Kiev Is Burning

[bojan]

Vikhr or possibly Ataka.

[glenn239]

16 hours ago, DB said:

 

- The oil price in yuan and rupees may have been stable since the pivot, but the exchange rate between those currencies and the ruble has dropped by over 40%, and so Russia's oil is worth commensurately less and is being exchanged for currency that is of limited utility in the first place.

I've seen reports that the Russians find the Rupee of limited use, but I've seen nothing anywhere that suggests anything along the lines as that holding Yuan is not valuable to Russia?

 

[glenn239]

16 hours ago, Josh said:

NATO would just be doing the same with vastly greater SEAD, ECM, volume, and precision. Like I said, they can either push the long range SAMs far enough back from the front to do high altitude glide bombs like the Russians or they can do low altitude pull ups like the Ukrainians.

I don't think NATO glide bomb attacks will be decisive.  Nor, having watched the parade of Western weapons perform in Ukraine, do I believe that much of anything the USAF brings to the table will work as well in action as is claimed in the advertising.

Quote

The USAF uses tankers pretty much everywhere and there is already a permanent presences at RAF Mildenhall. It isn’t hard to establish point defenses at a high value site

Tankers have to go to pre-established rendezvous points and fly figure 8 tracks under full observation of thousands of people and civilian radars while lazily refueling aircraft within SU-57 strike range.   This sounds more vulnerable to me for the tankers than just having the F-15's landing at different airports and refuel.

Quote

I think it’s ridiculous to have a 2000nm drone carrier if it isn’t super stealthy. Were you thinking a Reaper or TB-2 analog was going to survive a ten hour trip through NATO airspace? 

Who said anything about non-stealthy drone carriers?   Why would anyone go through the trouble of building a drone carrier intended for deep operations and then not bother with building in stealthy features?  Is this is a movie and the Russians are Scooby-doo villains following a Hollywood script?

Quote

They wouldn’t have to deal with A50s or MiG-31s; those could not maintain patrols close to the border like in Ukraine. 

 The USAF could barely handle MIG-25's in the Gulf War and were damn lucky on numerous occasions the Iraqi jets were old planes with old missiles.  You list MIG-31's and A-50's as if these are the same level of problem for NATO.  I think your claim that NATO can take care of Russian A-50's has considerably more merit than your claim that they can take out the MIG-31's.  

Quote

I made no such statement regarding ZSU training cycles.

You made wildly unsubstantiated claims about how many million troops the Russians can field with their own and their allies' resources.  I mentioned the Ukrainian example to show that even Ukraine can field more troops than NATO could easily bomb.  

Quote

Neither side seems to be able to adequately train its reserves at the moment.

Adequately train them FOR WHAT?  Sorry for the bolding, but you're jumping all over the place.  In one moment you say NATO canl kick the Russians out of Ukraine, which means the Russians need only train and equip large numbers of infantry for static defense to prevent that happening.  In the next moment you say that Russia takes a long time to train and equip mechanized formations for offensive warfare.  Those are two very different missions, and the requirements for static defenses are far less for one than the other.

Quote

Well fair is fair. If you’re going to start hitting airbases, you can’t get upset when the other side does so as well.

In one post you say that the USAF must not bomb deep in Russia because, obviously, the USAF can cease to exist if it does.  Then here, without further explanation, you throw all that restraint out the window at the first Tu-95 missile raid on a UK airbase.   But surely you realize that if F-15's in the UK are bombing Russian troops that these UK bases are targets for Russian attack, and that your first principle of not making deep bombing raids still holds provided that Russian raids are restricted to UK infrastructure involved in the Ukraine war?

Quote

More broadly I think another disconnect between our opinions is that I’m using NATO numbers and capabilities now and in the immediate future, where as you seem to be projecting into a post Ukraine war situation after an extended Russian build up.  

You were thinking that Russia will attack NATO, but without having done an extended period of buildup first?   The  Scooby-Doo villain theory is gaining strength.  :^)

Quote

NATO is not going to hold still over the next five years. Look at the furious rate of Polish defense purchases.

I don't think NATO can hold industrial pace with the Sino-Russian coalition going forward.  I think every year they will fall further behind.  It's as simple as that.  

 

[seahawk]

Russia to add 170.000 troops in response to NATO aggression, Hopefully only a first step and Russia will soon have 2.000.000 soldiers under arms.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/vladimir-putin-to-increase-russian-troop-numbers-by-170-000-in-response-to-expansion-of-nato/ar-AA1kTdGy

[Roman Alymov]

Bradley wreck towed by M88 ARV https://t.me/milinfolive/111854

[Josh]

46 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

I don't think NATO glide bomb attacks will be decisive.  Nor, having watched the parade of Western weapons perform in Ukraine, do I believe that much of anything the USAF brings to the table will work as well in action as is claimed in the advertising.

HIMARS was quite decisive. I don’t think it would be over hyped to say it had a strategic level effect - I don’t think either the Kharkiv or Kherson offensives could have occurred without them. I think the USAF would bring a lot more volume and a much deeper reach than a couple dozen artillery systems.

 

46 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Tankers have to go to pre-established rendezvous points and fly figure 8 tracks under full observation of thousands of people and civilian radars while lazily refueling aircraft within SU-57 strike range.   This sounds more vulnerable to me for the tankers than just having the F-15's landing at different airports and refuel.

Su-57 is currently outnumbered nearly 100:1 by NATO fifth generation aircraft and there is little prospect of that situation improving. If they want to try to fly clear across Poland of Scandinavia, that will save NATO some time and trouble finding them on their side of the border.

 

46 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Who said anything about non-stealthy drone carriers?   Why would anyone go through the trouble of building a drone carrier intended for deep operations and then not bother with building in stealthy features?  Is this is a movie and the Russians are Scooby-doo villains following a Hollywood script?

Ok, when the S70 enters full rate production, you have your long range stealth UAV. I think you’ll be waiting awhile.

 

46 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

 The USAF could barely handle MIG-25's in the Gulf War and were damn lucky on numerous occasions the Iraqi jets were old planes with old missiles.  You list MIG-31's and A-50's as if these are the same level of problem for NATO.  I think your claim that NATO can take care of Russian A-50's has considerably more merit than your claim that they can take out the MIG-31's.

If the MiGs loiter around running a racetrack like they likely are now, yeah I think they will be fired upon before they know they are even being tracked. If they race in and out again, I expect they can survive a lot longer, but they aren’t going to be providing a persistent CAP or significantly expanding ground based radar coverage.

 

46 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

You made wildly unsubstantiated claims about how many million troops the Russians can field with their own and their allies' resources.  I mentioned the Ukrainian example to show that even Ukraine can field more troops than NATO could easily bomb.

I think NATO airpower can destroy Russian logistics pretty easily. Actually bombing troops probably wouldn’t have to happen on a particularly large scale. The goal isn’t to invade Russia, the goal is to put them on there side of the border and keep them there.

 

46 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Adequately train them FOR WHAT?  Sorry for the bolding, but you're jumping all over the place.  In one moment you say NATO canl kick the Russians out of Ukraine, which means the Russians need only train and equip large numbers of infantry for static defense to prevent that happening.  In the next moment you say that Russia takes a long time to train and equip mechanized formations for offensive warfare.  Those are two very different missions, and the requirements for static defenses are far less for one than the other.

Ah, I think this conversation is a big misunderstanding. I am discussing a hypothetical Russia-NATO conflict post Ukraine war involving Russia invading a NATO country. I don’t believe NATO will take any military action against Russia under any other circumstances. That is the only scenario I am discussing; NATO is never going to try to dislodge Russia from Ukraine. On that note I’ll just drop this; we are talking past each other.

 

[Strannik]

2 hours ago, glenn239 said:

I've seen reports that the Russians find the Rupee of limited use, but I've seen nothing anywhere that suggests anything along the lines as that holding Yuan is not valuable to Russia?

 

Rus/China trade is making new records every quarter. Garbage info brought here by a hopeful Russaphobe

[Strannik]

10 minutes ago, Josh said:

 On that note I’ll just drop this; we are talking past each other.

 

If only we could've connected you two to an electric generator before the start of this conversation 🤣

Edited December 2, 2023 by Strannik

[Roman Alymov]

6 minutes ago, Strannik said:

Rus/China trade is making new records every quarter. Garbage info brought here by a hopeful Russaphobe

  It is not exactly "hopeful Russaphobe" but just lack of understanding of Russia dealing with long-established status of de-facto colony of West: our liberal economists are so used to getting USD/EUR in exchange for natural resoiurces and then stockpiling this pseudo-money in Western institutions (de-facto exchanging natural resources for Western debt, the same as giving away resources for free) - that now they do not know what to do with Rupee. They can't even steal it and use for buying more palaces in London.  The idea of using this Rupee to buy somethig useful for population - from tea to Indian textile to hand tools (significant part of handtools of medium segment are produced in India) is strange for them. Luckily, somebody have finally discovered the idea to buy ships in India - well, that is reasonable (Russian shipyards are overloaded), but still too little.

[crazyinsane105]

 

Modernized AK-12 review. Overall it is a pretty good rifle

[Stuart Galbraith]

14 hours ago, seahawk said:

Russia to add 170.000 troops in response to NATO aggression, Hopefully only a first step and Russia will soon have 2.000.000 soldiers under arms.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/vladimir-putin-to-increase-russian-troop-numbers-by-170-000-in-response-to-expansion-of-nato/ar-AA1kTdGy

Great idea. What are they arming them with, M1891's or PPSH?

[Stuart Galbraith]

14 hours ago, Josh said:

HIMARS was quite decisive. I don’t think it would be over hyped to say it had a strategic level effect - I don’t think either the Kharkiv or Kherson offensives could have occurred without them. I think the USAF would bring a lot more volume and a much deeper reach than a couple dozen artillery systems.

 

Su-57 is currently outnumbered nearly 100:1 by NATO fifth generation aircraft and there is little prospect of that situation improving. If they want to try to fly clear across Poland of Scandinavia, that will save NATO some time and trouble finding them on their side of the border.

 

Ok, when the S70 enters full rate production, you have your long range stealth UAV. I think you’ll be waiting awhile.

 

If the MiGs loiter around running a racetrack like they likely are now, yeah I think they will be fired upon before they know they are even being tracked. If they race in and out again, I expect they can survive a lot longer, but they aren’t going to be providing a persistent CAP or significantly expanding ground based radar coverage.

 

I think NATO airpower can destroy Russian logistics pretty easily. Actually bombing troops probably wouldn’t have to happen on a particularly large scale. The goal isn’t to invade Russia, the goal is to put them on there side of the border and keep them there.

 

Ah, I think this conversation is a big misunderstanding. I am discussing a hypothetical Russia-NATO conflict post Ukraine war involving Russia invading a NATO country. I don’t believe NATO will take any military action against Russia under any other circumstances. That is the only scenario I am discussing; NATO is never going to try to dislodge Russia from Ukraine. On that note I’ll just drop this; we are talking past each other.

 

You werent. I got that was exactly what you meant from your first post. If he didnt get it, its because he is in arch contrarian mode again.

[mkenny]

54 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Great idea. What are they arming them with, M1891's or PPSH?

No need for fancy high-tech war-winning game-changing western wunder-waffen. Thye can just issue them the same shovels used to destroy the Ukranian  summer  offensive.

[ink]

6 hours ago, crazyinsane105 said:

 

Modernized AK-12 review. Overall it is a pretty good rifle

Was going to say that it's not really a rifle war, this one, but then I remembered all those drone videos of trench warfare Roman keeps posting.

[Gavin-Phillips]

It might not be "new news" but this appeared on my Youtube feed this morning; newly formed Russian 104th Airborne Division has been deployed into frontline Ukraine.  Obviously there is the issue of training being mentioned and how effective this new formation might be when they see actual combat.  I personally will be intrigued in what equipment they will end up using as perhaps the BMD-series has had its day with the VDV now having organic tank support?  So they'll probably be replaced with BMP's instead.

Deep Weapons channel; newly formed 104th Airborne

I've also heard a Ukrainian claim of a world-beating sniper engagement at 3.2km using some kind of hybrid 12.7mm round inserted into a 14.5mm casing?  Regardless of what kind of rifle was used, that's some extreme distance whichever way you look at it.

Edited December 3, 2023 by Gavin-Phillips
Adding a bit of detail and spelling!

[Roman Alymov]

Field mouse problem (result of combination of harvest left on fields, soft previous winter and expected cold winter this year) is not only causing additional hardship on soldiers in trenches (both sides), but even on armor

https://t.me/c/1771711124/2066

[Roman Alymov]

Pro-Rus video of two Chineese Desertcross 1000-3 ATVs destroyed by IEDs dropped from converted agricultural drones, somewhere near Krynki. Probably first video of this vehicles lost

https://t.me/c/1771711124/2072

[Roman Alymov]

Compilation of pro-Ukr videos of the same M109 SPG before and after Lancet strike, including inside view https://t.me/milinfolive/111902

[Roman Alymov]

Not about current events, but about rutes of them - from historial A.Dukov

"At the first All-Union Agricultural Exhibition in 1939, there were pavilions of all the Union republics, except one. Guess which one?

Yes, that's right. The RSFSR was not awarded a pavilion, instead the pavilions of the macro-regions within the RSFSR were made + separately the pavilions of the Tatar and Bashkir ASSR, which a few years earlier had sought the status of union republics. A kind of consolation prize.

At the second VSHV (1949-1954), the pavilion of the RSFSR appeared, but the largest pavilion was not the pavilion of the RSFSR, but the pavilion of the Ukrainian SSR, launched in 1954. By the way, it was placed exactly opposite the main building, making the second architectural dominant of the exhibition. The answer to the question of which republic is the main one in the Union, thus, was given quite clearly.

I have already written why this is so. (https://t.me/historiographe/7991)"

"They ask why all the second secretaries in the Communist Party of Ukraine were their own, (https://t.me/historiographe/7989 ) and not representatives of the Center.

This is also why the second secretaries of the Communist Party of Ukraine (the only ones from all the Republican parties) were members of the Central Committee of the CPSU.

The same reason why the Communist Party of Ukraine (the only one of all the Republican parties) had its own Politburo.

The Communist Party of Ukraine was the first among the republican parties (since there is no party in the RSFSR), the most powerful, numerous and aware of its corporate interests,

Accordingly, the Center should be considered first of all with her. And this is also why there is such a significant presence of people from the Communist Party of Ukraine in the party <leadership>.

The CPU has the best lobbying opportunities.

The remaining 14 Republican parties have weaker lobbying opportunities, but good ones.

The "capital" regional committees of the RSFSR - Moscow and Leningrad - have lobbying opportunities as republics, and more than many.

The rest of the regional committees of the RSFSR have a residual principle, but the regional committees of the A(utonomous)SSR have a little more than the regional committees of simple regions (thanks to representation in the Council of Nationalities).

That's was the system."

"Why was it possible to transfer Crimea from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR, but not to transfer the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region from the Azerbaijani SSR to the Armenian SSR?

Because the issue of the transfer of Crimea was decided between the Politburo and the leadership of the Communist Party of Ukraine, and the issue of the NKAO was decided between the Politburo, the leadership of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan and the leadership of the Communist Party of Armenia. And therefore, the leadership of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan, with its objections, invariably blocked the transfer of its territories to its neighbor, and there was no one to block the transfer of Crimea - the Communist Party of the RSFSR did not existed.

And here we should think about the fact that in 1990, the Gorbachev-Lukyanov plan for the dismemberment of the RSFSR appeared by raising the status of ethnoautonomies to union ones, and then, despite the efforts of the Center, the Communist Party of the RSFSR was created."

[Roman Alymov]

"Archive footage (https://t.me/zogrussia1 ) dated March 21 of this year, which were filmed on the northern flank of Bakhmut, during the ongoing "Bakhmut meat grinder" at that time.

In the first video, a column of the Armed Forces of Ukraine consisting of one tank and three jeeps is moving towards the positions of the Wagner PMCs. After making only one shot, the Ukrainian tank immediately receives a return shot from the RPG-30 "Hook" and flashes like candle.

In the second video, MTLB speed up to the Wagner positions and takes away WIAs from the position. The AFU tank is still burning in the background.

Video number three shows the same road along which the AFU launched another attack on the PMCs positions, but the artillery of the "Orchestra" thwarted the attempt."

https://t.me/c/1771711124/2074

[crazyinsane105]

7 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Great idea. What are they arming them with, M1891's or PPSH?

They have plenty of AKs..I don’t think arming them is the issue. 
 

Issue is that Russian Armed Forces is simply too damn small to be able to effectively fight in Ukraine. This recent increase is literally a drop in the bucket in terms of what Russia actually needs

[BansheeOne]

On 11/23/2023 at 1:05 PM, mandeb48 said:

M2 for Kubinka :

https://t.me/lost_armour/1862

I remain dubious based just upon the usual "sneak into no-ones land and pose with an abandoned AFV" pictures, but Oryx agrees it was captured; of course they have been accused of low standards of proof for losses themselves. Anyway, if correct that would make the third high-profile Western vehicle captured by Russia after one each AMX-10 RC and CV9040.

[Dark_Falcon]

3 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

Field mouse problem (result of combination of harvest left on fields, soft previous winter and expected cold winter this year) is not only causing additional hardship on soldiers in trenches (both sides), but even on armor

https://t.me/c/1771711124/2066

Larger cat deployments are needed.

[Dark_Falcon]

Perun's video this week covers a topic we've all been talking about here.  All opinions welcome but please remember his views are not necessarily my own.

 

 

[Roman Alymov]

12 minutes ago, Dark_Falcon said:

Larger cat deployments are needed.

Cats can't help - they are physically unable to eat (or even just catch) such number of mice