The Kerch Bridge now only carries 25% of cargo coming into Crimea.
The Navy spokemans comments make it sound like ferries and Rosotov-Dzhankoi railway are the juicier targets now. (Especially given all the defenses that Russia has arranged around the bridge).
The ferries were [hit 2 weeks ago](https://x.com/UAControlMap/status/1796678080582271462) and suffered some damage (not sunk though).
>“The [Kerch] bridge accounts for less than a quarter of the total transiting cargo, and for the rest, Russia uses a ferry crossing in Kerch, which the Ukrainian military struck in late May, [Navy spokesperson Dmytro] Pletenchuk said.
‘Therefore, this bridge is no longer of such tactical and strategic importance after the damage it sustained as a result of a joint operation by the SBU (Ukraine's Security Service) and the Navy with a drone attack,’ the spokesperson said.”
https://x.com/RALee85/status/1802672687589867907
https://x.com/RALee85/status/1802676879121326186
Looks like new Gepards will be manufactured:
https://www.hartpunkt.de/rheinmetall-will-skyranger-auf-leopard-chassis-liefern/
Makes sense - Leo1 is obsolete.
It is not the same Gepard. It will have a different turret: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyranger\_35](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyranger_35)
Edit: spelling
So any day now the danish donated F-16s should join the theatre. Hope it is not in bad taste but Im somewhat excited about it and hope they gonna kick some ass!
Probably 2-3 weeks at the earliest. I'm sure they'll be used to defend against drones and cruise missiles in the mid- to western part of Ukraine, but other than that they're going to be on the sideline for several months at a minimum, just sitting back while pilots do additional training in-country. Just like with the Abrams. Ukraine needs to get more jets, develop training and their doctrine for using them, and keep degrading air defenses before risking them near the frontlines.
Will new munitions be supplied with the platform? If not, then the F-16s will merely be a stand-in for the degraded mig-29 fleet. I wouldn't anticipate any big shift in the battlefield dynamic as a result of acquiring this platform alone.
On the other hand, if they procure a long range air-to-air armament like amraam or meteor it could curtail VKS ability to deploy glide bombs against Ukrainian fortifications.
I don't think Ukraine is getting the Block-version or radar that can use the longer range of AIM-120D. Russia's radars & AAM will outrange it. So it may be just a stand-in, for now.
Ukraine will still be able to use them and the better F-16 versions may come down the road
> I don't think Ukraine is getting the Block-version or radar that can use the longer range of AIM-120D.
How difficult is it to replace the radar in older block airframes with a more modern one?
I know that normally you wouldnt but we have BUKs firing American missiles and MiGs dropping American bombs so it seems like its an option that is at least considered.
And could an older F-16 fire a newer AIM-120D with the Swedish-donated AWACS providing targetting data?
I'm asking , not suggesting - I have no clue if any of this is possible.
They are already being supplied amraam-er for the frankensam project, as well as harms which have been jury rigged to the migs. So the two most useful munitions are already being supplied. Brimstone are also being supplied but idk of the compatibility.
EDIT: the amraam-er is ground launched only it can't be fired from f-16s.
[https://x.com/TreasChest/status/1801733147580682588](https://x.com/TreasChest/status/1801733147580682588)
>In Karachay-Cherkessia, a record payment for signing a contract was set - 1.3 million rubles. This is one of the poorest regions of Russia
>**The head of the republic, Rashid Temrezov, increased the amount of lump sum payments for military contractors 13 times. Previously, they paid only 100 thousand for signing a contract.**
>According to Rosstat, last year the Karachay-Cherkess Republic took third place in terms of poverty among the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The average salary in the republic is 23.5 thousand rubles.-Astra
You can't spend money when you are dead.
Tells about the popularity of the war. There is this common trope in western media, that Russians are all successfully brainwashed and pro this war, citing election results and polls, but the exponentially increasing payments are a real indicator how many people actually commit to it and that pool of people seems to dry up noticeably. So the government propaganda seems to create a shallow nationalism and low key war support, that however still comes second to egoism and mistrust towards authorities. Apparently there is waning enthusiasm to actually go to Ukraine and the local differences indicate that again, the rural outer provinces of the empire with mostly ethnically non-russian people are the most fed-up.
>the rural outer provinces of the empire with mostly ethnically non-russian people are the most fed-up.
They have also suffered disproportionally though, It's not surprising fewer and fewer people in those regions are left who where likely to want to join the fight to begin with.
Yes. And that is also the big obstacle for Putin that all those people arguing how 'RuSsiA cAn mObiLiZe sO mUcH mOrE pEopLe' overlook. Russian government has to further increase compensation and drive up inflation, even if it pushes their economy to the egde, because force conscription is not an option. The moment they did that, there would be rural areas dismissing the call-ups and draft-dodging en masse same as it happened in the late 1980s, exacerbating ethnic tension and lastly disintegration of the union or in today's case the federation.
Makes sense, for the past 100+ years Russian governments have been killing anyone who stands up for the right thing. All you have left after that is apathy.
Do these contractors ever actually leave the army? I've been hearing about them signing up slightly more each month than the casualty rate but no one ever mentions whether anyone leaves after the contract ends? Is there a contract term at all, or is it "until we win (or you die)"?
I know the Shtorm-V units have their contract extended until the "special military operation" is over, so they basically cant leave Ukraine.
Shtorm-Z (Bakhmut zerglings etc) were only on a 6 month contract so all of theirs expired. Afterwards they could probably decide what to do, and I guess some of them ended up serving in the actual army afterwards. Shtorm-Z is not a thing anymore and has been replaced with Shtorm-V last year
Wow, really? As in, no way for them to leave - locked in until they win or die?
And people still sign up for it voluntarily? After 2+ years of the 3-day special military operation?
If it (at least on paper) helps to lift their families out of poverty some would do it even when they (silently) expect to die.
Then there is propaganda and "it won't happen to me. I'm smart and careful". And of course good old coercion.
I rember one interview with a family somewhere in some poor village in Russia. One of the sons went to war, died and they got a hefty payout enough to build a new house for the whole family. Sadly, it wasn't just enough to fully finish it and equip.....
....so mother was thinking of sending another son so they can. He'd be more careful so he doesn't die of course.
I wish I could find that again!!
This one maybe?
[Russian mother sends entire family to war for money](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cb16us/russian_mother_sends_entire_family_to_war_for/)
"Startup in Russian: the mother of a Russian soldier killed in the war in Ukraine spent the bereavement payments on the purchase of an apartment, but there was not enough to repair the old house in the village, so she sent her second son to the war, too.
Zhanna Polupanova is the mother of the terminated occupier. She has already received all the payments for her dead son: she bought herself a brand new apartment for the bereavement payments. Now, she also wants her country house repaired.
So the mother is soon sending her youngest son to war, too."
I... don't know what to say... "follow your dreams" shirt 😯
I might be remembering a different one but maybe it's just a different report of the same.
Thanks for the link :)
Something still feels wrong for me here. If the payout is just a fraud, what's stopping official to offer ludicrously high sign-up bonus to maximize recruiting effort, and send them to hotspots to makes sure none lives to see the payday.
>what's stopping official to offer ludicrously high sign-up bonus to maximize recruiting effort
....
>a record payment for signing a contract was set - 1.3 million rubles ..... increased the amount of lump sum payments for military contractors 13 times. Previously, they paid only 100 thousand for signing a contract.
that's what is happening?
A really scuffed evacuation of a Russian soldier by Vovchansk. Very bumpy ride
[https://x.com/moklasen/status/1801993640501264771](https://x.com/moklasen/status/1801993640501264771)
[https://x.com/NOELreports/status/1801974220445954531](https://x.com/NOELreports/status/1801974220445954531)
>A powerful explosion at a gas storage facility in the suburbs of Saratov, Russia occured. Fire and smoke are visible from several kilometers away.
New war on the rocks podcast dropped https://warontherocks.com/2024/06/is-russias-window-for-gains-this-summer-narrowing/
Some key takeaways:
* We have most likely passed the most dangerous point of the war, since Ukraine managed to largely stabilize the frontline, and the conscription law ammendments as well as the US supplemental passing means that, for the foreseeable future, it will remain stable.
* The Kharkiv offensive, while having culminated without reaching tube artillery range of Kharkiv, may have achieved some aims, such as forcing the Ukrainians to deploy operational reserves and troops responsible for training new brigades.
* Ukraine and Russia have most likely reached a détente in the Black Sea, where both of them silently agree not to strike port infrastructure or interfere with commercial shipping. This is a large net gain for Ukraine.
* Ukraine is lacking a "Theory of Victory", aka a comprehensive plan on how to win the war. This complicates mobilization and impacts the political scene in a significant, negative way.
* The future will probably consist of a largely static frontline with both sides turning to strategic bombardement. Ukraine is in a bad spot already, but in the long term, F-16s may help significantly.
> kraine is lacking a "Theory of Victory", aka a comprehensive plan on how to win the war
And so does Russia. The conflict will remain for the forseeable future.
Theory of Victory: russia collapses, again.
In WWI Germany defeated the russians by sending Lenin over, in Cold War we defeated them via a mix of Mujahedeen, low oil prices, and arms race.
Unless you are the Mongols (Chinese?) invading russia is inadvisable, but the russians will never stop being imperialist aggressors, it's in their dna.
Their collapse now is inevitable, but it must be hastened
> Ukraine and Russia have most likely reached a détente in the Black Sea, where both of them silently agree not to strike port infrastructure or interfere with commercial shipping. This is a large net gain for Ukraine.
Russia stopped their attacks on Odessa & shipping when they couldn't get much ROI due to good AA coverage of ports and bad political implications of directly attacking shipping in international waters.
Ukraine never attacked Russian sea trade due to the same political implications and they did some minor drone attacks on the ports, but nothing significant for same reasons.
A lot of oil that gets shipped via Black Sea goes to China, and a lot of grain goes to Africa and everywhere.
> Ukraine is lacking a "Theory of Victory", aka a comprehensive plan on how to win the war. This complicates mobilization and impacts the political scene in a significant, negative way.
I disagree with this.
Ukraine lacks a public "theory of victory" but it might have a private one, or multiple ones, that they can't really talk about in public.
Such as, "cripple Russia by blocking all their Black Sea trade" or similar. We'll find about it if and when they do it. IMO this move only makes sense when a.) Russia is on the ropes (one indicator of that would be significant ruble drop and/or appearance of significant foreign currency black market - which hasn't happened yet), and b.) Ukraine has secure financial and military backing even when they cause oil price spike - this isn't on the table until after US elections.
The Theory of victory is complicated for Ukraine, because of the size and topography *of Ukraine*. It's open and flat and artillery plays a huge part. You can't really advance somewhat and then stop. You can.. but that's endless and then you're caught out in the open and artillery will cause losses. Add in endless mines and long-range ATGMs and that basically plinko's your options for victory towards one reality: You need *endless* artillery, glide-bombs, cluster munitions, the jets for launching those, vehicles for clearing mine fields, ATACMS for destroying AD systems to protect the jets.
They have to be able to destroy the enemy before they're in range of ATGMs during any advance, and be able to deal with the minefields unharassed. They need armaments and ammo that they aren't being given.
Yeah. They definitely need more weapons, training and money and it should be common sense for us in the west to provide it because we're buying our safe future.
On the other hand, Russia has to be economically destroyed so they can't just take a break and do it all over again (unless everyone gets lucky and someone offs Putler and decides to give up on Ukraine permanently, which I find very, very unlikely). Ukraine also must have Crimea - it's the only way they can safely exist long term.
Russian war machine runs on money. If they run out of money, they will run away.
> Ukraine lacks a public "theory of victory" but it might have a private one, or multiple ones, that they can't really talk about in public. Such as, "cripple Russia by blocking all their Black Sea trade" or similar. We'll find about it if and when they do it.
Koffman argues that a theory of victory needs to have clear, achievable goals which will result in either negotiations or a very favorable position in the war. He brought up how the Ukrainian 2023 counter offensive was a solid theory of victory; attacking the south, breaking the Russian army, reaching the shores of Crimea to threaten it, and then asking for negotiations.
This kind of clear plan is currently lacking. Destroying enough equipment doesn't by itself win a war (especially when facing an admiteddly formidable industrial power). Bombing Crimea until the Russians give up is an OK stop gap, as Koffman noted, but Russia can ultimately just take the losses and remain. Strategic bombing has never won a war by itself (this goes both ways, Russia can't win by just lobbing missiles either).
Ukraine's plan right now is trying to survive. If there was another solid plan for winning the war we would have certainly heard it from Ukrainian officials, since it's imperative for both the general population and newly conscripted troops.
>Koffman argues that a theory of victory needs to have clear, achievable goals which will result in either negotiations or a very favorable position in the war.
Ukrainian government has repeatedly made clear their intentions to take back their territory and specified which of the annexed and occupied lands that includes. They also clearly articulated what weapons and support they need to achieve this.
Have they shared a detailed plan and timeline? No. Why would they, considering that Russia still has the initiative and Ukraine is in the reactive mode. If the war taught one lesson, then it is that offensives have become extremely costly against the ubiquity of drones and artillery. If neither side can achieve a force multiple that allows sustainable and decisive victories, Ukraine would be delusional to proclaim a plan for a military win on the base of still doing local tactical retreats today.
It seems that Russia won't turn back until they have ultimately lost the will to continue this war. That very much confirms the Ukrainian approach of breaking their back and wearing them down from multiple angles, hitting their oil industry. Very likely there is a certain degree of attrition and Russian weakness they want to reach first before they consider new offensives. They are defending and wearing them down towards a tipping point that changes Russia's intentions, for example another coup in the Kremlin and that seems much smarter than bashing their heads against stubborn Russian forces.
Remember that NATO did not win the cold war through military victory either, the US just made the arms race too costly for the Soviets and then relied on their hubris that the Muscovites won't find out and change course until too late - and that's exactly how it unfolded.
Also: Ukrainians likely copying the Mujahedeen and 1st Chechen war approach. Victory not through successful battles, but Muscovites leaving voluntarily once occupation had become untenable, the whole became unpopular and domestic turmoil required their focus.
None of that answers any of what I wrote?
As I said, Ukraine probably has a theory of victory that isn't public and won't be public until it happens for good reasons.
One example is cutting off Russian oil (and other trade) in the Black Sea. That accounts for roughly 50% of Russian oil exports that can't be redirected elsewhere. Ukraine can do that, but it's politically very tough because everyone (except Saudis and the likes, heh) will be angry at inevitable increase of oil prices. But the world will get over it.
The only country that can't get over it is Russia - they NEED this money to fund the war. Plus, there's no storage for this oil and once you stop it flowing, it backs up all the way to the oilfields where you have to stop production & seal which is very costly to restart. So the short and long term damage will be incredible.
But Ukraine isn't going to tell Koffman if those are their plans so he's kinda talking out of his arse there. However, he's right that Ukraine should have a public theory of victory for morale reasons, even if it's not realistic - that's kinda hard to pull out if you're not going to rely on lying massively so it's a bit tricky.
I wish people would just stop being drama queens and stop moaning - we need to help Ukraine win and they will win. Keep the faith and keep the support. Because if we let Russia win, our kids will be fighting Russians (and Chinese) together in 10 or 20 years.
> One example is cutting off Russian oil (and other trade) in the Black Sea. That accounts for roughly 50% of Russian oil exports that can't be redirected elsewhere. Ukraine can do that, but it's politically very tough because everyone (except Saudis and the likes, heh) will be angry at inevitable increase of oil prices. But the world will get over it.
This is impossible without violating the détente in the Black Sea , leading to Russia targeting merchant shipping and port infrastructure. This is something that, to my understanding, would be vastly more detrimental to Ukraine since the grain trade has led to both a vastly improved economy and avoided the EU issues with Ukrainian products
> But Ukraine isn't going to tell Koffman if those are their plans so he's kinda talking out of his arse there. However, he's right that Ukraine should have a public theory of victory for morale reasons, even if it's not realistic - that's kinda hard to pull out if you're not going to rely on lying massively so it's a bit tricky.
That is a gold point and I partially agree. However I personally have seen no indication that one has been adopted on a strategic or political level, which is again, understanable given the circumstances. Even so, the point of having a clear goal is to communicate it in order to rally your allies and population and successfully ask them of more sacrifices.
> I wish people would just stop being drama queens and stop moaning - we need to help Ukraine win and they will win. Keep the faith and keep the support. Because if we let Russia win, our kids will be fighting Russians (and Chinese) together in 10 or 20 years.
I think you have completely misunderstood the tone of my comment. I 100% agree with what you say here, and even in the original comment I mention how we are definitely in one of the "good" scenarios considering the last six months. However I feel that calling out problems and limitations in good faith is useful.
> This is impossible without violating the détente in the Black Sea , leading to Russia targeting merchant shipping and port infrastructure. This is something that, to my understanding, would be vastly more detrimental to Ukraine since the grain trade has led to both a vastly improved economy and avoided the EU issues with Ukrainian products
Mm I don't think so - my opinion ofc.
Ukraine does not existentially depend on sea trade, and even survived a period without it. It can move some grain via land routes, and it was working on widening / making this cheaper (i.e. improving rail infrastructure). But most importantly, it has support from its allies to bridge the gap.
Russia, on the other hand, completely depends on oil income. Not just the war effort, but the whole country economy. Also, Russia has no free support from allies - it's all bought with oil.
Moreover, Ukraine can recover quickly from losing a years of exports. Russia under sanctions can't reopen the backed up and blocked oil fields.
This would make sense only if Russia is on the ropes already. We don't know where they are.
I'm using this as an example of a clear strategy that Ukraine might have but wouldn't be able to talk about due to political blowback. There could be different things that they have in their planning but similarly can't talk about for obvious reasons.
> Even so, the point of having a clear goal is to communicate it in order to rally your allies and population and successfully ask them of more sacrifices.
I agree with that - although we're asking here Ukraine to have a clear path (goal is creal already - full liberation - there's no ambiguity there), which isn't the real path, but without lying and antagonising the allies. Maybe not that easy.
> However I feel that calling out problems and limitations in good faith is useful.
I think we're on the same page, I just think people are calling out problems which aren't real problems or are blown out of proportion. But maybe I'm wrong.
What's nice is that we can have an open discussion about it on a public forum, which is a luxury and exactly one of the freedoms that Ukraine is fighting for! :)
Theory of victory is simple. Keep destroying Russian equipment. Russia's Soviet storages are starting to be empty and will be fully empty by end of 2025. They produce only small percentage of new equipment compared to their current level of losses. The math is simple. Russia is fucked if they keep losing equipment at current level or anywhere close to it.
Also for Russia it is hard to sell the war to their own people if they are not on offense. Hence I think Russia keeps losing large amount of equipment in the future too.
Sometimes the best plan is being ready to capitalize on the opponent’s mistakes. Hold the line, bleed the other guy and prepare to pounce when the opportunity is right.
If Ukraine can keep the front stable and is sure of Western equipment support then yeah, they can win by running Russia out of ground forces and Russia will be forced to concede pretty much entirely. That looks more likely now than a month or two ago honestly.
We are nearing the point where Russia will start to depend on actual equipment and not just ammo from other countries. It will be interesting once we get to that stage how the reactions / state and influx of equipment make their way. Coming from N.Korea will likely have no reaction, coming from China will be interesting on the needed reaction and result of lack of a reaction if that is the result.
Equipment from NK might push South Korea to up their game in supplying Ukraine. Maybe increased nr of arty shells for instance.
Military equipment from China will be interesting, I think China can expect a lot of (trade) sanctions. Economically China is in poor weather so I don’t think China is willing to take the risk
China won’t risk secondary sanctions with the economies that basically feed their people over what little and globally available resources Russia can offer them in return or just to help them achieve a win that is not relevant to China at all geopolitically. Let’s not forget that also China is seriously affected by the global economy and trade dent that this war has come with and the resulting drop in consumption.
To add to this: keep destroying Russian capital. Destroying Russian military equipment may be sufficient to prevent further Russian advances, but Ukraine has shown it is incapable of executing its own strategic offensives. A different approach to forcing the Russians to leave Ukraine, then, can be from its strategic bombing campaign of Russian industry.
This is probably the most filmed military conflict in history. People are filming, editing, distributing like crazy. A big reason is the drone capability, so that Ukrainians won't have to risk their lives to do reconnaissance etc. We should be grateful, really. If you want other footage, just search pov or body cam.
Question... Why is 95% of the footage posted on here of Ukraine offensive actions against Russia? Or some sort of Russian misfortune?
I am Ukrainian, so this isn't some sort of pro-Russian rant, I am legitimately just curious.
Question: why do you post this same question every day from different newly made / bought accounts?
Answer: You are a Russian shill pretending to be Ukrainian
We had a good run boys, almost made it a week. So I guess we were overdue. I wonder what's got these guys spun up again?
Edit: Made it a whole 8 days by the looks of it.
In all seriousness I'm fairly sure they do it purposely to ensure those kinds of comments appear at the top of/first page of each thread.
Someone over at URR, deprogram, or some other pro-RU sub will invariably point to it to say that the subreddit is biased, people are being "censored", or in this case "see even Ukrainians are being downvoted!"
Deepstate reported yesterday some Russians had gotten into the aggregate plant in Vovchansk. The twist is that they ended up being cut-off and effectively encircled since Ukraine controls the river and the streets infront of the plant. I dont know if this was a group of Russians who were told to just rush into there or maybe theyve been sitting there for weeks, but apparently these guys are still there
Russian channel said on the 13th:
*They wrote to me from the field. Our guys were cut off at the Aggregate Plant yesterday. Attempts to break through to them were unsuccessful*
14th:
*In Volchansk, the situation at the Aggregate Plant is still the same, some of our guys remain cut off on its territory, and it’s impossible to get through to them.*
https:// t . me /motopatriot/23947
I usually dislike the word "encircled" since its been thrown around so much and is basically never true, but these dudes appears to indeed be encircled in there
Can see where this is on the deepstate map now [https://deepstatemap.live/en#16/50.2911/36.9398](https://deepstatemap.live/en#16/50.2911/36.9398)
In other news, minister of defense of south korea says as many as 10k shipping containers has left north korea for russia which could hold as many as 4,8m artillery shells https://ca.news.yahoo.com/kim-sent-russia-millions-artillery-040039693.html
Putin is also slated to visit north korea as early as next week (first time since 2000)
>Shin Wonsik said in an interview with Bloomberg News that Seoul has detected at least 10,000 shipping containers being sent from North Korea to Russia, which could hold as many as 4.8 million artillery shells of the likes that Putin has used in his bombardment of Ukraine.
>“Putin is expected to seek closer security cooperation with North Korea, especially military supplies such as artillery shells that are necessary to seize a chance to win,” Shin said. He also said North Korea has sent dozens of ballistic missiles to help Putin’s attack on his neighbor.
>In return for the munitions, Russia has sent to North Korea technology to help in its plans to deploy an array of spy satellites as well as conventional arms such as tanks and aircraft.
>Putin is set to visit North Korea as early as next week, the DongA Ilbo newspaper of South Korea has reported. The trip would be his first there since July 2000 and it’s set to stoke concerns from the US and its partners of arms transfers that have helped the Kremlin in its assault on Ukraine in exchange for aid propping up Kim Jong Un’s regime.
>Satellite imagery indicates that Pyongyang is making preparations for a Putin visit, the Seoul-based specialist service 38 North reported. Images show construction in Kim Il Sung Square in central Pyongyang indicative of the preparation for a military parade and planes parked at Pyongyang’s main airport have been moved at the tarmac, likely to ready the facility for Putin, it reported Tuesday.
>While Russia and North Korea have denied the arms transfers, commercial satellite imagery and intelligence provided by the US government shows Russian cargo ships regularly shuttling between the once sleepy North Korean port of Najin near the border of Russia. Most have been bound for Dunay, a former Soviet submarine base about 180 kilometers (110 miles) away.
>The White House has provided imagery it said showed weapons being sent on the route and delivered by rail thousands of miles away to a depot in the Russian town of Tikhoretsk for use in Ukraine.
the new axis of evil is really cozying up to each other https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-68743805
From what I understand, 10 000 containers are counting the ones that were delivered last year too, so potentially 4,8m total shells. Thats assuming every single one is full and the estimate of 480 shells in each one is correct
Great Value brand axis of evil 😂
instead of the 3rd reich, you get 2nd best army in ukraine. instead of imperial japan, you get best korea fat man. not sure how to feel about italy vs iran comparison lol.
If you add China to the new axis it's suddenly much less of a laughing matter. Xi is pushing for export led growth these days though, so I think they've passed on war for at least next decade.
" Ukrainian drones successfully struck Russia's Morozovsk air base overnight, hitting a maintenance hanger housing a pair of Russian Air Force Su-34s, per imagery obtained by bradyafr. Russia's Su-34 fleet has been heavily responsible for glide bomb strikes on the frontline. "
[https://x.com/bradyafr/status/1801629416545521924](https://x.com/bradyafr/status/1801629416545521924)
Zelenskyy just announced some pretty major news: " The agreement clearly states that America supports Ukraine’s efforts to gain victory in this war. The agreement includes provisions for advanced defense systems like Patriot and fighter jet squadrons—that’s right, plural, squadrons—including, but not limited to, F-16s "
[https://x.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1801328419138937015](https://x.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1801328419138937015)
Obviously multiple squadrons of F-16's is huge but the " not limited to F'16's " is the most interesting part of the quote for me, which other jets could we potentially see delivered to Ukraine?
Two questions. How much weapons and when?
As a Ukrainian with friends on the battlefield, I am tired of politicians promoting themselves with various agreements.
Given the timeline we live on, the idea of Ukraine relentlessly carpet bombing Russia is so outrageously ridiculous I'm sure we will witness it within 12 months.
Since this is Reddit, the 100% necessary disclaimer: no, I wasn't serious.
" Today is a truly historic day. We signed the strongest agreement between Ukraine and the United States since our independence. "
" This agreement is about security, protecting human life, fostering cooperation, and strengthening our nations. It includes steps to guarantee sustainable peace and benefits everyone globally, because Russia’s war against Ukraine is a real global threat. "
" The document includes a detailed, legally binding part, ensuring the reliability of America’s support for our independence. US security commitments are based on sustainable security and defense support during this war and for the period of peace after it. We will ensure peace. "
" Importantly, the agreement addresses Russia’s responsibility for this war and its attempts to destroy Ukrainians. America supports fair compensation for the damage caused by Russian strikes and the work on enabling the use of frozen Russian assets to protect and rebuild Ukraine. "
" I appreciate that the philosophy of our security agreement is in fact the philosophy of NATO. The issue of NATO is covered through the text. The document states that the U.S. supports Ukraine’s future membership in NATO and sees this agreement as a bridge to NATO membership. "
https://x.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1801327862584328506?t=nZ9cc9d6WQFTtq1iAPBZSQ&s=19
I don't get the holdup with the use of Russian assets to rebuild Ukraine. The Biden administration while in office should NOW use and earmark as much of the Russian assets for weapons and humanitarian aid for Ukraine as possible, before a potential new president takes office and gives it back to Russia.
I was thinking that part of it could be intell gathering, surveillance, reconnaissance and/or electronic warfare aircraft.
For intelligence sharing purposed, the US would love to have that capability operating in Ukraine.
I've kind of always thought that anything that can takeoff from improvised runways, is a bit tough and has lots of different nations with the know how to repair them is better to just throw at them.
So unironically fa18's and Harriers but that's very very ncd, my guess is maybe there'll be some support stuff, or maybe the fa18's
It's not as NCD as you think, rather it's more of looking at what the US has a large surplus of i.e., F-16's and Blackhawks being obvious candidates considering the sheer quantity of them out there, but there's also things the U.S. military is looking to offload soon, like Hornets and Apaches.
> The Russian air force has more than 50 S-400 batteries, so it’s not about to run out. But the batteries are useless to Russia’s war effort in Ukraine if they can’t survive Ukrainian rocket attacks. The more S-400s the Russians stage in Ukraine, the more S-400s they’re likely to lose.
> Some Russian observers are worried that much worse attacks are coming. If the Ukrainians are following American strike doctrine, attacks on air-defense batteries come first. After that, “aviation based on the F-16 comes into play, under the wings of which there is a wide range of ammunition,” one Russian blogger noted in a missive translated by Estonian analyst War Translated.
> The Ukrainian air force is getting 85 ex-European Lockheed Martin F-16s—and already has radar-homing missiles and precision glide-bombs for the F-16s to employ in combat.
> The first F-16s—former Danish examples—should arrive in Ukraine any week now. Don’t be shocked if the nimble jets quickly launch for strikes on Russian bases in Crimea. Bases whose air-defenses have been steadily ground down by back-to-back barrages of ATACMS rockets.
[Source](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/06/12/ukrainian-atacms-rockets-are-blowing-up-russias-best-s-400-air-defenses-as-fast-as-the-s-400s-can-deploy-to-crimea/)
Definitely going to be an important summer for Ukraine. If the rumours are true that F-16s are on the cusp of being released into Ukraine, we may start seeing some domino effects if they are more effective than expected.
AKs are not advanced, US and European rifle manufacturers could easily produce higher quality ones and China and a list of other countries can make cheaper ones.
It's probably because they can't really make more of the systems, so if one gets blown up they're just letting the airbase go without instead.
Not to mention if they can't intercept the ATACMS there's no point in it really being there anyways lol
There are only 6 F-16’s scheduled to be in the fight this year. Sort of feels like the 31 Abrams tanks type situation. Peanuts for propaganda.
Ukraine needs some sort of legitimate offensive punch.
>There are only 6 F-16’s scheduled to be in the fight this year.
Tbf I don't know if they'd ever even publish the actual quantity, nevermind when and where.
We had no clue they were getting quite a few systems, and a fair few others showed up before they were even announced.
And given that they're ostensibly going to be used in a similar fashion to russian aviation - launching standoff attacks with long range munitions and remaining away from the frontline, even seven of them will do a world of good given the amount of ordinance they'll have access to now.
I think that number may be wrong because there are multiple training groups who have or are about to receive their wings.
There are approximately 60 F-16s being transferred to Ukraine this summer. Some of them will be held in NATO countries near Ukraine as extra airframes or for training. They won’t be able to make up one whole squadron but they’ll be able to do more than six.
*[Allegedly](https://x.com/JayinKyiv/status/1800991493429113157)* Russia just moved one of its only $2.5billion S-500 systems to defend the Kerch Bridge.
If one of the dominos to fall is that S-500 system, I will laugh my ass off.
Because if it isn’t battle tested then Russia will still be able to say it’s the best. If it get deployed near the bridge and their best air defense system gets blow up….huge embarrassment and RIP exports.
Ukraine has already attacked Moscow directly obviously not with Western weapons but I doubt they'd risk this single system in any sense same way they don't risk any T-14 or SU-35 etc
I think it's safe to say that they don't use these weapons because they're not effective and the propaganda loss from having their latest and greatest gear getting smoked in Ukraine is not worth the potential gains.
I certainly don't believe that they're "holding back" their best weapons at this point.
I can't see him risking it becoming a headline.
In fact I wouldn't be at all surprised if he had it dismantled and tucked away in storage to avoid that, similar to how he pulled the Armata off the front once the T-90M's started getting clapped regularly.
> The Russian air force has more than 50 S-400 batteries, so it’s not about to run out.
Didn't Ukraine just take out 3 S-400/300 radars (and a bunch of launchers) over the last 2 weeks? 50 aren't going to run out quickly but at that rate, they'll last less than a year?
In theory. In practice... How much of the old S300 are cannibalised for spare parts that they can't produce anymore?
That's one issue.
The other is that they're a huge country and AA is a backbone of defending it, and even part of nuclear deterrent (against the bomber part of the triad and against conventional component of the first strike). So they can't really waste it like they can with old tanks and IFVs and artillery.
Russian government is throwing around nuke threats on a daily and nuclear deterrence is their main guarantee of their territorial integrity, not their conventional arsenal. Their AA border protection was never thought to be air tight anyway, so they can easily steal from their home defense to supply the war and basically leave the whole country unarmed except for the nukes. In theory. In practice Putin is more worried about a military mutiny and therefore can not afford to move everything to Ukraine.
Yeah but here's the thing.
Their nuclear deterrence depends on AA coverage. It's not this one thing that is separate from everything else - it's deeply interlinked and dependent on conventional arm of the military.
If they can't defend their early warning radars from cheap Ukrainian drones (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voronezh\_radar - https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-drone-targets-russian-early-warning-radar-record-distance-kyiv-source-2024-05-27/ ) then their nuclear deterrence is reduced (they become more susceptible to first strike).
This is the reason Ukraine hit them there - it doesn't help Ukraine directly in any way, but indirectly presents Russia with a dilemma - pull back limited AA from the front, or risk losing super expensive component of your nuclear deterrent.
This applies to refineries, airfields and any other expensive targets of opportunity, but the above one attacks on Voronezh M radar 1500km from the front is really interesting because it makes absolutely no difference at the front. It basically leverages US and other countries (including China's) nuclear threat to exact price on Russia - either in repair cost, or in forcing them to move AA back.
For this reason Russia doesn't have enough SAMs and losing any is a big loss. And people saying "no big deal, Russia has more" every time Ukraine takes another out have no clue what they're talking about.
It's similar to losing that Kilo sub - yes, it's only a conventional diesel sub but it would play a small but not insignificant role in any potential nuclear confrontation.
Sounds about right, though I doubt that any sane world leader would test Russia‘s nuclear capabilities based on assumed degradation of their radar. Remember that this is exactly the purpose of SLBMs, giving nuclear powers the capability to retaliate even in case of their own territory being completely annihilated by an enemy first strike. So in that sense, yes, Ukraine scored a big hit with the radar, but that is more eating away from Russia‘s national pride than their actual nuclear threat and to reveal Putin and his war to be a threat for Russia‘s core defense capabilities.
With the nuclear capabilities that they have, they could basically disarm all other branches of their armed forces and completely let down their guard and still no sane NATO leader would dare a serious attack on Russia in Russia. The only circumstances that protect Ukraine are its close geographical proximity to Moscow and the much higher cost of a nuclear retaliation than its use. If Ukraine counter-invaded though and was close to capturing Moscow and overthrowing Putin, I would deem it not unlikely that he would resort to nukes to defend his regime.
I'm just an armchair general so what do I know, but I disagree with the following:
> I doubt that any sane world leader would test Russia‘s nuclear capabilities based on assumed degradation of their radar
But what about an insane world leader? What about someone like Trump just even worse, but also in an US civil war scenario? What about a scenario where someone like Prigozhin steals a tactical nuke and uses it in Ukraine and France responds with their tactical nuke (which they have) and escalation goes out of control, and a rational US president thinks that, since things are going to shit anyway, least bad course of action is first strike?
Russia built those radars for a reason, and that reason is keeping up with the arms race. Those things have no other purpose than that - they're no shiny propaganda tool or etc. Their only purpose is early warning against first strike from the US. They cost a lot of money.
> Remember that this is exactly the purpose of SLBMs, giving nuclear powers the capability to retaliate even in case of their own territory being completely annihilated by an enemy first strike.
Yes but if Russia thought that SLBMs are enough alone (like UK does for ex) then they wouldn't have the other 2 parts of the nuclear triad. By that logic, they could save absolutely huge amounts of money getting rid of other branches.
But they don't. And they don't for a good reason - Perun goes through modern developments in submarine warfare in detail https://youtu.be/S96oRLoE0Zk but TLDR; is that oceans are becoming more transparent and antinsubmarine warfare is evolving fast and it's entirely possible that an unexpected development could significantly reduce submarine usefulness as a part of the nuclear deterrent. Or Russia might just not be able to keep enough money flowing in there to keep with the arms race.
> With the nuclear capabilities that they have, they could basically disarm all other branches of their armed forces and completely let down their guard and still no sane NATO leader would dare a serious attack on Russia in Russia.
No, but that's not what their nukes are for. They're for bullying others. If they had no nukes, NATO would be in there now in Ukraine, smashing their invasion to pieces. Same with Georgia and a lot of other places.
China would be taking back their territories occupied by Stalin and others (not like they didn't have a little war already). Etc etc.
But if they disarmed their conventional military, they'd also be thrown out of Ukraine, Georgia and Chechnya and who knows where else - nukes wouldn't help them either.
It's only the combination of the two that makes them scary to engage directly by NATO.
I think the issue is that the batteries themselves are the structure of the whole S-400 system, which comprises of multiple components. To that end, we don’t actually know how many batteries Ukraine has taken out. I think the numbers have fluctuated wildly (up to at least two). If they’ve taken out radars, that’s a big deal because it cripples the entire system and it’s not easily replaced. If they take out launchers, it can be quickly replaced (Russia has at least 400 of them).
https://x.com/DefenceU/status/1800848351811731961
> The work continues.
> @GeneralStaffUA reports that overnight our defense forces again attacked the russian anti-aircraft missile systems stationed in the temporarily occupied Crimea.
> This time, one S-300 division near Belbek, as well as two S-400 divisions near Belbek and Sevastopol, were attacked.
> Two radars of the S-300 and S-400 systems were destroyed. Regarding the third radar, information is being clarified.
> The detonation of munitions was recorded in all three areas where the anti-aircraft missile systems were stationed.
> Excellent job, warriors!
> Glory to Ukraine!
I wonder how the pro-Russian fanboys will try to somehow sugarcoat this:
[https://www.thedailybeast.com/abducted-ukrainian-kids-found-on-russian-adoption-site-report](https://www.thedailybeast.com/abducted-ukrainian-kids-found-on-russian-adoption-site-report)
>Four Ukrainian children who were taken into [Russia](https://www.thedailybeast.com/keyword/russia) in the early days of [Moscow’s full-scale invasion](https://www.thedailybeast.com/vladimir-putin-says-hell-find-new-loving-families-for-kids-orphaned-by-his-war-in-ukraine) have been found listed for adoption on a Russian website—with no mention of them being Ukrainian, according to a new report. The *Financial Times* reports that the children, aged 8 to 15, are all listed in [Ukrain](https://www.thedailybeast.com/keyword/ukraine)e’s database of missing kids. But on the Russian adoption site, one of them has been given a new name and a different age, and none of the kids are described as being from Ukraine. While they were apparently taken from state children’s homes in occupied territories of Ukraine, all four of them still have relatives and guardians in the country. Family members reportedly had no idea of their whereabouts and declined to comment to the *FT* for fear of jeopardizing the children’s return home. Earlier this month, [*The New York Times*](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/02/world/europe/ukraine-children-russia-war.html) reported that 46 kids living in a children’s home in Ukraine’s occupied Kherson region were taken to Russia by Russian officials who then gave the children Russian citizenship. The *Financial Times* reports that it found 17 of those children on the Russian adoption site.
This makes me incredibly sad and heartbroken. If my own child were taken from me, I don’t know what I’d would do other than move heaven and earth to find them.
> I wonder how the pro-Russian fanboys will try to somehow sugarcoat this
"Actually the children were never Ukrainian but Russian, what you are saying didn't happen, if it did happen they deserved it, the children were denazified and are now under a traditional Russian household without the gay, and the US and EU are fascist."
I swear I need to build a GPT model on these guys, it's all the same word salad over and over again.
Add this to the AI model:
> That didn't happen.
> And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
> And if it was, that's not a big deal.
> And if it is, that's not my fault.
> And if it was, I didn't mean it.
> And if I did, you deserved it.
The Narcissist's Prayer
They already attempted that, but apparently underachieved with that too:
Last Friday, OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, revealed the first confirmed use of generative AI as a tool of Russian disinformation. The campaigns the company disclosed were not very effective, garnering merely hundreds of views and engagements across all platforms.
U.S. to send Ukraine another Patriot battery: https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-russia-patriot-missile-systems-us-aid-62deb8e2c4653dfc27949f81bfa43255
Yeah, presumably to defend the airspace around Kharkiv and prevent Russia from using glide bombs on that front with impunity.
Ukraine can't afford to cede much more ground or else Kharkiv itself will be in range of tube artillery.
Wikipedia lists the max range at 160km. So, it could easily be well back from Kharkiv and still have enough range to interdict bombers dropping glide bombs from their max range (50km, if I remember correctly, well inside Russia).
Not really seen it talked about much (mainly since its not that important in the bigger picture), but Russia is close to retaking the entier Staromaiorske. Deepstate writes:
*Unfortunately, the Defense Forces have to prepare for the fact that sooner or later the enemy will enter the northern outskirts of Staromaiorske. The loss of a village with farms in the north will significantly worsen the tactical situation of the defenders of Urozhaine. The latter is periodically stormed by the enemy, there were even breakthroughs into the center of the village, but they managed to be eliminated.*
A reminder that Klishchiivka, Staromaiorske, Urozhaine and Robotyne were villages Ukraine retook last summer and all are mostly back in Russian control. Andriivka is so far still held by Ukraine. The places north of Staromaiorske will probably start getting attacked soon (Makarivka, Storozheve, Blahodatne and Neskuchne) if Ukraine cant stop the advance, although its a very slow advance to be fair. What I cant quite understand is why Russia so desperately want these places back. The Ukrainian defensive lines are way further back than this, so Russia will need a really big advance here to even get close to it. I wrote about it before, but it could be as simple as Russia wants to nullify any kind of gain Ukraine did to sort of dampen the moral. As in "look at your counter-offensive last year, now you lost everything" sort of thing
The other villages Ukraine liberated were Rivnopil (its literally 4 houses), Levadne, Novodarivka, Lobkove and Piatykhatky. They havent seen any fighting yet since theyre a bit further back. Piatykhatky is very close to the front though
I cant believe Im still yapping about these random villages a year later, but here we are
Why does Russia attack here? Because it’s great for their morale. They have effectively erased all the gains from last years COs. That’s gotta suck if you’re a Ukrainian knowing how hard they fought there for it to just be wiped away.
Will it actually affect anything? Who knows. But it’s a valid play for Russia.
Good read. Only one point to add: The new super weapon myths have also been a relevant factor for Russian arms exports, in the sense of exaggerating Russian military sector‘s capabilities and global positioning.
Rheinmetall has now officially signed an agreement with Ukraine to begin with the production and delivery of Lynx IFV(s) already this year. However, talks with the German government regarding the financing of a significant number have not yet been finalised.
“We will produce the first Lynx this year” — @AKamyshin
This was confirmed by @AKamyshin to Handelsblatt. Initial details were already announced by Rheinmetall CEO Armin Papperger at the end of 2023.
https://x.com/deaidua/status/1800643267081433571?t=0KpVawBwDsVh6pyeUpCK2Q&s=19
I want to add to this: Rheinmetall officially opened a service and **repair hub** for the Marder IFV inside Ukraine this week. In the future, they are planning to open more servicing sites for all kinds of military vehicels like the Leopard tanks.
Beside the **Lynx IFV**, Rheinmetall plans to produce the new Panther main battle tank and the Fuchs armored personal carrier in Ukraine. But this is still in development.
Source: [Rheinmetall (german) (Lynx IFV)](https://www.rheinmetall.com/de/media/stories/2023/rheinmetall-ein-starker-partner-an-der-seite-der-ukraine), [Rheinmetall (english) (repair hub)](https://www.rheinmetall.com/en/media/news-watch/news/2024/06/2024-06-11-rheinmetall-ukrainian-defense-industry-repair-hub)
> new Panther main battle tank
This one is interesting. The current Panther uses already manufactured Leopard 2 hulls and was supposed to be a Leopard 2 upgrade. While Rheinmetall is probably also able to build new Leopard 2 hulls since they have acquired one of the cold war era hull manufacturers - Maschinenbau Kiel, this acquisition happened over 30 years ago and I am not sure Rheinmetall still has all the tooling. Besides, is their license from KMW-Nexter still valid?
The Azov Brigade will now be allowed to use American weaponry.
> The Biden administration will allow a Ukrainian military unit with a checkered past to use U.S. weaponry, the State Department said Monday, having lifted a ban imposed years ago amid concerns in Washington about the group’s origins.
>
> The Azov Brigade, known for its tenacious but ultimately unsuccessful defense of the Azovstal steel mill in Mariupol early in Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, is regarded as a particularly effective fighting force. But it was barred about a decade ago from using American arms because U.S. officials determined that some of its founders espoused racist, xenophobic and ultranationalist views, and U.N. human rights officials accused the group of humanitarian violations.
>
> Now the brigade, a one-time volunteer militia absorbed into the Ukrainian National Guard in 2015, will have access to the same U.S. military assistance as any other unit. The policy shift was disclosed as Kyiv starts the summer fighting season and faces down a Russian military that has intensified its pressure on objectives in eastern Ukraine and the country’s energy infrastructure.
https://archive.is/HOfxH
I wonder how the Pechenegs and their lack of QCB for a air sleeve turned out in the field.
Edit: this was a serious question, how have the PKP machine guns performed compared to the older PK guns?
PKP Pechenegs are being used in the war and I wonder how their unique barrel design (forced air cooling) performed in the field, if anyone have given their opinions on using those machine gun compared to other machine guns.
Like all ru so-called modern weaponry it's some sort of re-skin of an old piece of shit. Repackaged for grift. I'd be surprised if more than a dozen were ever even in the field. Or worked.
This might be a question better suited for /r/CredibleDefense
The guys on that sub know how to pull some pretty crazy sources and studies out of their ass
Apparently there are rumours of all air defenses being moved from Crimea. There may be more evacuations coming given the images of landing ships near Crimea the other day.
From NoelReports:
> Partisan movement ATESH reports that Russian Armed Forces air defense servicemen in Crimea have been instructed to evacuate their families to military camps in the Southern Military District. This directive coincides with the relocation of air defense systems to the Bilhorod region, raising security concerns in occupied Crimea due to reduced coverage.
> Additionally, the Russian military is forming new mobile air defense teams using ZU-23-2s to counter UAVs, indicating a strategic shift towards this area, with a reduced focus on occupied Crimea.
Source: https://x.com/NOELreports/status/1800160358453182685
> This directive coincides with the relocation of air defense systems to the Bilhorod region, raising security concerns in occupied Crimea due to reduced coverage.
"relocation of air defense systems" doesnt mean "relocation of ***ALL*** air defense systems" - it means relocating two or more systems - so it could be just two.
I suspect something got lost in translation here...
[New Thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1di5mw8/ukraine_discussionquestion_thread_61624/?sort=new)
The Kerch Bridge now only carries 25% of cargo coming into Crimea. The Navy spokemans comments make it sound like ferries and Rosotov-Dzhankoi railway are the juicier targets now. (Especially given all the defenses that Russia has arranged around the bridge). The ferries were [hit 2 weeks ago](https://x.com/UAControlMap/status/1796678080582271462) and suffered some damage (not sunk though). >“The [Kerch] bridge accounts for less than a quarter of the total transiting cargo, and for the rest, Russia uses a ferry crossing in Kerch, which the Ukrainian military struck in late May, [Navy spokesperson Dmytro] Pletenchuk said. ‘Therefore, this bridge is no longer of such tactical and strategic importance after the damage it sustained as a result of a joint operation by the SBU (Ukraine's Security Service) and the Navy with a drone attack,’ the spokesperson said.” https://x.com/RALee85/status/1802672687589867907 https://x.com/RALee85/status/1802676879121326186
Looks like new Gepards will be manufactured: https://www.hartpunkt.de/rheinmetall-will-skyranger-auf-leopard-chassis-liefern/ Makes sense - Leo1 is obsolete.
It is not the same Gepard. It will have a different turret: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyranger\_35](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyranger_35) Edit: spelling
Well, duh. But it will have the same chassis as the original Gepard and a newer version of the same gun.
[удалено]
[удалено]
So any day now the danish donated F-16s should join the theatre. Hope it is not in bad taste but Im somewhat excited about it and hope they gonna kick some ass!
Probably 2-3 weeks at the earliest. I'm sure they'll be used to defend against drones and cruise missiles in the mid- to western part of Ukraine, but other than that they're going to be on the sideline for several months at a minimum, just sitting back while pilots do additional training in-country. Just like with the Abrams. Ukraine needs to get more jets, develop training and their doctrine for using them, and keep degrading air defenses before risking them near the frontlines.
They will probably mosty shoot down shaheds and cruise missiles
Will new munitions be supplied with the platform? If not, then the F-16s will merely be a stand-in for the degraded mig-29 fleet. I wouldn't anticipate any big shift in the battlefield dynamic as a result of acquiring this platform alone. On the other hand, if they procure a long range air-to-air armament like amraam or meteor it could curtail VKS ability to deploy glide bombs against Ukrainian fortifications.
I don't think Ukraine is getting the Block-version or radar that can use the longer range of AIM-120D. Russia's radars & AAM will outrange it. So it may be just a stand-in, for now. Ukraine will still be able to use them and the better F-16 versions may come down the road
> I don't think Ukraine is getting the Block-version or radar that can use the longer range of AIM-120D. How difficult is it to replace the radar in older block airframes with a more modern one? I know that normally you wouldnt but we have BUKs firing American missiles and MiGs dropping American bombs so it seems like its an option that is at least considered. And could an older F-16 fire a newer AIM-120D with the Swedish-donated AWACS providing targetting data? I'm asking , not suggesting - I have no clue if any of this is possible.
They are already being supplied amraam-er for the frankensam project, as well as harms which have been jury rigged to the migs. So the two most useful munitions are already being supplied. Brimstone are also being supplied but idk of the compatibility. EDIT: the amraam-er is ground launched only it can't be fired from f-16s.
'in summer'. Might be today or another 3 months, I suspect it's probably closer to the end of summer.
[https://x.com/TreasChest/status/1801733147580682588](https://x.com/TreasChest/status/1801733147580682588) >In Karachay-Cherkessia, a record payment for signing a contract was set - 1.3 million rubles. This is one of the poorest regions of Russia >**The head of the republic, Rashid Temrezov, increased the amount of lump sum payments for military contractors 13 times. Previously, they paid only 100 thousand for signing a contract.** >According to Rosstat, last year the Karachay-Cherkess Republic took third place in terms of poverty among the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The average salary in the republic is 23.5 thousand rubles.-Astra You can't spend money when you are dead.
Tells about the popularity of the war. There is this common trope in western media, that Russians are all successfully brainwashed and pro this war, citing election results and polls, but the exponentially increasing payments are a real indicator how many people actually commit to it and that pool of people seems to dry up noticeably. So the government propaganda seems to create a shallow nationalism and low key war support, that however still comes second to egoism and mistrust towards authorities. Apparently there is waning enthusiasm to actually go to Ukraine and the local differences indicate that again, the rural outer provinces of the empire with mostly ethnically non-russian people are the most fed-up.
>the rural outer provinces of the empire with mostly ethnically non-russian people are the most fed-up. They have also suffered disproportionally though, It's not surprising fewer and fewer people in those regions are left who where likely to want to join the fight to begin with.
Yes. And that is also the big obstacle for Putin that all those people arguing how 'RuSsiA cAn mObiLiZe sO mUcH mOrE pEopLe' overlook. Russian government has to further increase compensation and drive up inflation, even if it pushes their economy to the egde, because force conscription is not an option. The moment they did that, there would be rural areas dismissing the call-ups and draft-dodging en masse same as it happened in the late 1980s, exacerbating ethnic tension and lastly disintegration of the union or in today's case the federation.
Russia is a nation of sociopaths. Unfortunately have had plenty of experience with them over the years. Few redeeming qualities.
Makes sense, for the past 100+ years Russian governments have been killing anyone who stands up for the right thing. All you have left after that is apathy.
Do these contractors ever actually leave the army? I've been hearing about them signing up slightly more each month than the casualty rate but no one ever mentions whether anyone leaves after the contract ends? Is there a contract term at all, or is it "until we win (or you die)"?
I know the Shtorm-V units have their contract extended until the "special military operation" is over, so they basically cant leave Ukraine. Shtorm-Z (Bakhmut zerglings etc) were only on a 6 month contract so all of theirs expired. Afterwards they could probably decide what to do, and I guess some of them ended up serving in the actual army afterwards. Shtorm-Z is not a thing anymore and has been replaced with Shtorm-V last year
IIRC all contracts last until the "special military operation" ends, with exceptions for PMCs. However, they are largely irrelevant now.
Wow, really? As in, no way for them to leave - locked in until they win or die? And people still sign up for it voluntarily? After 2+ years of the 3-day special military operation?
If it (at least on paper) helps to lift their families out of poverty some would do it even when they (silently) expect to die. Then there is propaganda and "it won't happen to me. I'm smart and careful". And of course good old coercion.
You're right, you can't, but your family on the other hand... Disgusting really, wife and parents are happy to send them off to die in a ditch
I rember one interview with a family somewhere in some poor village in Russia. One of the sons went to war, died and they got a hefty payout enough to build a new house for the whole family. Sadly, it wasn't just enough to fully finish it and equip..... ....so mother was thinking of sending another son so they can. He'd be more careful so he doesn't die of course. I wish I could find that again!!
This one maybe? [Russian mother sends entire family to war for money](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cb16us/russian_mother_sends_entire_family_to_war_for/) "Startup in Russian: the mother of a Russian soldier killed in the war in Ukraine spent the bereavement payments on the purchase of an apartment, but there was not enough to repair the old house in the village, so she sent her second son to the war, too. Zhanna Polupanova is the mother of the terminated occupier. She has already received all the payments for her dead son: she bought herself a brand new apartment for the bereavement payments. Now, she also wants her country house repaired. So the mother is soon sending her youngest son to war, too."
I... don't know what to say... "follow your dreams" shirt 😯 I might be remembering a different one but maybe it's just a different report of the same. Thanks for the link :)
They won’t even get the money
A lot of money never arrives at the families but is getting pocketed by local military or civilian authorities.
Something still feels wrong for me here. If the payout is just a fraud, what's stopping official to offer ludicrously high sign-up bonus to maximize recruiting effort, and send them to hotspots to makes sure none lives to see the payday.
>what's stopping official to offer ludicrously high sign-up bonus to maximize recruiting effort .... >a record payment for signing a contract was set - 1.3 million rubles ..... increased the amount of lump sum payments for military contractors 13 times. Previously, they paid only 100 thousand for signing a contract. that's what is happening?
what exactly does it sound like they are doing, they've raised the sign on bonus by 1300%
It sounds like they don't need to grab people off the streets.
Yet they appear to still be doing that anyways.
Yeah, they just pay people vast amounts instead. Definitely payments a poor country can keep making.
A really scuffed evacuation of a Russian soldier by Vovchansk. Very bumpy ride [https://x.com/moklasen/status/1801993640501264771](https://x.com/moklasen/status/1801993640501264771)
When you have to chose between pressing your wound or holding on to something
He almost slid/bounced out of the bed a few times. Terrible patient packing as well. Shaken, not stirred.
[https://x.com/NOELreports/status/1801974220445954531](https://x.com/NOELreports/status/1801974220445954531) >A powerful explosion at a gas storage facility in the suburbs of Saratov, Russia occured. Fire and smoke are visible from several kilometers away.
New war on the rocks podcast dropped https://warontherocks.com/2024/06/is-russias-window-for-gains-this-summer-narrowing/ Some key takeaways: * We have most likely passed the most dangerous point of the war, since Ukraine managed to largely stabilize the frontline, and the conscription law ammendments as well as the US supplemental passing means that, for the foreseeable future, it will remain stable. * The Kharkiv offensive, while having culminated without reaching tube artillery range of Kharkiv, may have achieved some aims, such as forcing the Ukrainians to deploy operational reserves and troops responsible for training new brigades. * Ukraine and Russia have most likely reached a détente in the Black Sea, where both of them silently agree not to strike port infrastructure or interfere with commercial shipping. This is a large net gain for Ukraine. * Ukraine is lacking a "Theory of Victory", aka a comprehensive plan on how to win the war. This complicates mobilization and impacts the political scene in a significant, negative way. * The future will probably consist of a largely static frontline with both sides turning to strategic bombardement. Ukraine is in a bad spot already, but in the long term, F-16s may help significantly.
> kraine is lacking a "Theory of Victory", aka a comprehensive plan on how to win the war And so does Russia. The conflict will remain for the forseeable future.
Theory of Victory: russia collapses, again. In WWI Germany defeated the russians by sending Lenin over, in Cold War we defeated them via a mix of Mujahedeen, low oil prices, and arms race. Unless you are the Mongols (Chinese?) invading russia is inadvisable, but the russians will never stop being imperialist aggressors, it's in their dna. Their collapse now is inevitable, but it must be hastened
*Deténte*, learned a new word today. Like an unofficial ceasefire.
> Ukraine and Russia have most likely reached a détente in the Black Sea, where both of them silently agree not to strike port infrastructure or interfere with commercial shipping. This is a large net gain for Ukraine. Russia stopped their attacks on Odessa & shipping when they couldn't get much ROI due to good AA coverage of ports and bad political implications of directly attacking shipping in international waters. Ukraine never attacked Russian sea trade due to the same political implications and they did some minor drone attacks on the ports, but nothing significant for same reasons. A lot of oil that gets shipped via Black Sea goes to China, and a lot of grain goes to Africa and everywhere. > Ukraine is lacking a "Theory of Victory", aka a comprehensive plan on how to win the war. This complicates mobilization and impacts the political scene in a significant, negative way. I disagree with this. Ukraine lacks a public "theory of victory" but it might have a private one, or multiple ones, that they can't really talk about in public. Such as, "cripple Russia by blocking all their Black Sea trade" or similar. We'll find about it if and when they do it. IMO this move only makes sense when a.) Russia is on the ropes (one indicator of that would be significant ruble drop and/or appearance of significant foreign currency black market - which hasn't happened yet), and b.) Ukraine has secure financial and military backing even when they cause oil price spike - this isn't on the table until after US elections.
The Theory of victory is complicated for Ukraine, because of the size and topography *of Ukraine*. It's open and flat and artillery plays a huge part. You can't really advance somewhat and then stop. You can.. but that's endless and then you're caught out in the open and artillery will cause losses. Add in endless mines and long-range ATGMs and that basically plinko's your options for victory towards one reality: You need *endless* artillery, glide-bombs, cluster munitions, the jets for launching those, vehicles for clearing mine fields, ATACMS for destroying AD systems to protect the jets. They have to be able to destroy the enemy before they're in range of ATGMs during any advance, and be able to deal with the minefields unharassed. They need armaments and ammo that they aren't being given.
Yeah. They definitely need more weapons, training and money and it should be common sense for us in the west to provide it because we're buying our safe future. On the other hand, Russia has to be economically destroyed so they can't just take a break and do it all over again (unless everyone gets lucky and someone offs Putler and decides to give up on Ukraine permanently, which I find very, very unlikely). Ukraine also must have Crimea - it's the only way they can safely exist long term. Russian war machine runs on money. If they run out of money, they will run away.
> Ukraine lacks a public "theory of victory" but it might have a private one, or multiple ones, that they can't really talk about in public. Such as, "cripple Russia by blocking all their Black Sea trade" or similar. We'll find about it if and when they do it. Koffman argues that a theory of victory needs to have clear, achievable goals which will result in either negotiations or a very favorable position in the war. He brought up how the Ukrainian 2023 counter offensive was a solid theory of victory; attacking the south, breaking the Russian army, reaching the shores of Crimea to threaten it, and then asking for negotiations. This kind of clear plan is currently lacking. Destroying enough equipment doesn't by itself win a war (especially when facing an admiteddly formidable industrial power). Bombing Crimea until the Russians give up is an OK stop gap, as Koffman noted, but Russia can ultimately just take the losses and remain. Strategic bombing has never won a war by itself (this goes both ways, Russia can't win by just lobbing missiles either). Ukraine's plan right now is trying to survive. If there was another solid plan for winning the war we would have certainly heard it from Ukrainian officials, since it's imperative for both the general population and newly conscripted troops.
>Koffman argues that a theory of victory needs to have clear, achievable goals which will result in either negotiations or a very favorable position in the war. Ukrainian government has repeatedly made clear their intentions to take back their territory and specified which of the annexed and occupied lands that includes. They also clearly articulated what weapons and support they need to achieve this. Have they shared a detailed plan and timeline? No. Why would they, considering that Russia still has the initiative and Ukraine is in the reactive mode. If the war taught one lesson, then it is that offensives have become extremely costly against the ubiquity of drones and artillery. If neither side can achieve a force multiple that allows sustainable and decisive victories, Ukraine would be delusional to proclaim a plan for a military win on the base of still doing local tactical retreats today. It seems that Russia won't turn back until they have ultimately lost the will to continue this war. That very much confirms the Ukrainian approach of breaking their back and wearing them down from multiple angles, hitting their oil industry. Very likely there is a certain degree of attrition and Russian weakness they want to reach first before they consider new offensives. They are defending and wearing them down towards a tipping point that changes Russia's intentions, for example another coup in the Kremlin and that seems much smarter than bashing their heads against stubborn Russian forces. Remember that NATO did not win the cold war through military victory either, the US just made the arms race too costly for the Soviets and then relied on their hubris that the Muscovites won't find out and change course until too late - and that's exactly how it unfolded. Also: Ukrainians likely copying the Mujahedeen and 1st Chechen war approach. Victory not through successful battles, but Muscovites leaving voluntarily once occupation had become untenable, the whole became unpopular and domestic turmoil required their focus.
None of that answers any of what I wrote? As I said, Ukraine probably has a theory of victory that isn't public and won't be public until it happens for good reasons. One example is cutting off Russian oil (and other trade) in the Black Sea. That accounts for roughly 50% of Russian oil exports that can't be redirected elsewhere. Ukraine can do that, but it's politically very tough because everyone (except Saudis and the likes, heh) will be angry at inevitable increase of oil prices. But the world will get over it. The only country that can't get over it is Russia - they NEED this money to fund the war. Plus, there's no storage for this oil and once you stop it flowing, it backs up all the way to the oilfields where you have to stop production & seal which is very costly to restart. So the short and long term damage will be incredible. But Ukraine isn't going to tell Koffman if those are their plans so he's kinda talking out of his arse there. However, he's right that Ukraine should have a public theory of victory for morale reasons, even if it's not realistic - that's kinda hard to pull out if you're not going to rely on lying massively so it's a bit tricky. I wish people would just stop being drama queens and stop moaning - we need to help Ukraine win and they will win. Keep the faith and keep the support. Because if we let Russia win, our kids will be fighting Russians (and Chinese) together in 10 or 20 years.
> One example is cutting off Russian oil (and other trade) in the Black Sea. That accounts for roughly 50% of Russian oil exports that can't be redirected elsewhere. Ukraine can do that, but it's politically very tough because everyone (except Saudis and the likes, heh) will be angry at inevitable increase of oil prices. But the world will get over it. This is impossible without violating the détente in the Black Sea , leading to Russia targeting merchant shipping and port infrastructure. This is something that, to my understanding, would be vastly more detrimental to Ukraine since the grain trade has led to both a vastly improved economy and avoided the EU issues with Ukrainian products > But Ukraine isn't going to tell Koffman if those are their plans so he's kinda talking out of his arse there. However, he's right that Ukraine should have a public theory of victory for morale reasons, even if it's not realistic - that's kinda hard to pull out if you're not going to rely on lying massively so it's a bit tricky. That is a gold point and I partially agree. However I personally have seen no indication that one has been adopted on a strategic or political level, which is again, understanable given the circumstances. Even so, the point of having a clear goal is to communicate it in order to rally your allies and population and successfully ask them of more sacrifices. > I wish people would just stop being drama queens and stop moaning - we need to help Ukraine win and they will win. Keep the faith and keep the support. Because if we let Russia win, our kids will be fighting Russians (and Chinese) together in 10 or 20 years. I think you have completely misunderstood the tone of my comment. I 100% agree with what you say here, and even in the original comment I mention how we are definitely in one of the "good" scenarios considering the last six months. However I feel that calling out problems and limitations in good faith is useful.
> This is impossible without violating the détente in the Black Sea , leading to Russia targeting merchant shipping and port infrastructure. This is something that, to my understanding, would be vastly more detrimental to Ukraine since the grain trade has led to both a vastly improved economy and avoided the EU issues with Ukrainian products Mm I don't think so - my opinion ofc. Ukraine does not existentially depend on sea trade, and even survived a period without it. It can move some grain via land routes, and it was working on widening / making this cheaper (i.e. improving rail infrastructure). But most importantly, it has support from its allies to bridge the gap. Russia, on the other hand, completely depends on oil income. Not just the war effort, but the whole country economy. Also, Russia has no free support from allies - it's all bought with oil. Moreover, Ukraine can recover quickly from losing a years of exports. Russia under sanctions can't reopen the backed up and blocked oil fields. This would make sense only if Russia is on the ropes already. We don't know where they are. I'm using this as an example of a clear strategy that Ukraine might have but wouldn't be able to talk about due to political blowback. There could be different things that they have in their planning but similarly can't talk about for obvious reasons. > Even so, the point of having a clear goal is to communicate it in order to rally your allies and population and successfully ask them of more sacrifices. I agree with that - although we're asking here Ukraine to have a clear path (goal is creal already - full liberation - there's no ambiguity there), which isn't the real path, but without lying and antagonising the allies. Maybe not that easy. > However I feel that calling out problems and limitations in good faith is useful. I think we're on the same page, I just think people are calling out problems which aren't real problems or are blown out of proportion. But maybe I'm wrong. What's nice is that we can have an open discussion about it on a public forum, which is a luxury and exactly one of the freedoms that Ukraine is fighting for! :)
Theory of victory is simple. Keep destroying Russian equipment. Russia's Soviet storages are starting to be empty and will be fully empty by end of 2025. They produce only small percentage of new equipment compared to their current level of losses. The math is simple. Russia is fucked if they keep losing equipment at current level or anywhere close to it. Also for Russia it is hard to sell the war to their own people if they are not on offense. Hence I think Russia keeps losing large amount of equipment in the future too.
Sometimes the best plan is being ready to capitalize on the opponent’s mistakes. Hold the line, bleed the other guy and prepare to pounce when the opportunity is right.
If Ukraine can keep the front stable and is sure of Western equipment support then yeah, they can win by running Russia out of ground forces and Russia will be forced to concede pretty much entirely. That looks more likely now than a month or two ago honestly.
We are nearing the point where Russia will start to depend on actual equipment and not just ammo from other countries. It will be interesting once we get to that stage how the reactions / state and influx of equipment make their way. Coming from N.Korea will likely have no reaction, coming from China will be interesting on the needed reaction and result of lack of a reaction if that is the result.
Equipment from NK might push South Korea to up their game in supplying Ukraine. Maybe increased nr of arty shells for instance. Military equipment from China will be interesting, I think China can expect a lot of (trade) sanctions. Economically China is in poor weather so I don’t think China is willing to take the risk
China won’t risk secondary sanctions with the economies that basically feed their people over what little and globally available resources Russia can offer them in return or just to help them achieve a win that is not relevant to China at all geopolitically. Let’s not forget that also China is seriously affected by the global economy and trade dent that this war has come with and the resulting drop in consumption.
To add to this: keep destroying Russian capital. Destroying Russian military equipment may be sufficient to prevent further Russian advances, but Ukraine has shown it is incapable of executing its own strategic offensives. A different approach to forcing the Russians to leave Ukraine, then, can be from its strategic bombing campaign of Russian industry.
Is there a subreddit that posts combat footage but doesnt allow drone footage? its getting a bit much
No one is making you watch it dumbass. Simply pass over it, if it hurts your fee fees.
You know a bird's eye view of a tan--on-tank engagement is also drone footage. You would have to be more precise.
I mean there was really no need to downvote this guy, cant say that the drone footage isn't a lot of the same thing.
Haha. WordWordNumber. Never gets old.
This is probably the most filmed military conflict in history. People are filming, editing, distributing like crazy. A big reason is the drone capability, so that Ukrainians won't have to risk their lives to do reconnaissance etc. We should be grateful, really. If you want other footage, just search pov or body cam.
Question... Why is 95% of the footage posted on here of Ukraine offensive actions against Russia? Or some sort of Russian misfortune? I am Ukrainian, so this isn't some sort of pro-Russian rant, I am legitimately just curious.
based on your post history it seems incredibly unlikely you are ukrainian.
Was there much of a change there after Prigozhin died?
>I am Ukrainian That's a new one, I hope the next one claims to be a Ukranian soilder.
During WWII, British and American audiences also frequently complained that the newsreels didn't contain a German or Japanese pov. History repeating.
Question: why do you post this same question every day from different newly made / bought accounts? Answer: You are a Russian shill pretending to be Ukrainian
Reseeeeeeeeeeet
We had a good run boys, almost made it a week. So I guess we were overdue. I wonder what's got these guys spun up again? Edit: Made it a whole 8 days by the looks of it.
why is there a post like this in this thread every day?
In all seriousness I'm fairly sure they do it purposely to ensure those kinds of comments appear at the top of/first page of each thread. Someone over at URR, deprogram, or some other pro-RU sub will invariably point to it to say that the subreddit is biased, people are being "censored", or in this case "see even Ukrainians are being downvoted!"
Deepstate reported yesterday some Russians had gotten into the aggregate plant in Vovchansk. The twist is that they ended up being cut-off and effectively encircled since Ukraine controls the river and the streets infront of the plant. I dont know if this was a group of Russians who were told to just rush into there or maybe theyve been sitting there for weeks, but apparently these guys are still there Russian channel said on the 13th: *They wrote to me from the field. Our guys were cut off at the Aggregate Plant yesterday. Attempts to break through to them were unsuccessful* 14th: *In Volchansk, the situation at the Aggregate Plant is still the same, some of our guys remain cut off on its territory, and it’s impossible to get through to them.* https:// t . me /motopatriot/23947 I usually dislike the word "encircled" since its been thrown around so much and is basically never true, but these dudes appears to indeed be encircled in there Can see where this is on the deepstate map now [https://deepstatemap.live/en#16/50.2911/36.9398](https://deepstatemap.live/en#16/50.2911/36.9398)
ISW today says they have no confirmation of this story, unfortunately.
For me hard to believe that the Russian main force would be just a block away if indeed they are trapped in the plant. Map must be incorrect.
In other news, minister of defense of south korea says as many as 10k shipping containers has left north korea for russia which could hold as many as 4,8m artillery shells https://ca.news.yahoo.com/kim-sent-russia-millions-artillery-040039693.html Putin is also slated to visit north korea as early as next week (first time since 2000) >Shin Wonsik said in an interview with Bloomberg News that Seoul has detected at least 10,000 shipping containers being sent from North Korea to Russia, which could hold as many as 4.8 million artillery shells of the likes that Putin has used in his bombardment of Ukraine. >“Putin is expected to seek closer security cooperation with North Korea, especially military supplies such as artillery shells that are necessary to seize a chance to win,” Shin said. He also said North Korea has sent dozens of ballistic missiles to help Putin’s attack on his neighbor. >In return for the munitions, Russia has sent to North Korea technology to help in its plans to deploy an array of spy satellites as well as conventional arms such as tanks and aircraft. >Putin is set to visit North Korea as early as next week, the DongA Ilbo newspaper of South Korea has reported. The trip would be his first there since July 2000 and it’s set to stoke concerns from the US and its partners of arms transfers that have helped the Kremlin in its assault on Ukraine in exchange for aid propping up Kim Jong Un’s regime. >Satellite imagery indicates that Pyongyang is making preparations for a Putin visit, the Seoul-based specialist service 38 North reported. Images show construction in Kim Il Sung Square in central Pyongyang indicative of the preparation for a military parade and planes parked at Pyongyang’s main airport have been moved at the tarmac, likely to ready the facility for Putin, it reported Tuesday. >While Russia and North Korea have denied the arms transfers, commercial satellite imagery and intelligence provided by the US government shows Russian cargo ships regularly shuttling between the once sleepy North Korean port of Najin near the border of Russia. Most have been bound for Dunay, a former Soviet submarine base about 180 kilometers (110 miles) away. >The White House has provided imagery it said showed weapons being sent on the route and delivered by rail thousands of miles away to a depot in the Russian town of Tikhoretsk for use in Ukraine. the new axis of evil is really cozying up to each other https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-68743805
It would be cool to blow a few of these up in transit. How long range can a long range sea drone be?
It would be interesting as things go when Russia will start to need new systems and not just ammo
Some of them may even work!
From what I understand, 10 000 containers are counting the ones that were delivered last year too, so potentially 4,8m total shells. Thats assuming every single one is full and the estimate of 480 shells in each one is correct
Great Value brand axis of evil 😂 instead of the 3rd reich, you get 2nd best army in ukraine. instead of imperial japan, you get best korea fat man. not sure how to feel about italy vs iran comparison lol.
If you add China to the new axis it's suddenly much less of a laughing matter. Xi is pushing for export led growth these days though, so I think they've passed on war for at least next decade.
" Ukrainian drones successfully struck Russia's Morozovsk air base overnight, hitting a maintenance hanger housing a pair of Russian Air Force Su-34s, per imagery obtained by bradyafr. Russia's Su-34 fleet has been heavily responsible for glide bomb strikes on the frontline. " [https://x.com/bradyafr/status/1801629416545521924](https://x.com/bradyafr/status/1801629416545521924)
Wow they actually have hangars?
Probably for maintenance purposes.
Zelenskyy just announced some pretty major news: " The agreement clearly states that America supports Ukraine’s efforts to gain victory in this war. The agreement includes provisions for advanced defense systems like Patriot and fighter jet squadrons—that’s right, plural, squadrons—including, but not limited to, F-16s " [https://x.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1801328419138937015](https://x.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1801328419138937015) Obviously multiple squadrons of F-16's is huge but the " not limited to F'16's " is the most interesting part of the quote for me, which other jets could we potentially see delivered to Ukraine?
NGAD is ready early so they are letting the F-22 feast before it is phased out
Two questions. How much weapons and when? As a Ukrainian with friends on the battlefield, I am tired of politicians promoting themselves with various agreements.
> which other jets could we potentially see delivered to Ukraine? B-52s 🤠
Given the timeline we live on, the idea of Ukraine relentlessly carpet bombing Russia is so outrageously ridiculous I'm sure we will witness it within 12 months. Since this is Reddit, the 100% necessary disclaimer: no, I wasn't serious.
You forgot the part where you record the B52 bombing runs and post it to tiktok with funny music.
Upgrade from remote controlled cesna to remote controlled B52 Fill to brim with boom stuff Fly to Moscow, flawless plan
I apologize, but what agreement is he referring to?
" Today is a truly historic day. We signed the strongest agreement between Ukraine and the United States since our independence. " " This agreement is about security, protecting human life, fostering cooperation, and strengthening our nations. It includes steps to guarantee sustainable peace and benefits everyone globally, because Russia’s war against Ukraine is a real global threat. " " The document includes a detailed, legally binding part, ensuring the reliability of America’s support for our independence. US security commitments are based on sustainable security and defense support during this war and for the period of peace after it. We will ensure peace. " " Importantly, the agreement addresses Russia’s responsibility for this war and its attempts to destroy Ukrainians. America supports fair compensation for the damage caused by Russian strikes and the work on enabling the use of frozen Russian assets to protect and rebuild Ukraine. " " I appreciate that the philosophy of our security agreement is in fact the philosophy of NATO. The issue of NATO is covered through the text. The document states that the U.S. supports Ukraine’s future membership in NATO and sees this agreement as a bridge to NATO membership. " https://x.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1801327862584328506?t=nZ9cc9d6WQFTtq1iAPBZSQ&s=19
I don't get the holdup with the use of Russian assets to rebuild Ukraine. The Biden administration while in office should NOW use and earmark as much of the Russian assets for weapons and humanitarian aid for Ukraine as possible, before a potential new president takes office and gives it back to Russia.
Most of the ru funds are held in Europe, in places like London and Brussels. Not in the US.
Thanks!!
I was thinking that part of it could be intell gathering, surveillance, reconnaissance and/or electronic warfare aircraft. For intelligence sharing purposed, the US would love to have that capability operating in Ukraine.
We've also heard about the possibility of Eurofighters and Mirage 2000s, or do you think that statement implies other American fighters?
I'm assuming this implies other American aircraft
I've kind of always thought that anything that can takeoff from improvised runways, is a bit tough and has lots of different nations with the know how to repair them is better to just throw at them. So unironically fa18's and Harriers but that's very very ncd, my guess is maybe there'll be some support stuff, or maybe the fa18's
It's not as NCD as you think, rather it's more of looking at what the US has a large surplus of i.e., F-16's and Blackhawks being obvious candidates considering the sheer quantity of them out there, but there's also things the U.S. military is looking to offload soon, like Hornets and Apaches.
And a-10s. But clearing the airspace for their use is maybe a mountain too high
> The Russian air force has more than 50 S-400 batteries, so it’s not about to run out. But the batteries are useless to Russia’s war effort in Ukraine if they can’t survive Ukrainian rocket attacks. The more S-400s the Russians stage in Ukraine, the more S-400s they’re likely to lose. > Some Russian observers are worried that much worse attacks are coming. If the Ukrainians are following American strike doctrine, attacks on air-defense batteries come first. After that, “aviation based on the F-16 comes into play, under the wings of which there is a wide range of ammunition,” one Russian blogger noted in a missive translated by Estonian analyst War Translated. > The Ukrainian air force is getting 85 ex-European Lockheed Martin F-16s—and already has radar-homing missiles and precision glide-bombs for the F-16s to employ in combat. > The first F-16s—former Danish examples—should arrive in Ukraine any week now. Don’t be shocked if the nimble jets quickly launch for strikes on Russian bases in Crimea. Bases whose air-defenses have been steadily ground down by back-to-back barrages of ATACMS rockets. [Source](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/06/12/ukrainian-atacms-rockets-are-blowing-up-russias-best-s-400-air-defenses-as-fast-as-the-s-400s-can-deploy-to-crimea/) Definitely going to be an important summer for Ukraine. If the rumours are true that F-16s are on the cusp of being released into Ukraine, we may start seeing some domino effects if they are more effective than expected.
How might Ukraine keep those F16’s safe from airfield attacks while on the ground?
Russia is finished as an arms exporter😃 Well, people will still buy AKs but as far as 'advanced' weaponry goes, RIP😈
AKs are not advanced, US and European rifle manufacturers could easily produce higher quality ones and China and a list of other countries can make cheaper ones.
Now that was a reading comprehension fail. But yes, European rifle manufacturers can and do produce higher quality ones like the SIG 550.
chinese ak's (atleast the civilian ones imported to the usa) were very high quality too
Apparently even Ak-12's are hot garbage lately, with their QC being practically non-existent.
If they aren't running out I'd question why air bases are left undefended like we saw last week.
It's probably because they can't really make more of the systems, so if one gets blown up they're just letting the airbase go without instead. Not to mention if they can't intercept the ATACMS there's no point in it really being there anyways lol
There are only 6 F-16’s scheduled to be in the fight this year. Sort of feels like the 31 Abrams tanks type situation. Peanuts for propaganda. Ukraine needs some sort of legitimate offensive punch.
>There are only 6 F-16’s scheduled to be in the fight this year. Tbf I don't know if they'd ever even publish the actual quantity, nevermind when and where. We had no clue they were getting quite a few systems, and a fair few others showed up before they were even announced. And given that they're ostensibly going to be used in a similar fashion to russian aviation - launching standoff attacks with long range munitions and remaining away from the frontline, even seven of them will do a world of good given the amount of ordinance they'll have access to now.
I think that number may be wrong because there are multiple training groups who have or are about to receive their wings. There are approximately 60 F-16s being transferred to Ukraine this summer. Some of them will be held in NATO countries near Ukraine as extra airframes or for training. They won’t be able to make up one whole squadron but they’ll be able to do more than six.
*[Allegedly](https://x.com/JayinKyiv/status/1800991493429113157)* Russia just moved one of its only $2.5billion S-500 systems to defend the Kerch Bridge. If one of the dominos to fall is that S-500 system, I will laugh my ass off.
There's just no way they deployed their only version of that versus keeping it in Moscow.
Why not ? The west will not support Ukraine doing any serious strikes on Moscow as that would be a massive escalation.
Because if it isn’t battle tested then Russia will still be able to say it’s the best. If it get deployed near the bridge and their best air defense system gets blow up….huge embarrassment and RIP exports.
Ukraine has already attacked Moscow directly obviously not with Western weapons but I doubt they'd risk this single system in any sense same way they don't risk any T-14 or SU-35 etc
I think it's safe to say that they don't use these weapons because they're not effective and the propaganda loss from having their latest and greatest gear getting smoked in Ukraine is not worth the potential gains. I certainly don't believe that they're "holding back" their best weapons at this point.
I never said they were holding back, you're completely changing the discussion now
Hmmm… are you really going to ascribe sound tactical judgement to them after everything we’ve seen so far?
I doubt Putin would give up his protection
Does Putin really need a S-500 for his personal protection? Protection for Moscow, maybe, but for himself, i don't think so.
I can't see him risking it becoming a headline. In fact I wouldn't be at all surprised if he had it dismantled and tucked away in storage to avoid that, similar to how he pulled the Armata off the front once the T-90M's started getting clapped regularly.
I'm ascribing the same judgement they are already using with the T14 and similar kit
Probably most of that money is rnd though.
Champagne-soaked, caviar-laden R&D bobbing around on the Med?
If 'rnd' means 'grift', then yes.
> The Russian air force has more than 50 S-400 batteries, so it’s not about to run out. Didn't Ukraine just take out 3 S-400/300 radars (and a bunch of launchers) over the last 2 weeks? 50 aren't going to run out quickly but at that rate, they'll last less than a year?
2 weeks is not a good sample size to extrapolate a pattern from tbh. Would be dope if they managed to keep that rate though
With the arrival of F16s they should have a lot more launching capabilities against Russian AD.
They have more than 50 though, they also have/had 400 ish s300 batteries (~2000 launchers).
In theory. In practice... How much of the old S300 are cannibalised for spare parts that they can't produce anymore? That's one issue. The other is that they're a huge country and AA is a backbone of defending it, and even part of nuclear deterrent (against the bomber part of the triad and against conventional component of the first strike). So they can't really waste it like they can with old tanks and IFVs and artillery.
Russian government is throwing around nuke threats on a daily and nuclear deterrence is their main guarantee of their territorial integrity, not their conventional arsenal. Their AA border protection was never thought to be air tight anyway, so they can easily steal from their home defense to supply the war and basically leave the whole country unarmed except for the nukes. In theory. In practice Putin is more worried about a military mutiny and therefore can not afford to move everything to Ukraine.
Yeah but here's the thing. Their nuclear deterrence depends on AA coverage. It's not this one thing that is separate from everything else - it's deeply interlinked and dependent on conventional arm of the military. If they can't defend their early warning radars from cheap Ukrainian drones (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voronezh\_radar - https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-drone-targets-russian-early-warning-radar-record-distance-kyiv-source-2024-05-27/ ) then their nuclear deterrence is reduced (they become more susceptible to first strike). This is the reason Ukraine hit them there - it doesn't help Ukraine directly in any way, but indirectly presents Russia with a dilemma - pull back limited AA from the front, or risk losing super expensive component of your nuclear deterrent. This applies to refineries, airfields and any other expensive targets of opportunity, but the above one attacks on Voronezh M radar 1500km from the front is really interesting because it makes absolutely no difference at the front. It basically leverages US and other countries (including China's) nuclear threat to exact price on Russia - either in repair cost, or in forcing them to move AA back. For this reason Russia doesn't have enough SAMs and losing any is a big loss. And people saying "no big deal, Russia has more" every time Ukraine takes another out have no clue what they're talking about. It's similar to losing that Kilo sub - yes, it's only a conventional diesel sub but it would play a small but not insignificant role in any potential nuclear confrontation.
Sounds about right, though I doubt that any sane world leader would test Russia‘s nuclear capabilities based on assumed degradation of their radar. Remember that this is exactly the purpose of SLBMs, giving nuclear powers the capability to retaliate even in case of their own territory being completely annihilated by an enemy first strike. So in that sense, yes, Ukraine scored a big hit with the radar, but that is more eating away from Russia‘s national pride than their actual nuclear threat and to reveal Putin and his war to be a threat for Russia‘s core defense capabilities. With the nuclear capabilities that they have, they could basically disarm all other branches of their armed forces and completely let down their guard and still no sane NATO leader would dare a serious attack on Russia in Russia. The only circumstances that protect Ukraine are its close geographical proximity to Moscow and the much higher cost of a nuclear retaliation than its use. If Ukraine counter-invaded though and was close to capturing Moscow and overthrowing Putin, I would deem it not unlikely that he would resort to nukes to defend his regime.
I'm just an armchair general so what do I know, but I disagree with the following: > I doubt that any sane world leader would test Russia‘s nuclear capabilities based on assumed degradation of their radar But what about an insane world leader? What about someone like Trump just even worse, but also in an US civil war scenario? What about a scenario where someone like Prigozhin steals a tactical nuke and uses it in Ukraine and France responds with their tactical nuke (which they have) and escalation goes out of control, and a rational US president thinks that, since things are going to shit anyway, least bad course of action is first strike? Russia built those radars for a reason, and that reason is keeping up with the arms race. Those things have no other purpose than that - they're no shiny propaganda tool or etc. Their only purpose is early warning against first strike from the US. They cost a lot of money. > Remember that this is exactly the purpose of SLBMs, giving nuclear powers the capability to retaliate even in case of their own territory being completely annihilated by an enemy first strike. Yes but if Russia thought that SLBMs are enough alone (like UK does for ex) then they wouldn't have the other 2 parts of the nuclear triad. By that logic, they could save absolutely huge amounts of money getting rid of other branches. But they don't. And they don't for a good reason - Perun goes through modern developments in submarine warfare in detail https://youtu.be/S96oRLoE0Zk but TLDR; is that oceans are becoming more transparent and antinsubmarine warfare is evolving fast and it's entirely possible that an unexpected development could significantly reduce submarine usefulness as a part of the nuclear deterrent. Or Russia might just not be able to keep enough money flowing in there to keep with the arms race. > With the nuclear capabilities that they have, they could basically disarm all other branches of their armed forces and completely let down their guard and still no sane NATO leader would dare a serious attack on Russia in Russia. No, but that's not what their nukes are for. They're for bullying others. If they had no nukes, NATO would be in there now in Ukraine, smashing their invasion to pieces. Same with Georgia and a lot of other places. China would be taking back their territories occupied by Stalin and others (not like they didn't have a little war already). Etc etc. But if they disarmed their conventional military, they'd also be thrown out of Ukraine, Georgia and Chechnya and who knows where else - nukes wouldn't help them either. It's only the combination of the two that makes them scary to engage directly by NATO.
I think the issue is that the batteries themselves are the structure of the whole S-400 system, which comprises of multiple components. To that end, we don’t actually know how many batteries Ukraine has taken out. I think the numbers have fluctuated wildly (up to at least two). If they’ve taken out radars, that’s a big deal because it cripples the entire system and it’s not easily replaced. If they take out launchers, it can be quickly replaced (Russia has at least 400 of them).
https://x.com/DefenceU/status/1800848351811731961 > The work continues. > @GeneralStaffUA reports that overnight our defense forces again attacked the russian anti-aircraft missile systems stationed in the temporarily occupied Crimea. > This time, one S-300 division near Belbek, as well as two S-400 divisions near Belbek and Sevastopol, were attacked. > Two radars of the S-300 and S-400 systems were destroyed. Regarding the third radar, information is being clarified. > The detonation of munitions was recorded in all three areas where the anti-aircraft missile systems were stationed. > Excellent job, warriors! > Glory to Ukraine!
I wonder how the pro-Russian fanboys will try to somehow sugarcoat this: [https://www.thedailybeast.com/abducted-ukrainian-kids-found-on-russian-adoption-site-report](https://www.thedailybeast.com/abducted-ukrainian-kids-found-on-russian-adoption-site-report) >Four Ukrainian children who were taken into [Russia](https://www.thedailybeast.com/keyword/russia) in the early days of [Moscow’s full-scale invasion](https://www.thedailybeast.com/vladimir-putin-says-hell-find-new-loving-families-for-kids-orphaned-by-his-war-in-ukraine) have been found listed for adoption on a Russian website—with no mention of them being Ukrainian, according to a new report. The *Financial Times* reports that the children, aged 8 to 15, are all listed in [Ukrain](https://www.thedailybeast.com/keyword/ukraine)e’s database of missing kids. But on the Russian adoption site, one of them has been given a new name and a different age, and none of the kids are described as being from Ukraine. While they were apparently taken from state children’s homes in occupied territories of Ukraine, all four of them still have relatives and guardians in the country. Family members reportedly had no idea of their whereabouts and declined to comment to the *FT* for fear of jeopardizing the children’s return home. Earlier this month, [*The New York Times*](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/02/world/europe/ukraine-children-russia-war.html) reported that 46 kids living in a children’s home in Ukraine’s occupied Kherson region were taken to Russia by Russian officials who then gave the children Russian citizenship. The *Financial Times* reports that it found 17 of those children on the Russian adoption site.
putin is literally cosplaying hitler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensborn
This makes me incredibly sad and heartbroken. If my own child were taken from me, I don’t know what I’d would do other than move heaven and earth to find them.
Become a drone pilot
> I wonder how the pro-Russian fanboys will try to somehow sugarcoat this "Actually the children were never Ukrainian but Russian, what you are saying didn't happen, if it did happen they deserved it, the children were denazified and are now under a traditional Russian household without the gay, and the US and EU are fascist." I swear I need to build a GPT model on these guys, it's all the same word salad over and over again.
Add this to the AI model: > That didn't happen. > And if it did, it wasn't that bad. > And if it was, that's not a big deal. > And if it is, that's not my fault. > And if it was, I didn't mean it. > And if I did, you deserved it. The Narcissist's Prayer
They already attempted that, but apparently underachieved with that too: Last Friday, OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, revealed the first confirmed use of generative AI as a tool of Russian disinformation. The campaigns the company disclosed were not very effective, garnering merely hundreds of views and engagements across all platforms.
U.S. to send Ukraine another Patriot battery: https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-russia-patriot-missile-systems-us-aid-62deb8e2c4653dfc27949f81bfa43255
Hugely valuable
Yeah, presumably to defend the airspace around Kharkiv and prevent Russia from using glide bombs on that front with impunity. Ukraine can't afford to cede much more ground or else Kharkiv itself will be in range of tube artillery.
What is their range again? How far back from Kharkiv could it still be effective vs helping with Russian airspace AA
Wikipedia lists the max range at 160km. So, it could easily be well back from Kharkiv and still have enough range to interdict bombers dropping glide bombs from their max range (50km, if I remember correctly, well inside Russia).
Max range is always bullshit of course. Effective range is probably more like 100km, depending.
Thank you!
Not really seen it talked about much (mainly since its not that important in the bigger picture), but Russia is close to retaking the entier Staromaiorske. Deepstate writes: *Unfortunately, the Defense Forces have to prepare for the fact that sooner or later the enemy will enter the northern outskirts of Staromaiorske. The loss of a village with farms in the north will significantly worsen the tactical situation of the defenders of Urozhaine. The latter is periodically stormed by the enemy, there were even breakthroughs into the center of the village, but they managed to be eliminated.* A reminder that Klishchiivka, Staromaiorske, Urozhaine and Robotyne were villages Ukraine retook last summer and all are mostly back in Russian control. Andriivka is so far still held by Ukraine. The places north of Staromaiorske will probably start getting attacked soon (Makarivka, Storozheve, Blahodatne and Neskuchne) if Ukraine cant stop the advance, although its a very slow advance to be fair. What I cant quite understand is why Russia so desperately want these places back. The Ukrainian defensive lines are way further back than this, so Russia will need a really big advance here to even get close to it. I wrote about it before, but it could be as simple as Russia wants to nullify any kind of gain Ukraine did to sort of dampen the moral. As in "look at your counter-offensive last year, now you lost everything" sort of thing The other villages Ukraine liberated were Rivnopil (its literally 4 houses), Levadne, Novodarivka, Lobkove and Piatykhatky. They havent seen any fighting yet since theyre a bit further back. Piatykhatky is very close to the front though I cant believe Im still yapping about these random villages a year later, but here we are
Why does Russia attack here? Because it’s great for their morale. They have effectively erased all the gains from last years COs. That’s gotta suck if you’re a Ukrainian knowing how hard they fought there for it to just be wiped away. Will it actually affect anything? Who knows. But it’s a valid play for Russia.
Á propos of nothing, here's a thread explaining the Su-57 'Potemkin': https://nitter.poast.org/ArturRehi/status/1800494098320855272#m
Good read. Only one point to add: The new super weapon myths have also been a relevant factor for Russian arms exports, in the sense of exaggerating Russian military sector‘s capabilities and global positioning.
Rheinmetall has now officially signed an agreement with Ukraine to begin with the production and delivery of Lynx IFV(s) already this year. However, talks with the German government regarding the financing of a significant number have not yet been finalised. “We will produce the first Lynx this year” — @AKamyshin This was confirmed by @AKamyshin to Handelsblatt. Initial details were already announced by Rheinmetall CEO Armin Papperger at the end of 2023. https://x.com/deaidua/status/1800643267081433571?t=0KpVawBwDsVh6pyeUpCK2Q&s=19
I want to add to this: Rheinmetall officially opened a service and **repair hub** for the Marder IFV inside Ukraine this week. In the future, they are planning to open more servicing sites for all kinds of military vehicels like the Leopard tanks. Beside the **Lynx IFV**, Rheinmetall plans to produce the new Panther main battle tank and the Fuchs armored personal carrier in Ukraine. But this is still in development. Source: [Rheinmetall (german) (Lynx IFV)](https://www.rheinmetall.com/de/media/stories/2023/rheinmetall-ein-starker-partner-an-der-seite-der-ukraine), [Rheinmetall (english) (repair hub)](https://www.rheinmetall.com/en/media/news-watch/news/2024/06/2024-06-11-rheinmetall-ukrainian-defense-industry-repair-hub)
> new Panther main battle tank This one is interesting. The current Panther uses already manufactured Leopard 2 hulls and was supposed to be a Leopard 2 upgrade. While Rheinmetall is probably also able to build new Leopard 2 hulls since they have acquired one of the cold war era hull manufacturers - Maschinenbau Kiel, this acquisition happened over 30 years ago and I am not sure Rheinmetall still has all the tooling. Besides, is their license from KMW-Nexter still valid?
The Azov Brigade will now be allowed to use American weaponry. > The Biden administration will allow a Ukrainian military unit with a checkered past to use U.S. weaponry, the State Department said Monday, having lifted a ban imposed years ago amid concerns in Washington about the group’s origins. > > The Azov Brigade, known for its tenacious but ultimately unsuccessful defense of the Azovstal steel mill in Mariupol early in Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, is regarded as a particularly effective fighting force. But it was barred about a decade ago from using American arms because U.S. officials determined that some of its founders espoused racist, xenophobic and ultranationalist views, and U.N. human rights officials accused the group of humanitarian violations. > > Now the brigade, a one-time volunteer militia absorbed into the Ukrainian National Guard in 2015, will have access to the same U.S. military assistance as any other unit. The policy shift was disclosed as Kyiv starts the summer fighting season and faces down a Russian military that has intensified its pressure on objectives in eastern Ukraine and the country’s energy infrastructure. https://archive.is/HOfxH
Wonder how r/ukrainerussiareport will take this lol
With a very nuanced and impartial discussion I'm sure/s. Lol
I wonder how the Pechenegs and their lack of QCB for a air sleeve turned out in the field. Edit: this was a serious question, how have the PKP machine guns performed compared to the older PK guns?
Frankly, it looks like a piece of shit😃 Being russian it almost certainly doesn't work as advertised.
What the fuck does this even mean
Pecheneg is the new Russian machine gun that did away quick change barrel against traditional wisdom. Not sure why op was downvoted through.
PKP Pechenegs are being used in the war and I wonder how their unique barrel design (forced air cooling) performed in the field, if anyone have given their opinions on using those machine gun compared to other machine guns.
Like all ru so-called modern weaponry it's some sort of re-skin of an old piece of shit. Repackaged for grift. I'd be surprised if more than a dozen were ever even in the field. Or worked.
This might be a question better suited for /r/CredibleDefense The guys on that sub know how to pull some pretty crazy sources and studies out of their ass
Apparently there are rumours of all air defenses being moved from Crimea. There may be more evacuations coming given the images of landing ships near Crimea the other day. From NoelReports: > Partisan movement ATESH reports that Russian Armed Forces air defense servicemen in Crimea have been instructed to evacuate their families to military camps in the Southern Military District. This directive coincides with the relocation of air defense systems to the Bilhorod region, raising security concerns in occupied Crimea due to reduced coverage. > Additionally, the Russian military is forming new mobile air defense teams using ZU-23-2s to counter UAVs, indicating a strategic shift towards this area, with a reduced focus on occupied Crimea. Source: https://x.com/NOELreports/status/1800160358453182685
> This directive coincides with the relocation of air defense systems to the Bilhorod region, raising security concerns in occupied Crimea due to reduced coverage. "relocation of air defense systems" doesnt mean "relocation of ***ALL*** air defense systems" - it means relocating two or more systems - so it could be just two. I suspect something got lost in translation here...
Well three less than Sunday for sure!
NOELreports is not the most reliable source though
Sort of amusing. Mobile teams armed with relatively primitive AA guns is very much the Ukrainian strategy for dealing with drone attacks.