Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

[Gomig-21]

I've observed the same trend based on the videos from the Russian side. The Lancet loitering munition has probably been the most effective weapon the Russians have used in terms of tactics. But that is extremely damning for them. Theoretically, this shouldn't be the case given the size and capability of their armed forces, but if there were any more clearer demonstration of how lack of training, weak command and control, and poor tactics can nullify even the most capable of militaries, this would be it.

Looks like the Ukraine is trying to match the lancet's performance by launching their own kamikaze drone.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686000173460103169

The hardest part is mastering the data linkage between operator and munition and having more standoff control capabilities. EW countermeasures are also critical because of the enemy being able to hack into and take control of these highly susceptible drones. Mastering that closed-circuit control and having good EW countermeasures are what seemed to have made the biggest difference for the Russians so far IMO. I also noticed that the payload isn't really that great from the info we have on the warhead size and weight as well as the videos of the impact hits vs munitions exploding in tanks etc. It can only pack so much punch. I think the next upgraded lancet will most likely be a bigger unit to pack a bigger payload, making the logistical aspect a bit harder.

I'm probably going to get flack from you for saying this, but it reminds me of the poor performance of the Arabs against the Israelis - another example of where a smaller, better trained and led force can defeat a much larger, arguably better equipped opponent.

No flak from me, ma man. You are 100% in your right to make that correlation.

But I don't think the Russian performance is anywhere nearly as bad as the Arabs' performance in 1967. The latter was a decisive, few days blowout defeat that changed the course of history in the ME forever. The former (or Russian performance here in this war) is not even close to that Arab debacle of 1967.

But yes, I'm with you as far as the preconceived notion of a Russian performance. I think most of us expected them to be much more dominating in the battlefield than what has happened so far. Is that fair for the Russians? Of course not, it's just the impression one gets from looking at the grand scheme of things, along with all the hype we've been shown of Russian power through the decades of the cold war until today. Goes to show that war realities on the ground are unpredictable.

I also think there is a huge difference in the way Russia has planned to fight NATO through the cold war (just like NATO took a certain military approach to fighting Russia). I don't think either planned on long, drawn out wars. Approached plans were more along the lines of a combination of WWII tactics & cold war tactics along with the ever so possibility of nukes being introduced into huge, stalemate fighting. At least the fear of nukes being brought in by either losing side.

 

[F-22Raptor]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686090646556229632

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686089837588156417

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686088702475325440

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686050846457446419

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686049717430501380

 

[F-22Raptor]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686049208409686016

 

[aziqbal]

Mercenaries upset

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686082768550137857

 

[LeGenD]

I also think there is a huge difference in the way Russia has planned to fight NATO through the cold war (just like NATO took a certain military approach to fighting Russia). I don't think either planned on long, drawn out wars. Approached plans were more along the lines of a combination of WWII tactics & cold war tactics along with the ever so possibility of nukes being introduced into huge, stalemate fighting. At least the fear of nukes being brought in by either losing side.

The army that was dispatched to defeat Iraq in 1991 was previously deployed in Europe to take on Soviet forces. This was the world's first Digitalized military force with network-centric operations capability and combined arms warfare capability. It was equipped to defeat a capable opponent in days or in months at most. The idea was to defeat Soviet Union in the location of interest but keep the war conventional.

US remains on another level in comparison to both Ukraine and Russia in conventional war capacity.

First Photos of Destroyed Leopard and Bradley’s, confirmed

 

[Ich]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1685709286490456064

 

[Vergennes]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686083542671917056

 

[Corax]

Also noticed that the payload isn't really that great from the info we have on the warhead size and weight as well as the videos of the impact hits vs munitions exploding in tanks etc. It can only pack so much punch. I think the next upgraded lancet will most likely be a bigger unit to pack a bigger payload, making the logistical aspect a bit harder.



No flak from me, ma man. You are 100% in your right to make that correlation.

But I don't think the Russian performance is anywhere nearly as bad as the Arabs' performance in 1967. The latter was a decisive, few days blowout defeat that changed the course of history in the ME forever. The former (or Russian performance here in this war) is not even close to that Arab debacle of 1967.

But yes, I'm with you as far as the preconceived notion of a Russian performance. I think most of us expected them to be much more dominating in the battlefield than what has happened so far. Is that fair for the Russians? Of course not, it's just the impression one gets from looking at the grand scheme of things, along with all the hype we've been shown of Russian power through the decades of the cold war until today. Goes to show that war realities on the ground are unpredictable.

I also think there is a huge difference in the way Russia has planned to fight NATO through the cold war (just like NATO took a certain military approach to fighting Russia). I don't think either planned on long, drawn out wars. Approached plans were more along the lines of a combination of WWII tactics & cold war tactics along with the ever so possibility of nukes being introduced into huge, stalemate fighting. At least the fear of nukes being brought in by either losing side.

I'm glad you mentioned the warhead of the Lancet, because I've noticed in some videos a difference in the detonation sequence and potential use of shaped charges designed to penetrate armour. I know there are currently at least two variants/sizes of the Lancet, and that could explain what we're seeing, or the Russians may have applied ad hoc modifications to the warhead. The latest variant that was recently shown clearly shows a significant redesign and potentially larger warhead to defeat armour, but we'll have to see.

I think what we're witnessing in the general performance of the Russian military is the general morass and decay that set in after the collapse of the Soviet Union, with little to no effective policies to modern their armed forces according to prevailing conflict scenarios. You would have thought the Russians observing the US-led operations in the Middle East and Afghanistan would be an eye opener for them and an opportunity to learn but this clearly hasn't been the case. They have no excuse for their lack of combined arms warfare (they have the equipment) other than poor leadership and training, and extremely outdated doctrine. There's glimpses of them adjusting and adapting in Ukraine, but it's too little too late. At this rate, it seems all they can hope to achieve is a stalemate and force negotiations, but that policy is a surefire way to invite defeat in my view.

 

[MeFishToo]

Did you hear the system alert saying in clear English "One thousand and two"? At 1:13

This is very obvious an Ukranian asset, also that's a GPS system, it should have been cut off from the Russian.

This is a major hint This is a cut and chop footage, if they were there to cover this heroic act, they wouldn't use edited Ukranian footage for it...

To me it sounds like “one area two”, but it doesnt matter. Could be the russians using western systems or software, like so many parts in the Orlan 10.
But it definitely wasnt the russian tank that destroyed those vehicles arriving in a column.

 

[The SC]

Summer Operations | Modernization Of Weapons Based On The SMO Experience. Military Summary 2023.7.31​

 

[The SC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686109288924606464

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686113812292730880

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686107171786768384

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686108703999643648

 

[Gomig-21]

The army that was dispatched to defeat Iraq in 1991 was previously deployed in Europe to take on Soviet forces. This was the world's first Digitalized military force with network-centric operations capability and combined arms warfare capability. It was equipped to defeat a capable opponent in days or in months at most.

Sure. Aside from the digitized aspect, combined arms and even network-centric operations have been battlefield tested and used by the US, Brits, Germans and even French since the late 1800s into the turn of the 20th century. The US really made an emphasis on network-centric warfare during the Vietnam war.

It is pretty funny how there are the few who think that just because the US was in Afghanistan for 20 years and spent $2.5 Trillion that it was a defeat lol! Or even what they did in Iraq. The simple explanation is that the US is unlike any other power in the world, in that despite the reasons to go to war, they emphasize rebuilding as a mega essential part of the totality of the war plan. No one else can even come close to that track record since post-Vietnam.

The idea was to defeat Soviet Union in the location of interest but keep the war conventional.

Basically, the European theater. There is vast experience in battlefield operations in European landscapes between WWI & WWII and throughout the cold war to these most recent Baltic states wars. Just the planning around West and East Germany containment was enough to keep the generals very busy for decades upon decades.

US remains on another level in comparison to both Ukraine and Russia in conventional war capacity.

I highly doubt you'd get the slightest disagreement in that assessment from anyone on this board, let alone on this topic.

Was that just a general thought you needed to share, or was there something specific in my post that led you to think I was criticizing US power compared to Russia or Ukraine? I looked back and didn't see anything but just curious if I missed it since that is obviously not the prevailing train of thought.

 

[jhungary]

To me it sounds like “one area two”, but it doesnt matter. Could be the russians using western systems or software, like so many parts in the Orlan 10.
But it definitely wasnt the russian tank that destroyed those vehicles arriving in a column.

Well, western system won't work unless they port them to Russian system, and even Orlan drone would have used Russian as system alert message, and I am pretty sure GPS won't work at all anywhere in Russia.

 

[Abdul Rehman Majeed]

What's the kill count on both sides?

Ukraine - 250,000

Russia - 500,000

 

[aviator_fan]

How sad is this ?

All those young men died for what ? Zelenskyy and his western cronies ??

Those who say send weapons to Ukraine should go to the front line

Russia is ruthless

https://twitter.com/x/status/1685024044125442048

True statement but as always a double standard: where is your sympathy for the tens of thousands of Russians who got told to quite their jobs to go fight for mother Russia at the OFF CHANCE THAT UKraine may join NATO while in the meantime two other countries joined NATO.

The Ukrainians are fighting for what they believe in, they don't need you to patronize them any more the Taliban or Mujahideen would have cared for your opinion.

WHen they want to stop dying, they will give up their weapons. Or they won't and may make sure Russia doesn't win. Either way, the opinions of anybody on this forum of what these men with arms should or should not do is worthless

Ukraine - 250,000

Russia - 500,000

There won't be clear victors in the short-term. Ukraine wins if Russia doesn't win (stalemate).. Russia loses if it doesn't win. Otherwise it was a total waste.

Russia controls a bit of territory while two of its northern neighbors joined NATO and Baltic Sea turned into a lake of NATO and Russia's NATO border (including Murmansk) just doubled.

This is is the sort of outcome traitors to their country produce. Thats what Putin has done.