviet-era artillery already. Many ukrainians do have of course experience with newer civilian technologies (and western ones in particular), but weapon systems are still not quite the same as that.

Not trying to take sides in yall's back and forth, but it does bring up a good point: yes, we need to provide aid that can be utilized quickly. But we also really need to start training Ukrainians in complex systems. Ones that'll take weeks, months, or even years. There is a finite amount of Eastern Bloc crap and easily trainable NATO stuff. Going forward, if we want to help the Ukrainians take back Crimea for example, there is a good chance it'll be in over a year with M1A2 Abrams, F-16s, etc. Stuff that'll take a long time to train. Hopefully we have started weeks ago...

DeltaMD90 wrote:

Not trying to take sides in yall's back and forth, but it does bring up a good point: yes, we need to provide aid that can be utilized quickly.

Yes, insofar the provision of "experience-compatible" material mainly from the eastern european allies was exactly right (with that again backfilled by other partners), but as we all know the volume of that is just limited and the quality will not be sufficient in the end either.

But we also really need to start training Ukrainians in complex systems. Ones that'll take weeks, months, or even years. There is a finite amount of Eastern Bloc crap and easily trainable NATO stuff. Going forward, if we want to help the Ukrainians take back Crimea for example, there is a good chance it'll be in over a year with M1A2 Abrams, F-16s, etc. Stuff that'll take a long time to train. Hopefully we have started weeks ago...

Yes, and the PZH2000 and Gepard systems are examples of that. Aircraft are probably the most difficult in part because there will be some conflicting priorities with the limited number of available personnel, but also because those will be the most provocative. But that probably can't be helped at some point. Putin just has to deal with it.

(Nukes wouldn't really help him much even if he actually resorted to them – as soon as he goes from threats to actual use he's in a whole new hell of a situation and even China may not be willing to lend even just tacit support!)

DeltaMD90 wrote:

Stuff that'll take a long time to train. Hopefully we have started weeks ago...

The US started with the M113. They will most likely follow up with the M109..

If the PZH2000 are on the way, then logically, the Leopard tanks would follow (I'm assuming that the two have the chassis in common).

It's incremental learning as well as building up spares inventory and maintenance experience.

bt

If what they say is true, that the fight in the east will be an artilery duel, then with the 155s the Ukrainian have will out range the Russian.

Then the only concern would be to protect the 155 batteries from Russian aircrafts. So look to western made mid to high altitude SAM systems as the next step of escalation. The SAMs are also more useful in shooting down cruise missiles.

bt

It would definitely be nice to get Ukraine away from its Russian/Soviet aircraft and into Western stuff, but that will take time. But then we have to start somewhere.

The Soviet stuff won’t be around forever.

That said as far as I’m aware nobody is offering western planes at the moment, and besides Putin will throw a big tantrum over that.

I'm wondering how the kamakazee drones are doing. When I first learned about them, they seemed like a game changer. Being able to be launched and picking off tanks/arty/etc one by one. But I recently saw a video of one... They missed the Russian soldiers and merely scared them away.

Now I really do feel for the Russian troops, wrong as they are, but I was hoping these drones would be more lethal and accurate. Sample size is one, of course, but I was disappointed

Vintage wrote:

T4thH wrote:

Yes and the deploy time of the Pzh2000 is 40 sec and not 40 min, like "your" generation of howitzers. So after move/stop to first shot, is 40 sec, 10 rounds in the first munute, 30 sec after last round till scoot. A well trained crew will all do this in less than two minutes.
Additional Ukraine will get several truck based high end counter artillary radar systems, who are fully integrated with the Pzh2000 system, So while the enemy shell is from the enemy artillary statem is still in the air, the shell of the Pzh2000 is also already on the way to them. Also this system can measure the own granate during the flight and live upgrade the data/aiming, during the flight of the first one, prior impact.

A high end artillary system like the Pzh2000 or the K9 Thunder has not much anymore to do, what you are thinking about.

Please explain the "what you are thinking about" question, I'm not sure I understand. Note that my post above wasn't about specific artillery systems, or about fire control radars, but I'll respond to your post anyway:

I'm not at all knocking the PzH2000, but the M777 is a very capable artillery piece. It has a unique advantage of being helicopter transportable, and Ukraine has helicopters capable of doing this, they have been given them by the United states.

The M777 requires three minutes to emplace, and two to three minutes to displace. The maximum rate of fire for the M777 is 4 rounds per minute for up to 2 minutes; the sustained rate of fire is 2 rounds per minute. Indirect fire for the M777A1 and A2 is usually aimed using the digital fire control system. It provides rapid and accurate ballistic computation, navigation, pointing, and self-location capabilities,
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/m777.htm

There are other capable howitzers that have been given to Ukraine. The French CAESAR is a SP artillery piece as is the PzH2000, the CAESER can also be linked to a digital fire control system. Ukraine has been provided with digital fire control radar sets since before the invasion took place, and they have been given more as the war has gone on.

Ukrainians already had a very interesting homegrown GIS system for artillery that can integrate all kinds of pieces and sensors into a huge single "battery" shooting mostly from dispersed positions to prevent accurate counter-battery fire and aircraft finding massed positions.

https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status ... 0313433088

That's probably what's giving them the edge rather than the individual guns actually making the shots but SP guns are definitely an advantage over towed. Ukrainians lost a lot guns in the Donbass war because of lack of prime movers, I can see them preferring SP over towed whenever possible.

Of course, in the current situation they'll take almost anything you throw at them.

bikerthai wrote:

If what they say is true, that the fight in the east will be an artilery duel, then with the 155s the Ukrainian have will out range the Russian.

Then the only concern would be to protect the 155 batteries from Russian aircrafts. So look to western made mid to high altitude SAM systems as the next step of escalation. The SAMs are also more useful in shooting down cruise missiles.

bt

The Russians have a real problem with intelligence gathering; they don't seem to have the ability to gather live intelligence and act upon that information; hence they usually seem to target fixed installations, and on occasion, whatever mobile asset that hasn't relocated in enough time.

In addition, the Russian Air Force doesn't seem willing to risk their aircraft; the majority of the observed operations involve Russian Air Force strategic bombers lobbing missiles at Ukraine from well within Russian air space, and if Russian Air Force aircraft do cross into Ukraine to attack, they generally take safe targets for them such as Mariupol, where the Ukrainians have no air defence.

Even then, the Russian pilots remain skittish, preferring drop their payloads and then bugging out ASAP. They don't do any patrolling over Ukrainian territory at all it seems, no CAP (combat air patrol). This means that unless the Russians have a specific target they want to hit, Ukrainian forces can move around relatively well without fear of being discovered by Russian aircraft.

The problem is that the Russians are running out of long range missiles to conduct said attacks, and have no ability to replenish their stocks due to sanctions.

Finally, the Ukrainians have adopted shoot and scoot operations with their artillery, along with dispersed artillery support. When they shell a target, they do so from dispersed positions from all directions from a variety of guns and mortars, and due to the limits of Russian counter battery technology, the Russians can't effectively target every single position; their counter battery technology makes the assumption that enemy artillery is shooting from concentrated positions from one direction and stays there while they attack a position.

The Ukrainians have the technology and doctrine to shell Russian positions from dispersed locations from a variety of different types of guns and mortars of all sizes, dispersed across a large geographical area, and is capable of bringing them all together to shoot at a position with every round from every gun hitting at about the same time. Then, after each gun has fired a few rounds, the Ukrainians then bug out and go to another firing position, and repeat the process all over again.

DeltaMD90 wrote:

But I recently saw a video of one... They missed the Russian soldiers and merely scared them away.

I thought the same also. But there were some comments on the Daily Kos that noted that the target was a dug out machine gun bunker (hidden by camo?). So the target was the gun port of the bunker and not the soldiers.

There was another article (can't remember the origin) that said the 600 have not arrived yet. And that the 600 could actually be reused if no target is available.

bt

https://mobile.twitter.com/NotWoofers/s ... 9166024707

Never saw this footage. Interesting that Chinese state media is showing their viewers how bad things are going for Russian forces.

GDB wrote:

Another video from this excellent channel, about foreign aid, Lend Lease and what it means in practical terms;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=va8VTrNl_xY

The irony being that the program had previously been used to boost the Soviet Union to defeat Hitler, now it's being used to boost Ukraine to defeat Russia and Putin...!

alberchico wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1524351169166024707

Never saw this footage. Interesting that Chinese state media is showing their viewers how bad things are going for Russian forces.

In a way I guess the idea is to bolster the thinking that China is on another level, but if you think about it, you could also deduce that maybe the Chinese military is similar to the Russian one...

Aesma wrote:

alberchico wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1524351169166024707

Never saw this footage. Interesting that Chinese state media is showing their viewers how bad things are going for Russian forces.

In a way I guess the idea is to bolster the thinking that China is on another level, but if you think about it, you could also deduce that maybe the Chinese military is similar to the Russian one...

On a side note, I believe it's the first time I watch a non-Russian footage taken inside the occupied area. To me it was more interesting to see the coming and going of vehicles than the turret launch that was just another occurrence of a Russian tank dying. This footage was an opportunity to gain a little inside look at what's happening in these areas. While we tend to focus on the military events, I'm really wondering what the Russians are doing in the occupied territories. We know what happened in Bucha, I have read somewhere about the fact that the Russians had lists of people they would arrest once they get in Ukraine, I have read that they have already deported hundreds of thousands of people from Ukraine to Russia, separating children from their parents in the process. I'm wondering what are the actions undertaken to try to support the people still living in the occupied territories. They will hopefully be liberated sooner rather than later.

Reading through all the problems that the Russians are encountering, it's like fate has dealt an Operation Barborossa reverse uno card to the Russians. The day Ukraine ultimately wins will always be remembered as the polar opposite of May 9th. By that time, May 9th will be all that the Russians will have left to pretend to celebrate.

alberchico wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1524351169166024707

Never saw this footage. Interesting that Chinese state media is showing their viewers how bad things are going for Russian forces.

The location is significant; see this Twitter thread:

https://twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/ ... 5539393539

Basically, it's deep within Russian-controlled territory; 100km away from the front lines, 13km away from the Russian border in what is claimed as separatist territory since 2014. Supposedly 'safe'.

And yet, we have footage of a Russian tank joining the Turret Tossing Olympics and sending it's turret sky high.

So how on earth did the Ukrainians blow up a tank this far inside separatist territory? They don't have any artillery that can reach that far, and there's no obvious sign in the video of incoming fire. Either Ukrainian special forces deep within hostile territory with anti-tank missiles or using IED's and anti-tank mines, or Ukrainian UAV's dropping bombs.

By now we are all used to staggering Russian losses, but this one might take the cake:

The better part of a Russian army battalion—50 or so vehicles and up to a thousand troops—in recent days tried to cross a pontoon bridge spanning the Siverskyi Donets River, running west to east between the separatist provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine.

Ukrainian artillery caught them at the river bank—and destroyed them. The rapid destruction of around three dozen tanks and other armored vehicles, along with the bridge itself, underscores Russia’s deepening woes as its troops try, and fail, to make meaningful gains in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2 ... rn-ukraine

I've read a bunch of Russian cope saying these are actually Ukrainian losses. Once the "O"s on the tanks were pointed out, it was of course said the Ukrainians painted them on. Right...

I believe the coordinates are at 48.950284, 38.226420 for anyone that wants to look around (Russians were crossing from west to east). The way the destroyed tanks are pointing suggests that they were going from Russian held to Ukrainian held territory, as if the absurd Russian cope needs debunking

ThePointblank wrote:

So how on earth did the Ukrainians blow up a tank this far inside separatist territory?

Down thread, one of the commentor said the Chinese journalist who took the video was warned of snipers on that stretch of the road.

So possible IED by partisans or SF?

bt

Putin not looking so good.
https://nypost.com/2022/05/11/putin-see ... ckey-game/

DeltaMD90 wrote:

I believe the coordinates are at 48.950284, 38.226420 for anyone that wants to look around (Russians were crossing from west to east.

Good call, you're right on.
I started searching the Donets around Bilohorivka in GE, but gave up because I thought I'd never find a place that I could be sure of.
But the spot you have called out is undoubtedly the right place, everything lines up.

Just read a thread about the battle of the pontoon bridges.

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2022/5/1 ... hey-failed

You would think they would have secured far bank with an amphibious or helo assault before throwing the bridges across.

But with Ukrainian drones and artilery in play because the Russian Air Force can not suppress the artilery, they would have to extend that bridgehead pretty far to avoid being shelled.

It would have been a difficult operation either way, but with inept planning and insufficient forces it became a disaster.


bt

Can someone give an explanation to the contrasting situation between what happened in the east compared to what happened in the south ? Is it that the war in the east was going on since 2014, so Ukraine has better soldiers there, more infrastructure, etc. ?

You would think defending the south should be easier, with the two choke points south and north of Crimea.

Aesma wrote:

Can someone give an explanation to the contrasting situation between what happened in the east compared to what happened in the south ? Is it that the war in the east was going on since 2014, so Ukraine has better soldiers there, more infrastructure, etc. ?

You would think defending the south should be easier, with the two choke points south and north of Crimea.

The Russians have their focus on Donbas. I believe that their thinking is that if they can push back the Ukrainians to the borders of Luhansk and Donetsk provinces, they can claim that that was their goal all along, and try to give away territory in the south for a peace agreement.

They gave up the Kiev offensive, and they gave up the Khariv offensive, the weight of their army is now deployed around Izyum - Severodonetsk, and they are getting set back there almost as much as they advance.

Well they don't gain much territory in the places you say they're focusing on, meanwhile they got Mariupol and Kherson where they're not focussing ? And now the Russians in Kherson are asking for annexation to Russia, so it doesn't seem logical.

Aesma wrote:

Well they don't gain much territory in the places you say they're focusing on, meanwhile they got Mariupol and Kherson where they're not focussing ? And now the Russians in Kherson are asking for annexation to Russia, so it doesn't seem logical.

They took Mariupol and Kherson in the first days of the invasion because they were able to advance from Crimea as well as from the East. In Kherson's case, a Ukrainian General in charge of the defense had Russian loyalties.

Zelenskyy Dismisses Two Ukrainian Officers, Describes Them As “Traitors” – On Thursday night, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy issued a statement announcing that he had dismissed two top Ukrainian generals, slamming them as “antiheroes.”
https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/04/exp ... -generals/

Aesma wrote:

Is it that the war in the east was going on since 2014, so Ukraine has better soldiers there, more infrastructure, etc. ?

Better soldiers as in regulars as opposed to territorial defense, and lots more of them. Infrastructure as in trenches and fortifications.

Why not in the Kherson area? Probably because they don't have enough money or manpower to fortify that region as well. Note that the Kherson/Odessa front is subjected to Naval assault. So fixed fortification potentially can be outflanked by sea landing.

Right now taking Kherson may be tempting, but the Russian would have blown the bridge and you would have to maneuver east anyway.

bt

We'll see what the plan is, if there is one. But losing all your coastline seems much worse to me than losing the Donbass.

Aesma wrote:

We'll see what the plan is, if there is one. But losing all your coastline seems much worse to me than losing the Donbass.

It's one of those what-ifs that will be studied in history

So far, by happenstance, the Kherson front was the most quiet of the four (Kyiv, Karkiv, Donbas including Mariupo.)

bt

bikerthai wrote:

Aesma wrote:

We'll see what the plan is, if there is one. But losing all your coastline seems much worse to me than losing the Donbass.

It's one of those what-ifs that will be studied in history

So far, by happenstance, the Kherson front was the most quiet of the four (Kyiv, Karkiv, Donbas including Mariupo.)

bt

Sorry, but the Kherson frontline was never really quit. It was even the first one, where the Russian offense has miserably failed. Kherson was also the first big target, Russia has reached (and the only one till now).The offense was pretty well going on, Russia had reached Mykolaiv, the second target, where they were already half the way to encircle them, when the offense failed and Russian units have been pushed back to Kherson. Kherson airport is one of the biggest disasters of the Russian army. Something like 19 times they have placed units there and 19 times (minimum) they have been slaughtered by artillery. They have lost dozens of helicopters and hundreds of tanks/trucks/artillary/MRLS there and high amount of other equipment and soldieres. Nowhere they got so far as around Kherson to half of the way to Odessa at begin of the war, and nowhere they have been so early forced back.

Now we know why russians are stealing washer and dryers!!

“Russia is resorting to putting computer chips from dishwashers and refrigerators in tanks due to US sanctions, official says”

We have reports from Ukrainians that when they find “Russian military equipment on the ground, it's filled with semiconductors that they took out of dishwashers and refrigerators," commerce secretary Gina Raimondo told the Senate Committee on Appropriations on Wednesday.“

I saw a meme on Reddit that had the tank names T-72M as Maytag, T72LG, T-72S as Samsung and etc…. Haha

I foresee a huge market in Ukraine once the war is over. So much to rebuild, replace in housing, appliances, clothing. I just hope China and India are punished by not being allowed in.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-resor ... 28364.html

I guess the definition of "dual use" might expand, causing headaches.

This fascinating article from 1987 written by a former West German chancellor explains the Russian mindset. I think his views are mostly correct, but very politically incorrect to say out loud.

https://mobile.twitter.com/WeLoveNATO/s ... 1083881472

The full article is in German but google should auto translate it just fine:

https://de.style.yahoo.com/style/35-jah ... ccounter=2

Putin reacts in a quite disheveled way after Finland and Sweden expressed their wish to join NATO.

If these two countries joining NATO is soooo terrible for Russia...

...I propose a deal:

"Dear Vladimir: We peace-loving Scandinavians will not join NATO if you'll withdraw all your troops from Ukraine, including Donbas and Crimea. Are ten days enough?"

tomcat wrote:

Aesma wrote:

alberchico wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1524351169166024707

Never saw this footage. Interesting that Chinese state media is showing their viewers how bad things are going for Russian forces.

In a way I guess the idea is to bolster the thinking that China is on another level, but if you think about it, you could also deduce that maybe the Chinese military is similar to the Russian one...

On a side note, I believe it's the first time I watch a non-Russian footage taken inside the occupied area. To me it was more interesting to see the coming and going of vehicles than the turret launch that was just another occurrence of a Russian tank dying. This footage was an opportunity to gain a little inside look at what's happening in these areas. While we tend to focus on the military events, I'm really wondering what the Russians are doing in the occupied territories. We know what happened in Bucha, I have read somewhere about the fact that the Russians had lists of people they would arrest once they get in Ukraine, I have read that they have already deported hundreds of thousands of people from Ukraine to Russia, separating children from their parents in the process. I'm wondering what are the actions undertaken to try to support the people still living in the occupied territories. They will hopefully be liberated sooner rather than later.

One of the things you would not understand from the video, with "comings and goings of vehicles", is that the area that russia occupies since 2014, is now a "total mobilization" fishbowl. If you happened to be inside territories, controlled by terror groups DPR/LPR, you were cooked February 23, 2022. Unless you had a Russian passport, that is -- and even that wasn't a guarantee of safe passage.
Since February 24, 2022, they are pressing anyone they can catch -- male and of military age (18 to 65 AFAIR) -- into "DPR/LPR service".
Social media in those occupied territories is full of wailing -- like they grabbed a jazz orchestra, and threw it to storm Mariupol. Of course,a good portion of that orchestra joined the Aleksandrov Choir, signing a ballad to Russian warship Moskva. (Hopefully, they didn't have a chance to hurt any people before that).

So it's a good insight to what happens if you surrender a territory fo Muscovy -- you live peacefully, then they show up to "liberate you". And if you don't have the wits or opportunity to get out of the dodge -- be prepared to be conscripted on a whim, and thrown into battle to "liberate" other people..

Ironically, ruskie social media is full of photos of women of Donetsk, Luhansk, and surrounding occupied areas, holding 100 000 rubles (luckier ones) or 50 000 rubles. These are "widows of heroes of New Russia" and their reward for providing husbands to ruskie meatgrinder. (not a joke. I had to scratch my eyes when I saw those).

If someone has ever asked, how it looks like, when an AA rocket system is jammed....2x times....

This is the result of jamming.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJmXOpFUyWk

An interesting insight of a man who fled from Mariupol by foot.

It sounds like there are a lot of checkpoints all along roads.
So much for been 'liberated'

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... m-mariupol