There's been quite a bit of night-time helicopter footage. Are these clips mostly just for show? Or is the army aviation actually having some impact on the front?
The War in the Ukraine
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
There's been quite a bit of night-time helicopter footage. Are these clips mostly just for show? Or is the army aviation actually having some impact on the front?
Not necessary to invoke fearmongering over nuclear weapons.... not neccessary. Do you think Biden or Scholz reads SDF forums?? NATO escalation is BAD, we know.... and you are preaching to the choir here.
Interestingly the second highest upvoted comments says the following:
So undoubtably (if true), we can expect NATO fighter jets incoming to Ukraine relatively soon....
Last edited:
It might be the opposite: the maximum of what they can achieve. Russia is constrained by the shortage of the most important military resource - the ability to plan and execute the effective use of all the other resources.
When your "brain" is capable then you can adapt and make up for other weaknesses - much like Israel was able to do early on. When it isn't it doesn't matter how big or strong the rest of the body is. Russian military is brain-dead on a level that makes NATO look like the reincarnation of Einstein. The only question is how much of it is endemic to the military establishment itself and how much of it is caused by political structures outside of the military.
For me the best evidence is no combined assault at the Dniester estuary.
There were multiple missile strikes against the bridge in Zatoka but despite capturing Snake Island Russia didn't execute the logical next step. It would open a second front toward Odessa, open direct sea connection to Transnistria, put pressure on Moldova and cut off transit from Romania. When you look at the map the area is ridiculously defensible and causes so many disruptions that it is a crime that nobody had plans for the operation prepared in advance.
I mean... just look at this. As long as you have the means to put a perimeter along the Dniester your back is against a neutral third party. You capture the western part of the bay and set up a base of operations there and sit tight.
The two yellow dots indicate the only two passages across Dniester. The red area is the maximum necessary to completely isolate the Budjak from the sea ensuring protection for Snake Island and beachhead for further advancement as well as the area necessary to connect to Transnistria by sea and road.
What's worse I made a quick calculation of the available transport capacity in the amphibious fleet that was deployed in the Black Sea and it was sufficient for 1 or 2 BTGs depending on composition in a single trip. Augmented by helicopter and paratrooper assault delivering another 1-2BTGs it would be sufficient to hold the ground until reinforcements were transported. Yes, this is precisely the kind of scenario where having paratroopers would be an advantage and it would be glorious because they really would be used as paratroopers to capture the land.
If it was done in the first day of the invasion the air force would have full control of the skies and the navy could be used to full capacity without much opposition. By day 3 the control of the area would be firmly established and Odessa would be threatened directly even without Mikolaiyv being captured.
But that's just the military part and war is just politics with other means.
This is the ethnic composition of the region:
When you compare Russian majority areas and the areas I marked as red a lot overlaps. The rest is ground for intelligence preparing riots, insurgent and separatist groups. Budjak has the means to sustain itself as a politically independent region because of sea access and the ability to mediate transit between Moldova and Transnistria. It's also a non-Ukrainian majority region and one that mostly voted for opposition parties. This is not an overtly pro-Russia region like Crimea or Donbas but it is not overtly pro-Kiyv so it can be done... if done competently.
All the forces that were wasted capturing the western bank of Dnepr for nothing could be put to good use in Budjak.
There are other less obvious examples but this one is my favourite because it lays bare the sheer incompetence of Russian military planning and lack of coherent strategy of escalation. It is so obvious and so potent that lack of any attempt to capture it is the equivalent of Ukraine not creating a defensive buffer along the border with Crimea which caused the collapse of the southern front in the first days of the invasion, and loss of Mariupol as a result.
It would obviously also help if Russia actually planned for such operations and developed its force structure toward such mission. The 31st Air Assault Brigade from Ulyanovsk experimented with their own aviation. There should be a similar unit in Crimea serving as a vanguard for further VDV deployment. Similarly the 810th Marine Infantry Brigade shouldn't be a mechanized formation primarily but one that specializes in riverine warfare and small unit tactics.
Instead their genius plan was to capture Kiyv by landing at Hostomel (home of one of the few heavy rapid reaction units of the Ukrainian National Guard no less!) It wasn't a "daring raid". It was "damn retarded". And marine infantry was used to help with the capture Berdyansk and then kept fighting deep inland. Because apparently that's what marines should do - fight in the deserts of Iraq and in the mountains of Afghtanistan.
You mean... this big offensive operation?
Rule of thumb is one vehicle/system temporarily lost to wear for every one vehicle/system lost to combat.
Add about 50 lost helicopters and another 50+ combat aircraft. Double it for wear. Current "high combat tension" sortie rate is 150 per day. It's been six months since there has been any serious VKS activity on the front. They're flying CAP with R-37s within their own airspace against a country with no air force.
To compare: Ukraine has received almost 2,5 thousand wheeled IMVs and APCs which are not much worse than BMP-1/2 as far as protection goes. The calculus starts to look strangely fair and balanced.
The only other big offensive operation that is coming is the good old human wave "Urraaaaa! Vpyer'yod! Za rodinu i bat'ka
Oh wait. They're already doing that, aren't they?
I've studied many military conflicts over the years but this one absolutely takes the top as being the most grotesquely surreal and counter-logical and just downright confusing in terms of how absurdly hilarious it is when it should have no right to be. At this point I'm watching it with morbid curiosity as if it was roadkill that still twitches and makes funny noises and just refuses to die.
Russia Stronk'ers are the military equivalent of flat-earthers or Wehraboos so their presence in this thread turned it into a useless waste of time. But Russia was still fully capable of capturing all of the coast, the land bridge to crimea and some of the eastern part of the country. Whether it made strategic sense (it didn't) is another question but militarily they could do it if they prepared for it. Wars are won by whoever is better prepared. But to prepare you need to have a brain to develop a plan. Whatever is the equivalent of the brain in Russian military wasn't working. I think this is why their army is moving in Ukraine like an army of zombies.
They want braaaaaaiiiiins.
If so then seriously they invaded the wrong country for that. What a clusterf...
Have something interesting to share? Can be PM if you don't want to make a mess out of it in this thread. Doesn't have to violate any rules. I have my own ins for that. Just interested in observations.
Last edited:
I have a feeling that Russia has no capability left for a major offensive operations, would take the claim of another supposed offensive in the spring with a grain of salt
No, they don't!
It has gradually become apparent that Russia is committed to a positional attritional war, as this maximizes the asymmetry of their advantage in ranged fires.
Western regime media has set a very low standard for reporting on the war in Ukraine - in a nutshell, Russia is suffering horrible casualties as it struggles to capture a small town with negligible operational importance. The truth is the literal opposite of this story.
Prigozhin on the battles taking place in the city of Bakhmut:
The task of taking Bakhmut is to destroy the Ukrainian army in the vicinity of the city and prevent any offensive actions in any direction of the front. All of their combat-ready units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are sent to Bakhmut. And the Wagner PMC destroys them, opening up operational opportunities in other areas.
Putin - about the situation on the line of contact: The enemy does not care for anything or anyone. They shoot their own in the back, they created blocking detachments. A week ago, the guys told me - in one of the settlements they are surveiling, the enemy moving forward, and their own men are firing at their backs. Dense fire, so to ensure the conscripts do not retreat. This is the work of the nationalist battalions, but they themselves do not exactly storm ahead.
Quick question: Is all the NATO equipment entering and projected to enter Ukraine sufficient to alter the battlefield to where Russia must resort to nuclear weapons to prevent catastrophic defeat?
If yes, we know how this is going to end. If no, we're making a mountain out of a molehill and dancing to the West's tune.
If yes, we know how this is going to end. If no, we're making a mountain out of a molehill and dancing to the West's tune.
Ukraine is preparing for an offensive in the south with new NATO weapons and forced mobilisation.
According to popular Russian Telegram channels, Zelensky has issued an unofficial order for the rapid mobilisation of 200,000 people. This explains the increasing videos showing people literally being dragged off the streets and out of their homes against their will.
I don't understand why anybody should take Prigozhin at face value. I don't believe Ukrainian self-serving statements and reporting, why would Russians be any different in that regard?
The likely reality, is that both sides are suffering heavy attrition, but Ukraine is suffering incrementally more due to Russian artillery superiority in the area.
The way that a lot of these Wagner assault group "probe" Ukrainian defenses, is just utterly needless and callous. I highly doubt that Russian forces have continued to wage on the battle in this manner with the express purpose of "depleting" Ukrainian manpower. That sounds incredibly contrived.
Why? Wouldn't an extra 300K men, plus focusing on a single vector (instead of Kherson, Kiev, and Kharkiv vectors) enable Russia to have some semblance of offensive capability? Before it spread itself too widely and under manpower, but now with more manpower and focusing solely on Donbass, it should make big breakthroughs (theoretically)
Of course, 31 Abrams, 14 Challengers, and 14 Leopards isn't going to result in defeat of Russia. The quantity is too little to alter the battlefield that results in it's defeat.... Even if Ukraine gets hundreds of tanks, it will be years before they are full equipped, proficiently trained, and without air superiority, they will hardly achieve optimal effectiveness. At best, you will see Korean style ceasefire with more NATO equipment....but recovery of all occupied territory is unlikely. Also, fearmongering about nukes is not acceptable and future posts about nukes will be auto deleted (not targeting you specifically, just generally).