War in Ukraine, technical and military aspects only

[glenn239]

2 hours ago, old_goat said:

 A donkey can keep going in mud where even tanks get stuck. 

They are also indifferent to drones and don't make the evening news when killed.

[alejandro_]

18 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Ooh, that quote is familiar.  Don't tell me, let me guess....Hitler, 1944, looking at data on USAF production figures?

Not Hitler but former minister of defense Shoigu, who claimed that missile/UAV data provided by Ukraine was several times larger than the one launched by Russia. Even Ukrainian sources do not agree, as data presented by Ukrainian Armed Forces commander Syrskyi in August 2022 were rather different to that of KPZSU (Ukrainian Air Force Command).

[Roman Alymov]

1 hour ago, alejandro_ said:

Not Hitler but former minister of defense Shoigu, who claimed that missile/UAV data provided by Ukraine was several times larger than the one launched by Russia. Even Ukrainian sources do not agree, as data presented by Ukrainian Armed Forces commander Syrskyi in August 2022 were rather different to that of KPZSU (Ukrainian Air Force Command).

Not to challenge you opinion, but to avoid misunderstanding: In the intervew in May, 2023, then-MoD Shoigu ment specifically Kinzhal missiles. He said "We do not produce so many Kinzhals as they claim shot down every time"  and then said "The number of this intercepts is three times more then number of of our launches". Also, according to him, enemy reports are consistently mistaken on type of MISSILES.

      Шойгу разоблачил ложь Киева: "Сбивают в три раза больше, чем мы запускаем"

     Шойгу: Украина «перехватывает» в три раза больше ракет, чем мы пускаем / 16 мая 2023 | Политика, Новости дня 16.05.23 | © РИА Новый День

   So it is hard to tell how accurate are the data in the table (both in "+" and "-") - for example, number of Kinzhals in Jan and Feb 2025 is marked zero, but could pro-Ukrainians really tell Kinzhal from Iskander? It is de-facto the same mussile, and without constant radar monitoring of traectories, it is not easy to tell one from another....

[JWB]

https://x.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1899734165962018822

Ukrainian engineers from the 4th Mechanized Battalion of the Presidential Brigade "Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytskyi" came up with a small "tactical charge" - a bomb carried by a drone, which they named a "Presidential Hello."

[glenn239]

34 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

but could pro-Ukrainians really tell Kinzhal from Iskander?

They've got good information on MIG-31K flights, so that will be the way they do it.

[Roman Alymov]

1 minute ago, glenn239 said:

They've got good information on MIG-31K flights, so that will be the way they do it.

They used to have it (at least, there was constant information alerts about MIG-31K takeoffs on pro-Ukr TG channels) but lately i do not see them- while it is unlikely MIG-31K ceased all flights, even training ones with imitators...

[MiGG0]

Also you could fly MIG-31K area where Iskander area launched which would confuse them more (and then fly MIG somewhere else to launch Kinzhal) even if tracked. 

[alejandro_]

55 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

Not to challenge you opinion, but to avoid misunderstanding: In the intervew in May, 2023, then-MoD Shoigu ment specifically Kinzhal missiles.

Edited. I found the article in Reuters. He makes a comment on Ukrainian missile intercepts, but maybe journalist got confused:
 

Russia's Shoigu was quoted as saying the number of claimed Ukrainian missile intercepts in general is "three times greater than the number we launch".

"And they get the type of missiles wrong all the time. That's why they don't hit them," he said, without elaborating.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/air-defence-systems-repelling-attacks-ukraine-early-tuesday-officials-2023-05-16/

Edited March 12 by alejandro_

[glenn239]

41 minutes ago, alejandro_ said:

Edited. I found the article in Reuters. He makes a comment on Ukrainian missile intercepts, but maybe journalist got confused:
 

Dunno about the missile figures, but the drone totals do not look out of line.  I see no reason why if the necessary plants were built that the Russians, (or Ukrainians) couldn't produce 3,000 or more Shahed style drones a month, and increasing all the time.

[glenn239]

Video on new Pantsir system.  Lasers, tracks, and mini-missiles,

 

[seahawk]

So immune to anything the west could throw at it.

[Roman Alymov]

Close-up view of the wreck of Osa SAM launcher adopted for R-73 missiles https://t.me/infomil_live/15850

[Roman Alymov]

Drone vs. robotic platform https://t.me/boris_rozhin/157646

[Yama]

4 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Dunno about the missile figures, but the drone totals do not look out of line.  I see no reason why if the necessary plants were built that the Russians, (or Ukrainians) couldn't produce 3,000 or more Shahed style drones a month, and increasing all the time.

That would mean ~100 drone strikes nightly, and we don't see it. Actual production figures based on usage seem to be about 1000+ per month.

[alejandro_]

There were a feww articles in the Ukrainian and French press on this topic:

Why SAMP/T may really have problems shooting down ballistic missiles

For SAMP/T, of course, the ability to combat ballistic targets is declared, but there is no clarification on which Aster 30 missiles

Allegedly, the European SAMP/T anti-aircraft missile systems turned out to be ineffective not only because of the lack of missiles for them, but also because they do not work well against ballistic targets. Defense Express has already devoted a publication to the first question, in which it analyzed how many missiles for SAMP/T exist in total and how many are produced. However, the problem of destroying ballistic targets voiced by the sources is really more complicated and requires a separate publication.

The problem with intercepting ballistic targets, announced by "people familiar with the matter," is supposedly software-related. And this immediately evokes a parallel with the repetition of history with the problematic Patriot software that missed Iraqi Scuds in 1991. Recall that the error in the code concerned time measurement, which occurred due to the Patriot being on combat duty for a long time.

But it is unlikely that SAMP/T has exactly the same problem, which became a well-known illustrative example of a bug in the code that cost the lives of American military personnel. However, it should be noted that the problem was also in the GEM-T missiles themselves, which do not guarantee the destruction of the warhead of a ballistic missile in the air, which is why the CRI anti-missile was first created, and then the MSE with kinetic interception technologies .

As for the SAMP/T capability, according to official information on the capabilities of destroying ballistic missiles, it is declared only for the Aster 30 Block 1 and Block 1 NT versions of the missiles.

Block 1 appeared in the early 2010s and differs from the basic version in new homing head software and updated missile control systems. The first test interception of ballistic targets by this missile took place in 2010. However, the supply of SAMP/T to the French army began earlier than this moment, back in 2007, and a little later to the Italian army, that is, they initially came with Aster 30 Block 0 missiles. It is also worth adding time to the adoption of the new version of the missile, the start of serial production and delivery to the army of Aster 30 Block 1.

Moreover, in fact, immediately after the completion of work on Block 1 in 2015, the program for creating the Aster 30 Block 1NT was launched. The reason for the upgrade is to expand the ability to combat ballistic missiles. That is, the very fact of the need for the next upgrade directly indicates that the regular Block 1 is not doing well with intercepting ballistic targets.

It is Block 1NT that should become one of the updates to the entire air defense system, which was called SAMP/T NG, which will be launched into production in 2026. At the same time, the French themselves said that thanks to SAMP/T NG they will be able to shoot down "even the Dagger." The destruction of which by Patiot available in Ukraine has long been no news, which also hints at certain limited capabilities of the European air defense system compared to the American one.

The new Aster 30 Block 1NT differs from the previous Block 1 version in that it has a new radar homing head in the Ka-band (26.5-40 GHz), which allows it to hit targets more accurately than the previous version of the Aster 30 Block 1 ARGSN, which operated in the Ku-band (10.7-12.75 GHz).

Of course, the French and British navies have proven to have shot down ballistic missiles using the Aster 30 during a civil navigation support operation in the Red Sea. But the exact missile consumption and overall effectiveness of the ship-based system have not been announced. Moreover, there may be a significant difference in the fire control system between ship-based and ground-based SAMs.

That is, in general, regarding the real capabilities of SAMP/T to intercept ballistic targets, there may actually be questions not in terms of "maybe - may not", but in terms of real effectiveness, taking into account the specific version of the anti-aircraft missile and ballistic missile being intercepted.

https://defence-ua.com/weapon_and_tech/chomu_u_sampt_dijsno_mozhut_buti_problemi_zi_zbittjam_balistichnih_raket-18218.html

 

[Roman Alymov]

Video of FPV drone failures https://t.me/voenacher/78762

[JWB]

https://x.com/Osinttechnical/status/1900203701475618982

Sweden is sending another 18 highly capable Archer artillery systems to Ukraine.

The package will also include five ARTHUR counterbattery radar systems, allowing Ukrainian Archers to hunt Russian artillery more effectively.

[alejandro_]

AK-12 with non-standard? forward handguard

[DB]

11 hours ago, alejandro_ said:

There were a feww articles in the Ukrainian and French press on this topic:

Why SAMP/T may really have problems shooting down ballistic missiles

For SAMP/T, of course, the ability to combat ballistic targets is declared, but there is no clarification on which Aster 30 missiles

Allegedly, the European SAMP/T anti-aircraft missile systems turned out to be ineffective not only because of the lack of missiles for them, but also because they do not work well against ballistic targets. Defense Express has already devoted a publication to the first question, in which it analyzed how many missiles for SAMP/T exist in total and how many are produced. However, the problem of destroying ballistic targets voiced by the sources is really more complicated and requires a separate publication.

The problem with intercepting ballistic targets, announced by "people familiar with the matter," is supposedly software-related. And this immediately evokes a parallel with the repetition of history with the problematic Patriot software that missed Iraqi Scuds in 1991. Recall that the error in the code concerned time measurement, which occurred due to the Patriot being on combat duty for a long time.

But it is unlikely that SAMP/T has exactly the same problem, which became a well-known illustrative example of a bug in the code that cost the lives of American military personnel. However, it should be noted that the problem was also in the GEM-T missiles themselves, which do not guarantee the destruction of the warhead of a ballistic missile in the air, which is why the CRI anti-missile was first created, and then the MSE with kinetic interception technologies .

As for the SAMP/T capability, according to official information on the capabilities of destroying ballistic missiles, it is declared only for the Aster 30 Block 1 and Block 1 NT versions of the missiles.

Block 1 appeared in the early 2010s and differs from the basic version in new homing head software and updated missile control systems. The first test interception of ballistic targets by this missile took place in 2010. However, the supply of SAMP/T to the French army began earlier than this moment, back in 2007, and a little later to the Italian army, that is, they initially came with Aster 30 Block 0 missiles. It is also worth adding time to the adoption of the new version of the missile, the start of serial production and delivery to the army of Aster 30 Block 1.

Moreover, in fact, immediately after the completion of work on Block 1 in 2015, the program for creating the Aster 30 Block 1NT was launched. The reason for the upgrade is to expand the ability to combat ballistic missiles. That is, the very fact of the need for the next upgrade directly indicates that the regular Block 1 is not doing well with intercepting ballistic targets.

It is Block 1NT that should become one of the updates to the entire air defense system, which was called SAMP/T NG, which will be launched into production in 2026. At the same time, the French themselves said that thanks to SAMP/T NG they will be able to shoot down "even the Dagger." The destruction of which by Patiot available in Ukraine has long been no news, which also hints at certain limited capabilities of the European air defense system compared to the American one.

The new Aster 30 Block 1NT differs from the previous Block 1 version in that it has a new radar homing head in the Ka-band (26.5-40 GHz), which allows it to hit targets more accurately than the previous version of the Aster 30 Block 1 ARGSN, which operated in the Ku-band (10.7-12.75 GHz).

Of course, the French and British navies have proven to have shot down ballistic missiles using the Aster 30 during a civil navigation support operation in the Red Sea. But the exact missile consumption and overall effectiveness of the ship-based system have not been announced. Moreover, there may be a significant difference in the fire control system between ship-based and ground-based SAMs.

That is, in general, regarding the real capabilities of SAMP/T to intercept ballistic targets, there may actually be questions not in terms of "maybe - may not", but in terms of real effectiveness, taking into account the specific version of the anti-aircraft missile and ballistic missile being intercepted.

https://defence-ua.com/weapon_and_tech/chomu_u_sampt_dijsno_mozhut_buti_problemi_zi_zbittjam_balistichnih_raket-18218.html

 

Quite incoherent because it fudges the varying declared capabilities of the "Blocks", entry into service dates, development firing trials and so on.

There is no declared ABM capability for Aster 30 Block 0.

Block 1 is supposed to be capable against <600km range SRBMs.

Block 1NT is supposed to be capable against somewhat longer range BMs <1500km.

The numbers above all come from wiki and not MBDA publicity material, because obviously.

[alejandro_]

12 hours ago, DB said:

Quite incoherent because it fudges the varying declared capabilities of the "Blocks", entry into service dates, development firing trials and so on.

There is no declared ABM capability for Aster 30 Block 0.

Block 1 is supposed to be capable against <600km range SRBMs.

Block 1NT is supposed to be capable against somewhat longer range BMs <1500km.

The numbers above all come from wiki and not MBDA publicity material, because obviously.

Thank you, some media were quick to answer the claims. 
 

Interview with commander of the medical company in 47th Brigade. Some data on type of wounds:

At the beginning of the conversation, you said that the specifics of injuries do not change depending on the direction. Does this also apply to the Kursk operation, in which your brigade is currently involved? Is it mainly shrapnel? 

Yes, about 90%. It's fpv, mortars, artillery. There are very few bullets. Almost all the work is done by drones - dumps, fpv. Often the wounded, if they can, describe the situation in which they were wounded. Almost always it's fpv or dumps. 

https://censor.net/ua/resonance/3537619/komandyr-medroty-47-yi-brygady-pozyvnyyi-mahaon

[glenn239]

59 minutes ago, alejandro_ said:

Almost always it's fpv or dumps. 

Dumps means what, UAV bombers or artillery salvos?

[alejandro_]

11 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Dumps means what, UAV bombers or artillery salvos?

Perhaps Roman can clarify, but it should be grenades/ammunition dropped by drones.

Edited March 14 by alejandro_

[On the way]

Still don't see any Hard Kill APS system deployed in the Ukraine. Why? I would think that makers of Trophy, Iron Fist, AMAP ADS, Iron Curtain, etc would be fighting to equip Western tanks in the Ukraine. If for no other reason then to assess the performance of their products in combat situations. Same for the Russian side with Afganit. It's a good environment for their use, with much open space reducing the chances of collateral damage to nearby troops. 

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

There was a huge rush on to get kit into Ukraine to fill the gap. Not so easy to pull it out to reequip it with Trophy. The only feasible way to do that is inside Ukraine, and is anyone really going to want to put western techs that far forward so they can get shot at?

There is also another point to remember. Im not aware any of those systems were developed with drones in mind. im sure they could be adjusted to deal with them, but who is going to want to risk their sales that it doesnt work?

I think we have to recognise, pretty much all the investment the Soviets made in APS was completely wasted, because it needed skilled crews to make it work. The Russian army likely for that reason didnt want to invest in it, and probably wont get it in any numbers till Armata arrives on the battlefield. If it ever does of course.

[TrustMe]

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

...I think we have to recognise, pretty much all the investment the Soviets made in APS was completely wasted, because it needed skilled crews to make it work. The Russian army likely for that reason didnt want to invest in it, and probably wont get it in any numbers till Armata arrives on the battlefield. If it ever does of course.

 

Wasn't the Soviet decision to got for ERA instead of APS was because ERA worked and APS didn't?