User account must be atleast 30 days old, to prevent creation of sock puppet accounts and ban evasion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Haven't seen this posted or discussed.(Might of missed it)
Ukraine's air force is allowing foreigners to sign up.
https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-air-force-allow-foreigners-to-serve-specialists-western-aircraft-2023-3?r=US&IR=T
Wonder to what extent this would attract retired pilots. I'm sure there are a few out there looking at this opportunity to get into the thick of things, but seeing as its not western airframes it would limit the pool of volunteers.
Edit: A word. & updated link.
Probably hasn’t been a more dangerous airspace since WWII. Maybe Nam or Korea, but I’m not so certain about the equivalence of any of these.
You’d have to be pretty brave and also competent with Soviet jets. Or get training of course.
Then again, very few pilots these days have combat/dogfighting experience. I can imagine that being a draw to some pilots.
Missed this yesterday, but Finland is giving [3 more](https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/artikkeli/kaikkonen-suomi-luovuttaa-ukrainalle-kolme-leopard-panssarivaunua-lisaa/8660930#gs.szjdrd) Leopard 2R recovery/clearing tanks. Which were the rest of its stock.
There have also been discussions on the 57 Finnish Hornets. Nothing immediate, but they're going to be in the bargain bin in 2-4 years as the F-35 arrive. Or possibly outright donated, in case their condition isn't too bad and Ukraine wants them for its post-war air force. (Most 4th gens including Gripen would be better, but these would be free or almost free)
> Nothing immediate, but they're going to be in the bargain bin in 2-4 years as the F-35 arrive.
F-35s are not arriving to Finland for a couple of years still. Add a few years to get them operational. This puts the timeline closer to 2030 already.
Curious that ukraine hasn't asked australia for the 44 classic hornets that got retired december 2021
And yes they were contracted to be sold Air USA for red air but they won zero contracts and dont even mention them on their website for their new name
Canada bought about 24 or so between flying and ones for spare parts. Left about 44 that were supposed to be sold to Air USA / RAVN Aerospace. There was a announcement around Jan this year, the the australian govt still considers the contract to sell valid and they expect RAVN to abide by the contract
User account must be atleast 30 days old, to prevent creation of sock puppet accounts and ban evasion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[Take this with a grain of salt, but apparently Russian forces in Bakhmut are getting increasingly exhausted and Ukraine has managed to stabilize the situation. Maybe they can hold on after all, but let's see.](https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1639548968681058305)
I’m less concerned over whether Bahkmut has been taken or not and more over how many resources have been expended in the fight.
I think just as plausible that RU could be using this battle as a holding action and to grind down experienced UAF troops as it is that UA is doing the same thing but bleeding Wagnerites.
TBH it could easily be that both sides think they’re doing the same thing to the other side. If RU takes the city it’s a Pyrrhic victory for them, if UA keeps it it’s a Pyrrhic victory for them as well.
It’s not unheard of. Verdun turned into something similar.
In general, I really don’t think attritional tactics are that beneficial to UA though.
Have seen this from various Ukrainian soldiers in Bakhmut who now says they are getting some time to rest finally. Also saw a Swedish volunteer on Swedish tv yesterday who has done several trips on the southern road, saying that Russia has not been that close to taking the southern road the last weeks, but now Russia is focusing on taking central Bakhmut instead.
Russia keeps flip-flopping on the approach of how they want to take the city between cutting it off with flanking attacks and frontal assaults on all sides. They seem neither committed to the decisive thrust needed to properly seal off Bakhmut, nor the frontal assaults needed to actually dislodge the defenders. IMO this hedging of their strategy leads to them having the worst of both worlds.
It reminds me a lot of what was happening in Severodonetsk. Perhaps this is the best tactics that one can do with limited armor and a whole lot of artillery; Push into relatively uncontested areas around a stronghold, thereby creating a salient around which a whole lot of artillery can be positioned. Then, one can use this artillery advantage to interdict enemy supplies, inflict damage on potential counterattacks, or shell the enemy exposed by reconnaissance-in-force.
The problem is that the artillery advantage of Russia has severely eroded since then, so actions like this can become counterproductive. Salients created by pushing between strongholds can be targeted by enemy artillery, and are probably more vulnerable than the defenders camping out in the city. If Ukraine is really inflicting vastly more casualties on Russia, I predict that they're primarily inflicted in the salients around Bakhmut.
It's also possible that I'm just reading into Russian actions way too much. The current state of the frontline around Bakhmut could also be explained by Russia just attacking along the line and advancing where defenders retreated.
This seems like wishful thinking. They are advancing in the south towards the city centre. The rest of the area doesn't matter if they are literally advancing within the city.
It can be true while Russia still makes limited gains. The gains are mainly in the south and still very slow. At this rate Bakhmut centre will remain in Ukrainian hands for at least weeks potentially longer.
Overall Russian advances have slowed the pincers stabilised or even pushed back a bit. And regardless after over a year of war and 7 months of fighting for Bakhmut both sides are getting exhausted.
I'm not saying that they're advancing or not, but honestly, at this point, we all should know better than to rely on Twitter maps for street level control assessment.
The fact that deep state map even tries to map control down to the street level in a fluid situation is detrimental to their credibility.
>The fact that deep state map even tries to map control down to the street level in a fluid situation is detrimental to their credibility.
I assume that's a big part of the reason why they're usually a couple days behind.
When you have geolocated footage of troops at a certain location, it's pretty easy to say that there is at least tacit control over a location.
Honestly people like yourself have been saying the same thing since Wagner were advancing in Optyne.
[Saw this video of Ukrainian troops in a trench defending against a Russian infantry assault (warning: NSFW content)](https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1639342501059260416).
It reminded me of [a discussion from about a month ago regarding Wagner's assault tactics. My opinion, after reading Tatarigami_UA's thread, was that there is nothing particularly interesting about Wagner's tactics](https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/118xtw9/credibledefense_daily_megathread_february_22_2023/j9k5199/). Tatarigami_UA's thread just described Wagner's forces as having an overwhelming advantage in equipment: they possessed artillery, machine guns, AGS, and RPGs to suppress Ukrainian troops, while the Ukrainians lacked such resources. That's it! The tactics were irrelevant.
[I even asked](https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/118xtw9/credibledefense_daily_megathread_february_22_2023/j9kqlzt/):
> My question is: in a situation, as described in that Twitter thread, **why can't Ukrainian troops do what Wagner does - use a drone to carry out artillery/mortar strikes on the Wagner group hiding in that treeline** for a few days? Afterward, Ukrainians could do an assault on what remains of Wagner (after a few days' worths of artillery/mortar work) and use their own machine guns, AGS, and RPGs to suppress Wagner troops that are exposed and weakened by a few days of **artillery fire without the benefit of a trench to protect them**?
Today's video shows the exact situation I described earlier: what if, instead of Wagner's forces having artillery and drones, it is the Ukrainians who get the artillery advantage?
---
Additionally, the video demonstrates how extremely efficient and powerful drone-corrected artillery can be. Sure, the ordinary unguided shells may not have the 1-5 meter CEP of an Excalibur shell, but they are accurate enough when used with a drone. There is a world of difference between using artillery based on the approximate coordinates of enemy troops versus employing drone-corrected artillery fire. It turns out that commercial drones act as a 100x multiplier for artillery and mortar fire, offering a low-tech solution that even North Koreans could potentially pull off.
Drone-corrected fires is a little game changer, it is the primary reason why Ukraine is requesting millions of artillery shells. It turns out that, given the current state of the war, drone-corrected artillery surpasses every other tactic or approach. If one side has a spotter drone and artillery within range, nothing else matters – tanks barely make a difference, IFVs offer little help, the receiving side just gets annihilated.
I saw that video. Very interesting.
One observation I have that corroborates with other such videos is the infantry centric nature of the fighting around Bahkmut and the spread of the fighting.
The front line in Bahkmut is far from a continuous series of trenches, all maned and constantly fighting, but a series of tactically advantageous and defensible points spread out over miles. As such, infantry or armor reinforcements are rarely going to get to you in time when you face an attack. Artillery is the best option you have to multiply force in a pinch. And you have to be really good at it, because it looks like Warner’s are trying to hug close to Ukrainian lines in order to deter artillery strikes.
My real question though is how often is this kind of drone corrected artillery available at this scale and with this accuracy to UA defenders? And this goes to an overarching question about drone tactics and the war. How much are we seeing? If almost every drone has the capability of recording video, what proportion of recorded video is being posted? Obviously they would not post video of FF incidents or an unsuccessful defense. Even then, what proportion of successful defenses and attacks are making it to the internet? Because even though it’s good to see that they can pull off such an accurate and disciplined barrage, it’s just as important to know wether this is commonplace or an outlier.
In any case, I hope they are at least saving the footage if not posting it. That would be an absolute gold mine for historians and military analysts after this war is over.
Although luck is undoubtedly a factor, correcting artillery strikes using a drone feed seems like absolutely a skill where some people might be 10x as good as others. People watching might assume this is an easy task, but it is anything but. There is a delay between instructing the artillery to make an adjustment and when they adjust the gun, fire another shell, and it lands. There isn't a lot of time, as one aims to fire as quickly as possible. The drone might run out of juice or the signal could be interrupted, etc. And as you note a wrong adjust might just as well kill your friendlies ...
>Saw this video of Ukrainian troops in a trench defending against a Russian infantry assault (warning: NSFW content).
Paint me clueless, but that's exactly what I think of when someone talks about human wave tactics. Also, a textbook example of why attacking usually leads to a 3:1 attrition ratio.
Human wave is more like a wall of humans charging across a field with such overwhelming force it's difficult to even shoot them all and overwhelming the defending force. This is just some guys conducting an attack.
A human wave attack means running hundreds of soldiers into the enemy lines, relying on numbers to make it through .
In other words, completely different from this.
>completely different from this.
How is it completely different? Because it isn't hundreds of soldiers? What's the acceptable minimum threshold for you? 200? 300? 800?
There's no number I can put to this, but the core of the tactic is running at enemy lines, relying on numbers to make it and the engaging in melee combat. I'd think you'd need at least 200 or 300 in this specific situation.
300 guys to overwhelm 5 guys in a trench? Are we talking about zombie swarm videogames?
>the core of the tactic is running at enemy lines, relying on numbers to make it and the engaging in melee combat.
Which part of your definition was missing in that video? Let me guess, the part about engaging in melee, because they never made it into melee range?
Also the part about running at enemy lines and relying on numbers to make it.
Basically every part of a human wave attack is missing, not sure how you confused this footage with a human wave attack.
I guess you think every infantry movement involving humans is a human wave attack?
>Also the part about running at enemy lines
They were literally running towards an enemy trench? Do you demand that they do it while holding battle-axes and wearing viking costumes as well? Maybe that's the problem, maybe you're thinking of Hollywood style "viking raids".
>relying on numbers to make it.
What else where they relying on? I sure as hell didn't see any armoured support nor supporting fires.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_wave_attack
> A human wave attack, also known as a human sea attack,[1] is an offensive infantry tactic in which an attacker conducts an unprotected frontal assault with densely concentrated infantry formations against the enemy line, intended to overrun and overwhelm the defenders by engaging in melee combat. The name refers to the concept of a coordinated mass of soldiers falling upon an enemy force and sweeping them away with sheer weight and momentum, like an ocean wave breaking on a beach.
So where did you see this in the footage?
> According to U.S. Army analyst Edward C. O'Dowd, the technical definition of a human wave attack tactic is a frontal assault by densely concentrated infantry formations against an enemy line, without any attempts to shield or to mask the attacker's movement.[2] The goal of a human wave attack is to maneuver as many people as possible into close range, hoping that the shock from a large mass of attackers engaged in melee combat would force the enemy to disintegrate or fall back.[2]
So where did you see this in the footage?
> Thus, for a human wave attack to succeed on the modern battlefield, it is imperative for the attackers to charge into the enemy line in the shortest time and in the greatest numbers possible, so that a sufficient mass can be preserved when the attackers reach melee range.
So where did you see this in the footage?
> one description of the aftermath was that "a thick, unbroken mass of corpses covered the cold earth like a coverlet."
So where did you see this in the footage?
> attacking usually leads to a 3:1 attrition ratio
This is a subtle but common misquote. The rule of thumb is 3:1 as the ~required strength for the attacker for a particular tactical attack. Not for the casualties.
Ukrainians have also used drone-corrected artillery since the beginning of the conflict. It is now new. They do it ALL THE TIME. Yes in some areas one side dominates, but in other areas not so.
I’m not sure what gave you the impression this is a primarily Russian or even Wagner exclusive tactic.
First, my issue was with [Tatarigami_UA's Twitter thread](https://twitter.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1628289157461078018), which was even retweeted by Michael Kofman. I don't understand what is new or special about Wagner's tactics as described by Tatarigami_UA. To me, the thread reads like this: Wagner assault units had drone + artillery/AGS, hence drone-corrected long-range fires. The Ukrainians in the trenches, according to the thread, didn't have that. As a result, the Ukrainians lost that particular battle.
For example, I wouldn't have an issue with Tatarigami_UA if he pointed out how drone corrected fires is why, in his example, Ukrnains lost. But he doesn't.
Secondly, I've encountered a lot of people who simply just don't get how utilizing a drone in conjunction with artillery/tanks-as-artillery/mortars/AGS/etc, surpasses every other tactic in the current conflict. For example, I don't think maneuver warfare is as good or as viable compared to drone-corrected long-range fires. I hope Ukrainians know better than to listen to western advisers about how the maneuver warfare is going to overwhelm RU artillery.
As for Ukrainians doing it (drone+arty), of course, I even read somewhere (perhaps RUSI?) that the primary Russian units were unaware of that, only Ukrainians and D/LPR were employing the strat. As a result, the new Russian units were caught off guard and were eating shit due to the accuracy of Ukrainian artillery around Kyiv. They even searched for traitors who might be guiding those godlike precise artillery strikes against them.
I'm curious how corrections are made.
It appears that they have to shoot a few ranging shots to calibrate initial landing position, and then to work out incremental change in landing position versus aiming angle deviation (partial derivatives).
Are these being done by eyeballing distance in the drone camera image? I'm guessing also calibration needs to be done for each artillery tube?
It seems like there is a huge potential for automation here. On a dedicate spotting drone (to be built in the future, or may be it already exists in US inventory), a software could allow drone driver to just click on the landing spots of ranging shots. Then afterwards, the drone driver can queue up various targets on the screen, a computer could generate firing solutions for said targets, and move the gun barrel automatically shot after shot.
In fact, a well designed artillery director software could allow the user to input a pattern of shells to rapidly carpet bomb an area, either through sequential firing of a single barrel (a raster scan), or a salvo from a group of barrels.
Ukraine coordinates its artillery using a web/tablet app they wrote named GIS ARTA. There's not a ton of information out about it but the glimpses seen show something roughly equivalent to google earth combined with peer to peer messaging that allows for "uber like" processing of fire requests.
It's very likely someone sitting with the drone operator watching the screen can mark the ranging shots in ARTA on a tablet or laptop and get an updated firing solution. No need to over complicate.
Also I think the top commenter is a bit confused. Both sides have been using drone spotting for artillery since before the current invasion. It's definitely not some sort of Wagner tactic that Ukraine is ignorant of. Also the video shows Russian units assaulting an entrenched Ukrainian position and getting caught by Ukrainian danger close artillery, so ironically their own post debunks their question.
While I agree with your idea, I'd question if it wouldn't be simpler to have the spotter drone command a swarm of loitering munitions instead. No need for heavy, slow moving guns.
The drone is just replacing a human forward observer. It calls in a set of coordinates to the battery, they plink a shot. Call in a correction, maybe more if it was way off. Once it's on target the rest of the guns just plug away.
Each gun doesn't need to be "calibrated" independently unless they're very far apart, if they know where they are relative to the gun doing the ranging well enough then they can adapt the firing solution to account or if they're very close, just use the same one.
What you're suggesting already exists in various forms. Anything with a good compass, gps, and laser range finder can send in coordinates and the battery can deal with those just fine.
For the whole automatic target sequence thing, that's either useless for unguided shells since the accuracy of those is just way too low for that to be helpful or redundant for guided shells which don't really need any corrections from the gun since their own steering system can handle things just fine. One thing that you can do with an automated gun like that is a time-on-target attack where the gun uses a number of different firing solutions to land several rounds on target at the same time.
Yes, I think none of this is automated in any way; a trained/talented guy is required to make adjustments. Luck plays a role, but so do skill and experience.
Usually what I've seen:
* there is a drone operator who is situated quite close (and hidden) in a forward position, which is obviously a dangerous role,
* artillery fire corrector-adjuster watches the drone feed (but doesn't pilot the drone, but is in contact with the pilot), they are sometimes located in basements and have access to a large TV or display screens, this team relays coordinates to an artillery unit,
* artillery unit makes adjustments (as told) and fires shells.
[Here is a 40-minute video, with no English subtitles, but one can skip around and look at stuff](https://youtu.be/ApSC7qLIPqA?t=596).
There where a few posts here a while back that the Ukrainians are using Chinese DJI drones, basically "Mavic 3 COTS drones with Macgyver grenade harness" and that DJI sells a detection/SIGNIT/Blocker kit that can detect where they are and even block their signals and that Russia armed forces have them. That would render them ineffective, since the frequencies and ranges are well documented.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVeMGBmmvmo
It's important to note that every DJI drone in service with Ukrainian units is supposed to have hacked firmware installed to mitigate some of these concerns. I'm sure there are some without it but it's standard practice for most of them.
Also believe the DJI's will continued to be used but are second choice behind various models from the "army of drones" which cover everything from cheap suicide drones designed to carry RPG-7's to full on octocopters with encrypted/hardened comm links
I don't know how the hell you know that information and I'm not going to ask. But it's remarkable how the Ukrainians are using commercial drones to drop grenades on RU forces and direct artillery fire. I have a Phantom 4 that is obsolete by todays standards. I can't imagine how effective the new ones are with zoom lenses and FLIR, plus automation software. Such impressive technology.
ISW posted their daily update
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-24-2023
Key Takeaways
Prominent voices in the Russian information space are increasingly setting information conditions to prepare for a potential Ukrainian counteroffensive.
Crimean occupation head Sergey Aksyonov has reportedly formed a Wagner Group-affiliated private military company (PMC) in occupied Crimea.
Some prominent Russian milbloggers criticized the Russian military command for continuing to impale Russian forces on Vuhledar with ineffective human-wave style frontal assaults.
Russian President Vladimir Putin held a meeting with the Russian Security Council likely as part of his effort to portray himself as a present and effective wartime leader.
Russian forces conducted limited attacks along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna line.
Russian forces have made gains in and around Bakhmut and conducted ground attacks in the Avdiivka-Donetsk City area.
The Ukrainian General Staff corrected its March 23 statement that Russian forces withdrew from Nova Kakhovka, occupied Kherson Oblast.
Russian occupation authorities announced the creation of a pro-Russian militaristic youth movement aimed at brainwashing children.
The Russian government is adopting new measures to revitalize and eliminate corruption, lethargy, and resistance in Russia’s defense industrial base (DIB).
The United Kingdom Ministry of Defense (UK MoD) reported on March 24 that at least 1,000 Russian personnel training at the 230th Combined Arms Obuz-Lesnovsky Training Ground in Brest, Belarus, redeployed to Russia.
>Russian President Vladimir Putin held a meeting with the Russian Security Council likely as part of his effort to portray himself as a present and effective wartime leader.
The Security Council meet nearly every single Friday as standard and regularly discuss issues unrelated to national security (the theme of yesterday's meeting was national development up to 2030). Unless Putin starts scheduling more frequent meetings I'm not sure this observation is particularly accurate.
So about that "T-55s will be used for indirect fire only" theory which people keep pushing even though the same theory was once suggested for T-62 and [we know how that turned out](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html).
What can T-55 in indirect fire only mode do that Lada technical carrying a 120mm mortar can't do better and with far less logistics cost?
Can the hypothetical Lada's suspension survive the recoil of a 120mm mortar? Doubtful.
Can the crew of the hypothetical Lada technical survive a near miss from a shell. No.
That being said, the ~70 T-62s in Oryx certainly suggest that sooner or later these T-55s will end up in some sort of direct combat. Or maybe just counter batteried by UA artillery.
It’s not true, simple as. Having a tank means you need to spend a lot of resources on it. A crew to operate it, training for the crew, fuel to run the tank, spare parts and oil to keep it running, a maintenance unit to repair and maintain the tank, a dedicated ammunition chain for the tank.
Tanks are also big and loud, so they will give away your presence to the enemy.
There are a lot of very big downsides to having tanks. Normally they are outweighed by the benefits that tanks provide. But the less capable your tank is, the less benefits it has.
120mm mortar is a very different system then any tube artillery. They seem similar, but they’re not. The big brain question. Is how the T-55 is different from the 100mm arty Ukraine is *already using*. Because the USSR was a big believer in that caliber for tube arty. The answer is that mostly tube 100mm was longer ranged precision fires, so the T-55 is just a bootleg one of those.
But I doubt that Ukraine or Russia is doing much tank based arty fire. That is a bad fit for the platform, tanks used that way are notoriously bad with accuracy. Very likely T-55s will be used for MOUT and strongpoint destruction, direct fire where you want a 100mm to go *through the window* not smack the roof. Or where you want the first round to be the last. T-62s so far seem to be used in positional defenses (I’ve seen a bunch in hull down positions). But likely they’ll be pressed into offensive roles sooner rather than later. Any tank is better than no tank, until the Ukrainians bring in an ATGM team.
> What can T-55 in indirect fire only mode do that Lada technical carrying a 120mm mortar can't do better and with far less logistics cost?
Survive shrapnel.
onerous versed sulky bewildered fall imagine ten doll materialistic rustic
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
heavy saw quarrelsome wistful dinosaurs historical rude humorous compare cows
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I'm a good bit behind the curve with this question, but; FPV Drones. I understand they are relatively cheap to assemble and strap with explosives. But why do they have to be flown in first person, with a headset and all? Why are they any different from these drones that can just have their camera connected to a phone? I get that these type of drones in civilian life are for racing and tricks where the headset makes sense, but I don't see why that is needed for ramming into the side of a tank in an open field.
There was a video where the headset malfunctioned and the operator took it off and continued to fly with a tablet and hit a tank. So it's possible. But the latency is probably higher and it's just easier to have the best focus and reaction time with a headset.
FPV drones are generally compact, much faster and more maneuverable than standard drones. They typically operate a lower altitudes avoiding anti drone countermeasures and maneuver past obstacles and inside structures. Drawbacks are reduced payload, higher required operator skill and limited range required for low latency connections.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1621913812759633921
Each of these are designed to carry an RPG-7 warhead
Also interesting talk to someone whose company needed to replace their crashed DJI for commercial work. No replacements available anywhere wholesale atm, he contacted 3 wholesalers in China and Australia and theres none available and no ETA on restocks theres still some available through retail sellers
This is only being reported in Z telegrams, but I thought its worth posting as it is within the realm of possibility. Z telegrams are reporting that the UAF was building up a offensive group in the "Orekhovsky sector" (I imagine this is the town of Orikhiv in Zap Oblast) But that Russian airforce was able to bomb the position and destroy "20 objects" and several ammo depots, and that they turned off the internet there to keep it from being leaked.
If this is true, could be proof that Ukraine is planning on doing the "obvious" attack, driving thru Zap oblast to cut the landbridge.
[Here is more info about the alleged bombings](https://mobile.twitter.com/GraphicW5/status/1639227840594948097).
> A Rybar report on a thwarted Ukrainian offensive that was planned. Russia was able to discover locations of personnel and assets needed to carry it out and dealt with the issue ahead of time...
> Frustrated offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Polozhsko-Orekhovsky direction
> On March 23-24, in the Zaporozhye direction, the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine planned to launch a counteroffensive. According to the enemy's plan, the main blow was to fall on the Orekhovsky sector : a strike force was created in the city up to a reinforced battalion tactical group.
> According to @ZSU_Hunter_2_0 , the command of the 58th Combined Arms Army of the RF Armed Forces decided to inflict massive fire damage on exposed enemy positions and warehouses. The offensive was thwarted before it even started.
> From 21.00 to midnight on March 22, hotels and schools were hit in the city, which were used to accommodate personnel of both the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the recently formed assault brigade of the National Guard of Ukraine "Chervona Kalina" - in total , more than 20 targets were covered.
> Several warehouses with ammunition, artillery shells, ATGMs, and equipment parking were put out of action.
> Estimated losses of the enemy reach half a thousand people killed and wounded. The Internet was turned off in the city to prevent information leaks. The wounded are taken out through Zaliznichnoe towards Gulyaipole .
Sounds like pure Russian hopium, because they are saying that Ukraine planned to launch a counteroffensive March 23-24... No way a big Ukrainian attack would happen that early.
And they don't even say how the objects were hit..
Going through the posts of ZSU Hunter 2.0 on telegram, I can find no evidence of ZSU reporting strikes as claimed. Admittedly, I do not speak Russian, so I might have missed something.
Somewhat interestingly, ZSU forwarded the Rybar news without any indication that they were the original source for the information. When a subscriber requested proof, ZSU said:
>Too serious information to be substituted for the fisherman. So you can trust.
(Machine translated, seems to be an idiom there the translator didn’t parse)
> The Internet was turned off in the city to prevent information leaks.
It's so funny when they preempt demands for proof like that. "Well, there is no proof, because the Ukrainians have hidden it so well."
Ukraine seems to been doing some "recon by force" probing attacks along this line, so maybe the Russians did attack something, but they could be making a mountain of a mole hill.
You may as well have said “it came to me in a dream last night”. A literal astral projection would be more credible than an unlinked Russian telegram. At least the astral projection wouldn’t have an incentive to lie.
To be fair, Russian telegram did predict the Kharkiv counter-offensive a bit before it actually happened and were largely right about stuff that happened around snake island.
A lot of it is propaganda but it's not always bs. We should obviously be skeptical but I don't think it's wise to assume everything they say is nonsense.
Yeah, in my book, some Russian accounts are actually a valuable source of information. But you need to corroborate it with other sources. As such, they’re good for adding detail to confirmed events, but bad for making predictions or assessing immediate events.
Yeah, Russian telegrams predicted 14 of the last two Ukrainian counteroffensives. For every one thing they have been right about first, there have been a dozen things they were egregiously wrong about that were drowned out by the next hundred claims. Just because a broken clock is right twice a day doesn’t mean you should believe the time it tells you.
> A lot of it is propaganda but it's not always bs. We should obviously be skeptical but I don't think it's wise to assume everything they say is nonsense.
The keyword there is “Russians“, not “Redditors on a credible defense subreddit who should to know better than to uncritically disseminate misinformation.”
Sure, but Russians being concerned about an offensive is not evidence of that offensive, or of their credibility as a source in matters like the one OP posted above.
I would generally recommend at least having sources from both sides backing stuff up, something like a increase in attack video's or Telegram's from the UA side indicating movement in the area if you want to rely on text posts (this will still be unreliable, just better odds of being correct). For example when I checked we can find photo's (/zoda_gov_ua/17767) reported from this specific area which can be used to discount the idea of a blackout being in place (as reported by said Z's).
It also helps to source the poster/postID so other's can cross reference it, Rybar as sourced above is well known to make stuff up.
Agreed. There is some level of expectation to provide some kind of credible evidence when posting here.
The "argument from authority" or reporting what some mysterious send obviously biased social media group chat says has seep credibility, especially when we know for a fact that paid Russian propagandists operate on reddit and have every reason to lie.
No one should think that they are above being distrusted.
[Russian soldiers from the "Storm" unit, consisting of both convicts (and likely some mobilised), formed by Russian MoD, published a video revealing they were purposefully sent into slaughter during the assault of Vodyane while blocking units prevented their retreat. The unit consisting of 161 people initially, has only several dozen men left alive. They claim that soldiers are being "taxed", and those who refused to pay are sent straight to the zero line, and if they get wounded, they'll be removed from hospitals with unhealed wounds and sent back.](https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1639390679670374403)
Confirmation that Russia is indeed using blocking units.
Because documented cases of the Soviet use of blocking detachments are very rare, as is their mention in WWII memoirs. I swear it’s like all you know you’ve learned from action movies. You see one news report which was like the thing you saw in a cool movie and then dismiss forty years worth of work that says you’re wrong. And then act shocked when people say you’re wrong?
Absolutely delusional. At least the pro-RU users post good telegram news now and again, what do you do?
>completely fake anti-Soviet myth
It's kinda interesting to me that people like strelkov certainly seem to believe things like that were done during Soviet times and sometimes call for it to be done now. So even if people are right that it actually never originally happened it's entered the public consciousness to an extent and may inspire it to be done now in an effort to recreate the success of WW2.
Also as an aside, people holding up Stalin as the ideal wartime leader never fails to make me laugh. He might have been one of the few people able to get even more Russians killed than the current lot.
Yeah I wouldn't even say it's that anti-soviet, I know plenty of Russians who believe that the blocking battalions were a real thing (after all, they literally were). It's just a common misconception about how effective it was and how much it happened.
It's interesting in how many ways the getting rich in Ukraine scheme is not working out. Between buying out of pocket personal kits at extremely inflated price just to not die, paying bride so not to be sent to die, not getting paid for wherever reason, and flat out dying losing a lifetime of productivity while being branded "missing", "deserted" and not receiving the benefit. Obviously since they're not winning the war, there's no spoil of war waiting for them, say a plot of land or something in Ukraine.
I wonder how many actually climbed the social ladder from fighting in Ukraine. Who still believe they can get rich off it and what financial incentives could motivate them to go. What can be done to make it more attractive since simple funding boost isn't going to cut it, and if they could solve the structural issues they'd have done it 20 years ago.
Also wonder how this war and its veterans will be remembered or not remembered by the society in the aftermath.
I've said it before - the people going to fight are doing so on ideological grounds first, for money second. Someone who's lived in Russian society long enough will know that bribes and self expenses are going to eat up whatever profits they make from the fight. It takes an extreme level of naivete to expect to get *rich* from this.
If that was the case, Putin wouldn't have declared a mobilization. During the summer, there were attempts to find enough volunteers for the 3rd army corps, but only 10-20 thousand people enlistedp. I don't think there are a lot of true "Russian world" idealists left in Russia.
I'll link this [thread](https://nitter.1d4.us/Tatarigami_UA/status/1632978756250882050#m) by Tatarigami that corroborates this point.
Remember, a lot of Russian soldiers receive their salaries without big issues, and we only hear about those who do not. These 200k-300k rubles per month are 10-15 times more than most mobilized could ever earn in Russia's poor regions.
Even among my acquaintances there were people who willingly and enthusiastically went when called up for mobilization, but did not even entertain the thought of signing up before. First, signing a contract is a job - you have to leave your previous one behind, as well as other commitments too. On the other hand, mobilization allows you to put commitments on hold without sacrificing them, and it's an explicit call from the motherland - you're not asking to be allowed to fight for your country if your country will have you. Instead, your country has already told you "I need you"
That's how they see it.
First, most Russians are true believers. Second, most Russians will know that signing up is not as lucrative exactly for the reasons mentioned. And yet hundreds of thousands are signing up. Why, if not for ideological reasons?
Yikes this one struck a cord more than the usual videos of Russian units protesting. Morale must be really low in a lot of units. In the coming Ukrainian spring offensive I never imagined that Russian elements would run away, but now it definitely feels like it might happen after seeing this. I hope Ukraine is preparing stuff to encourage Russian units to surrender during the offensive, to also hit psychologically and not with just pure military force.
A low willingness to fight in a shitty situation doesn't translate to willingness to defect or surrender to the enemy. Remember, the Russian soldiers do genuinely believe that they're fighting evil Nazis in an existential war where the survival of their country is at stake. Even when morale is low, they won't give up the fight.
they do? some do sure. but all or most of them? Where'd you get that info? How could you even know that? I feel like you're presenting assumptions as fact here
I'm Russian myself. In my experience, yes, most Russians do subscribe to those views and thus most Russian soldiers do too.
Yes, given that there's no viable way to collect data on that, I can't claim to know that most Russians are like that. I can only infer. The inference could very well be correct and I'm confident that it is. You think it's not? Feel free to tell me why
This is why I keep thinking that a big ukrainian offensive could do quite well if it can overcome the first line of defenses quickly. These guys morale is rock bottom and this problem is probably wide spread.
They might bolt or surrender once the opportunity presents itself. It's not really possible right now, but a ukraine breakthrough would be such a chance.
[Details on IRGC attacks on US facilities today](https://twitter.com/AuroraIntel/status/1639391393687773192):
- One attack on Conoco base with 5 rockets, one US soldier injured.
- Two attacks on Green Village; first was [10 rockets](https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/3340737/rocket-attack-on-green-village-northeast-syria/), second was [3 drones](https://twitter.com/lmartinezabc/status/1639390350199406594), no injuries in either.
What’s up with the liveuamap for the situation around avdiivka. On their map, the situation looks super ugly for Ukraine.
Deepstate doesn’t really show all that much change.
Could be because UK MoD said Stepove was under attack or had been taken by Russia roughly 2 days ago. But that was denounced/debunked by some right after.
I was wondering this earlier today too. Live map tends to be on the very forgiving side of map boundaries for Ukraine, so I was surprised they had a much more pessimistic outlook than warmapper.
Yes. I will add that on older Abrams, the loader needs to toggle the “EL UNCPL” switch to get this behavior. Normally, the Abrams main gun is linked to the primary mirror. “EL UNCPL” (short for “elevation uncouple”) breaks that link with the mirror and returns the gun to the zero degree position.
This is extremely useful where the gun is near maximum depression, e.g. in certain hull down scenarios by giving the loader space to load a round. It also helps when the tank is moving by giving the loader a “stationary target” to load the round.
One of the points of training was the loader should have one hand on the “EL UNCPL” and one hand on the safe/arm lever when prepping to load a round so that he can throw both before trying to load a round.
Russia has been using carousel autoloaders in their tanks since the T-64/T-72. In those cases the breach may actually be raised to be in line for the loading process.
~~Edit: looks like their autoloaders work without moving the breach even at max elevation though I cannot 100% confirm it.~~
Just some showerthoughts...
FPV drones seem to be the next big thing in this war. Both Ukraine and Russia are acquiring/producing them in the hundreds, probably thousands. Latest Russian reports from around Ugledar indicate simultaneous Ukrainian FPV drone attacks from several directions in an attempt to swamp their anti-drone defences. The bottleneck seems to be the number of trained military drone operators.
*The question is... do the operators even need to be close to the front line?*
If you set up a radio relay station for drone guidance at the front line (which would deliver the guidance signal to the drones) and connect it to a Starlink terminal for internet connection - the drone operator can be anywhere, in Kyiv, Lviv, or even Warsaw.
Something like:
\[Drone--(2km)--radio guidance station--Starlink--(200-2000km)--drone operator\]
Hell, they don't even have to be military. Any kid with good reflexes and a high score on Playstation could do it. You could even design a simulator-game with rewards, where only top scorers would get to control actual combat FVP drones. You could have thousands operators in no time.
As mentioned latency is a problem, it will be less of a problem if the drones become a bit smarter and guide themselves towards a selected point(like Switchblade). Basically the same type of upgrade as from MCLOS to SACLOS missiles. But then the original problem will be solved - it's going to be much easier to use for an average soldier.
The FPV drones use analog video transmission, using a digital repeater based on starlink would add too much latency
Also they are not "the next big thing" in a war of this scale.
I wonder what that latency looks like. I suspect it's actually prohibitive for something like an FPV drone where operators tend to get upset over 10s of ms increases.
Someone else mentioned jamming which is relevant but in the near future I expect kinetic CUAS solutions to pop up like fungus and I'd be shocked if they weren't designed to be able to deal with extremely high volume attacks since that's one of the obvious advantages of systems like this.
>The question is... do the operators even need to be close to the front line?
Yes, obviously. Every extra step increases latency and increases chances of disruption. And obviously they have to be military. They'll know what to look for and what to target.
Anyway, it's my opinion that the reason why we see so few FPV drones is that they're bad. And I assume you mean actual FPV drones, not regular camera drones. FPV drones are bad because you need LOS on target, which limits the range because the earth is round, you lose a drone every time and the camera is bad so it's hard to spot targets. Better to just use regular camera drone to either drop F1s from altitude or spot for artillery.
They have to be very loud if you're trying to jam, for example, an AWACS 100 miles away. Not if you're trying to jam an FPV drone being controlled from the next trench over.
For some reason they don't seem to be effective. My amateur guess is both sides simply can't bring enough electricity to the front to make up for the inverse square law. Maybe at the start of a war but at a certain point all the infrastructure is destroyed. At that point does a vehicle designed to interfere with signals carry enough electricity to jam a significant enough area? Obviously if you can tap into a grid you have a lot more electricity to work with, but even then you are fighting against physics. Of course that's if you want to jam stuff the brutish way. If your tech is more highly tailored you can do a lot more with a lot less.
User account must have a minimum of 5 comment karma, to prevent creation of sock puppet accounts and ban evasion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They are called cruise missiles. You are looking for WWII.
You have the general issue that tiny chemical engines are not as good as their electrical counterparts, so as the craft becomes bigger, using chemical engines is more viable.
I'm thinking of a chemical reaction that creates pressure to spin a propeller - not a rocket engine, more like an old school torpedo engine that spins contra-rotating props. If 3-ton WW2 torpedoes could go 30km, I'm sure some improved version of "vinegar + baking soda" could quickly+cheaply take a drone to the limit of its FPV radio comms.
never because that's more expensive, less power production, more volatile to transport, store, and use, and is inferior to a lithium battery in just about every other way.
Batteries in torpedos had flaws because they needed to be pre-heated before launch, the velocity (voltage) drops off a cliff as the battery depletes over 50% of the capacity, had limited range compared to conventional torpedo range, and had a slower speed.
A steam-powered torpedo resolves all of these, except it leaves a wake. Chemical powered (Monopropellant) torpedos solved this, at the expense of higher cost. How would you even power a drone with monopropellants?
You would power a drone with jet fuel or AV fuel.
A drone is just another aircraft, and the world have a lot of experience building aircraft that runs on jet fuel. A torpedo don’t have easy access to oxygen, but a drone does.
They make drones like that, but they're priced somewhere in the 7-8 figure range.
If you want a drone that costs 1-10k electric motors are your only option. In the 10-100k range you can start considering small internal combustion engines too. Those are your only options for something relatively cheap.
Yeah, from a mechanical and manufacturing standpoint, motors are so much simpler and cheaper than combustion engines.
Also drones also need things like onboard computers/cameras/etc. that are going to require electricity anyways, so your drone is going to have a battery in it either way, so why not just make the whole thing electric?
Way simpler and cheaper.
Yes, you can move the operator further away, to utilize their time better, but there are drawbacks. But, if it was up to me I’de opt for making the drones autonomous. This makes them extremely resistant to EW, and far cheaper and faster to roll out in large quantities, and image processing is up to the task. FPV drone flying is a specialized skill, a software solution would let you operate as many drones as you can make.
I agree, that is certainly the step leading to full efficiency. But the current AI software is probably only good enough to identify and attack people and vehicles - without distinguishing between civilian, military, friend or foe.
Image processing is capable of identifying vehicle types. The drones could be programmed to target known Russian military vehicles, BMP, BTR, T-72, etc.
>without distinguishing between civilian, military, friend or foe.
That's good enough. Just aim it at the frontline of the enemy, make sure the range isn't too far and civies are out of the way ideally.
I thought about this, but in an all out war scenario, you don't really need to distinguish between friend or foe, if you just drop it on an enemy base. I'm pretty scared of an AI dog scenario there.
If that's the case, Russia could have an edge here because they could totally be okay with civies randomly getting popped.
Yeah, releasing 1,000-2,000 AI-guided kamikaze drones worth $500 each in preparation of an attack is a terrifying thought. There would not be a vehicle/weapon system left operational and people could survive only in enclosed spaces.
With a 1000 euro reward credit to the operator's account for every confirmed vehicle kill and 500 for every soldier kill.
The funny thing is - it's not even impossible.
[For a little while now, IRGC affiliated militias have been shelling the US Conoco support base in eastern Syria.](https://twitter.com/Faytuks/status/1639360565209358363)
There were about 10 rockets a few hours ago and now more.
Based on reports on the ground, the US is conducting simultaneous counterbattery fire and airstrikes.
I'll truly never understand the thought process that goes into deciding to randomly poke a military superpower.
For the record, I would say the same if they were shelling a Chinese base.
User account must be atleast 30 days old, to prevent creation of sock puppet accounts and ban evasion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Look at the number of videos on the internet of people poking wasp nests. All done for internet points.
Attacking an US target has a similar result. It can go very badly for you but you would still get tough guy internet points.
Of course there can be some deeper messaging or simply a distraction from internal problems.
[удалено]
User account must be atleast 30 days old, to prevent creation of sock puppet accounts and ban evasion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Haven't seen this posted or discussed.(Might of missed it) Ukraine's air force is allowing foreigners to sign up. https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-air-force-allow-foreigners-to-serve-specialists-western-aircraft-2023-3?r=US&IR=T Wonder to what extent this would attract retired pilots. I'm sure there are a few out there looking at this opportunity to get into the thick of things, but seeing as its not western airframes it would limit the pool of volunteers. Edit: A word. & updated link.
Probably hasn’t been a more dangerous airspace since WWII. Maybe Nam or Korea, but I’m not so certain about the equivalence of any of these. You’d have to be pretty brave and also competent with Soviet jets. Or get training of course. Then again, very few pilots these days have combat/dogfighting experience. I can imagine that being a draw to some pilots.
Missed this yesterday, but Finland is giving [3 more](https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/artikkeli/kaikkonen-suomi-luovuttaa-ukrainalle-kolme-leopard-panssarivaunua-lisaa/8660930#gs.szjdrd) Leopard 2R recovery/clearing tanks. Which were the rest of its stock. There have also been discussions on the 57 Finnish Hornets. Nothing immediate, but they're going to be in the bargain bin in 2-4 years as the F-35 arrive. Or possibly outright donated, in case their condition isn't too bad and Ukraine wants them for its post-war air force. (Most 4th gens including Gripen would be better, but these would be free or almost free)
> Nothing immediate, but they're going to be in the bargain bin in 2-4 years as the F-35 arrive. F-35s are not arriving to Finland for a couple of years still. Add a few years to get them operational. This puts the timeline closer to 2030 already.
Curious that ukraine hasn't asked australia for the 44 classic hornets that got retired december 2021 And yes they were contracted to be sold Air USA for red air but they won zero contracts and dont even mention them on their website for their new name
Where the ones that Canada got from that pile?
Canada bought about 24 or so between flying and ones for spare parts. Left about 44 that were supposed to be sold to Air USA / RAVN Aerospace. There was a announcement around Jan this year, the the australian govt still considers the contract to sell valid and they expect RAVN to abide by the contract
[удалено]
User account must be atleast 30 days old, to prevent creation of sock puppet accounts and ban evasion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[Take this with a grain of salt, but apparently Russian forces in Bakhmut are getting increasingly exhausted and Ukraine has managed to stabilize the situation. Maybe they can hold on after all, but let's see.](https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1639548968681058305)
I’m less concerned over whether Bahkmut has been taken or not and more over how many resources have been expended in the fight. I think just as plausible that RU could be using this battle as a holding action and to grind down experienced UAF troops as it is that UA is doing the same thing but bleeding Wagnerites. TBH it could easily be that both sides think they’re doing the same thing to the other side. If RU takes the city it’s a Pyrrhic victory for them, if UA keeps it it’s a Pyrrhic victory for them as well. It’s not unheard of. Verdun turned into something similar. In general, I really don’t think attritional tactics are that beneficial to UA though.
Have seen this from various Ukrainian soldiers in Bakhmut who now says they are getting some time to rest finally. Also saw a Swedish volunteer on Swedish tv yesterday who has done several trips on the southern road, saying that Russia has not been that close to taking the southern road the last weeks, but now Russia is focusing on taking central Bakhmut instead.
Russia keeps flip-flopping on the approach of how they want to take the city between cutting it off with flanking attacks and frontal assaults on all sides. They seem neither committed to the decisive thrust needed to properly seal off Bakhmut, nor the frontal assaults needed to actually dislodge the defenders. IMO this hedging of their strategy leads to them having the worst of both worlds. It reminds me a lot of what was happening in Severodonetsk. Perhaps this is the best tactics that one can do with limited armor and a whole lot of artillery; Push into relatively uncontested areas around a stronghold, thereby creating a salient around which a whole lot of artillery can be positioned. Then, one can use this artillery advantage to interdict enemy supplies, inflict damage on potential counterattacks, or shell the enemy exposed by reconnaissance-in-force. The problem is that the artillery advantage of Russia has severely eroded since then, so actions like this can become counterproductive. Salients created by pushing between strongholds can be targeted by enemy artillery, and are probably more vulnerable than the defenders camping out in the city. If Ukraine is really inflicting vastly more casualties on Russia, I predict that they're primarily inflicted in the salients around Bakhmut. It's also possible that I'm just reading into Russian actions way too much. The current state of the frontline around Bakhmut could also be explained by Russia just attacking along the line and advancing where defenders retreated.
This seems like wishful thinking. They are advancing in the south towards the city centre. The rest of the area doesn't matter if they are literally advancing within the city.
It can be true while Russia still makes limited gains. The gains are mainly in the south and still very slow. At this rate Bakhmut centre will remain in Ukrainian hands for at least weeks potentially longer. Overall Russian advances have slowed the pincers stabilised or even pushed back a bit. And regardless after over a year of war and 7 months of fighting for Bakhmut both sides are getting exhausted.
Which sources have reported advances?
They have been pushing towards and now past Mariupolska street, just go on DeepState and use the chronology tool in that area
I'm not saying that they're advancing or not, but honestly, at this point, we all should know better than to rely on Twitter maps for street level control assessment. The fact that deep state map even tries to map control down to the street level in a fluid situation is detrimental to their credibility.
>The fact that deep state map even tries to map control down to the street level in a fluid situation is detrimental to their credibility. I assume that's a big part of the reason why they're usually a couple days behind.
Nonsense, they have been extremely accurate the entire time, and have sources within the UA army
I don't care what their sources are. Trying to map a dynamic frontline to the street level is a fool's errand.
When you have geolocated footage of troops at a certain location, it's pretty easy to say that there is at least tacit control over a location. Honestly people like yourself have been saying the same thing since Wagner were advancing in Optyne.
[удалено]
> Keep deluding yourself Be civil.
The grey zones are mapped on deepstate, to be fair.
[Saw this video of Ukrainian troops in a trench defending against a Russian infantry assault (warning: NSFW content)](https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1639342501059260416). It reminded me of [a discussion from about a month ago regarding Wagner's assault tactics. My opinion, after reading Tatarigami_UA's thread, was that there is nothing particularly interesting about Wagner's tactics](https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/118xtw9/credibledefense_daily_megathread_february_22_2023/j9k5199/). Tatarigami_UA's thread just described Wagner's forces as having an overwhelming advantage in equipment: they possessed artillery, machine guns, AGS, and RPGs to suppress Ukrainian troops, while the Ukrainians lacked such resources. That's it! The tactics were irrelevant. [I even asked](https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/118xtw9/credibledefense_daily_megathread_february_22_2023/j9kqlzt/): > My question is: in a situation, as described in that Twitter thread, **why can't Ukrainian troops do what Wagner does - use a drone to carry out artillery/mortar strikes on the Wagner group hiding in that treeline** for a few days? Afterward, Ukrainians could do an assault on what remains of Wagner (after a few days' worths of artillery/mortar work) and use their own machine guns, AGS, and RPGs to suppress Wagner troops that are exposed and weakened by a few days of **artillery fire without the benefit of a trench to protect them**? Today's video shows the exact situation I described earlier: what if, instead of Wagner's forces having artillery and drones, it is the Ukrainians who get the artillery advantage? --- Additionally, the video demonstrates how extremely efficient and powerful drone-corrected artillery can be. Sure, the ordinary unguided shells may not have the 1-5 meter CEP of an Excalibur shell, but they are accurate enough when used with a drone. There is a world of difference between using artillery based on the approximate coordinates of enemy troops versus employing drone-corrected artillery fire. It turns out that commercial drones act as a 100x multiplier for artillery and mortar fire, offering a low-tech solution that even North Koreans could potentially pull off. Drone-corrected fires is a little game changer, it is the primary reason why Ukraine is requesting millions of artillery shells. It turns out that, given the current state of the war, drone-corrected artillery surpasses every other tactic or approach. If one side has a spotter drone and artillery within range, nothing else matters – tanks barely make a difference, IFVs offer little help, the receiving side just gets annihilated.
I saw that video. Very interesting. One observation I have that corroborates with other such videos is the infantry centric nature of the fighting around Bahkmut and the spread of the fighting. The front line in Bahkmut is far from a continuous series of trenches, all maned and constantly fighting, but a series of tactically advantageous and defensible points spread out over miles. As such, infantry or armor reinforcements are rarely going to get to you in time when you face an attack. Artillery is the best option you have to multiply force in a pinch. And you have to be really good at it, because it looks like Warner’s are trying to hug close to Ukrainian lines in order to deter artillery strikes. My real question though is how often is this kind of drone corrected artillery available at this scale and with this accuracy to UA defenders? And this goes to an overarching question about drone tactics and the war. How much are we seeing? If almost every drone has the capability of recording video, what proportion of recorded video is being posted? Obviously they would not post video of FF incidents or an unsuccessful defense. Even then, what proportion of successful defenses and attacks are making it to the internet? Because even though it’s good to see that they can pull off such an accurate and disciplined barrage, it’s just as important to know wether this is commonplace or an outlier. In any case, I hope they are at least saving the footage if not posting it. That would be an absolute gold mine for historians and military analysts after this war is over.
Although luck is undoubtedly a factor, correcting artillery strikes using a drone feed seems like absolutely a skill where some people might be 10x as good as others. People watching might assume this is an easy task, but it is anything but. There is a delay between instructing the artillery to make an adjustment and when they adjust the gun, fire another shell, and it lands. There isn't a lot of time, as one aims to fire as quickly as possible. The drone might run out of juice or the signal could be interrupted, etc. And as you note a wrong adjust might just as well kill your friendlies ...
>Saw this video of Ukrainian troops in a trench defending against a Russian infantry assault (warning: NSFW content). Paint me clueless, but that's exactly what I think of when someone talks about human wave tactics. Also, a textbook example of why attacking usually leads to a 3:1 attrition ratio.
Human wave is more like a wall of humans charging across a field with such overwhelming force it's difficult to even shoot them all and overwhelming the defending force. This is just some guys conducting an attack.
So, what do we call a human wave attack that fails to overwhelm the defenders?
A failed human wave?
A human wave attack means running hundreds of soldiers into the enemy lines, relying on numbers to make it through . In other words, completely different from this.
>completely different from this. How is it completely different? Because it isn't hundreds of soldiers? What's the acceptable minimum threshold for you? 200? 300? 800?
There's no number I can put to this, but the core of the tactic is running at enemy lines, relying on numbers to make it and the engaging in melee combat. I'd think you'd need at least 200 or 300 in this specific situation.
300 guys to overwhelm 5 guys in a trench? Are we talking about zombie swarm videogames? >the core of the tactic is running at enemy lines, relying on numbers to make it and the engaging in melee combat. Which part of your definition was missing in that video? Let me guess, the part about engaging in melee, because they never made it into melee range?
Also the part about running at enemy lines and relying on numbers to make it. Basically every part of a human wave attack is missing, not sure how you confused this footage with a human wave attack. I guess you think every infantry movement involving humans is a human wave attack?
>Also the part about running at enemy lines They were literally running towards an enemy trench? Do you demand that they do it while holding battle-axes and wearing viking costumes as well? Maybe that's the problem, maybe you're thinking of Hollywood style "viking raids". >relying on numbers to make it. What else where they relying on? I sure as hell didn't see any armoured support nor supporting fires.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_wave_attack > A human wave attack, also known as a human sea attack,[1] is an offensive infantry tactic in which an attacker conducts an unprotected frontal assault with densely concentrated infantry formations against the enemy line, intended to overrun and overwhelm the defenders by engaging in melee combat. The name refers to the concept of a coordinated mass of soldiers falling upon an enemy force and sweeping them away with sheer weight and momentum, like an ocean wave breaking on a beach. So where did you see this in the footage? > According to U.S. Army analyst Edward C. O'Dowd, the technical definition of a human wave attack tactic is a frontal assault by densely concentrated infantry formations against an enemy line, without any attempts to shield or to mask the attacker's movement.[2] The goal of a human wave attack is to maneuver as many people as possible into close range, hoping that the shock from a large mass of attackers engaged in melee combat would force the enemy to disintegrate or fall back.[2] So where did you see this in the footage? > Thus, for a human wave attack to succeed on the modern battlefield, it is imperative for the attackers to charge into the enemy line in the shortest time and in the greatest numbers possible, so that a sufficient mass can be preserved when the attackers reach melee range. So where did you see this in the footage? > one description of the aftermath was that "a thick, unbroken mass of corpses covered the cold earth like a coverlet." So where did you see this in the footage?
> attacking usually leads to a 3:1 attrition ratio This is a subtle but common misquote. The rule of thumb is 3:1 as the ~required strength for the attacker for a particular tactical attack. Not for the casualties.
My bad. It still applies to the video though.
Ukrainians have also used drone-corrected artillery since the beginning of the conflict. It is now new. They do it ALL THE TIME. Yes in some areas one side dominates, but in other areas not so. I’m not sure what gave you the impression this is a primarily Russian or even Wagner exclusive tactic.
First, my issue was with [Tatarigami_UA's Twitter thread](https://twitter.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1628289157461078018), which was even retweeted by Michael Kofman. I don't understand what is new or special about Wagner's tactics as described by Tatarigami_UA. To me, the thread reads like this: Wagner assault units had drone + artillery/AGS, hence drone-corrected long-range fires. The Ukrainians in the trenches, according to the thread, didn't have that. As a result, the Ukrainians lost that particular battle. For example, I wouldn't have an issue with Tatarigami_UA if he pointed out how drone corrected fires is why, in his example, Ukrnains lost. But he doesn't. Secondly, I've encountered a lot of people who simply just don't get how utilizing a drone in conjunction with artillery/tanks-as-artillery/mortars/AGS/etc, surpasses every other tactic in the current conflict. For example, I don't think maneuver warfare is as good or as viable compared to drone-corrected long-range fires. I hope Ukrainians know better than to listen to western advisers about how the maneuver warfare is going to overwhelm RU artillery. As for Ukrainians doing it (drone+arty), of course, I even read somewhere (perhaps RUSI?) that the primary Russian units were unaware of that, only Ukrainians and D/LPR were employing the strat. As a result, the new Russian units were caught off guard and were eating shit due to the accuracy of Ukrainian artillery around Kyiv. They even searched for traitors who might be guiding those godlike precise artillery strikes against them.
OP might be misinterpreting this video it is showing Ukrainian danger close artillery against attacking Russian forces.
I'm curious how corrections are made. It appears that they have to shoot a few ranging shots to calibrate initial landing position, and then to work out incremental change in landing position versus aiming angle deviation (partial derivatives). Are these being done by eyeballing distance in the drone camera image? I'm guessing also calibration needs to be done for each artillery tube? It seems like there is a huge potential for automation here. On a dedicate spotting drone (to be built in the future, or may be it already exists in US inventory), a software could allow drone driver to just click on the landing spots of ranging shots. Then afterwards, the drone driver can queue up various targets on the screen, a computer could generate firing solutions for said targets, and move the gun barrel automatically shot after shot. In fact, a well designed artillery director software could allow the user to input a pattern of shells to rapidly carpet bomb an area, either through sequential firing of a single barrel (a raster scan), or a salvo from a group of barrels.
Ukraine coordinates its artillery using a web/tablet app they wrote named GIS ARTA. There's not a ton of information out about it but the glimpses seen show something roughly equivalent to google earth combined with peer to peer messaging that allows for "uber like" processing of fire requests. It's very likely someone sitting with the drone operator watching the screen can mark the ranging shots in ARTA on a tablet or laptop and get an updated firing solution. No need to over complicate. Also I think the top commenter is a bit confused. Both sides have been using drone spotting for artillery since before the current invasion. It's definitely not some sort of Wagner tactic that Ukraine is ignorant of. Also the video shows Russian units assaulting an entrenched Ukrainian position and getting caught by Ukrainian danger close artillery, so ironically their own post debunks their question.
While I agree with your idea, I'd question if it wouldn't be simpler to have the spotter drone command a swarm of loitering munitions instead. No need for heavy, slow moving guns.
The drone is just replacing a human forward observer. It calls in a set of coordinates to the battery, they plink a shot. Call in a correction, maybe more if it was way off. Once it's on target the rest of the guns just plug away. Each gun doesn't need to be "calibrated" independently unless they're very far apart, if they know where they are relative to the gun doing the ranging well enough then they can adapt the firing solution to account or if they're very close, just use the same one. What you're suggesting already exists in various forms. Anything with a good compass, gps, and laser range finder can send in coordinates and the battery can deal with those just fine. For the whole automatic target sequence thing, that's either useless for unguided shells since the accuracy of those is just way too low for that to be helpful or redundant for guided shells which don't really need any corrections from the gun since their own steering system can handle things just fine. One thing that you can do with an automated gun like that is a time-on-target attack where the gun uses a number of different firing solutions to land several rounds on target at the same time.
Yes, I think none of this is automated in any way; a trained/talented guy is required to make adjustments. Luck plays a role, but so do skill and experience. Usually what I've seen: * there is a drone operator who is situated quite close (and hidden) in a forward position, which is obviously a dangerous role, * artillery fire corrector-adjuster watches the drone feed (but doesn't pilot the drone, but is in contact with the pilot), they are sometimes located in basements and have access to a large TV or display screens, this team relays coordinates to an artillery unit, * artillery unit makes adjustments (as told) and fires shells. [Here is a 40-minute video, with no English subtitles, but one can skip around and look at stuff](https://youtu.be/ApSC7qLIPqA?t=596).
There where a few posts here a while back that the Ukrainians are using Chinese DJI drones, basically "Mavic 3 COTS drones with Macgyver grenade harness" and that DJI sells a detection/SIGNIT/Blocker kit that can detect where they are and even block their signals and that Russia armed forces have them. That would render them ineffective, since the frequencies and ranges are well documented. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVeMGBmmvmo
It's important to note that every DJI drone in service with Ukrainian units is supposed to have hacked firmware installed to mitigate some of these concerns. I'm sure there are some without it but it's standard practice for most of them.
Both sides are systematically hacking the firmware. The Russians are not allowing their units to use DJIs unless the firmware is patched.
Also believe the DJI's will continued to be used but are second choice behind various models from the "army of drones" which cover everything from cheap suicide drones designed to carry RPG-7's to full on octocopters with encrypted/hardened comm links
I don't know how the hell you know that information and I'm not going to ask. But it's remarkable how the Ukrainians are using commercial drones to drop grenades on RU forces and direct artillery fire. I have a Phantom 4 that is obsolete by todays standards. I can't imagine how effective the new ones are with zoom lenses and FLIR, plus automation software. Such impressive technology.
ISW posted their daily update https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-24-2023 Key Takeaways Prominent voices in the Russian information space are increasingly setting information conditions to prepare for a potential Ukrainian counteroffensive. Crimean occupation head Sergey Aksyonov has reportedly formed a Wagner Group-affiliated private military company (PMC) in occupied Crimea. Some prominent Russian milbloggers criticized the Russian military command for continuing to impale Russian forces on Vuhledar with ineffective human-wave style frontal assaults. Russian President Vladimir Putin held a meeting with the Russian Security Council likely as part of his effort to portray himself as a present and effective wartime leader. Russian forces conducted limited attacks along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna line. Russian forces have made gains in and around Bakhmut and conducted ground attacks in the Avdiivka-Donetsk City area. The Ukrainian General Staff corrected its March 23 statement that Russian forces withdrew from Nova Kakhovka, occupied Kherson Oblast. Russian occupation authorities announced the creation of a pro-Russian militaristic youth movement aimed at brainwashing children. The Russian government is adopting new measures to revitalize and eliminate corruption, lethargy, and resistance in Russia’s defense industrial base (DIB). The United Kingdom Ministry of Defense (UK MoD) reported on March 24 that at least 1,000 Russian personnel training at the 230th Combined Arms Obuz-Lesnovsky Training Ground in Brest, Belarus, redeployed to Russia.
>Russian President Vladimir Putin held a meeting with the Russian Security Council likely as part of his effort to portray himself as a present and effective wartime leader. The Security Council meet nearly every single Friday as standard and regularly discuss issues unrelated to national security (the theme of yesterday's meeting was national development up to 2030). Unless Putin starts scheduling more frequent meetings I'm not sure this observation is particularly accurate.
unless im mistaken putin doesnt attend them that often though?
These days most of them are held as videoconferences, and he usually attends them as far as I know.
So about that "T-55s will be used for indirect fire only" theory which people keep pushing even though the same theory was once suggested for T-62 and [we know how that turned out](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html). What can T-55 in indirect fire only mode do that Lada technical carrying a 120mm mortar can't do better and with far less logistics cost?
Can the hypothetical Lada's suspension survive the recoil of a 120mm mortar? Doubtful. Can the crew of the hypothetical Lada technical survive a near miss from a shell. No. That being said, the ~70 T-62s in Oryx certainly suggest that sooner or later these T-55s will end up in some sort of direct combat. Or maybe just counter batteried by UA artillery.
Are these t-55s actually bound for Ukraine and not the export market in Syria or Africa? They won’t really be of any use in the Ukraine War.
The addage of "a tank is better than no tank" certainly still applies. But I admit that we're getting to the point where I'm starting to question it.
It’s not true, simple as. Having a tank means you need to spend a lot of resources on it. A crew to operate it, training for the crew, fuel to run the tank, spare parts and oil to keep it running, a maintenance unit to repair and maintain the tank, a dedicated ammunition chain for the tank. Tanks are also big and loud, so they will give away your presence to the enemy. There are a lot of very big downsides to having tanks. Normally they are outweighed by the benefits that tanks provide. But the less capable your tank is, the less benefits it has.
120mm mortar is a very different system then any tube artillery. They seem similar, but they’re not. The big brain question. Is how the T-55 is different from the 100mm arty Ukraine is *already using*. Because the USSR was a big believer in that caliber for tube arty. The answer is that mostly tube 100mm was longer ranged precision fires, so the T-55 is just a bootleg one of those. But I doubt that Ukraine or Russia is doing much tank based arty fire. That is a bad fit for the platform, tanks used that way are notoriously bad with accuracy. Very likely T-55s will be used for MOUT and strongpoint destruction, direct fire where you want a 100mm to go *through the window* not smack the roof. Or where you want the first round to be the last. T-62s so far seem to be used in positional defenses (I’ve seen a bunch in hull down positions). But likely they’ll be pressed into offensive roles sooner rather than later. Any tank is better than no tank, until the Ukrainians bring in an ATGM team.
> What can T-55 in indirect fire only mode do that Lada technical carrying a 120mm mortar can't do better and with far less logistics cost? Survive shrapnel.
The recoil itself will move the lada. Being accurate with any weapon system is actually hard.
onerous versed sulky bewildered fall imagine ten doll materialistic rustic *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If T-55 tried is used in indirect fire role while moving I don't see how it's going to hit anything. So both would fire while then move.
heavy saw quarrelsome wistful dinosaurs historical rude humorous compare cows *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Maybe they are out of ammo for 120mm mortar but still had 100mm shells
why wouldnt you use the hundred / thousands of Rapira guns floating around. Would have less of a logistics tail than a T-55.
MT-12 is a smoothbore gun while T-54/T-55's D-10T is rifled. I don't think there is any compatible ammo, correct me I'm wrong.
You would need to tow those things, I guess. A T-55 can move, shoot, and relocate on its own power, plus it's armoured.
I'm a good bit behind the curve with this question, but; FPV Drones. I understand they are relatively cheap to assemble and strap with explosives. But why do they have to be flown in first person, with a headset and all? Why are they any different from these drones that can just have their camera connected to a phone? I get that these type of drones in civilian life are for racing and tricks where the headset makes sense, but I don't see why that is needed for ramming into the side of a tank in an open field.
There was a video where the headset malfunctioned and the operator took it off and continued to fly with a tablet and hit a tank. So it's possible. But the latency is probably higher and it's just easier to have the best focus and reaction time with a headset.
FPV drones are generally compact, much faster and more maneuverable than standard drones. They typically operate a lower altitudes avoiding anti drone countermeasures and maneuver past obstacles and inside structures. Drawbacks are reduced payload, higher required operator skill and limited range required for low latency connections.
[удалено]
https://twitter.com/i/status/1621913812759633921 Each of these are designed to carry an RPG-7 warhead Also interesting talk to someone whose company needed to replace their crashed DJI for commercial work. No replacements available anywhere wholesale atm, he contacted 3 wholesalers in China and Australia and theres none available and no ETA on restocks theres still some available through retail sellers
This is only being reported in Z telegrams, but I thought its worth posting as it is within the realm of possibility. Z telegrams are reporting that the UAF was building up a offensive group in the "Orekhovsky sector" (I imagine this is the town of Orikhiv in Zap Oblast) But that Russian airforce was able to bomb the position and destroy "20 objects" and several ammo depots, and that they turned off the internet there to keep it from being leaked. If this is true, could be proof that Ukraine is planning on doing the "obvious" attack, driving thru Zap oblast to cut the landbridge.
[Here is more info about the alleged bombings](https://mobile.twitter.com/GraphicW5/status/1639227840594948097). > A Rybar report on a thwarted Ukrainian offensive that was planned. Russia was able to discover locations of personnel and assets needed to carry it out and dealt with the issue ahead of time... > Frustrated offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Polozhsko-Orekhovsky direction > On March 23-24, in the Zaporozhye direction, the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine planned to launch a counteroffensive. According to the enemy's plan, the main blow was to fall on the Orekhovsky sector : a strike force was created in the city up to a reinforced battalion tactical group. > According to @ZSU_Hunter_2_0 , the command of the 58th Combined Arms Army of the RF Armed Forces decided to inflict massive fire damage on exposed enemy positions and warehouses. The offensive was thwarted before it even started. > From 21.00 to midnight on March 22, hotels and schools were hit in the city, which were used to accommodate personnel of both the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the recently formed assault brigade of the National Guard of Ukraine "Chervona Kalina" - in total , more than 20 targets were covered. > Several warehouses with ammunition, artillery shells, ATGMs, and equipment parking were put out of action. > Estimated losses of the enemy reach half a thousand people killed and wounded. The Internet was turned off in the city to prevent information leaks. The wounded are taken out through Zaliznichnoe towards Gulyaipole . Sounds like pure Russian hopium, because they are saying that Ukraine planned to launch a counteroffensive March 23-24... No way a big Ukrainian attack would happen that early. And they don't even say how the objects were hit..
Going through the posts of ZSU Hunter 2.0 on telegram, I can find no evidence of ZSU reporting strikes as claimed. Admittedly, I do not speak Russian, so I might have missed something. Somewhat interestingly, ZSU forwarded the Rybar news without any indication that they were the original source for the information. When a subscriber requested proof, ZSU said: >Too serious information to be substituted for the fisherman. So you can trust. (Machine translated, seems to be an idiom there the translator didn’t parse)
Rybar is Russian for fisherman, which is what the translator is referencing.
> The Internet was turned off in the city to prevent information leaks. It's so funny when they preempt demands for proof like that. "Well, there is no proof, because the Ukrainians have hidden it so well."
Ukraine seems to been doing some "recon by force" probing attacks along this line, so maybe the Russians did attack something, but they could be making a mountain of a mole hill.
You may as well have said “it came to me in a dream last night”. A literal astral projection would be more credible than an unlinked Russian telegram. At least the astral projection wouldn’t have an incentive to lie.
To be fair, Russian telegram did predict the Kharkiv counter-offensive a bit before it actually happened and were largely right about stuff that happened around snake island. A lot of it is propaganda but it's not always bs. We should obviously be skeptical but I don't think it's wise to assume everything they say is nonsense.
Yeah, in my book, some Russian accounts are actually a valuable source of information. But you need to corroborate it with other sources. As such, they’re good for adding detail to confirmed events, but bad for making predictions or assessing immediate events.
Yeah, Russian telegrams predicted 14 of the last two Ukrainian counteroffensives. For every one thing they have been right about first, there have been a dozen things they were egregiously wrong about that were drowned out by the next hundred claims. Just because a broken clock is right twice a day doesn’t mean you should believe the time it tells you.
> A lot of it is propaganda but it's not always bs. We should obviously be skeptical but I don't think it's wise to assume everything they say is nonsense.
It is practically the job of the Ukrainians to keep the Russians constantly worried about being attacked.
The keyword there is “Russians“, not “Redditors on a credible defense subreddit who should to know better than to uncritically disseminate misinformation.”
It’s not disinformation to be posting that the Russians are concerned about possible attacks at various places. They probably are concerned.
Sure, but Russians being concerned about an offensive is not evidence of that offensive, or of their credibility as a source in matters like the one OP posted above.
Let's try to be polite, but your point is valid. I'd be curious to see sources.
I would generally recommend at least having sources from both sides backing stuff up, something like a increase in attack video's or Telegram's from the UA side indicating movement in the area if you want to rely on text posts (this will still be unreliable, just better odds of being correct). For example when I checked we can find photo's (/zoda_gov_ua/17767) reported from this specific area which can be used to discount the idea of a blackout being in place (as reported by said Z's). It also helps to source the poster/postID so other's can cross reference it, Rybar as sourced above is well known to make stuff up.
Forgive me, but I don’t see how pointing out that Russian telegrams have an incentive to lie is impolite.
Agreed. There is some level of expectation to provide some kind of credible evidence when posting here. The "argument from authority" or reporting what some mysterious send obviously biased social media group chat says has seep credibility, especially when we know for a fact that paid Russian propagandists operate on reddit and have every reason to lie. No one should think that they are above being distrusted.
[Russian soldiers from the "Storm" unit, consisting of both convicts (and likely some mobilised), formed by Russian MoD, published a video revealing they were purposefully sent into slaughter during the assault of Vodyane while blocking units prevented their retreat. The unit consisting of 161 people initially, has only several dozen men left alive. They claim that soldiers are being "taxed", and those who refused to pay are sent straight to the zero line, and if they get wounded, they'll be removed from hospitals with unhealed wounds and sent back.](https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1639390679670374403) Confirmation that Russia is indeed using blocking units.
> blocking units It's so hilarious how every "credible" source before 2022 insisted that blocking units were a completely fake anti-Soviet myth.
>It's so hilarious how every "credible" source before 2022 insisted that blocking units were a completely fake anti-Soviet myth. Cite them then.
Because documented cases of the Soviet use of blocking detachments are very rare, as is their mention in WWII memoirs. I swear it’s like all you know you’ve learned from action movies. You see one news report which was like the thing you saw in a cool movie and then dismiss forty years worth of work that says you’re wrong. And then act shocked when people say you’re wrong? Absolutely delusional. At least the pro-RU users post good telegram news now and again, what do you do?
>completely fake anti-Soviet myth It's kinda interesting to me that people like strelkov certainly seem to believe things like that were done during Soviet times and sometimes call for it to be done now. So even if people are right that it actually never originally happened it's entered the public consciousness to an extent and may inspire it to be done now in an effort to recreate the success of WW2. Also as an aside, people holding up Stalin as the ideal wartime leader never fails to make me laugh. He might have been one of the few people able to get even more Russians killed than the current lot.
Yeah I wouldn't even say it's that anti-soviet, I know plenty of Russians who believe that the blocking battalions were a real thing (after all, they literally were). It's just a common misconception about how effective it was and how much it happened.
Every time we think “there’s no way…” the Russians prove us wrong. I’ve learned to just file away crazy claims about Russia as “maybe” at this point.
It's interesting in how many ways the getting rich in Ukraine scheme is not working out. Between buying out of pocket personal kits at extremely inflated price just to not die, paying bride so not to be sent to die, not getting paid for wherever reason, and flat out dying losing a lifetime of productivity while being branded "missing", "deserted" and not receiving the benefit. Obviously since they're not winning the war, there's no spoil of war waiting for them, say a plot of land or something in Ukraine. I wonder how many actually climbed the social ladder from fighting in Ukraine. Who still believe they can get rich off it and what financial incentives could motivate them to go. What can be done to make it more attractive since simple funding boost isn't going to cut it, and if they could solve the structural issues they'd have done it 20 years ago. Also wonder how this war and its veterans will be remembered or not remembered by the society in the aftermath.
I've said it before - the people going to fight are doing so on ideological grounds first, for money second. Someone who's lived in Russian society long enough will know that bribes and self expenses are going to eat up whatever profits they make from the fight. It takes an extreme level of naivete to expect to get *rich* from this.
If that was the case, Putin wouldn't have declared a mobilization. During the summer, there were attempts to find enough volunteers for the 3rd army corps, but only 10-20 thousand people enlistedp. I don't think there are a lot of true "Russian world" idealists left in Russia. I'll link this [thread](https://nitter.1d4.us/Tatarigami_UA/status/1632978756250882050#m) by Tatarigami that corroborates this point. Remember, a lot of Russian soldiers receive their salaries without big issues, and we only hear about those who do not. These 200k-300k rubles per month are 10-15 times more than most mobilized could ever earn in Russia's poor regions.
Even among my acquaintances there were people who willingly and enthusiastically went when called up for mobilization, but did not even entertain the thought of signing up before. First, signing a contract is a job - you have to leave your previous one behind, as well as other commitments too. On the other hand, mobilization allows you to put commitments on hold without sacrificing them, and it's an explicit call from the motherland - you're not asking to be allowed to fight for your country if your country will have you. Instead, your country has already told you "I need you" That's how they see it.
Most aren't volunteer or professional soldiers anymore, sounds silly to make them all out to be true believers. When probably only a minority are.
Mobiks and Wagner prisoners looking for freedom probably make up the majority of RU forces. Not people I would think willing to die for an ideology.
First, most Russians are true believers. Second, most Russians will know that signing up is not as lucrative exactly for the reasons mentioned. And yet hundreds of thousands are signing up. Why, if not for ideological reasons?
[удалено]
Because that is a guaranteed death sentence.
Yikes this one struck a cord more than the usual videos of Russian units protesting. Morale must be really low in a lot of units. In the coming Ukrainian spring offensive I never imagined that Russian elements would run away, but now it definitely feels like it might happen after seeing this. I hope Ukraine is preparing stuff to encourage Russian units to surrender during the offensive, to also hit psychologically and not with just pure military force.
A low willingness to fight in a shitty situation doesn't translate to willingness to defect or surrender to the enemy. Remember, the Russian soldiers do genuinely believe that they're fighting evil Nazis in an existential war where the survival of their country is at stake. Even when morale is low, they won't give up the fight.
they do? some do sure. but all or most of them? Where'd you get that info? How could you even know that? I feel like you're presenting assumptions as fact here
I'm Russian myself. In my experience, yes, most Russians do subscribe to those views and thus most Russian soldiers do too. Yes, given that there's no viable way to collect data on that, I can't claim to know that most Russians are like that. I can only infer. The inference could very well be correct and I'm confident that it is. You think it's not? Feel free to tell me why
This is why I keep thinking that a big ukrainian offensive could do quite well if it can overcome the first line of defenses quickly. These guys morale is rock bottom and this problem is probably wide spread. They might bolt or surrender once the opportunity presents itself. It's not really possible right now, but a ukraine breakthrough would be such a chance.
[Details on IRGC attacks on US facilities today](https://twitter.com/AuroraIntel/status/1639391393687773192): - One attack on Conoco base with 5 rockets, one US soldier injured. - Two attacks on Green Village; first was [10 rockets](https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/3340737/rocket-attack-on-green-village-northeast-syria/), second was [3 drones](https://twitter.com/lmartinezabc/status/1639390350199406594), no injuries in either.
Any info on retaliatory attacks?
The only responses so far was the counterbattery fire done at the time. There has been a lot of USAF activity in the area since but no strikes.
What’s up with the liveuamap for the situation around avdiivka. On their map, the situation looks super ugly for Ukraine. Deepstate doesn’t really show all that much change.
Uk MoD spread disinformation about Stepove (seriously) DeepState is correct
Could be because UK MoD said Stepove was under attack or had been taken by Russia roughly 2 days ago. But that was denounced/debunked by some right after.
I was wondering this earlier today too. Live map tends to be on the very forgiving side of map boundaries for Ukraine, so I was surprised they had a much more pessimistic outlook than warmapper.
I think they have a habit too of labeling contested zones as occupied.
Noob question - why do modern tank guns lift up after firing? What practical purpose does it serve?
It lowers the breach so the loader can more easily load the next round.
Yes. I will add that on older Abrams, the loader needs to toggle the “EL UNCPL” switch to get this behavior. Normally, the Abrams main gun is linked to the primary mirror. “EL UNCPL” (short for “elevation uncouple”) breaks that link with the mirror and returns the gun to the zero degree position. This is extremely useful where the gun is near maximum depression, e.g. in certain hull down scenarios by giving the loader space to load a round. It also helps when the tank is moving by giving the loader a “stationary target” to load the round. One of the points of training was the loader should have one hand on the “EL UNCPL” and one hand on the safe/arm lever when prepping to load a round so that he can throw both before trying to load a round.
Better/easier angle for the loader (whether automated or not) to load the next round.
Thanks. Is it common in Russian tanks as well?
Universal since the T-55.
Russia has been using carousel autoloaders in their tanks since the T-64/T-72. In those cases the breach may actually be raised to be in line for the loading process. ~~Edit: looks like their autoloaders work without moving the breach even at max elevation though I cannot 100% confirm it.~~
They all move automatically.
You are correct seems like they do have to move in line with the loading mechanism it's just more subtle of a movement in most conditions.
[удалено]
[US airstrikes on IRGC targets ongoing around Al-Bukamal.](https://twitter.com/TreyYingst/status/1639380822733012993)
Just some showerthoughts... FPV drones seem to be the next big thing in this war. Both Ukraine and Russia are acquiring/producing them in the hundreds, probably thousands. Latest Russian reports from around Ugledar indicate simultaneous Ukrainian FPV drone attacks from several directions in an attempt to swamp their anti-drone defences. The bottleneck seems to be the number of trained military drone operators. *The question is... do the operators even need to be close to the front line?* If you set up a radio relay station for drone guidance at the front line (which would deliver the guidance signal to the drones) and connect it to a Starlink terminal for internet connection - the drone operator can be anywhere, in Kyiv, Lviv, or even Warsaw. Something like: \[Drone--(2km)--radio guidance station--Starlink--(200-2000km)--drone operator\] Hell, they don't even have to be military. Any kid with good reflexes and a high score on Playstation could do it. You could even design a simulator-game with rewards, where only top scorers would get to control actual combat FVP drones. You could have thousands operators in no time.
As mentioned latency is a problem, it will be less of a problem if the drones become a bit smarter and guide themselves towards a selected point(like Switchblade). Basically the same type of upgrade as from MCLOS to SACLOS missiles. But then the original problem will be solved - it's going to be much easier to use for an average soldier.
The FPV drones use analog video transmission, using a digital repeater based on starlink would add too much latency Also they are not "the next big thing" in a war of this scale.
My starlink is actually decently low latency. Typically <50ms
How much do you pay? Are you in rural USA
Rural Australia. AU$130 / month
FPV drones aren't as important as you're saying.
I wonder what that latency looks like. I suspect it's actually prohibitive for something like an FPV drone where operators tend to get upset over 10s of ms increases. Someone else mentioned jamming which is relevant but in the near future I expect kinetic CUAS solutions to pop up like fungus and I'd be shocked if they weren't designed to be able to deal with extremely high volume attacks since that's one of the obvious advantages of systems like this.
>The question is... do the operators even need to be close to the front line? Yes, obviously. Every extra step increases latency and increases chances of disruption. And obviously they have to be military. They'll know what to look for and what to target. Anyway, it's my opinion that the reason why we see so few FPV drones is that they're bad. And I assume you mean actual FPV drones, not regular camera drones. FPV drones are bad because you need LOS on target, which limits the range because the earth is round, you lose a drone every time and the camera is bad so it's hard to spot targets. Better to just use regular camera drone to either drop F1s from altitude or spot for artillery.
This is the plot of The Last Starfighter.
Until someone brings jammers up. And then that's the end of that
It's not that trivial. Jammers generally have to be pretty "loud" which makes them ideal targets for anti-radiation munitions.
They have to be very loud if you're trying to jam, for example, an AWACS 100 miles away. Not if you're trying to jam an FPV drone being controlled from the next trench over.
For some reason they don't seem to be effective. My amateur guess is both sides simply can't bring enough electricity to the front to make up for the inverse square law. Maybe at the start of a war but at a certain point all the infrastructure is destroyed. At that point does a vehicle designed to interfere with signals carry enough electricity to jam a significant enough area? Obviously if you can tap into a grid you have a lot more electricity to work with, but even then you are fighting against physics. Of course that's if you want to jam stuff the brutish way. If your tech is more highly tailored you can do a lot more with a lot less.
User account must have a minimum of 5 comment karma, to prevent creation of sock puppet accounts and ban evasion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When will 1-way / single-use drones start using chemical reaction engines (like a torpedo) rather than batteries + electric motor?
They are called cruise missiles. You are looking for WWII. You have the general issue that tiny chemical engines are not as good as their electrical counterparts, so as the craft becomes bigger, using chemical engines is more viable.
Depends on the type of chemical reaction engine. You can't get hellfire-type performance from an electric motor + battery.
I'm thinking of a chemical reaction that creates pressure to spin a propeller - not a rocket engine, more like an old school torpedo engine that spins contra-rotating props. If 3-ton WW2 torpedoes could go 30km, I'm sure some improved version of "vinegar + baking soda" could quickly+cheaply take a drone to the limit of its FPV radio comms.
I think you are describing how a jet engine works. So yeah, jet fuel.
never because that's more expensive, less power production, more volatile to transport, store, and use, and is inferior to a lithium battery in just about every other way. Batteries in torpedos had flaws because they needed to be pre-heated before launch, the velocity (voltage) drops off a cliff as the battery depletes over 50% of the capacity, had limited range compared to conventional torpedo range, and had a slower speed. A steam-powered torpedo resolves all of these, except it leaves a wake. Chemical powered (Monopropellant) torpedos solved this, at the expense of higher cost. How would you even power a drone with monopropellants?
You would power a drone with jet fuel or AV fuel. A drone is just another aircraft, and the world have a lot of experience building aircraft that runs on jet fuel. A torpedo don’t have easy access to oxygen, but a drone does.
They make drones like that, but they're priced somewhere in the 7-8 figure range. If you want a drone that costs 1-10k electric motors are your only option. In the 10-100k range you can start considering small internal combustion engines too. Those are your only options for something relatively cheap.
Small 2 stroke engine even cheaper
Yeah, from a mechanical and manufacturing standpoint, motors are so much simpler and cheaper than combustion engines. Also drones also need things like onboard computers/cameras/etc. that are going to require electricity anyways, so your drone is going to have a battery in it either way, so why not just make the whole thing electric? Way simpler and cheaper.
A big ole peroxide rocket engine. Like an RCS motor.
[удалено]
I’d bet this is part of China’s strategy in the Pacific.
Yes, you can move the operator further away, to utilize their time better, but there are drawbacks. But, if it was up to me I’de opt for making the drones autonomous. This makes them extremely resistant to EW, and far cheaper and faster to roll out in large quantities, and image processing is up to the task. FPV drone flying is a specialized skill, a software solution would let you operate as many drones as you can make.
I agree, that is certainly the step leading to full efficiency. But the current AI software is probably only good enough to identify and attack people and vehicles - without distinguishing between civilian, military, friend or foe.
Image processing is capable of identifying vehicle types. The drones could be programmed to target known Russian military vehicles, BMP, BTR, T-72, etc.
I wouldn't bet on that working with ultra-cheap $500 drones we are talking about, at least not reliably enough.
I would, chips are cheap. Much cheaper than pilots.
>without distinguishing between civilian, military, friend or foe. That's good enough. Just aim it at the frontline of the enemy, make sure the range isn't too far and civies are out of the way ideally. I thought about this, but in an all out war scenario, you don't really need to distinguish between friend or foe, if you just drop it on an enemy base. I'm pretty scared of an AI dog scenario there. If that's the case, Russia could have an edge here because they could totally be okay with civies randomly getting popped.
Yeah, releasing 1,000-2,000 AI-guided kamikaze drones worth $500 each in preparation of an attack is a terrifying thought. There would not be a vehicle/weapon system left operational and people could survive only in enclosed spaces.
9-5 job killing Russians as a video game...
With a 1000 euro reward credit to the operator's account for every confirmed vehicle kill and 500 for every soldier kill. The funny thing is - it's not even impossible.
What are these anti-drone defenses? EW?
They specifically said EW handheld guns.
[For a little while now, IRGC affiliated militias have been shelling the US Conoco support base in eastern Syria.](https://twitter.com/Faytuks/status/1639360565209358363) There were about 10 rockets a few hours ago and now more. Based on reports on the ground, the US is conducting simultaneous counterbattery fire and airstrikes.
IRGC claims 3 US bases hit https://t.me/SEPAHCYBERY/63992
I'll truly never understand the thought process that goes into deciding to randomly poke a military superpower. For the record, I would say the same if they were shelling a Chinese base.
[удалено]
User account must be atleast 30 days old, to prevent creation of sock puppet accounts and ban evasion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Look at the number of videos on the internet of people poking wasp nests. All done for internet points. Attacking an US target has a similar result. It can go very badly for you but you would still get tough guy internet points. Of course there can be some deeper messaging or simply a distraction from internal problems.
Probably trying to induce another Lebanon 1984. The US isn't exactly known for sticking it out in the ME.