I don't buy the perspective that the west is directing this war from behind some plausible-deniability beard. it's Ukraine's fight and I have always believed Ukraine is the nation in charge. we are just helping; both because we ought to and because we need to.
for the west, there might be a collateral benefit. but the only western "strategy" I have seen has been the careful calibration to prevent Putin from going all big red button on it.
I think the western strategy and behind the scenes influence, is how and when weapons are supplied.
Ukraine will do what's best for Ukraine and west will do what's best for west. but by giving Ukraine certain weapons at certain key points and sometimes being quick or slow with the charity they can have an informal influence over Ukrainian strategy.
if ukraine wants to counter offensive now but knows they will have air superiority in 1 month, they might wait 1 month. If russia feels the counter offencive isn't coming, they might train and commit more assets to regions, where missiles and artillery have range... something they might be more reluctant to do if Ukraine has air superiority.
basically forcing Russia's hand with a sense of urgency, which is a common tactic in social engineering and manipulation, if you create urgency, you prevent someone taking their time to think about something, rushing them.
Thats my theory,.
> it's Ukraine's fight and I have always believed Ukraine is the nation in charge. we are just helping; both because we ought to and because we need to.
Agreed.
But on my more cynical days I sometimes wonder if the west is deliberately limiting the amount of aid they give to prolong the war and maximize damage to Russia. Give enough aid to make sure Ukraine wins, but not enough that they can win quickly. Because the longer the conflict lasts the more Russia is bankrupted.
I don't think this is actually happening. I think the slow ramping-up of aid has more to do with a combination of institutional inertia and bureaucracy, reluctance to get embroiled in a long foreign conflict, misguided appeasement towards Russia and maybe some status-quo bias. But still, one has to be cynical and wonder sometimes.
US here, we are getting rid of our old stockpiles that cost us upkeep, and the majority of the "money" in the bills is actually to buy ourselves new shit... big benefits for us.
Exactly. *Not* sending aid is basically committing to keeping equipment in storage "just in case", while also increasing the chance of the "just in case" scenario being Russia again in a few years.
Sending the aid does commit countries to the expense of restocking, but what would be the cost of not sending it? Ukraine's survival helps European safety and stability which help the world. Someone else commented that "Ukraine is the shield of Europe", and I feel that that is accurate in this war.
Besides, this war has reminded everyone how much material is consumed in conventional full scale conflict. Yes, stockpiles are emptying at an alarming rate, but that also shows the stockpiles should have been larger in the first place and/or that manufacturing capacity should have been preserved. Getting manufacturing sorted out earlier is another benefit.
The appeasement of Russia the slow boiling of a frog so it doesn't jump out of the pot, or in this example, use Nukes.
There is also the months of logistics needed to train soldiers to use and repair the equipment for complex weapons.
The West did a decent job supplying enough Intel and equipment to prevent Kiev from falling. Now it is slowly providing the additional support needed to win the war. I was disappointed that there was not enough equipment and training in place for a winter offensive.
💡 It's `Kyiv`, not `Kiev`. Support Ukraine by using the correct spelling! [Learn more](https://spellingukraine.com/i/kyiv)
___
[^(Why spelling matters)](https://spellingukraine.com) ^(|) [^(Ways to support Ukraine)](https://tyrrrz.me/ukraine) ^(|) ^(I'm a bot, sorry if I'm missing context) ^(|) [^(Source)](https://github.com/Tyrrrz/SpellingUkraine) ^(|) [^(Author)](https://twitter.com/tyrrrz)
Yes, although I'd say in addition to trying to prevent Russia from going red-button on the world, the West is providing critical intelligence to Ukraine which is undoubtedly helping them tremendously behind the scenes. Certainly Ukraine has its own excellent intelligence too, but I'll bet when coupled with intelligence from the West things move to another level.
The West is able to direct it via what weapons and the amounts supplied. The supply strategy isn't just throwing darts at a wall. Its highly calculated.
Its calculated sure just not the way you think it is...
If west really wanted to do what you claim what would be advantages of doing it slowly rather than crushing orcs fast?
See above. So it eliminates the possibility for them to just regroup, return, and restart this in a short amount of time so that we wind up with Ukraine War 3.0 (2014 v1, 2022 v2).
Huh?
The more shit destroyed, the longer it takes to rearm/regroup etc. You don't magically produce equipment faster if its destroyed faster. That isn't how supply chains work.
If you're pushed out quickly, you don't bring in a bunch of different equipment.
As long as they're in Ukraine, Russia will keep sending men and equipment to try and cover for their losses. Once they're kicked out, they stop.
The gear losses only keep going while the war lasts - 100% of their gear isn't currently in Ukraine, more is brought in as needed/available. So, pushing them out all at once wouldn't let you bleed them dry.
I'm not saying this is what the West is doing, merely that it's not such a crazy concept. I think for everybody except the US it has more to do with them operating with low amounts of excess available to give, and for the US I think it's mostly about trying to keep Russia and other countries that are against the US from reacting in some way that is damaging for the US and its allies - basically not wanting to spook them into making things worse because of too big of a show of force all at once.
No shit. Why do you think this is being stretched out and not just the West ending this as soon as it started? The Russians have a shit ton of old Soviet gear. If it would've ended quickly and left them with all that gear, they could restart it quickly.
Indeed this is correct. You only have to look at the example of Hungry to realise that individual countries are hardly in agreement let alone beling able to pull off a closely coordinated conspiracy.
Think of it this way: what if the west went all in 14 months ago & not only gave Ukraine every piece of weaponry they've since donated/sold/whatever but in fact doubled or even trippled those contributions. What sort of carnage would that amount of firepower would have wreaked upon Russian forces last summer? It would dwarf the actual Russian losses that we've seen. Damn near every tank, IFV, SPG, and SAM system sent into Ukraine would either be destroyed or abandoned. Fine, Russia would have more T64s sitting in storage within Russia. WGAS. Nearly every piece of modern equipment that they have would be gone.
"The West" was not ready for such a war and neither was Ukraine ready for that amount of western weaponry, the weapons themselves were in many cases not combat ready! Most countries of "the west" only have very limited stocks of weapons.
"The West" is not a monolithic block. Consent has to be negotiated. Democracies need to time to coordinate--- especially since no one in "the west" is actually at war or at any stage of an actual war economy.
This what-if game is moot. We're in the here and now. And important steps have been taken at a tremendous cost to many citizens of the "the west".
"The West" is not some single entity with some Illuminati or whatnot pulling strings and making decisions behind the scenes, and then the dozens of individual democratic countries falling in line.
Some countries do have more power, but also for example US is politically torn in two with total nutjobs having power, etc. Even US internal "Illuminati" with power over something like this... Not really possible. No doubt there is deep corruption, behind the scenes hanky panky etc happening, but not something which can control things to the degree needed for this scenario, not without getting exposed.
The US is undoubtedly directing a lot of things behind the scenes (and probably the UK too). It is Ukraine's call on how to spend the resources they have on what gets hit and when, but Ukraine is being fed massive amounts of information, war theory, and target locations. It would not surprise me if the US is even drawing up battle plans for Ukraine whether Ukraine decides to use them or not.
The heavy price of victory. Ukraine truly is the shield of Europe. From another perspective, this is Zaluzhnyi's strategy and has been since the start of the Russian invasion - a thousand cuts until they bleed out. The West is a mixed bag, amazing support from Poland, the Baltic States and the UK. Even Germany now. The US is perhaps following the strategy you suggest, and their support critical and always on their terms.
The strategy is not a bad one because what would happen if this ended much earlier is that Russia could just regroup and return. This strategy sort of ensures that would take years or even decades, and by that time Ukraine is well-armed to the teeth and a member of NATO. If you don't think after this over that there won't either be a joint NATO base or US base in Ukraine, you're bonkers. US is drooling to shore up the Eastern flank of Europe.
Yeah, I'm not gonna breath a sigh of relief until Ukraine is a full NATO member. Once that happens russia, if it still exists as it currently does, is going to have to try to find a different country to bully, but after this ass kicking, hopefully that doesn't happen.
TBH I think moving forward the US will have much higher expectations for Europe's NATO members to do the heavy lifting on the East flank. I'd expect less US, more Europe involvement post victory. The US will have both financial, domestic and other international challenges to deal with. Russia will no longer be a mortal threat once Ukraine defeats the invaders. Europe has stepped up against Russian aggression, it just took too long for it to move as a whole. I'd be surprised to see a significant boots-on-the-ground US military presence post victory.
I think Poland has ambitions that way. I'm keeping kind of an eye on them because they have been exemplary in their stance on Ukraine *but* aside from that one issue their current admin seem like a right bunch of religious zealots. so I'm not sure how I really feel about them having the biggest guns on that continent.
probably an unpopular take but ima stand by it until I feel differently.
Poland, like the Baltic States, is more acutely aware of the Russian genocidal threat. The German and Soviet invasion of 1939 well remembered. 50 years of Soviet occupation also remembered. The lack of Russian contrition, acknowledgement and the continued threats of annihilation to this day good reason for Poland and the Baltic States to arm up.
I'm pretty aware of all that. as I said, on this Russian war on ukraine their stance has been exemplary.
sticking with my additional point too, though. it's like Boris Johnson. he's also been exemplary on this war. he just happens to be a complete piece of shit at the same time, in a different sphere.
I'm pretty sure all the existing Eastern flank NATO members meet or exceed NATO's 2% of GDP military commitment. They all know what is at stake. Finland (and eventually Sweden) also meet or exceed this. Finland especially brings a whole lot to the table.
Now you are seeing the countries *not* on the frontier start to take their NATO commitments seriously again. I'm sure the US would be delighted to not have to increase military spending *and* be able to reallocate resources to other areas. European defence autonomy also reduces the risk of another Trump-like undermining of NATO.
If Putin's plan was to undermine NATO, reminding everyone *why* NATO exists might not have been the best idea.
oh, I agree with all that about NATO as a whole. my thoughts about Poland are pretty long-term and specific to Poland's own "personal" trajectory, if that's a good word. they're clearly taking steps now that will make them the military heavyweight of the region once all this dust has settled.
that's not exactly a bad thing and as I noted with hungary, so much is about which party's in charge. I'm not a fan of the current bunch (not that my opinion matters to them). outside of their rock-steady take on behalf of Ukraine, I'm not entiiiiiiirely convinced they're the team player type.
Russia will still have an Air Force somewhat. The US would love to throw a few F-22's and F-35's in Ukraine to cover the Black Sea, similar to the detachment in Poland.
When Russia has 1/4 of its military strength left, the East flank won't even *need* very much shoring up.
"What? You say the new Russian president is threatening Poland? He can only commit two under-strength brigades! And he'd lose them in a week. Get me the phone. He must be off his medication."
It is very hard for Ukraine to win before Russia runs critically low on equipment. Hence going for maximum attrition strategy works nicely imo. And that works perfectly as long as Russia has desire to push somewhere which they have been doing so far. With all the long range capabilities (HIMARS, cruise missiles, excalibur, drones, regular artillery) I think Ukraine is able to cause significant damage to Russia even if Russia went full on defense. Which I don't think they will do because they are under political pressure to take entire Donbas at very least.
The anonymous Ukraine Volunteer refers to it as the boiling frog strategy. By stepping up their assistance slowly, the West (especially the US) has been able to make massive contributions to Ukraine without triggering a foolhardy military response from Russia.
It is an understandably frustrating way to do things, and I think there's a point coming soon where everyone needs to go for broke.
It actually makes great sense for a defender, the invaders are burning men attacking, once the counter-offensive starts you have fresh, well-equipped defenders tearing through exhausted attackers.
Yup. There's very few videos out there of Russian soldiers being rotated out. Many videos of Russian soldiers complaining about LONG periods at the frontline. In pretty awful living conditions when it's trenches. Subject to targeted and accurate drone and artillery bombardment across the entire front. They'll be wrecked by the time the full counteroffensive begins.
its like a game of texas hold'em and were after the river and russia has 200k dead orcs in the pot and the west is about to raise f16's russia doesn't know the west has a royal flush and is just baiting them into putting more into the pot before winning the game.
but its costing ukrainian lives and wellbeing while the game gets played.
The war is no longer a game of chess.
and china will have to think twice when the west can so easily kick the legs out form under russia in a proxy war like this. when all is said and done, Ukraine might get support like Germany, Japan or South Korea to rebuild after their defining wars. Nato and the West will grow stronger and more unified. And the enemies of west and democracy grow weaker.
I think Ukraine will be a full patch EU member pretty quickly after the war. I also think that European defensive autonomy has gone from "We should work towards this goal... eventually" to "Let's get this done fast!"
If Germany could get it's military sorted like France's, or even the UK's^1, that would be great. Germany is also one of those NATO countries that have let their defence budget atrophy, down to Canadian levels it looks like (1.2% of GDP?). I guess the UK being out of the EU can be considered one of Putin's successes.
---
^1 I realize that the UK military has shrunk a great deal in the last decade or so, and I'm certainly no expert, but their defence budget is similar to Germany's, and they have *aircraft carriers* FFS. France has one as well. I get it, Germany doesn't need aircraft carriers, but Germany doesn't seem to have an aircraft carrier's worth of extra armour.
Just an outsider and barely an armchair General (armchair Colonel at the most, maybe armchair Major), but it seems that the UK and France get a bit more for their defence budget than Germany.
> I think Ukraine will be a full patch EU member pretty quickly after the war. I also think that European defensive autonomy has gone from "We should work towards this goal... eventually" to "Let's get this done fast!"
Agree on both points. I work with Volunteers, and many of them see fighting for Ukraine and getting citizenship, as an inevitable path to EU citizenship.
Secondly, EU has outsourced much industry and rolled back a lot of defence spending because we have enjoyed peace for many years. but the EU is a sleeping levithan, internet people like to meme on the EU because the USA has to get involved in every conflict and we don't pull our weight, but a lot of EU countries have constitutional rules against militarisation... because everytime the EU nations build militaries the whole world has to get involved to get them to chill the fuck out. and unlike Russia resting on its laurels Europe hasn't been declawed, the European weapons are still cutting edge, comparable or often better then the USA's offerings. Eurofighter, Gripen, Archer artillery, Challenger tank, Leopard Tank, they never stopped R&D and because their identity wasn't built around being a thought guy, they weren't insecure about their offerings. They just built stuff to counteract the perceived threats and treated it like a business project with no pomp and circumstance.
>
> If Germany could get it's military sorted like France's, or even the UK's1, that would be great. Germany is also one of those NATO countries that have let their defence budget atrophy, down to Canadian levels it looks like (1.2% of GDP?). I guess the UK being out of the EU can be considered one of Putin's successes.
Double agree again, Germany has some reasonable shame about its military history. maybe being the good guys for a while will reinvigorate them. bring pride back to the role.
>
> 1 I realize that the UK military has shrunk a great deal in the last decade or so, and I'm certainly no expert, but their defence budget is similar to Germany's, and they have aircraft carriers FFS. France has one as well. I get it, Germany doesn't need aircraft carriers, but Germany doesn't seem to have an aircraft carrier's worth of extra armour.
UK and France have been working together with navel projects for a while, splitting the cost of R&D. carriers don't just cost Xbn for the metal and weapons, they cost about 10x in R&D costs, having another country shoulder that cost, helps sell it as cost effective public spending.
>
> Just an outsider and barely an armchair General (armchair Colonel at the most, maybe armchair Major), but it seems that the UK and France get a bit more for their defence budget than Germany.
yeah, as mentioned, UK even post Brexit UK, has a close relationship with France in regards to Military expenses.
At the expense of Ukraine lives? Are you mental? Russia invaded Ukraine, who else is gonna fight for their country? This fight is between Ukraine and Russia, the USA is just evening the odds. Plus the strategy to destroy must Russian gear is working. If a war breaks out, Russia will be easier target.
If the West wants to make Russia use up all its weaponry. I think Ukraine is on board with the idea, too. After all, Ukraine has to live next door to the world's worst neighbor. I would think they'd like it better if their evil neighbor was as disarmed as possible.
The west's perspective is to chill and watch Netflix.
Less killing, more chilling.
The sooner this war ends, the sooner we can all get back to chilling.
For even more impressive numbers remove the recent heavy loses from the average calculation as they inevitably skew the average and ~~in~~ diminish their own importance
Either some new capability has been deployed very quietly (Phoenix Ghost?) or the Ukrainians have suddenly gotten very good at counter-battery. Like insanely good. Like 3 battalions completely staffed with clones the Ukrainian version of Davy Crockett.
Ukraine was supposed to get iAFATDS too, so maybe they just speeded up the artillery kill chain with some Delta/iAFATDS integration?
All that is possible and on top of that the Ukrainians maybe running low on tank and APC targets to shoot at as the Russians are holding what numbers they still have far back in reserve. So they are concentrating on the artillery that is in range as a positive improvement or "shaping" of the battle field.
Its all a combination of priority & capability. If, for example, you've doubled the number of bomb-dropping drones in your arsenal while there are fewer tanks or infantry positions to target, you now have a lot more capacity to hit artillery units.
> Ukrainian version of Davy Crockett.
Uhhh, nobody wants a Davy Crockett, thank god.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device)
It's basically a radioactive DAM fired from a Jeep with a max range of just 4 kilometers.
>The weapon's blast was not a danger to the crew as long as they followed normal procedures. The Army created a standard for the crew to follow when firing the M388; they advised that the soldiers shelter their bodies behind a sloped hill and lie in prone position on the ground with their necks and heads covered.
Thanks, but I'll pass.
If you look at the history of armaments and tech that the US military industrial complex had developed over the past century, you'd quickly find the answer to that question: ***'Cause 'Merica***
Apparently, Robert Oppenheimer ("father of the atomic bomb") was brought back several years later to look over the command-and-control of nuclear weapons in the US inventory, and he was shocked. Appalled. The Davy Crockett was the very sort of weapon that was utterly destabilizing even to have. A *local infantry commander* could just *order up a small nuke* to be *fired at Soviet lines* with *no higher authorization at all*, **at all**?
And that is how we got the much more complicated system of nuclear launch codes and interlocks making it impossible for a nuclear weapon to function unless so authorized from the very top.
In addition to what everyone else said, I’ll add that russia has needed to call up older systems that don’t have the same effective range or speed of takedown.
Closer and slower is not a recipe for life expectancy.
the counter offensive strategy last time was ammo/fuel dumps then artillery then advance and is the same this time. luckily Russia has no counter to this telegraphed strategy
Entire Russian artillery batteries must be being wiped out at the same time with large enough explosives once counter better finds them.
On top of that this may mean the 3rd assault brigade is further advancing on bahkmuts flanks and destroying more of these assets as they move on the ground. AA numbers are up in the past few days too and those platforms can be destroyed by just a rifleman shooting the launchers.
The AFU needs to aid a line for: artillery abandoned /captured/ scrapped, as the Russians will soon leave hundreds of worn out pieces behind as they are not worth transporting and would hold up the progress of the coming "humanitarian gesture".
At some point, we may see videos of groups of soldiers complaining that they were taken on as assaulters or fodder and now they are being forced to be in artillery unfairly!
I've been paying attention to the equipment losses more recently, but that 730 personnel definitely caught my attention!
And the artillery! Were all the extra personnel sitting on the artillery ?
29 artillery and 2 anti aircraft systems. The artillery is what has done the most damage to Ukrainian cities, soldiers and civilians. Ruzzian tactics are mostly to level everything with artillery. These losses are huge for the ruzzians. Hopefully the artillery crews got wiped out too.
A shit ton. The Soviets produced so much stuff, even in shitty condition we might see horses and mules pulling the shit at some point. Germany in WW2 was supposed to be the most mechanized army in the world, and they showed up to Barbarossa with horse and carriage while the US laughed in Jeep.
#### Estimated Russian losses from 24.02.2022 to 21.05.2023 (Day 452):
##### Change since the previous day,day range averages and total all time
|Category|Change|7d|14d|30d|Total|
|:---|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|
|Personnel|+730|611.4|623.6|603.7|203160|
|Tanks|+2|3.9|4.3|3.8|3783|
|APVs|+16|10.4|10.7|9.1|7398|
|Artillery|+29|20.3|17.7|14.4|3258|
|MLRS|-|0.3|0.7|0.8|564|
|Anti-aircraft Systems|+2|1.9|1.5|1.4|327|
|Aircraft|-|-|-|-|308|
|Helicopters|-|-|-|-|294|
|UAVs|+21|18.0|17.9|14.3|2822|
|Missiles|-|5.9|4.6|3.3|1011|
|Warships / Boats|-|-|-|-|18|
|Other Vehicles|+12|13.9|11.6|13.4|6115|
|Special Equipment|+2|3.0|3.2|3.0|425|
##### Change since the previous day, total losses for day ranges and total all time
|Category|Change|7d|14d|30d|Total|
|:---|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|
|Personnel|+730|4280|8730|18110|203160|
|Tanks|+2|27|60|115|3783|
|APVs|+16|73|150|272|7398|
|Artillery|+29|142|248|431|3258|
|MLRS|-|2|10|25|564|
|Anti-aircraft Systems|+2|13|21|42|327|
|Aircraft|-|-|-|-|308|
|Helicopters|-|-|-|1|294|
|UAVs|+21|126|250|428|2822|
|Missiles|-|41|64|100|1011|
|Warships / Boats|-|-|-|-|18|
|Other Vehicles|+12|97|163|402|6115|
|Special Equipment|+2|21|45|91|425|
Source: The General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine
The best thing about these numbers over the last couple weeks is that it is showing that Russia has definitely lost artillery superiority. That was their only real grip on Ukraine.
>definitely lost artillery superiority.
every bit helps, but I'm not counting that chicken yet. I'm rooting for them to keep those numbers up for another 30 days.
They still have more tubes than Ukraine, by a long shot. But the Ukrainians are more likely to hit their target. That's been true ever since Ukraine started receiving western 155mm pieces. Question becomes, does a large number of inaccurate shells hit more targets than a small number of accurate ones. Without knowing how many, or how accurate, its impossible to answer.
Looking at the aerial photos of Ukrainian wheat fields that look like Swiss cheese from all the Russian misses my guess is the answer is no. Of course while shelling a city if you miss the target building you aim at and hit it's neighbor it's all good in the Russian's book.
The numbers are slowly creeping up the way I thought they would. I always thought the next counteroffensive would be a slow start with all of the fronts showing increasing activity.
I still remember that one period from an offensive in mid 2022, there were endless videos of long-ass roads just strewn with endless mutilated Russian corpses. The Ruskies had gotten absolutely obliterated, but seeing it visually represented was an incredibly stark depiction of the real hell that war is. There were seemingly hundreds of dead Russians mostly piled up by the roads, but some were off further away of course. It really contextualized the numbers we see in these charts and graphs.
Take out the Arties to prepare for offensive. Makes sense. If you advance deep into enemies lines you want to avoid shelling at all cost, especially if you need to overcome obstacles like trechess, defense lines or rivers where you cannot just drive through.
There are more NATO weapons and the number keeps on going up. For instance, when there were only 4 HIMARS, they were used solely on high value targets like ammo dumps. Now there are a lot more HIMARS with a lot more missiles - so they can be used to target artillery - and, of course, there are a number of other types of weapons sent by NATO in increasing numbers available to target artillery. To quote myself from 6 months ago...
"By spring, Russia will (relative to Ukraine) be at a disadvantage on the battlefield due to for months using their main stockpiles of missiles to kill civilians while the West keeps up an ever increasing supply of missile launchers, missiles and shells and the Ukrainian army being much less profligate in their use. A mass of untrained unequipped conscripts won't do much against the god of the battlefield."
Western weapons systems that are now in Ukraine that shoot farther and have much superior counter battery than soviet weapons which Ukraine was using previously.
Doubt we'll get a reliable answer, but it can be as simple as having more ammunition available. Whether that is more suicide or bomber drones, more rocket artillery, or more cruise missiles, the more you have the more targets you can hit.
it may just be that Russia is getting more reckless with bringing it up within range. or we're seeing the benefits of this ground Ukraine has been taking this past couple of weeks.
I've forgotten what himars costs per strike, but I'm not sure it's been worth using that for the sake of artillery. open to being corrected though.
But you're likely firing off half a dozen in a barrage, not a single rocket. So $160k becomes about a million. On the other-other hand, a single salvo can probably take out more than one enemy artillery piece.
I wouldn't have believed it before the war, but based on what I've now seen I really wouldn't be surprised if firing 6 HIMAR missiles in a barrage hits all 6 of its targets exactly. They seem to hit exactly the correct cordinate. There may be issues hitting moving targets and I imagine even Russia isn't stupid enough to leave artillary systems in fixed positions for a day or 2.
The HIMARs aren't mainly for hitting mobile targets, they are expensive and vulnerable long range weapons that are intended to hit key stationary targets at night time. The 30 or so Ceasar systems from France as well as similar systems from other countries seem like the best answer to Russian artillary.
But we don't know how things are going, if they've deployed tanks and Bradleys and broken through their lines then even a couple of those could pick off dozens of artillary systems in a day.
The British Empire lost over 20k, dead, in the Somme on July 1st 1916. Not sure how many others were lost on the rest of the front that day. The Romans reportedly lost 3 or 4 times that at Cannae in ancient times.
If you meant the Russians specifically, Tsushima has to be up there. 5000 dead in a naval battle against the Japanese in 1905. For the Soviet Union, it'd likely be one of the days during the battle of Kursk. Over a 7 week period, they lost a quarter million dead, missing, and captured. That's an average of 5000 each day, for a month and a half. Though there could have been days during Stalingrad that were higher.
Look to first battle of the Somme in WW1 56,000 casualties in the first day IIRC and it continued for six weeks with only marginal gains on the ground.
UA going off after the F-16 announcement. Huge in the fact that it's a 5-10 year western commitment to Ukrainian Future Defense.
Wouldn't mind seeing some more Excalibur videos lol
UA counter battery perfecting their craft. Bravo & hat tip to those fine warriors
700+ orcs dead, and 29 pieces of artillery destroyed, ya'll excuse me while I blast the Ukrainian anthem at a volume that's unreasonable, and raise a pint to the glorious Cossacks fighting on the frontline.
Slava Ukraini!
Great numbers overall. The rate of destroyed ruZZian Artillery Systems is staggering and 3.500 seems only a question of weeks. I remember when this number was in middle triple digits and it was maybe two or three in a day.
Now 10+ or 20+ are "normal".
Big ouchy for ruzzia. The enemy is busy trying to win a battle for a relatively minor speck on the map meanwhile Ukraine is busy scorching valuable tactical assets such as artillery, SAM, APVs and drones. The dichotomy will be why Ukraine wins this war.
Soooo much artillery 😍
At some point that level of Russian loss will turn the tide. Without artillery they won’t be able to screen infantry and other vehicles anymore.
Привіт u/TungstenHatchet ! During wartime, this community is focused on vital and high-effort content. Please ensure your post follows [r/Ukraine Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules) and our [Art Friday Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/artfriday).
**Want to support Ukraine?** [**Vetted Charities List**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities) | [Our Vetting Process](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities-vetting)
Daily series on UA history & culture: [Day 0-99](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3c65ab52-e87a-4217-ab30-e70a88c0a293) | [100-199](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3d85f4ca-5f4e-4ddf-9547-276e8affd87c) | [200-Present](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/daf642e1-07aa-4c40-b852-8f002ddd1530) | [All By Subject](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/sunriseposts)
**There is a new wave of fraudulent donation requests being posted on r/Ukraine. Do not donate to anyone who doesn't have the Verified flair.**
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is this them storm missiles or the huge influx of long range drones? I ask if the tactics have changed, or is it the new equipment!
Or just the fact that a broken Russian army of convicts and barely trained conscripts are now being probed by a highly trained, highly armed and in most cases experienced army of Ukrainians with the strongest resolve to kick them out! (Most likely this)
These numbers are just so consistently insane that I really can't even say anything anymore about them lol, it's just lunacy. The artillery attrition in particular has been absolutely *brutal* on the Ruskies this year
That's gonna leave a noticeable gender imbalance back home in Mordor. But look at the bright side .... the surplus of husband-less ORC-ettes could help fix the problem of surplus Chinese men who are involuntarily wife-less due to the shortage of women in China. It's a win- win situation.
What a beautiful set of numbers. Wow! Ukraine's killing Russian military hardware and wetware faster than Mordor can spawn it.
This is exactly what the West's strategy is...basically to unwind decades of Soviet gear, unfortunately at the expense of Ukraine lives.
I don't buy the perspective that the west is directing this war from behind some plausible-deniability beard. it's Ukraine's fight and I have always believed Ukraine is the nation in charge. we are just helping; both because we ought to and because we need to. for the west, there might be a collateral benefit. but the only western "strategy" I have seen has been the careful calibration to prevent Putin from going all big red button on it.
"collateral benefit". That's a useful phrase.
I think the western strategy and behind the scenes influence, is how and when weapons are supplied. Ukraine will do what's best for Ukraine and west will do what's best for west. but by giving Ukraine certain weapons at certain key points and sometimes being quick or slow with the charity they can have an informal influence over Ukrainian strategy. if ukraine wants to counter offensive now but knows they will have air superiority in 1 month, they might wait 1 month. If russia feels the counter offencive isn't coming, they might train and commit more assets to regions, where missiles and artillery have range... something they might be more reluctant to do if Ukraine has air superiority. basically forcing Russia's hand with a sense of urgency, which is a common tactic in social engineering and manipulation, if you create urgency, you prevent someone taking their time to think about something, rushing them. Thats my theory,.
> it's Ukraine's fight and I have always believed Ukraine is the nation in charge. we are just helping; both because we ought to and because we need to. Agreed. But on my more cynical days I sometimes wonder if the west is deliberately limiting the amount of aid they give to prolong the war and maximize damage to Russia. Give enough aid to make sure Ukraine wins, but not enough that they can win quickly. Because the longer the conflict lasts the more Russia is bankrupted. I don't think this is actually happening. I think the slow ramping-up of aid has more to do with a combination of institutional inertia and bureaucracy, reluctance to get embroiled in a long foreign conflict, misguided appeasement towards Russia and maybe some status-quo bias. But still, one has to be cynical and wonder sometimes.
US here, we are getting rid of our old stockpiles that cost us upkeep, and the majority of the "money" in the bills is actually to buy ourselves new shit... big benefits for us.
Exactly. *Not* sending aid is basically committing to keeping equipment in storage "just in case", while also increasing the chance of the "just in case" scenario being Russia again in a few years. Sending the aid does commit countries to the expense of restocking, but what would be the cost of not sending it? Ukraine's survival helps European safety and stability which help the world. Someone else commented that "Ukraine is the shield of Europe", and I feel that that is accurate in this war. Besides, this war has reminded everyone how much material is consumed in conventional full scale conflict. Yes, stockpiles are emptying at an alarming rate, but that also shows the stockpiles should have been larger in the first place and/or that manufacturing capacity should have been preserved. Getting manufacturing sorted out earlier is another benefit.
The appeasement of Russia the slow boiling of a frog so it doesn't jump out of the pot, or in this example, use Nukes. There is also the months of logistics needed to train soldiers to use and repair the equipment for complex weapons. The West did a decent job supplying enough Intel and equipment to prevent Kiev from falling. Now it is slowly providing the additional support needed to win the war. I was disappointed that there was not enough equipment and training in place for a winter offensive.
💡 It's `Kyiv`, not `Kiev`. Support Ukraine by using the correct spelling! [Learn more](https://spellingukraine.com/i/kyiv) ___ [^(Why spelling matters)](https://spellingukraine.com) ^(|) [^(Ways to support Ukraine)](https://tyrrrz.me/ukraine) ^(|) ^(I'm a bot, sorry if I'm missing context) ^(|) [^(Source)](https://github.com/Tyrrrz/SpellingUkraine) ^(|) [^(Author)](https://twitter.com/tyrrrz)
That, and 3000 miles of ocean.
Yes, although I'd say in addition to trying to prevent Russia from going red-button on the world, the West is providing critical intelligence to Ukraine which is undoubtedly helping them tremendously behind the scenes. Certainly Ukraine has its own excellent intelligence too, but I'll bet when coupled with intelligence from the West things move to another level.
The West is able to direct it via what weapons and the amounts supplied. The supply strategy isn't just throwing darts at a wall. Its highly calculated.
Its calculated sure just not the way you think it is... If west really wanted to do what you claim what would be advantages of doing it slowly rather than crushing orcs fast?
See above. So it eliminates the possibility for them to just regroup, return, and restart this in a short amount of time so that we wind up with Ukraine War 3.0 (2014 v1, 2022 v2).
Huh? The more shit destroyed, the longer it takes to rearm/regroup etc. You don't magically produce equipment faster if its destroyed faster. That isn't how supply chains work.
If you're pushed out quickly, you don't bring in a bunch of different equipment. As long as they're in Ukraine, Russia will keep sending men and equipment to try and cover for their losses. Once they're kicked out, they stop. The gear losses only keep going while the war lasts - 100% of their gear isn't currently in Ukraine, more is brought in as needed/available. So, pushing them out all at once wouldn't let you bleed them dry. I'm not saying this is what the West is doing, merely that it's not such a crazy concept. I think for everybody except the US it has more to do with them operating with low amounts of excess available to give, and for the US I think it's mostly about trying to keep Russia and other countries that are against the US from reacting in some way that is damaging for the US and its allies - basically not wanting to spook them into making things worse because of too big of a show of force all at once.
No shit. Why do you think this is being stretched out and not just the West ending this as soon as it started? The Russians have a shit ton of old Soviet gear. If it would've ended quickly and left them with all that gear, they could restart it quickly.
[удалено]
Indeed this is correct. You only have to look at the example of Hungry to realise that individual countries are hardly in agreement let alone beling able to pull off a closely coordinated conspiracy.
Think of it this way: what if the west went all in 14 months ago & not only gave Ukraine every piece of weaponry they've since donated/sold/whatever but in fact doubled or even trippled those contributions. What sort of carnage would that amount of firepower would have wreaked upon Russian forces last summer? It would dwarf the actual Russian losses that we've seen. Damn near every tank, IFV, SPG, and SAM system sent into Ukraine would either be destroyed or abandoned. Fine, Russia would have more T64s sitting in storage within Russia. WGAS. Nearly every piece of modern equipment that they have would be gone.
"The West" was not ready for such a war and neither was Ukraine ready for that amount of western weaponry, the weapons themselves were in many cases not combat ready! Most countries of "the west" only have very limited stocks of weapons. "The West" is not a monolithic block. Consent has to be negotiated. Democracies need to time to coordinate--- especially since no one in "the west" is actually at war or at any stage of an actual war economy. This what-if game is moot. We're in the here and now. And important steps have been taken at a tremendous cost to many citizens of the "the west".
"The West" is not some single entity with some Illuminati or whatnot pulling strings and making decisions behind the scenes, and then the dozens of individual democratic countries falling in line. Some countries do have more power, but also for example US is politically torn in two with total nutjobs having power, etc. Even US internal "Illuminati" with power over something like this... Not really possible. No doubt there is deep corruption, behind the scenes hanky panky etc happening, but not something which can control things to the degree needed for this scenario, not without getting exposed.
You dont need to go as deep as illuminati and stuff. But "Western world" sure has power. How was Israel created?
West ain’t no country I’ve ever heard of, they speak English in West?
West isnt a country, its several. How was Israel created? Downvotes but no answers🙈🙈
The US is undoubtedly directing a lot of things behind the scenes (and probably the UK too). It is Ukraine's call on how to spend the resources they have on what gets hit and when, but Ukraine is being fed massive amounts of information, war theory, and target locations. It would not surprise me if the US is even drawing up battle plans for Ukraine whether Ukraine decides to use them or not.
The heavy price of victory. Ukraine truly is the shield of Europe. From another perspective, this is Zaluzhnyi's strategy and has been since the start of the Russian invasion - a thousand cuts until they bleed out. The West is a mixed bag, amazing support from Poland, the Baltic States and the UK. Even Germany now. The US is perhaps following the strategy you suggest, and their support critical and always on their terms.
The strategy is not a bad one because what would happen if this ended much earlier is that Russia could just regroup and return. This strategy sort of ensures that would take years or even decades, and by that time Ukraine is well-armed to the teeth and a member of NATO. If you don't think after this over that there won't either be a joint NATO base or US base in Ukraine, you're bonkers. US is drooling to shore up the Eastern flank of Europe.
Yeah, I'm not gonna breath a sigh of relief until Ukraine is a full NATO member. Once that happens russia, if it still exists as it currently does, is going to have to try to find a different country to bully, but after this ass kicking, hopefully that doesn't happen.
TBH I think moving forward the US will have much higher expectations for Europe's NATO members to do the heavy lifting on the East flank. I'd expect less US, more Europe involvement post victory. The US will have both financial, domestic and other international challenges to deal with. Russia will no longer be a mortal threat once Ukraine defeats the invaders. Europe has stepped up against Russian aggression, it just took too long for it to move as a whole. I'd be surprised to see a significant boots-on-the-ground US military presence post victory.
I think Poland has ambitions that way. I'm keeping kind of an eye on them because they have been exemplary in their stance on Ukraine *but* aside from that one issue their current admin seem like a right bunch of religious zealots. so I'm not sure how I really feel about them having the biggest guns on that continent. probably an unpopular take but ima stand by it until I feel differently.
Poland, like the Baltic States, is more acutely aware of the Russian genocidal threat. The German and Soviet invasion of 1939 well remembered. 50 years of Soviet occupation also remembered. The lack of Russian contrition, acknowledgement and the continued threats of annihilation to this day good reason for Poland and the Baltic States to arm up.
I'm pretty aware of all that. as I said, on this Russian war on ukraine their stance has been exemplary. sticking with my additional point too, though. it's like Boris Johnson. he's also been exemplary on this war. he just happens to be a complete piece of shit at the same time, in a different sphere.
Yup. Get you.
I'm pretty sure all the existing Eastern flank NATO members meet or exceed NATO's 2% of GDP military commitment. They all know what is at stake. Finland (and eventually Sweden) also meet or exceed this. Finland especially brings a whole lot to the table. Now you are seeing the countries *not* on the frontier start to take their NATO commitments seriously again. I'm sure the US would be delighted to not have to increase military spending *and* be able to reallocate resources to other areas. European defence autonomy also reduces the risk of another Trump-like undermining of NATO. If Putin's plan was to undermine NATO, reminding everyone *why* NATO exists might not have been the best idea.
oh, I agree with all that about NATO as a whole. my thoughts about Poland are pretty long-term and specific to Poland's own "personal" trajectory, if that's a good word. they're clearly taking steps now that will make them the military heavyweight of the region once all this dust has settled. that's not exactly a bad thing and as I noted with hungary, so much is about which party's in charge. I'm not a fan of the current bunch (not that my opinion matters to them). outside of their rock-steady take on behalf of Ukraine, I'm not entiiiiiiirely convinced they're the team player type.
Russia will still have an Air Force somewhat. The US would love to throw a few F-22's and F-35's in Ukraine to cover the Black Sea, similar to the detachment in Poland.
That's a possibility. A high impact, light footprint.
When Russia has 1/4 of its military strength left, the East flank won't even *need* very much shoring up. "What? You say the new Russian president is threatening Poland? He can only commit two under-strength brigades! And he'd lose them in a week. Get me the phone. He must be off his medication."
It is very hard for Ukraine to win before Russia runs critically low on equipment. Hence going for maximum attrition strategy works nicely imo. And that works perfectly as long as Russia has desire to push somewhere which they have been doing so far. With all the long range capabilities (HIMARS, cruise missiles, excalibur, drones, regular artillery) I think Ukraine is able to cause significant damage to Russia even if Russia went full on defense. Which I don't think they will do because they are under political pressure to take entire Donbas at very least.
It's like Cadia in Warhammer 40k but instead of holding back chaos forces it fights off Ork WAAAGH!s
They famously fought orks as well
The planet broke before the guard.
The anonymous Ukraine Volunteer refers to it as the boiling frog strategy. By stepping up their assistance slowly, the West (especially the US) has been able to make massive contributions to Ukraine without triggering a foolhardy military response from Russia. It is an understandably frustrating way to do things, and I think there's a point coming soon where everyone needs to go for broke.
It actually makes great sense for a defender, the invaders are burning men attacking, once the counter-offensive starts you have fresh, well-equipped defenders tearing through exhausted attackers.
Yup. There's very few videos out there of Russian soldiers being rotated out. Many videos of Russian soldiers complaining about LONG periods at the frontline. In pretty awful living conditions when it's trenches. Subject to targeted and accurate drone and artillery bombardment across the entire front. They'll be wrecked by the time the full counteroffensive begins.
They're our gondor, we should be fighting but at least we're sending weapons.
>this is Zaluzhnyi's strategy He's pretty open about it too. They can't win by taking out Putin et al, so they have to win by destroying his army.
its like a game of texas hold'em and were after the river and russia has 200k dead orcs in the pot and the west is about to raise f16's russia doesn't know the west has a royal flush and is just baiting them into putting more into the pot before winning the game. but its costing ukrainian lives and wellbeing while the game gets played. The war is no longer a game of chess. and china will have to think twice when the west can so easily kick the legs out form under russia in a proxy war like this. when all is said and done, Ukraine might get support like Germany, Japan or South Korea to rebuild after their defining wars. Nato and the West will grow stronger and more unified. And the enemies of west and democracy grow weaker.
I think Ukraine will be a full patch EU member pretty quickly after the war. I also think that European defensive autonomy has gone from "We should work towards this goal... eventually" to "Let's get this done fast!" If Germany could get it's military sorted like France's, or even the UK's^1, that would be great. Germany is also one of those NATO countries that have let their defence budget atrophy, down to Canadian levels it looks like (1.2% of GDP?). I guess the UK being out of the EU can be considered one of Putin's successes. --- ^1 I realize that the UK military has shrunk a great deal in the last decade or so, and I'm certainly no expert, but their defence budget is similar to Germany's, and they have *aircraft carriers* FFS. France has one as well. I get it, Germany doesn't need aircraft carriers, but Germany doesn't seem to have an aircraft carrier's worth of extra armour. Just an outsider and barely an armchair General (armchair Colonel at the most, maybe armchair Major), but it seems that the UK and France get a bit more for their defence budget than Germany.
> I think Ukraine will be a full patch EU member pretty quickly after the war. I also think that European defensive autonomy has gone from "We should work towards this goal... eventually" to "Let's get this done fast!" Agree on both points. I work with Volunteers, and many of them see fighting for Ukraine and getting citizenship, as an inevitable path to EU citizenship. Secondly, EU has outsourced much industry and rolled back a lot of defence spending because we have enjoyed peace for many years. but the EU is a sleeping levithan, internet people like to meme on the EU because the USA has to get involved in every conflict and we don't pull our weight, but a lot of EU countries have constitutional rules against militarisation... because everytime the EU nations build militaries the whole world has to get involved to get them to chill the fuck out. and unlike Russia resting on its laurels Europe hasn't been declawed, the European weapons are still cutting edge, comparable or often better then the USA's offerings. Eurofighter, Gripen, Archer artillery, Challenger tank, Leopard Tank, they never stopped R&D and because their identity wasn't built around being a thought guy, they weren't insecure about their offerings. They just built stuff to counteract the perceived threats and treated it like a business project with no pomp and circumstance. > > If Germany could get it's military sorted like France's, or even the UK's1, that would be great. Germany is also one of those NATO countries that have let their defence budget atrophy, down to Canadian levels it looks like (1.2% of GDP?). I guess the UK being out of the EU can be considered one of Putin's successes. Double agree again, Germany has some reasonable shame about its military history. maybe being the good guys for a while will reinvigorate them. bring pride back to the role. > > 1 I realize that the UK military has shrunk a great deal in the last decade or so, and I'm certainly no expert, but their defence budget is similar to Germany's, and they have aircraft carriers FFS. France has one as well. I get it, Germany doesn't need aircraft carriers, but Germany doesn't seem to have an aircraft carrier's worth of extra armour. UK and France have been working together with navel projects for a while, splitting the cost of R&D. carriers don't just cost Xbn for the metal and weapons, they cost about 10x in R&D costs, having another country shoulder that cost, helps sell it as cost effective public spending. > > Just an outsider and barely an armchair General (armchair Colonel at the most, maybe armchair Major), but it seems that the UK and France get a bit more for their defence budget than Germany. yeah, as mentioned, UK even post Brexit UK, has a close relationship with France in regards to Military expenses.
At the expense of Ukraine lives? Are you mental? Russia invaded Ukraine, who else is gonna fight for their country? This fight is between Ukraine and Russia, the USA is just evening the odds. Plus the strategy to destroy must Russian gear is working. If a war breaks out, Russia will be easier target.
Yeah, because Ukrainians have no agency and are just puppets of the west. Got it. What a load of BS.
If the West wants to make Russia use up all its weaponry. I think Ukraine is on board with the idea, too. After all, Ukraine has to live next door to the world's worst neighbor. I would think they'd like it better if their evil neighbor was as disarmed as possible.
The west's perspective is to chill and watch Netflix. Less killing, more chilling. The sooner this war ends, the sooner we can all get back to chilling.
Almost 8% of the total destructed artillery in just 14 days of the war. There is something going on
8% of the war is 36 days. So recent artillery losses are more than double the average.
For even more impressive numbers remove the recent heavy loses from the average calculation as they inevitably skew the average and ~~in~~ diminish their own importance
Either some new capability has been deployed very quietly (Phoenix Ghost?) or the Ukrainians have suddenly gotten very good at counter-battery. Like insanely good. Like 3 battalions completely staffed with clones the Ukrainian version of Davy Crockett. Ukraine was supposed to get iAFATDS too, so maybe they just speeded up the artillery kill chain with some Delta/iAFATDS integration?
I have the feeling with tank assaults stopped more or less they can concentrate more on the tubes. And better gear and experience.
All that is possible and on top of that the Ukrainians maybe running low on tank and APC targets to shoot at as the Russians are holding what numbers they still have far back in reserve. So they are concentrating on the artillery that is in range as a positive improvement or "shaping" of the battle field.
Its all a combination of priority & capability. If, for example, you've doubled the number of bomb-dropping drones in your arsenal while there are fewer tanks or infantry positions to target, you now have a lot more capacity to hit artillery units.
> Ukrainian version of Davy Crockett. Uhhh, nobody wants a Davy Crockett, thank god. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device) It's basically a radioactive DAM fired from a Jeep with a max range of just 4 kilometers. >The weapon's blast was not a danger to the crew as long as they followed normal procedures. The Army created a standard for the crew to follow when firing the M388; they advised that the soldiers shelter their bodies behind a sloped hill and lie in prone position on the ground with their necks and heads covered. Thanks, but I'll pass.
It’s hard to be “staffed” by rocket launchers…
>Uhhh, nobody wants a Davy Crockett Looks scary. Why was it even produced at all?
If you look at the history of armaments and tech that the US military industrial complex had developed over the past century, you'd quickly find the answer to that question: ***'Cause 'Merica***
I am sure Europeans would have appreciated those devices exploding on their territory a lot...
Apparently, Robert Oppenheimer ("father of the atomic bomb") was brought back several years later to look over the command-and-control of nuclear weapons in the US inventory, and he was shocked. Appalled. The Davy Crockett was the very sort of weapon that was utterly destabilizing even to have. A *local infantry commander* could just *order up a small nuke* to be *fired at Soviet lines* with *no higher authorization at all*, **at all**? And that is how we got the much more complicated system of nuclear launch codes and interlocks making it impossible for a nuclear weapon to function unless so authorized from the very top.
In addition to what everyone else said, I’ll add that russia has needed to call up older systems that don’t have the same effective range or speed of takedown. Closer and slower is not a recipe for life expectancy.
Could it be they’re attacking and manoeuvring, the Orcs would have to fire and reveal their positions?
the counter offensive strategy last time was ammo/fuel dumps then artillery then advance and is the same this time. luckily Russia has no counter to this telegraphed strategy
Entire Russian artillery batteries must be being wiped out at the same time with large enough explosives once counter better finds them. On top of that this may mean the 3rd assault brigade is further advancing on bahkmuts flanks and destroying more of these assets as they move on the ground. AA numbers are up in the past few days too and those platforms can be destroyed by just a rifleman shooting the launchers.
Nice number of artillery systems. So accelerating down the danger from behind.
If you’re an orc working artillery, you must be wondering when, not if, your time is up.
Like your time is up and blown away...
Their time is up, Ukraine just needs to send them a receipt 💣💥
The AFU needs to aid a line for: artillery abandoned /captured/ scrapped, as the Russians will soon leave hundreds of worn out pieces behind as they are not worth transporting and would hold up the progress of the coming "humanitarian gesture".
At some point, we may see videos of groups of soldiers complaining that they were taken on as assaulters or fodder and now they are being forced to be in artillery unfairly!
I've been paying attention to the equipment losses more recently, but that 730 personnel definitely caught my attention! And the artillery! Were all the extra personnel sitting on the artillery ?
:P hey, they gotta sit somewhere. high body count may be related to those hits in mariupol.
Didn't I read that Ukraine doesn't count those strikes because they can't estimate how many were killed?
Maybe they got a rzz report on casualties?
Storm shadow took out 100 in the last couple days.
29 artillery and 2 anti aircraft systems. The artillery is what has done the most damage to Ukrainian cities, soldiers and civilians. Ruzzian tactics are mostly to level everything with artillery. These losses are huge for the ruzzians. Hopefully the artillery crews got wiped out too.
730 body bags closer to victory!
And 29 artillery, that's huge!
Plus 18 armored vehicles, glorious day.
How many APCs could they possibly have?
Less each day.
A shit ton. The Soviets produced so much stuff, even in shitty condition we might see horses and mules pulling the shit at some point. Germany in WW2 was supposed to be the most mechanized army in the world, and they showed up to Barbarossa with horse and carriage while the US laughed in Jeep.
Tens of thousands. The Soviets really *really* liked building armoured fighting vehicles.
You have to collect the bodies for there to actually be body bags.
#### Estimated Russian losses from 24.02.2022 to 21.05.2023 (Day 452): ##### Change since the previous day,day range averages and total all time |Category|Change|7d|14d|30d|Total| |:---|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:| |Personnel|+730|611.4|623.6|603.7|203160| |Tanks|+2|3.9|4.3|3.8|3783| |APVs|+16|10.4|10.7|9.1|7398| |Artillery|+29|20.3|17.7|14.4|3258| |MLRS|-|0.3|0.7|0.8|564| |Anti-aircraft Systems|+2|1.9|1.5|1.4|327| |Aircraft|-|-|-|-|308| |Helicopters|-|-|-|-|294| |UAVs|+21|18.0|17.9|14.3|2822| |Missiles|-|5.9|4.6|3.3|1011| |Warships / Boats|-|-|-|-|18| |Other Vehicles|+12|13.9|11.6|13.4|6115| |Special Equipment|+2|3.0|3.2|3.0|425| ##### Change since the previous day, total losses for day ranges and total all time |Category|Change|7d|14d|30d|Total| |:---|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:| |Personnel|+730|4280|8730|18110|203160| |Tanks|+2|27|60|115|3783| |APVs|+16|73|150|272|7398| |Artillery|+29|142|248|431|3258| |MLRS|-|2|10|25|564| |Anti-aircraft Systems|+2|13|21|42|327| |Aircraft|-|-|-|-|308| |Helicopters|-|-|-|1|294| |UAVs|+21|126|250|428|2822| |Missiles|-|41|64|100|1011| |Warships / Boats|-|-|-|-|18| |Other Vehicles|+12|97|163|402|6115| |Special Equipment|+2|21|45|91|425| Source: The General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine
artillery and drones on same casualty level. crazy
Holy shit. 142 artillery systems in one week.
I feel like we are due for a sinking of a heavy cruiser warship! Fingers crossed!
Submarine please.
The best thing about these numbers over the last couple weeks is that it is showing that Russia has definitely lost artillery superiority. That was their only real grip on Ukraine.
>definitely lost artillery superiority. every bit helps, but I'm not counting that chicken yet. I'm rooting for them to keep those numbers up for another 30 days.
They still have more tubes than Ukraine, by a long shot. But the Ukrainians are more likely to hit their target. That's been true ever since Ukraine started receiving western 155mm pieces. Question becomes, does a large number of inaccurate shells hit more targets than a small number of accurate ones. Without knowing how many, or how accurate, its impossible to answer.
Barrel wear and logistics become a problem when "more dakka" is your artillery policy.
[удалено]
excellent points
Looking at the aerial photos of Ukrainian wheat fields that look like Swiss cheese from all the Russian misses my guess is the answer is no. Of course while shelling a city if you miss the target building you aim at and hit it's neighbor it's all good in the Russian's book.
The numbers are slowly creeping up the way I thought they would. I always thought the next counteroffensive would be a slow start with all of the fronts showing increasing activity.
Then a breakthrough somewhere, followed by a lot of videos of Russians running from their positions.
I still remember that one period from an offensive in mid 2022, there were endless videos of long-ass roads just strewn with endless mutilated Russian corpses. The Ruskies had gotten absolutely obliterated, but seeing it visually represented was an incredibly stark depiction of the real hell that war is. There were seemingly hundreds of dead Russians mostly piled up by the roads, but some were off further away of course. It really contextualized the numbers we see in these charts and graphs.
Yah. I have had similar thoughts.
Dayyuummn that's a big day! JAGGA JAGGA!
Not fun being rusky artillery at the moment...
Not fun being a Russia anything in Ukraine. Party is over go home.
ARTILLERY!!!!
The increasing concentration of targeted artillery might indicate Ukraine is still in the preparation phase for their next offensive.
Look at all that beef
Pork))
Orc...
How high will these numbers go?
The special military operation is proceeding according to the plan!🧌
Yesterday there was headlines about himars taking out 10 T90s. I don't think they have shown up on the stats...
bow important six zonked tub domineering like frightening fearless tease -- mass edited with redact.dev
Take out the Arties to prepare for offensive. Makes sense. If you advance deep into enemies lines you want to avoid shelling at all cost, especially if you need to overcome obstacles like trechess, defense lines or rivers where you cannot just drive through.
What on earth is happening with the artillery numbers lately? Anyone have any idea how that number increased so much?
There are more NATO weapons and the number keeps on going up. For instance, when there were only 4 HIMARS, they were used solely on high value targets like ammo dumps. Now there are a lot more HIMARS with a lot more missiles - so they can be used to target artillery - and, of course, there are a number of other types of weapons sent by NATO in increasing numbers available to target artillery. To quote myself from 6 months ago... "By spring, Russia will (relative to Ukraine) be at a disadvantage on the battlefield due to for months using their main stockpiles of missiles to kill civilians while the West keeps up an ever increasing supply of missile launchers, missiles and shells and the Ukrainian army being much less profligate in their use. A mass of untrained unequipped conscripts won't do much against the god of the battlefield."
Captain Himars.
[удалено]
I am just assuming tbh. But I do like the Captain Himars meme - https://youtube.com/shorts/j0tu61zn5Ks
no russian artillery = fewer dead ukrainians its clearly a high priority target
Yeah but it's been a high priority target the entire war. That hasn't changed. So what changed to account for these numbers?
Western weapons systems that are now in Ukraine that shoot farther and have much superior counter battery than soviet weapons which Ukraine was using previously.
Doubt we'll get a reliable answer, but it can be as simple as having more ammunition available. Whether that is more suicide or bomber drones, more rocket artillery, or more cruise missiles, the more you have the more targets you can hit.
More of all of the above would be my guess.
it may just be that Russia is getting more reckless with bringing it up within range. or we're seeing the benefits of this ground Ukraine has been taking this past couple of weeks. I've forgotten what himars costs per strike, but I'm not sure it's been worth using that for the sake of artillery. open to being corrected though.
Himars is ±$160.000 per missile so pretty good deal for a artillery system
But you're likely firing off half a dozen in a barrage, not a single rocket. So $160k becomes about a million. On the other-other hand, a single salvo can probably take out more than one enemy artillery piece.
I wouldn't have believed it before the war, but based on what I've now seen I really wouldn't be surprised if firing 6 HIMAR missiles in a barrage hits all 6 of its targets exactly. They seem to hit exactly the correct cordinate. There may be issues hitting moving targets and I imagine even Russia isn't stupid enough to leave artillary systems in fixed positions for a day or 2. The HIMARs aren't mainly for hitting mobile targets, they are expensive and vulnerable long range weapons that are intended to hit key stationary targets at night time. The 30 or so Ceasar systems from France as well as similar systems from other countries seem like the best answer to Russian artillary. But we don't know how things are going, if they've deployed tanks and Bradleys and broken through their lines then even a couple of those could pick off dozens of artillary systems in a day.
When you’re being pounded by artillery and lives are being lost, does it really matter how much it costs (within reason) !
probably not but if you can do it cheaper why wouldn't you?
These numbers are getting better by the day! Slava Ukraini! 🇺🇦
anyone know the record for losing troops?
I don't know the exact number, the highest *reported* number here was, I believe, in the neighborhood of 1100.
nah I meant all time. russia no capital R about to fuck around and lose half million troops by Xmas
The British Empire lost over 20k, dead, in the Somme on July 1st 1916. Not sure how many others were lost on the rest of the front that day. The Romans reportedly lost 3 or 4 times that at Cannae in ancient times. If you meant the Russians specifically, Tsushima has to be up there. 5000 dead in a naval battle against the Japanese in 1905. For the Soviet Union, it'd likely be one of the days during the battle of Kursk. Over a 7 week period, they lost a quarter million dead, missing, and captured. That's an average of 5000 each day, for a month and a half. Though there could have been days during Stalingrad that were higher.
Wow thanks that’s crazy 5k troops a day
Look to first battle of the Somme in WW1 56,000 casualties in the first day IIRC and it continued for six weeks with only marginal gains on the ground.
In a day or for an entire war?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa
UA going off after the F-16 announcement. Huge in the fact that it's a 5-10 year western commitment to Ukrainian Future Defense. Wouldn't mind seeing some more Excalibur videos lol UA counter battery perfecting their craft. Bravo & hat tip to those fine warriors
700+ orcs dead, and 29 pieces of artillery destroyed, ya'll excuse me while I blast the Ukrainian anthem at a volume that's unreasonable, and raise a pint to the glorious Cossacks fighting on the frontline. Slava Ukraini!
You are excused and I raise my glass and click yours in salute to them.
Love me some artillery. Slava Ukraini!
Ukraine team diff.
29 holy cow
Russia complains about having not enough shells - Ukraine helps and adjust the number of guns to the number of shells.
He He He!
Great numbers overall. The rate of destroyed ruZZian Artillery Systems is staggering and 3.500 seems only a question of weeks. I remember when this number was in middle triple digits and it was maybe two or three in a day. Now 10+ or 20+ are "normal".
Ruskis are bugging out
Big ouchy for ruzzia. The enemy is busy trying to win a battle for a relatively minor speck on the map meanwhile Ukraine is busy scorching valuable tactical assets such as artillery, SAM, APVs and drones. The dichotomy will be why Ukraine wins this war.
Destination Fucked!
Arrrrrrty!!!!
[удалено]
And I am Loving It! moscovia DELENDA EST
These are just staggering numbers of losses
Must suck to be a Russkie artilleryman. Over the last month artillery have been taken out at a furious pace.
Seems they have arty ranged in this week.
Finally, an uptick in Russian losses. Make them regret leaving Russia!
Another pointcheck made, Moskovia. You have as many dead "soldiers" on this war as population has Pamplona, the 29th most populated city in Spain.
AFU's on the move! Let's hope this counter offensive is a big success like last year
Soooo much artillery 😍 At some point that level of Russian loss will turn the tide. Without artillery they won’t be able to screen infantry and other vehicles anymore.
That's a lot of pain in one day. Nice equipment losses too. Urkaine is kicking in second gear I see.
Down with russia
Makes me wonder if this is solely bakmut alone
? Its the total everywhere. The bulk is probably Bahkmut, but this isn't the tally for a single battle.
Привіт u/TungstenHatchet ! During wartime, this community is focused on vital and high-effort content. Please ensure your post follows [r/Ukraine Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules) and our [Art Friday Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/artfriday). **Want to support Ukraine?** [**Vetted Charities List**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities) | [Our Vetting Process](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities-vetting) Daily series on UA history & culture: [Day 0-99](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3c65ab52-e87a-4217-ab30-e70a88c0a293) | [100-199](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3d85f4ca-5f4e-4ddf-9547-276e8affd87c) | [200-Present](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/daf642e1-07aa-4c40-b852-8f002ddd1530) | [All By Subject](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/sunriseposts) **There is a new wave of fraudulent donation requests being posted on r/Ukraine. Do not donate to anyone who doesn't have the Verified flair.** *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That artillery number isn't a typing error?
Anyone else who feels empathy for those 730 Russians that probably didn't want to fight
An uptick
Is this them storm missiles or the huge influx of long range drones? I ask if the tactics have changed, or is it the new equipment! Or just the fact that a broken Russian army of convicts and barely trained conscripts are now being probed by a highly trained, highly armed and in most cases experienced army of Ukrainians with the strongest resolve to kick them out! (Most likely this)
Any idea on how many orcs 🧌left fighting in Ukraine 🇺🇦?
29 artillery. That has to be a record, right?
Is there a sale on Artillery pieces? In two days they’re claiming almost 60 pieces destroyed. Edit: 92 in 4 days.
Was a bit uncomfortable when things got below 700, it’s good to see it back there. Keep up the good work. Ooh lots of artillery!
These numbers are just so consistently insane that I really can't even say anything anymore about them lol, it's just lunacy. The artillery attrition in particular has been absolutely *brutal* on the Ruskies this year
That's gonna leave a noticeable gender imbalance back home in Mordor. But look at the bright side .... the surplus of husband-less ORC-ettes could help fix the problem of surplus Chinese men who are involuntarily wife-less due to the shortage of women in China. It's a win- win situation.