History in the Making: Russian Invasion

In reply to jmabarone :

One example does not prove that all Russian weapons are capable of the same accuracy. While it is no doubt true that the Russians have been disingenuous about strikes against useful but normally protected targets (hospitals, for example), it is also no doubt true that many of their strikes have gone off of their intended targets, due either to poor inherent accuracy of the system or due to EW and GPS jamming by the Ukrainians (just as normally accurate Western weapons have been sent off-target by Russian jamming). No government will admit it, but the simple fact is that a strike aimed at a militarily-significant target that is diverted or intercepted in a way that inadvertently results in civilian casualties is considered an operational success for the targeted side, albeit a sub-optimal one.

02Pilot said:

In reply to jmabarone :

One example does not prove that all Russian weapons are capable of the same accuracy. While it is no doubt true that the Russians have been disingenuous about strikes against useful but normally protected targets (hospitals, for example), it is also no doubt true that many of their strikes have gone off of their intended targets, due either to poor inherent accuracy of the system or due to EW and GPS jamming by the Ukrainians (just as normally accurate Western weapons have been sent off-target by Russian jamming). No government will admit it, but the simple fact is that a strike aimed at a militarily-significant target that is diverted or intercepted in a way that inadvertently results in civilian casualties is considered an operational success for the targeted side, albeit a sub-optimal one.

 

I gotcha and agree, but the context of many of his shared posts aren't just minor misses (i.e. the hospital right by the weapons depot).  152mm shells in the middle of residential areas, air strikes on an apartment complex, etc.  It is evident to people in Ukraine that the conflict is not about "denazification" of the leadership structure in Kiev unless "denazification" is all ethnic Ukrainians.  

Perhaps the GPS jamming capabilities are not employed in the Kharkiv region because they are held for more strategic locations.  He (our missionary) has noted that their region has been relatively quiet until recently in spite of being right on the border.  

I know there are some with a bit of gun knowledge here.  What do you make of this, found in Ukraine?:

The grip seems super unusual to me.  It almost looks like a gun optimized to shoot out of trenches (ala WWI), but I am not sure why it would have that type of sight on it.  Looks like it might be a bit of a wrist breaker also(!?)

WWI trench rifle:

Though the AK stock reminds me a bit more of this, but I don't see how it is aimed (maybe just to spray bullets, or maybe a separate mirror?):

aircooled said:

I know there are some with a bit of gun knowledge here.  What do you make of this, found in Ukraine?:

The grip seems super unusual to me.  It almost looks like a gun optimized to shoot out of trenches (ala WWI), but I am not sure why it would have that type of sight on it.  Looks like it might be a bit of a wrist breaker also(!?)

It looks like a fairly standard AKM with a damaged grip and burnt stock. Here's a Century Arms version with a folding stock.

AAZCD-Jon (Forum Supporter) said:

It looks like a fairly standard AKM with a damaged grip and burnt stock. 

 

Yup, looks like a really berk'd over AK-47 to me.

Agreed with the above.  Dust cover is missing too, but AKs have been proven to function without it.  

I guess that's the firearms version of someone finding the severely rotted corpse of a raccoon or whale and asking what kind of cryptid it is

Something similar has been posted previously.  This is a new article that is effectively the same point.

As noted, the chances of Ukraine making any significant ground gains in the future are very low and the question at this point really is how much will they loose.  The only potential "lane" I see for them at this point is to make it as painful for the Russians as possible so as to create a good negotiation position, potentially even to the point of gaining back land without having to capture it.  I would hope they are being supported (clearly silently) by the west in this, although the US publicly (seemingly) is asking them to stop.

For the chart, it should be noted, that although the current output is not that much lower than average, it has a very significant downward trend for a few months (which was clearly higher than average).  Also as noted previously, oil and gas are a significant part of their economy, especially now.

Putin’s fuel problem: How Ukraine is sapping Russia’s diesel and gasoline

Ukraine is taking out oil refineries inside Russia, cratering Moscow’s supplies and sending local prices soaring.

.....Diesel prices for Russian consumers have skyrocketed, rising almost 10 percent in the past week alone, according to the government’s figures. Petrol costs have also hit a six-month high, up more than 20 percent from the start of the year as supply tightens and more and more facilities are forced to suspend production.

Last Wednesday, two fuel storage facilities owned by Russian energy giant Rosneft, around 500 kilometers from the border with Ukraine, were severely damaged by drones as fuel went up in smoke. More than a dozen refineries across nine Russian regions have been similarly hit this year, with officials in Kyiv saying the industry is a legitimate war target.....

https://www.politico.eu/article/vladimir-putin-russia-diesel-prices-skyrocket-ukraine-war-drone-strikes-oil-refineries/

• Russia is the world’s third largest oil producer behind the United States and Saudi Arabia. In January 2022, Russia’s total oil production was 11.3 mb/d, of which 10 mb/d was crude oil, 960 kb/d condensates and 340 kb/d NGLs. By comparison, US total oil production was 17.6 mb/d while Saudi Arabia produced 12 mb/d. 
• Russia is the world’s largest exporter of oil to global markets and the second largest crude oil exporter behind Saudi Arabia. In December 2021, it exported 7.8 mb/d, of which crude and condensate accounted for 5 mb/d, or 64%. Oil product exports totalled 2.85 mb/d, of which 1.1 mb/d of gasoil, 650 kb/d of fuel oil and 500 kb/d of naphtha and 280 kb/d of vacuum gas oil (VGO). Gasoline, LPG, jet fuel and petroleum coke made up the remaining 350 kb/d. 

https://www.iea.org/reports/russian-supplies-to-global-energy-markets/oil-market-and-russian-supply-2

Russia rejects our western-biased reality and substitutes their own:

https://www.404media.co/russia-clones-wikipedia-censors-it-bans-original/

Comparing the two at the time of launch has already been most informative.

In reply to GameboyRMH :

But a potential gold mine of "information".  Check out this "incident":

Incident in Bucha

In accordance with the agreements in Istanbul, Russian troops reduced their activity in the Kiev and Chernigov directions and on March 30 left the city of Bucha near Kiev . The abandoned city was immediately occupied by Ukrainian special forces . Two days after the departure of Russian troops, on the evening of April 1, Ukrainian telegram channels for the first time reported about multiple bodies of those killed on the streets of the city, despite the fact that the day before, the head of the Bucha administration, Anatoly Fedoruk, did not mention anything like that in a televised speech on the occasion of the “victory.” . On April 2, the international press and Ukrainian authorities began publishing footage from Bucha, where corpses were visible scattered along the road, some of them wearing white bandages, which indicated the sympathies of the victims for the Russians.

Based on the condition of the bodies of the dead, the forensic expert suggested that death could have occurred no more than a day before the photograph was taken. Clean and intact clothing on the bodies was also noted, which was impossible when the corpses were exposed to the open air for a long time. The Russian Ministry of Defense denied involvement in the killings of civilians in Bucha, and called the published materials a provocation . There was no international investigation. The Russian Foreign Ministry appealed to the UN Secretary General with a demand to provide lists of those killed in Bucha in order to establish the identity and place of residence of these people, however, despite repeated reminders, the lists were never provided by the Ukrainian side [28] [29] .

I you want to look for yourself, it's called ruwiki (clearly tread lightly).  You can find it in a search and use google translate to read.

Oh, and here is the "other" Wikipedia about the same "incident", you will note a slight difference in the number of references.

During the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, heavy fighting took place in Bucha as part of the Kyiv offensive, resulting in severe Russian losses.[12] The city was captured by Russian forces on 12 March. Mayor Anatoliy Fedoruk announced the recapture of Bucha by Ukrainian forces on 31 March 2022.[13]

A few days after the recapture, on 2 April 2022, news reports and videos emerged showing streets in Bucha covered with the bodies of men dressed in civilian clothes. Some of those found had their hands tied.[14][15] Among those killed were women and children. According to first estimations at least 280 bodies were found.[16] There was also evidence that Russian soldiers had systemically tortured, mutilated and executed many Ukrainians in the basement of a summer camp.[17] The event caused the Ukrainian government to call on the ICC to investigate whether or not Russia had committed war crimes.[18] On 7 April, the mayor of Bucha, Anatoliy Fedoruk, reported that almost 90% of the dead residents had bullet wounds, not shrapnel wounds.[19]

Soon after the town's liberation, rebuilding efforts began. CNN reported in February 2023 that some areas looked almost "back to normal".[20] The road near Bucha has a "graveyard" of destroyed Russian military equipment that has become a tourist attraction and pilgrimage destination for Ukrainians to "see what victory looks like."[20]

On 2 July 2023, a memorial to 501 dead residents of Bucha, one of the first towns to suffer from the terror of the Russian military, was unveiled.[21]

In reply to GameboyRMH :

This once again confirms that the Russian government is concerned first and foremost with domestic stability and maintaining support there; just the fact that it's in Russian tells you that (foreign propaganda sites aimed at external audiences are almost always in English). Clearly, this sort of site is not going to convince many outside of Russia, but if it's the only internal source of information the state can shape whatever narrative it wants without fear of contradiction, creating the illusion of truth.

I know it's not the gif thread, but this seems appropriate for RuWiki:

For some perspective, this pretty much seems to follow what o2 laid out from what I can tell:

From entry on Ukraine:

Despite the neutrality initially enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine , after the 2014 coup d'etat, Ukraine headed towards joining the military-political NATO bloc opposing Russia . Increasing every year infringement of the rights of Russian-speaking citizens of Ukraine and national minorities, the war in Donbass , unleashed by the central authorities in Kiev in the spring of 2014 and lasting 8 years, radical nationalism , which became part of the state ideology and policy in Ukraine, many years of military development of the territory of Ukraine by NATO and the resulting threat to Russia's security led to the need for a Special Military Operation in Ukraine , which began by decision of Russian President Vladimir Putin on February 24, 2022.

From entry on Special Military Operation:

In an address by the Russian President in the early morning of February 24, 2022, it was said that a special military operation was being carried out to ensure the security of Russia ; demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine , protection of the Russian population , subjected to political, cultural, educational and linguistic discrimination in Ukraine.

From the speech of the President of Russia: “ In accordance with Article 51 of Part 7 of the UN Charter, with the sanction of the Federation Council of Russia and in pursuance of the treaties on friendship and mutual assistance ratified by the Federal Assembly on February 22 of this year with the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Lugansk People’s Republic, I have decided to hold a special military operation. »

The special military operation was preceded by a protracted crisis in relations between Russia and Ukraine , many years of NATO expansion to the east , failure to implement the Minsk agreements , increased supplies of weapons to Ukraine by NATO countries , a threat to the security of Russia , the war in Donbass , started by the Ukrainian authorities after the coup in the spring of 2014 and continued by the beginning of a special military operation 8 years.

Russia breached global chemical weapons ban in Ukraine war, US says

The United States on Wednesday accused Russia of violating the international chemical weapons ban by deploying the choking agent chloropicrin against Ukrainian troops and using riot control agents "as a method of warfare" in Ukraine...

...Chloropicrin is listed as a banned choking agent by the Hague-based Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which was created to implement and monitor compliance with the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-breached-global-chemical-weapons-ban-ukraine-war-us-says-2024-05-01/

The Russians may be rushing to get something done in the face of what seems like realization from the west that they very much need more support.  F16 will likely be showing up over Ukraine in a month or so (maybe even now...), long range ATACMS are already falling on airbases in Crimea, the Kerch bridge is now under direct threat and more so once F16's show up.

The Ukrainians may not be as on their heals as Russia may assume since with the impeding arrival of more munitions etc, means they may not have to conserve as much as they were because they know they will restock at a particular date.

Also of note is that Ukraine has withdrawn M1's from front line operations.  As with most other tanks, they are mostly targets at this point until more effective anti-drone systems are in place.

This summer is looking to be a busy time in Ukraine.  Will it be a turning point?  Who knows.  It is seemingly like the great hope of the Ukrainians is efficient/targeted use of technology while the Russian fall back on their seemingly unending ability to throw flesh at the lines.

Skibitskyi assessed that Russian forces will likely begin an offensive effort towards Kharkiv and Sumy oblasts at the end of May or start of June 2024 but that Russian forces will not be able to take Kharkiv or Sumy cities. Skibitskyi stated that Russian forces have currently concentrated roughly 35,000 personnel in the international border area and plan to concentrate a total of 50,000 to 70,000 personnel for this effort, presumably before the start of the offensive operation.[6] Skibitskyi stated that this grouping will be insufficient for achieving anything beyond localized gains, consistent with ISW’s assessments that Russian forces would likely struggle to take Kharkiv City but that Russian offensive operations in the area would draw and fix Ukrainian forces from other parts of the frontline.[7] Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi stated on April 28 that Ukrainian forces are monitoring the increased number of Russian forces regrouping in the Kharkiv direction, likely referring to Belgorod Oblast, and that Ukrainian forces have reinforced defensive positions in the "most threatened" areas with additional artillery and tank units.[8]

For reference as to where Sumy and Kharkiv are.  This area has been very quite since the start of the war and as can be seen below, is where the Russians where pushed back the hardest.  As can be seen below, the majority of the Russian forces seem to be elsewhere, but have a numbers advantage, making the front wider might work to their advantage.... but... some of those areas (e.g. south west and Crimea) are far harder to supply than others which may be one of the justifications for an attack from the north east (which is in the direction of Moscow).

Well... it looks like the Russians are starting to learn what the range of those new ATACMS are (the target area looks to be exactly where the unit 3 up, top center, from the city of Luhansk is in the map above):

Ukraine wiped out 100 Russian troops at once in a strike showcasing the range and power of its new US ATACMS

A Ukrainian ATACMS long-range missile strike killed more than 100 Russian soldiers in an occupied region 50 miles from the front line, according to OSINT and military analysts.

Ukrainian forces targeted a Russian military training area some 50 miles behind the front line in the occupied Luhansk Oblast in eastern Ukraine, per an assessment by The Institute for the Study of War....

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-new-long-range-atacms-kill-100-russia-soldiers-distant-2024-5

Pic of gathering apparently attacked with 4 missiles:

In reply to aircooled :

Unless that was a group of highly-trained specialists, that was a pointless waste of scarce and expensive munitions that could have been used to far greater effect elsewhere.

In reply to 02Pilot :

I was thinking a similar thing.  One might have been a decent deal, but 4, with the value Russia puts on it's troops... seems like kind of a bad deal.   It will of course serve to motivate Russia to more effectively scatter resources within that range, but there might have been a more valuable example they could have used.  They apparently did (may have) knocked out some aircraft at an airbase in Crimea recently with the new ATACMS.

I don't know how many they have, but much like the the regular range HIMARS rockets, they have a period of time where they will be extra effective until Russia either figures out how to counter them, or scatter resources (which might a lot of work considering the ranges involved).

It looks like some that is in the article linked above:

...Ukraine said that strike targeted the Dzhankoi military base in northern Crimea, destroying or critically damaging four S-400 launchers, three radar stations, air-defense equipment, and airspace surveillance equipment....

....Philip Karber, a military analyst with expertise on Ukraine, told Radio Free Europe this week that the long-range ATACMS have the potential to "basically make Crimea military worthless.".....

In other news, the British have given the green light for their donated weapons to be used against Russia proper. I have to imagine this is a feeler to see how the Russians react (it certainly was run past the US before being announced); if they complain loudly but otherwise continue business as usual, I would not be surprised to see the US at least start making noises about allowing the Ukrainians to go weapons-free inside Mother Russia.

In regards to the ATACMS strike noted above.  One possible reason for it that I was thinking... pure guess on my part... is that it might have been a bit of a message to the Russians to be careful about massing troops because of Ukraine's new capability.  Since the Russians seem to be setting up for a push from the north east (Kharkiv) this might be a way to disrupt that a bit.  Of note is that the ATACMS they used for this attack where of the cluster munitions style, which is similar to the artillery shells the US sent them, but like a 100 times more powerful (way more and way bigger sub-munitions)

https://us.firenews.video/war-in-ukraine-news/mgm-140b-what-is-known-about-atacms-with-a-cluster-warhead-and-where-will-the-ukrainian-armed-forces-now-finish-off-video-maps/

The guy who makes threats... makes a threat:

The first public statement of the Russian Federation threatening a strike against a Western country:
If Ukraine attacks Russia with British weapons, we will strike London’s targets both in Ukraine and abroad, - Russian Foreign Ministry

I found this pretty interesting.  Obviously in reference to Iran and it's attack, but relevant to what was discussed here about the economics of war and the cost / benefit of weapons and countermeasures (e.g.  $500,000 missiles shooting down $20,000 drones).

A few interesting aspects here.  One is the obvious cost / benefit ratio issue, another is the HORRIBLE reliability issues of the Iranian weapons (50%!!! wow, that's old school CCCP reliability numbers there!) and the third is that amount of work the F15's did!  I would be super curious as to how the F-15's took down the drones.  I would not think a Python (Israeli sidewinder style IR AA missile) could lock onto a drone (?).  Did they take them down with cannon?  Even if they did, having a radar lock would be critical and I am not sure and F15 Strike Eagle can do that (they are LOADED with fancy electronics though) since it is at night (they certainly have IR capabilities though).  Doing a gun run at a very low altitude target going 115mph at night when you likely want to keep your airspeed above 200....

Hey, if they could unwrap some of the old Spitfires they used to have they could go old school on them!!

On 13 April 2024, Iran launched a multi-axis attack against Israel using approximately 300 weapons—110 ballistic missiles, 30 cruise missiles, and over 150 kamikaze drones. It was one of (if not the) largest unmanned aerial attacks in history, but almost none of them hit their target.

Roughly half crashed due to technical issues, and of the 170 that remained, 99% were shot down—never to reach their target.

The Pentagon’s well-coordinated multinational regionwide effort to defend Israel worked, including the first combat use of SM-3 ballistic missile interceptors and a herculean effort by Air Force F-15E Strike Eagles that downed 70 drones.

It was effective, but the problem is it’s not replicable. The issue is partly capability and partly capacity, but the real problem is the strategy—cost imposition.

Costly

As a rule of thumb, defensive weapons are roughly twice as expensive as offensive ones. This is because they are often much more complex, a result of the significant technical demands of air and missile defense interceptors.

But that 2:1 is just missile vs. missile. The cost ratio of Iran’s attack is likely closer to 10:1…in favor of Iran. Considering all the other factors that enabled those allied missiles to be in the air—development, operations, logistics, sustainment, and the manpower to do it all—it’s easily 100:1.

The proliferation of low-cost, expendable drones makes this even worse.

In the Red Sea, military ships are forced to use high-end weapons because they are not defending themselves—they’re providing wide area defense for unarmed merchant ships. The result: $2m SM-2 missiles intercepting $2,000 Houthi drones. To this point, the Navy has expended $1 Billion in munitions countering attacks in the Middle East in the past six months. But it’s even worse when you consider this 100:1 cost exchange is before factoring in the costs associated with the ships shooting the missiles. Ouch.

Good news: Right now, the Pentagon currently has a cost-focused counter-drone team looking at this problem.

Cost Imposition

Whether deliberate or by circumstance, the US has been caught off guard by a cost-imposing strategy.

This type of strategy thoughtfully applies select technologies in ways that compel adversaries to allocate disproportionate resources to counter.

Cost imposition is not only painful in the sense of cost exchange; it’s scalable pain, too. Dialing up the effect of a cost-imposing strategy results in massive second and third-order impacts: magazine depth planning, logistics, and all the coordination to re-arm ground launchers, jets, and ships (which have to port to reload).

As the US military looks to reoptimize for great power competition, cost-imposing strategies are one of the most beneficial elements of the competitive spectrum.

If the drone has a turbine engine a sidewinder-style missile would lock onto it easily. If it has an ICE (which I think most of today's cheap kamikaze drones do, something between a large RC and medium motorcycle-sized ICE) it would still get a lock but not so easily. If it's electric-powered, trying to get an IR lock would be a joke.

In terms of getting a radar lock, a 3G+ fighter should be able to lock onto anything Cub-sized or larger without stealth features, but I wouldn't be surprised if they could lock onto something the size of a large RC plane with no stealth design. Here's a typical-size target drone that 3G+ fighters can easily get a radar lock on, for example:

The cost of drones and their impact vs the cost of the counter measures is an interesting deal.  Using a million to knock down a 100k drone is not sustainable. 

I suspect you are right (the F15E is a super capable plane).  I was thinking along the lines of the Shahed 136, which is very small and runs two cylinder two stroke I believe.  They do have larger ones though.  Pic, with Ukrainian president for scale (!)