OT: Putin's War in Ukraine

[kato13]

Russian TU-22M Bomber Downed Over Russia

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAwIVMfs3GM



Well this is something I never expected to actually see real life video of, even though I have read about, thought about, and even gamed many scenarios where such a thing would happen.

Probably friendly fire, but maybe spec ops working near an airfield?

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by kato13

Russian TU-22M Bomber Downed Over Russia

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAwIVMfs3GM



Well this is something I never expected to actually see real life video of, even though I have read about, thought about, and even gamed many scenarios where such a thing would happen.

Probably friendly fire, but maybe spec ops working near an airfield?

Allegedly our old friend the Ukrainian S-200. According to Ukrainian Intelligence, they were waiting for a week for the bombers to get close enough to an emplaced launcher, and they got a hit at 308 kilometers. An anonymous Ukrainian defense official told The War Zone that they've received "help from partners" upgrading the S-200's guidance system.

Personal speculation is they may have gotten assistance from Poland, who upgraded their monkey model S-200 missiles between 1999-2002, replacing tubes with transistors. I also suspect they may have slipped in an active radar seeker with the saved space/mass to help improve long-range accuracy over the semi-active radar seeker originally fitted - there was speculation right before the war that they had developed an active seeker for the S-125 and were trying to fit it to the S-200. If that improved accuracy sufficiently, they could also shrink the warhead and program the updated electronics to modify the flight profile to eke out some extra range with a slightly lighter missile. It would also let them shut off the ground radar much earlier if it wasn't having to illuminate the target for SARH, reducing the ground units' vulnerability to SEAD.

[kato13]

US Ukraine bill passed - \o/ yay!

I found it interesting an ATACMS transfer was coded into the text

Sec. 505. (a) Transfer of Long-Range ATACMS Required.—As soon as practicable after the date of enactment of this Act, the President shall transfer long range Army Tactical Missile Systems to the Government of Ukraine to assist the Government of Ukraine in defending itself and achieving victory against the Russian Federation.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-...5/text?s=2&r=4

While I am pretty sure we have already delivered some, I have been waiting for the time when there would be substantial delivery. Hopefully it will be soon.

While ATACMS may not be the final straw, along with F-16s (and Nato specific ordinance) arriving I am feeling more confident the Kerch bridge will not see new years day.

[kcdusk]

I'm a long time reader of The War Zone. But in the last two or three days i have not been able to read the articles when i click on them. I get a message that reads

"Application error: a client-side exception has occurred (see the browser console for more information)."

Any ideas if this is a problem my end? Or their end? Anyone else having a problem?

[Raellus]

I haven't had any issues. I'm not a tech-savvy guy, but try clearing your cache and see if that doesn't clear up the issue.

-

[kato13]

Ukrainian USV armed with a twin rail launcher for R-73 all-aspect IR homing air-to-air missiles.



I have been waiting for something like this to show up. The missile capability probably limits it to low flying and slow speed targets (helicopters) but still a nice addition to the Black sea.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by kato13

Ukrainian USV armed with a twin rail launcher for R-73 all-aspect IR homing air-to-air missiles.

War Zone dropped an article about this today.

https://www.twz.com/news-features/uk...o-air-missiles

The contrast in styles is somewhat humorous.

Ukrainian innovation: Drone attack boat with IR homing AAMs.

Russian innovation: Build a metal shed around an MBT to protect it from FPV attack drones.

Slava Ukraini!

-

[Raellus]

The Ukrainians are using their new, longer-range ATACMS to hit SAM sites and Russian-held airfields in Crimea. I wonder what their long-game is. I'm guessing that it's a shaping operation, to prepare for entry of the incoming F-16s from Netherlands and Denmark. That said, I'm not sure what the point is, strategically, as, at this point, I don't think Ukraine has any realistic chance of regaining Crimea by force-of-arms. So why expend their finite stock of long-range ATACMS in pursuit of that goal? It seems like they could be better spent shaping the battlefield in Donetsk and/or around Kharkiv, where UAF ground and- soon- air forces have a much better (but still not great, sadly) chance of regaining territory.

Thoughts?

-

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by Raellus

The Ukrainians are using their new, longer-range ATACMS to hit SAM sites and Russian-held airfields in Crimea. I wonder what their long-game is. I'm guessing that it's a shaping operation, to prepare for entry of the incoming F-16s from Netherlands and Denmark. That said, I'm not sure what the point is, strategically, as, at this point, I don't think Ukraine has any realistic chance of regaining Crimea by force-of-arms. So why expend their finite stock of long-range ATACMS in pursuit of that goal? It seems like they could be better spent shaping the battlefield in Donetsk and/or around Kharkiv, where UAF ground and- soon- air forces have a much better (but still not great, sadly) chance of regaining territory.

Thoughts?

-

Russia has been using those sites to launch missiles at civilian targets within Ukraine, both converted SAMs and hypersonics carried by aircraft flying from Crimean airbases. Knocking those out would reduce Russia's ability to target Odessa in particular, allowing more grain to be exported.

[ToughOmbres]

Originally Posted by Raellus

The Ukrainians are using their new, longer-range ATACMS to hit SAM sites and Russian-held airfields in Crimea. I wonder what their long-game is. I'm guessing that it's a shaping operation, to prepare for entry of the incoming F-16s from Netherlands and Denmark. That said, I'm not sure what the point is, strategically, as, at this point, I don't think Ukraine has any realistic chance of regaining Crimea by force-of-arms. So why expend their finite stock of long-range ATACMS in pursuit of that goal? It seems like they could be better spent shaping the battlefield in Donetsk and/or around Kharkiv, where UAF ground and- soon- air forces have a much better (but still not great, sadly) chance of regaining territory.

Thoughts?

-

A feint? Concentrate some effort in Crimea with ATACMS to draw off Russian resources then deploy the newly arrived F-16s en masse to achieve temporary air superiority in one of the sectors being threatened by recent Russian advances?

[Heffe]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

Russia has been using those sites to launch missiles at civilian targets within Ukraine, both converted SAMs and hypersonics carried by aircraft flying from Crimean airbases. Knocking those out would reduce Russia's ability to target Odessa in particular, allowing more grain to be exported.

It also forces Russia to shift more AA equipment away from other parts of the front, as Russia can't afford to leave Crimea defenseless against air attacks.

Ultimately, if Russia loses the Kerch bridge, it puts most of the southern part of Ukraine at risk of becoming out of supply. To be clear, I don't see Ukraine pushing into Crimea with ground forces (ever, as historically that never seems to work out well for attackers), but if the Kerch bridge goes down and Ukraine takes control of the isthmus or close to the isthmus, they may not need to. I imagine this may also partially explain Ukrainian attacks on Russian landing ships in the Black Sea. Crimea becoming unlivable for Russians would put extreme political pressure on Putin domestically.

[Vespers War]

Another potential justification for suppressing Russian anti-air assets in Crimea popped up as part of Sweden's airplane donation - in addition to 30 F-16s, they're donating a pair of Saab 340 AEW aircraft. The problem is going to be operating those somewhere where they can get a view of the airspace without being shot down by long-range SAMs or R-37 missiles. Reducing the AA defenses of Crimea could give them some breathing room to operate over the western Black Sea, since fighters trying to engage them there would have to get within range of Ukrainian SAMs or take a widely circuitous route that would give the radar plane time to leave the area.

[Raellus]

It's being reported that Ukraine plans to base a portion of its new F-16 fighters outside of Ukraine. A few reasons have been sited for this: to maintain an active training cadre on the type, to provide a source of replacement aircraft and parts, and, probably most importantly, to maintain a reserve outside the reach of the Russians (as Putin has already put a bounty on Ukrainian Falcons). Apparently, Putin has responded publicly to Ukraine's intentions by stating that Ukrainian F-16s outside of Ukraine are legitimate military targets, and that the Russians reserve the right to target and attack them. This may just be bluster, but it raises an interesting possibility: if Putin follows through on the threat and orders an attack of some sort on Ukrainian Falcons based in a NATO country, does this trigger Article 5 of the NATO charter? If so, would NATO respond with force? Worst case scenario, this is yet another way that WWIII could start in our day.

-

[ToughOmbres]

Originally Posted by Raellus

It's being reported that Ukraine plans to base a portion of its new F-16 fighters outside of Ukraine. A few reasons have been sited for this: to maintain an active training cadre on the type, to provide a source of replacement aircraft and parts, and, probably most importantly, to maintain a reserve outside the reach of the Russians (as Putin has already put a bounty on Ukrainian Falcons). Apparently, Putin has responded publicly to Ukraine's intentions by stating that Ukrainian F-16s outside of Ukraine are legitimate military targets, and that the Russians reserve the right to target and attack them. This may just be bluster, but it raises an interesting possibility: if Putin follows through on the threat and orders an attack of some sort on Ukrainian Falcons based in a NATO country, does this trigger Article 5 of the NATO charter? If so, would NATO respond with force? Worst case scenario, this is yet another way that WWIII could start in our day.

-

Probably bluster in my view but I don't put anything past Bad Vlad at this point. What, if anything, Brussels would do IF there were to be a strike on Ukrainian F-16's based in a NATO country? Anything goes, with my guess leaning toward either a modest proportional response or a finger wagging warning. Just my .02.

[Vespers War]

The Dutch have already delivered 8 Falcons to Romania for pan-European training (including Ukrainian pilots), which is supposed to increase to 12-18 aircraft on top of the 24 they're delivering to Ukraine for combat use. The Romanian F-16s are not Ukrainian, so despite being used to train Ukrainian pilots a strike on Romania would seem to be a more extreme escalation than I'd expect from Russia.

There has been talk of some of the 24 donated to Ukraine being retained in Denmark for pilot training, since right now Ukraine has more pilots awaiting training than there are available slots to train them. Those would match Putin's threat more closely, but Russia striking Denmark seems unlikely to me. I'll admit that Kremlinology is always a bit iffy, but this feels like an empty threat intended to make Denmark rethink their training program rather than the sort of thing that leads to an actual attack. At most I would expect sabotage efforts, rather than an overt military strike.

[Targan]

Putin is all talk. He will never order Russian forces to directly strike a NATO member while the alliance remains strong. That may change if something dramatic in NATO occurs, such as the US walking away from the alliance. Under such circumstances I could imagine Putin trying something just to see what the reaction would be. But for now I think his worst nightmare would be a full-scale NATO intervention in Ukraine. If that happened I'd expect his adult diaper delivery schedule to dramatically increase.

[Raellus]

WTF?

https://www.twz.com/news-features/uk...ed-territories

Is this going to encourage or discourage South Korea from providing lethal military aid to Ukraine?

-

[kato13]

I had very little doubt Korea was going to step up on tech deliveries and now with DPRK committing to send troops within a month, I have close to zero doubts.

I heard someone say Putin at the moment is reactionary and not strategic. Pissing off the worlds 5th largest arms exporter and the largest generator of western artillery ammunition (with remaining untapped capacity), seems to fit that assessment.

Korea now has the opportunity to test their weapons and kill North Korean soldiers 4000 miles from their borders.

[Vespers War]

Even if South Korea decides to stick to "defensive" weaponry, they license-built over a thousand Vulcan Air Defense Systems. A couple hundred were vehicle-mounted as the K263, based on the K200 IFV, and around a thousand were left as towed anti-aircraft guns. The K263 uses the same turret as the M163 that the Americans built based on the M113.

Any that South Korea isn't planning on using for their own SHORAD needs would likely be very welcome in Ukraine as supplements to existing systems, and they've been largely replaced by 35mm Skyguard systems, both towed and mounted on the K30 Biho. The Houthi in Yemen have fitted VADS into the beds of pickup trucks, and I have to imagine Ukraine would be capable of doing the same.

On the missile side of air defense, Korea is replacing a combination of Stinger, Igla, Mistral, and (UK) Javelin systems with the indigenous K-SAM, so any or all of those could be considered for transfer. I don't think they have enough of their larger SAM systems to consider transferring any of those.

If they're willing to provide offensive weapons, the K9 Thunder is probably too new, but it's replacing around a thousand of the K55/K55A1 self-propelled artillery system, which is based on the M109A2 Paladin. There are also around 100 of the K136 130/131mm MLRS in reserves that were originally going to be sold to the Philippines, but they backed out of the deal last year. Moving away from vehicles, there are a couple hundred ATACMS missiles that Korea might or might not be willing to send, along with a couple hundred obsolete Hyunmoo-1 short-ranged ballistic missiles that have allegedly been kept in reserve (which have around the same range as ATACMS, so they wouldn't be an escalation with regards to how far into Russia Ukraine could strike).

[Nowhere Man 1966]

Originally Posted by Raellus

WTF?

https://www.twz.com/news-features/uk...ed-territories

Is this going to encourage or discourage South Korea from providing lethal military aid to Ukraine?

-

I would not be surprised if some of them fly the coop if they have no family or ties to home.

[kato13]

Again history coming really close to repeating itself.

https://www.businessinsider.com/russ...strikes-2024-7

Russia may resort to an old World War II tactic that had a key role in the D-Day landings to repel Ukrainian drone attacks -- (Barrage Balloons)

[TGirl Kelley]

Originally Posted by kato13

Again history coming really close to repeating itself.

https://www.businessinsider.com/russ...strikes-2024-7

Russia may resort to an old World War II tactic that had a key role in the D-Day landings to repel Ukrainian drone attacks -- (Barrage Balloons)

As maneuverable as drones are and with the skill of Ukraine operators I don't foresee this being very effective.

[kato13]

New tool I just found out about.

A near real time indicator of active fires. (Used to track wild fires).

Apparently internet sleuths are using it to track air base fires.


This is Morozovsk_air_base
https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov...7,48.28,12.62z

Attached a screen shot for when the fire is out later.

[Raellus]

The Ukrainian invasion of Russia's Kursk region is pretty bonkers, IMHO. I don't think anyone anticipated an operation of this scope or scale at this point in the conflict. It's particularly surprising given that Russians had been making incremental territorial gains in several areas along the front, even prompting very real fears of an operational breakthrough west of Avdiivka.

What is the UAF's main objective? Relieve pressure on beleaguered stretches of the front? Occupy Russian territory with the aim of eventually exchanging it for sovereign Ukrainian territory during anticipated peace negotiations?

Will this incursion force the Russians to withdraw forces from Ukrainian territory to meet the threat? Is this a foolish use of UAF forces that could be better used elsewhere? Will the Russians cut off and destroy this force?

What are your thoughts, opinions, or predictions about this operation?

-

[Heffe]

Agreed that the invasion of Kursk Oblast is a bold decision by Ukraine. Rumor has it that the UA has pushed numerous brigades into Russia proper, with numbers hovering somewhere around 2 divisions' worth. As for the goals here? There's a lot of possible benefits, with the obvious drawbacks being as you state - the eventual cutting off and piecemeal destruction of the UA units now in Russia.

Some of the benefits, IMO, include the following:

• Territory to be used in future negotations.
• Morale boost for the Ukrainian people.
• Proof to Ukraine's allies that she's still in this fight and able to maneuver. And evidence that their support is being put to effective use.
• Forcing everyday Russians to deal with the fact that Russia isn't safe in this war, either. Not only, but any RU soldiers killed in Kursk Oblast are likely conscripts, not volunteers. These are friends and family members of people living in St. Petersburg and Moscow, not a bunch of poor, asian-looking volunteer soldiers from the far east of the country.
• Reductions of pressure from Kharkiv and Donetsk. Russia will be forced to pull troops away from other areas of the front to deal with this incursion.
• And finally, the timing of the counter-invasion (is that a thing?) is of particular note to me. The Russian's offensive near Kharkiv has stalled, and as of a few days ago there was some leaked intel that the forces in Vovchansk may end up having to pull back to stronger positions. In Donetsk, the Russian summer offensive has been going strong for months now, and is probably somewhere between 4-8 weeks before it culminates. Ukraine's strategy for the last year has been entirely focused on defense, and punishing Russia with high attrition. I suspect someone in Ukrainian command asked the question - how can we keep Russia attacking in earnest after the culmination of Russia's summer offensive, so that they don't enjoy the fruits of an operational pause and possible negotiations for the loss of Ukrainian land? And the answer was clear - put Russia into a position where it HAS to keep attacking Ukraine due to internal political pressure.

That last one IMO is the key for the decision to invade Russia. All in all, you have a Russian army whose offensive is approaching culmination - they're surely reaching a point where units are exhausted, needing to pause to rearm and regroup, and suddenly Ukraine launches a major assault into Russia itself.

I don't think the attack will reach Kursk (unless Russia entirely fails to respond) or anything. I believe this is more about continuing the existing strategy of attriting Russian forces down.

[Targan]

Perhaps the Ukrainians are attempting to infuriate Putin to such an extent that he orders the use of WMDs? The Ukrainians may have decided that the way things are going, they can't "win" on the terms Zelenskyy has been demanding. So take a WMD hit or two and hope the West is so outraged that it actively intervenes?

[kato13]

I could see the chemical threshold having being tripped at the moment, due to the embarrassment, and the fact the Chinese would probably protest a lot less to chemical than nuclear.

The recent commitment of the Ukrainian 80th Air Assault Brigade (with the highest tooth to tail ratio in the Ukrainian army) seems to indicate, this is not a just a raid, and there is hopes for even more significant gains.

I know it is much more complicated, but man it is looking like they really only did need F-16s.

[Raellus]

I worry that this invasion will reinforce Putin's B.S. narrative with the Russian public.

Putin: "See, I told you that Ukraine is an existential threat to Russia! We must continue the fight this NATO-sponsored fascist aggression against us!"

From what I've read in recent months, the majority of the Russian public supported the war to some degree before the UAF's Kursk incursion. While some Russians in the affected region might change their minds and decide the whole thing isn't worth fighting, support for the war among those Russians far from the combat zone might actually increase.

I think that this operation could also play into the hands of the anti-Ukraine faction within the US government.

You-know-who: "The pro-Ukraine party claimed that all the American weapons we've given to Ukraine were for self-defense. This doesn't look like self-defense to me. My friend Vladimir assured me several years ago that Ukraine was a threat to Russia and this proves him right. To stop this fresh Ukrainian aggression, we should stop the flow of weapons to Ukraine immediately."

That all said, I really hope that this operations proves to be a great success for Ukraine.

Slava Ukraini!

-

[LoneCollector1987]

According to what I read the axis of Ukraines attack leads to a russian nuclear reactor and a station where russian gas is sent to Europe.
If they would fall into Ukraines hand that would be good cards for Ukraine.
On the other hand if this is true then I suspect there will be very intense battles with lots of casualties coming.
And thats without NBC weapons.

[ToughOmbres]

Originally Posted by Raellus

The Ukrainian invasion of Russia's Kursk region is pretty bonkers, IMHO. I don't think anyone anticipated an operation of this scope or scale at this point in the conflict. It's particularly surprising given that Russians had been making incremental territorial gains in several areas along the front, even prompting very real fears of an operational breakthrough west of Avdiivka.

What is the UAF's main objective? Relieve pressure on beleaguered stretches of the front? Occupy Russian territory with the aim of eventually exchanging it for sovereign Ukrainian territory during anticipated peace negotiations?

Will this incursion force the Russians to withdraw forces from Ukrainian territory to meet the threat? Is this a foolish use of UAF forces that could be better used elsewhere? Will the Russians cut off and destroy this force?

What are your thoughts, opinions, or predictions about this operation?

-

I believe this to be a feint given how hard pressed the UAF are elsewhere on the front lines. Another more remote possibility is this is a spoiling attack on Russian forces in that area (Russian force concentrations that we are not privy to in the West.)

Historically and in an odd coincidence a risky counter-thrust/offensive in the Kursk region is enough to give me pause on Ukraine's behalf (Citadel/Zitadelle 1943 anyone?)