I mean - Outside of the sanctions which don't seem to be working- nobody is really preventing Russia from war. We don't see major air attacks deep into Russian territory disrupting production. The real question is if Russia is simply replacing the losses - if so they will eventually win.

black_ice said:

---

Soviet *******s got Europe by their half ball.

---

Today, yes.

I'm guessing not so much in the near future. This has the potential to undue a lot the green new deal sanctions that have been put on O&G.

If Europe does delever from Russia, the ability to do another special operation gets much more difficult.

Whirligigs said:

---

I mean - Outside of the sanctions which don't seem to be working- nobody is really preventing Russia from war. We don't see major air attacks deep into Russian territory disrupting production. The real question is if Russia is simply replacing the losses - if so they will eventually win.

---

There has to be a balance between usage and production, too. Supply has to meet demand, which is what I'm curious about.

Of course, you can also produce however many you want, but you also need to distribute them.

What I'm really curious about is if there may come a point of degradation of supply such that Ukraine feels it is optimal to launch a major attack. Is that realistic?

A big influx of HIMARS-hunting Iranian drones could be a real problem for the Ukrainians. ATTACK

ETA: Wait, holy *****

@14:03

Quote:

---

Now the Russian sources are actually claiming that the Ukrainians have actually just hit the dam on the Northern side of Kherson.

...

...Now if this dam right now is not feasible to drive equipment on anymore, then that would leave the only area to cross is the Southern bridge for the Russians to actually exfil. The Northern area would be left stranded.

---

74OA said:

---

A big influx of HIMARS-hunting Iranian drones could be a real problem for the Ukrainians. ATTACK

---

This drone supply issue has some serious ramifications for the Ukes. Time to stop jacking around and send them the long range HIMAR missiles.

Waffledynamics said:

---

Whirligigs said:

---

I mean - Outside of the sanctions which don't seem to be working- nobody is really preventing Russia from war. We don't see major air attacks deep into Russian territory disrupting production. The real question is if Russia is simply replacing the losses - if so they will eventually win.

---

There has to be a balance between usage and production, too. Supply has to meet demand, which is what I'm curious about.

Of course, you can also produce however many you want, but you also need to distribute them.

What I'm really curious about is if there may come a point of degradation of supply such that Ukraine feels it is optimal to launch a major attack. Is that realistic?

---

The fact that Ukraine has to rely on outside help to sustain the front lines isn't good. In fact, if Western Europe and the US devolves economically then Russia probably has a free hand - this will probably be validated as Slavic states eventually join the fray in favor of Russia. I know they aren't the most sophisticated military but they are getting a 'free lab' at conventional warfare all over again. After the disaster at Kiev and elsewhere, Russia has basically regrouped and are just slowly pulverizing the eastern front. This was not expected - given the propaganda a couple of months ago.

I'm not convinced they have used their "free lab" to master logistics however, they seem to be getting an awful lot of weapons depots destroyed lately

BattleGrackle said:

---

I'm not convinced they have used their "free lab" to master logistics however, they seem to be getting an awful lot of weapons depots destroyed lately

---

I'm not rooting for the Soviets (sorry I can't help myself) but if they can simply replace losses faster than the few, sophisticated foreign equipment being offered - it's not going to bode well.

Again, the resource war probably trumps everything right now - what's the date for nord to reopen? Late July? I guess we'll see.

Whirligigs said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

Whirligigs said:

---

I mean - Outside of the sanctions which don't seem to be working- nobody is really preventing Russia from war. We don't see major air attacks deep into Russian territory disrupting production. The real question is if Russia is simply replacing the losses - if so they will eventually win.

---

There has to be a balance between usage and production, too. Supply has to meet demand, which is what I'm curious about.

Of course, you can also produce however many you want, but you also need to distribute them.

What I'm really curious about is if there may come a point of degradation of supply such that Ukraine feels it is optimal to launch a major attack. Is that realistic?

---

The fact that Ukraine has to rely on outside help to sustain the front lines isn't good. In fact, if Western Europe and the US devolves economically then Russia probably has a free hand - this will probably be validated as Slavic states eventually join the fray in favor of Russia. I know they aren't the most sophisticated military but they are getting a 'free lab' at conventional warfare all over again. After the disaster at Kiev and elsewhere, Russia has basically regrouped and are just slowly pulverizing the eastern front. This was not expected - given the propaganda a couple of months ago.

---

Eastern Ukraine is more conducive to their style, and they've consolidated heavily. That said, they're still taking heavy losses and HIMARS are beginning to take a toll. They have 12 launchers, but they are wreaking havoc on Russian arms depots and C2 targets. As Ukraine gets more HIMARS ave M270 launchers and missiles, Russia will have to start keeping high priority targets farther away, limiting their offensive capabilities because they'll be so far from supplies to sustain them.

Waffledynamics said:

---

ETA: Wait, holy *****

@14:03

Quote:

---

Now the Russian sources are actually claiming that the Ukrainians have actually just hit the dam on the Northern side of Kherson

---

---

Extremely doubtful about this report. Very unlikely IMO

Today's SITREP.

74OA said:

---

Today's SITREP.

---

Good read. Thanks for sharing. Thread read by Mick Ryan in this article
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1546968367315111936.html

UPDATE

Outside of the grain export news, not much seems to have happened overnight (our night, not Ukraine's) except that Russia continues to pound the front with shelling.

Waffledynamics said:

---

Whirligigs said:

---

I mean - Outside of the sanctions which don't seem to be working- nobody is really preventing Russia from war. We don't see major air attacks deep into Russian territory disrupting production. The real question is if Russia is simply replacing the losses - if so they will eventually win.

---

There has to be a balance between usage and production, too. Supply has to meet demand, which is what I'm curious about.

Of course, you can also produce however many you want, but you also need to distribute them.

What I'm really curious about is if there may come a point of degradation of supply such that Ukraine feels it is optimal to launch a major attack. Is that realistic?

---

the answer to your question is in two parts:

No, Russian production cannot easily replace more advanced "smart" munitions with guidance systems and electronics as part of our sanctions is crippling them.

Yes, Russia can still produce older technology munitions that can still pound enemy positions such as they did on the Eastern Front in WWII.

Whirligigs said:

---

BattleGrackle said:

---

I'm not convinced they have used their "free lab" to master logistics however, they seem to be getting an awful lot of weapons depots destroyed lately

---

I'm not rooting for the Soviets (sorry I can't help myself) but if they can simply replace losses faster than the few, sophisticated foreign equipment being offered - it's not going to bode well.

Again, the resource war probably trumps everything right now - what's the date for nord to reopen? Late July? I guess we'll see.

---

you are looking at this from the opposite end..

it's not that Russia will run out of munitions.

the issue is if Ukraine can eventually gain enough artillery/rocket systems to roughly MATCH Russia.

the West doesn't have to have Russia run out of ammunition, they just have to provide Ukraine with enough batteries and tubes and launchers to create a static front and come in rough parity to Russia (as in World War I)

Correct me if I am wrong, but Ukraine doesn't even have to match Russia with military parity. They just need to stall the advance of Russia and make the cost of occupying the Crimea and Donbass unpalatable for the Russian people.

The correct artillery/rocket systems to supply isn't parity, it is enough to stall the Russian Military and to increase the expense in lives and material for their war.

RogerEnright said:

---

Correct me if I am wrong, but Ukraine doesn't even have to match Russia with military parity. They just need to stall the advance of Russia and make the cost of occupying the Crimea and Donbass unpalatable for the Russian people.

The correct artillery/rocket systems to supply isn't parity, it is enough to stall the Russian Military and to increase the expense in lives and material for their war.

---

More and more reports that peoples of crimea, LPR, & DPR have had enough of the orcs and want them out and go back under Ukraine control. Likely since 2014, only those in control really wanted to be part of russia benefitting through whatever privilege's or compensation putin was giving them.

Waffledynamics said:

---

Question for those more in the know: how easy is it to replace shells/rockets through production? With Russia using so many and losing more a la the HIMARS strikes, is it realistic to expect some exhaustion of supplies? I imagine it's not too difficult to replace them.

---

A good question. I wonder what Russia's economic output is currently? Putin has been clear he does not want a wartime production footing and I am positive that the current expenditures are waaaay outpacing normal peacetime production levels. Existing stockpiles were estimated to be massive though. With the corruption levels however, those numbers are probably off.

I don't have data in front of me, but I have a hard time imagining Russia keeping up this operational pace without a change to their overall policy and finally admitting they are in a full fledged war.

My first thought reading this was the possibility of using these to replace any damaged bridge spans over the Kokhovka dam if the Russians blow them. They won't blow the dam but they'd likely try to destroy the bridge sections above the spillway.

The #French company Matiere will transfer 36 lightly assembled bridges to #Ukraine - Dmytro Kuleba, head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. pic.twitter.com/ZLBOPv4DMO

— NEXTA (@nexta_tv) July 13, 2022

Eliminatus said:

---

benchmark said:

---

Speculating .... ammo dumps are important now but sometime soon HIMARS may start targeting air defense .... radar, launchers, etc. Forward air surveillance will become critical if they want to advance far enough to put the southern coastline and the Crimean border within HIMARS range.

---

I agree. The only problem I see is rocket availability. They have to be VERY selective with what they hit. Will they have enough to maintain the pressure on Russia's supply and ease the bombardments AND suppress their AA to a point where combat sorties will actually be feasible. Can they do it with what they have and in the pipeline in the very near future? Honestly don't know.

---

Wiki says over 700,000 MLRS/HIMARS rockets of all types have been produced. Since foreign users are US allies, it shouldn't be difficult to keep whatever small fleet Ukraine ends up with fully supplied with rockets from US and allied stocks even though some of that grand total has been expended or aged out over the years.

Waffledynamics said:

---

Whirligigs said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

Whirligigs said:

---

I mean - Outside of the sanctions which don't seem to be working- nobody is really preventing Russia from war. We don't see major air attacks deep into Russian territory disrupting production. The real question is if Russia is simply replacing the losses - if so they will eventually win.

---

There has to be a balance between usage and production, too. Supply has to meet demand, which is what I'm curious about.

Of course, you can also produce however many you want, but you also need to distribute them.

What I'm really curious about is if there may come a point of degradation of supply such that Ukraine feels it is optimal to launch a major attack. Is that realistic?

---

The fact that Ukraine has to rely on outside help to sustain the front lines isn't good. In fact, if Western Europe and the US devolves economically then Russia probably has a free hand - this will probably be validated as Slavic states eventually join the fray in favor of Russia. I know they aren't the most sophisticated military but they are getting a 'free lab' at conventional warfare all over again. After the disaster at Kiev and elsewhere, Russia has basically regrouped and are just slowly pulverizing the eastern front. This was not expected - given the propaganda a couple of months ago.

---

Why would you expect Slavic states to side with Russia. Many of them hate Russia with a visceral passion.

---

You know how I know that poster doesn't know anything about NATO and geopolitics?

Seems apropos ith all the HIMAR love.

pic.twitter.com/5A3auU9Bgu

— Christian Borys (@ItsBorys) July 13, 2022

HIMARS is to Bayraktar what Webb is to Hubble

Russia seem pretty ****ing concerned about the HIMARS. Especially since they know it also has the capability to reach out 300 km if they are supplied. I hope we don't announce it if we supply that capability. Let the Ukrainians announce it on the battlefield.

Funny stuff aside - it's now mid-July and the clock is ticking in the south. Will there be a legit offensive? Russian ammo dumps and command centers are under attack. Most of the Russian army is tied up in the east. Kherson is within artillery range and river crossings over the Innulets near Daviydiv Brid and Ivalivka villages have been made.

On the flip side, Russia has had 5 months to dig in ... and work continues. Reinforcement convoys to Kherson have been spotted in Melitopol. The longer Ukraine waits - the harder it will get. Time is short.

If Ukraine can't show serious progress in the south within 4-6 weeks - a new reality check may be needed.

pic.twitter.com/DwK5dAs3fy

— Christian Borys (@ItsBorys) July 12, 2022

Quote:

---

Funny stuff aside - it's now mid-July and the clock is ticking in the south. Will there be a legit offensive? Russian ammo dumps and command centers are under attack. Most of the Russian army is tied up in the east. Kherson is within artillery range and river crossings over the Innulets near Daviydiv Brid and Ivalivka villages have been made.

---

I can see your point about winter operations not being ideal but my perception is that winter operations are much harder on the Russians as their doctrine and logistics focus mainly and nearly exclusively on paved roads and railways.

Ukes are much more nimble in that respect.

4:08, he says that while Russia asked Iran for drones, Iran has said "no" and that they want to stay neutral in regards to this conflict.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but "good Iran" if true. What a weird timeline we live in.

Waffledynamics said:

---

4:08, he says that while Russia asked Iran for drones, Iran has said "no" and that they want to stay neutral in regards to this conflict.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but "good Iran" if true. What a weird timeline we live in.

---

Yes, I heard that too - but find it hard to believe. I think I read on one of 740s posts that Iran has already had 20-25 secretive cargo flights into Russia since the start of the invasion. If I'm the Ukes, I'm operating like Iran is FOS and doing everything possible to get the long range HIMAR missiles into the fight.

These drones have wicked potential if the Russians add them to their arsenal. Iran needs a partner in crime. So I definitely don't think this deal is dead yet.

Really interesting and detailed analysis of Russia's air force woes. I'd be curious to see what this board's aviation experts think.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russia-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-13

Quote:

---

Russian milbloggers criticized the Russian military on July 12 for sourcing Iranian UAVs to improve artillery targeting in Ukraine while failing to address the command issues that more severely limit the effectiveness of Russian artillery. Russian Telegram channel Rybar claimed on July 12 that Russian requests and approval for artillery fire pass through a convoluted chain of command, resulting in a delay of several hours to several days between Russian ground forces requesting artillery fire, Russian targeting, and conducting the actual strikes.[10] Rybar claimed that Russian forces in Syria reduced the time between targeting and striking to under an hour.[11] Rybar claimed that while the Russian need for more UAVs is clear and that Iranian UAVs helped achieve a target-to-fire time of 40 minutes in Syrian training grounds additional UAVs do not solve the problems of overcentralized Russian command and overreliance on artillery in Ukraine.[12] Russian milblogger Voyennyi Osvedomitel' claimed that Russian forces had faced the same overcentralized command during the First Chechen War, wherein the inability of Russian ground forces to request artillery support without going through a chain of command inhibited responses to enemy offensive actions.[13] Milblogger Yuzhnyi Veter claimed that Ukrainian artillery forces' target-to-response time is under 40 seconds

---

benchmark said:

---

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russia-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-13

Quote:

---

Russian milbloggers criticized the Russian military on July 12 for sourcing Iranian UAVs to improve artillery targeting in Ukraine while failing to address the command issues that more severely limit the effectiveness of Russian artillery. Russian Telegram channel Rybar claimed on July 12 that Russian requests and approval for artillery fire pass through a convoluted chain of command, resulting in a delay of several hours to several days between Russian ground forces requesting artillery fire, Russian targeting, and conducting the actual strikes.[10] Rybar claimed that Russian forces in Syria reduced the time between targeting and striking to under an hour.[11] Rybar claimed that while the Russian need for more UAVs is clear and that Iranian UAVs helped achieve a target-to-fire time of 40 minutes in Syrian training grounds additional UAVs do not solve the problems of overcentralized Russian command and overreliance on artillery in Ukraine.[12] Russian milblogger Voyennyi Osvedomitel' claimed that Russian forces had faced the same overcentralized command during the First Chechen War, wherein the inability of Russian ground forces to request artillery support without going through a chain of command inhibited responses to enemy offensive actions.[13] Milblogger Yuzhnyi Veter claimed that Ukrainian artillery forces' target-to-response time is under 40 seconds

---

---

I call bull$@#* . The timing doesn't matter when civilian buildings don't move.