***Russian - Ukraine War Tactical and Strategic Updates*** [Warning on OP]

7,971,687 Views | 48543 Replies | Last: 6 hrs ago by 74OA
one MEEN Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jabberwalkie09 said:

aggiehawg said:

wtmartinaggie said:

After this is all done, I wonder how much it comes out the the Russians got absolutely smoked on the Cyber battlefield.

There were unconfirmed reports of communications not working, jet navigation/HUD systems offline, and GPS calibration problems causing a great deal of chaos. It makes you wonder if rather than take it offline someone just tweaked things just enough for the russians to walk into a buzzsaw. It would also play into the phenomenon that continues to come out that the Ukrainians seem to be a step ahead of where the Russians will be and when...
Can someone confirm this tweet? Is that what is pictured?


AFAIK, Russisans do not use our GPS system natively. You can see what appears to be a Garmin unit above the instrumentation on that Fullback (SU-34). This isn't the first time that they have used commercial units in a theater. I want to say they've used them in Syria as well. We, the US, have restrictions on what can be exported. The commercial versions meet this requirement, but munitions type or units that can function with modification to munitions are controlled by the state department. An export license would be required.

The Russians actually have a similar system named GLONASS but it isn't as accurate as our GPS system. They're working on trying to get it better though. I've put forth the reason that their cruise missile strikes have failed to achieve their objectives is because of the amount of error inherent in the Russian GLONASS. I want to say GPS has an error margin of about a foot where as GLONASS has about a 3 foot error in accuracy.

Edit: What I'm fuzzy on is whether we can deny civilian usage of the system specifically.
Another point is that civilian GPS chips are speed limited. Once the calculations prove the GPS is moving faster than the intended unit (like a car, or a civilian aircraft) the position updates start spreading out in time. Its hard baked into the CPU design, there isn't a software cheat around it. Its specifically to prevent someone from making a homemade, GPS guided munition from off the shelf parts.
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
deddog said:

ATX_AG_08 said:


dang... those guys are in a great position, i mean the launcher is the only thing visible, about 1/2 a mile away - missile had ~ 8 second flying time
Nice shooting...but can I just take a sidebar for a second and question the point of wearing woodland camo and then wrapping high viz yellow on the sleeves? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of camo gear? I know they have to have a way for their side to know who they are, but seems there would be a better way.
aezmvp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mr. AGSPRT04 said:

The whole region was settled by the Kievan Rus people and then invaded many times over. More recently, for hundreds of years, Ukraine was a turf battle between Poland and the Grand Duchy of Muscovy with the local Cossacks caught in the middle, along with appearances by the Vikings, Ottomans, Lithuanians, Mongols, Tartars, Soviets and others. Belarus ("Little Rus") shares a very similar history and people groups. I imagine there are many family ties across borders.
You left out the Greeks. They had extensive settlements all along the Black Sea as well.
lb3
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
We know that NATO won't enact a no fly zone over Ukraine, but couldn't NATO accomplish basically the same goal by repositioning a few mechanized units, an A10 squadron, and a Patriot battery to Lithuania as well as a few squadrons each of F22s in Germany and F35s in Northern Poland?

To use a chess analogy, if we position our bishop threatening St. Petersburg would we not be forcing Russia to hold their top fixed wings and Army Equipment near St. Petersburg and away from the Ukranian battle?

PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG




TheCougarHunter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lb3 said:

We know that NATO won't enact a no fly zone over Ukraine, but couldn't NATO accomplish basically the same goal by repositioning a few mechanized units, an A10 squadron, and a Patriot battery to Lithuania as well as a few squadrons each of F22s in Germany and F35s in Northern Poland?

To use a chess analogy, if we position our bishop threatening St. Petersburg would we not be forcing Russia to hold their top fixed wings and Army Equipment near St. Petersburg and away from the Ukranian battle?




We already have air in position to strike any major city or base in Russia within a matter of hours. In fact I'd be willing to bet we have armed aircraft already airborne holding in a tanker track ready to go across the line at any point.
AgResearch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teddy Perkins
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Brave as hell but not the smartest move to be near windows with potential snipers around.
Blackbeard94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PJYoung said:






God protect this man!
deddog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PJYoung said:


I'm pretty sure that's psyops but holy cow!
(I mean i seriously doubt he's actually there all the time)

They probably got him in and out for this video is my guess
aezmvp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That dude is the OG. His campaign ads and dancing videos are hilarious. He has been 10x the leader than we've had since Reagan. I liked Trump and he had some balls, but this guy is going to either be a hero or a martyr. Either way he's going to be as legendary as Churchill.
Decay
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teddy Perkins said:

Brave as hell but not the smartest move to be near windows with potential snipers around.
I can't believe he's still there. The Russians have been blowing apartment buildings to hell left and right. You think they'd worry about collateral damage if they have a recent fix on him?

...and wow it's not even hard to find. "President's Office" on Bankova Street. Even with the Russian's latest in Tom-Tom-enabled weapons they could probably pull it off.
Decay
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
deddog said:

PJYoung said:


I'm pretty sure that's psyops but holy cow!
(I mean i seriously doubt he's actually there all the time)

They probably got him in and out for this video is my guess
Sure but that puts him at least in the area. What stops the Russians from blowing the whole block to hell?
deddog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Decay said:

deddog said:


I'm pretty sure that's psyops but holy cow!
(I mean i seriously doubt he's actually there all the time)

They probably got him in and out for this video is my guess
Sure but that puts him at least in the area. What stops the Russians from blowing the whole block to hell?
General incompetence?
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
deddog said:

Decay said:

deddog said:


I'm pretty sure that's psyops but holy cow!
(I mean i seriously doubt he's actually there all the time)

They probably got him in and out for this video is my guess
Sure but that puts him at least in the area. What stops the Russians from blowing the whole block to hell?
General incompetence?

Lack of precision guided missiles.
The Shank Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
deddog said:

Decay said:

deddog said:


I'm pretty sure that's psyops but holy cow!
(I mean i seriously doubt he's actually there all the time)

They probably got him in and out for this video is my guess
Sure but that puts him at least in the area. What stops the Russians from blowing the whole block to hell?
General incompetence?

If they really wanted him gone they'd send in a dozen supersonic fighters strapped with missiles and destroy the entire area.

So far they are being somewhat "careful". The longer this drags out, the less careful they will be.


They may also think it's not worth the cost of aircraft that could be shot down when they still are confident on taking Kyiv on the ground. They may be planning further invasions/fending off NATO over motherland after further invasions.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

"I emphasize that conscript soldiers are not participating in hostilities and will not participate in them. And there will be no additional call-up of reservists," Putin said in a televised message to mark International Women's Day.
Link

Does he really think those very young soldiers' mothers believe that?
mike0305
How long do you want to ignore this user?
lb3 said:

We know that NATO won't enact a no fly zone over Ukraine, but couldn't NATO accomplish basically the same goal by repositioning a few mechanized units, an A10 squadron, and a Patriot battery to Lithuania as well as a few squadrons each of F22s in Germany and F35s in Northern Poland?

To use a chess analogy, if we position our bishop threatening St. Petersburg would we not be forcing Russia to hold their top fixed wings and Army Equipment near St. Petersburg and away from the Ukranian battle?


Unless you are willing to pull the trigger they are no better than statues or scarecrows.

Hopefully we are positioned to detect/shoot down something particularly nasty, but that's better answered by the warhawks here.
spud1910
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Mr. AGSPRT04 said:

The whole region was settled by the Kievan Rus people and then invaded many times over. More recently, for hundreds of years, Ukraine was a turf battle between Poland and the Grand Duchy of Muscovy with the local Cossacks caught in the middle, along with appearances by the Vikings, Ottomans, Lithuanians, Mongols, Tartars, Soviets and others. Belarus ("Little Rus") shares a very similar history and people groups. I imagine there are many family ties across borders.
Yes, my wife still has family in both Moscow and Odessa that she called to check on since this started. Not uncommon.

[I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE 34 POSTS PER PAGE. ON THIS PAGE, 33 WERE FLAGGED. DON'T FLAG POSTS THAT YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH. FLAG FOR VALID REASONS. -STAFF]

[THIS IS THE LAST REMAINING POST, COMMENTS ARE NOT DIRECTED AT THIS POSTER. -STAFF}
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Was not aware of this but makes sense.

Quote:

Military researcher Justin Bronk noted on Friday that "the Russian Air Force has yet to commence large-scale operations."

"The continued absence of major air operations," he says, "now raises serious capability questions."
It's also a safe bet that it isn't the Ukraine Air Force preventing the VKS from establishing air superiority over Ukraine.

Ukraine inherited hundreds of frontline jets from the Soviet Union in 1991, but the country's kleptocratic governments were never able to maintain what they had. When Russia invaded on February 24, the Ukraine Air Force could muster maybe 225 aircraft of all types, few of them fully modern or even very well maintained.
Quote:

Bronk argues that "the continued pattern of activity" (or should that be inactivity?) suggests that "the VKS lacks the institutional capacity to plan, brief and fly complex air operations at scale."

"Single aircraft, pairs or occasionally four-ships have been the norm" for VKS over Syria," meaning that "commanders have very little practical experience of how to plan, brief and coordinate complex air operations." Bronk also notes that Russian Air Force pilots get less than half the training (both real and simulated) that Western pilots typically receive.
Quote:

Bronk concludes that if "VKS were capable of conducting complex air operations, it should have been comparatively simple for them to have achieved air superiority over Ukraine."
Quote:

Part of what's missing is likely fear of losses to Ukraine antiaircraft missilesweather-fixed, mobile, or man-portable air defenses (MANPADS).
One big reason the U.S. Air Force (and more recently, the Navy) went so big for stealth is that the battlespace was getting extremely uncomfortable for fighters and bombers. Soviet later, Russian and Chinese air defenses were getting denser and deadlier. The jet that was more difficult to detect, track, and hit would have the advantage.

That's stealth: It's an interlocking set of technologies and tactics that make stealthy planes more difficult to shoot down.

The U.S. introduced its first combat-capable stealth jet, the F-117, in 1981. Despite the fighter designation, the Nighthawk was actually a light strike bomber with zero air-to-air capability. That was followed by the B-2 Spirit heavy bomber, the F-22 Raptor air superiority fighter, and the F-35 Lightning II multirole fighter. The B-21 Raider heavy bomber is coming along nicely through the development process.
Quote:

While the U.S. has deployed four different stealth platforms (with a fifth on the way), Russia has four stealth fighters, period. VKS has received only four Su-57 stealth jets (how stealthy they actually are is a matter of debate), the first just last year. Whether any of the four is yet combat-ready isn't known.
WOW!! Four? That's it?

Link
redline248
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The part about planning and pilot training time is a huge reason I'm in favor of large defense budgets, aside from the obvious of staying ahead of the technology curve.
CondensedFogAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Quote:

"Don't be be afraid. The Russian army is not strong, it is just long. We will eat them slowly, like salami."
Well you know, not the worst analogy.
ATX_AG_08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's prob gonna leave a mark

Not a Bot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
From a strategic standpoint, they've prioritized the development of better missile and naval technology. They have a far more limited budget then the United States, so upgrading all aspects of their armed forces was just out of the question. They chose to modernize what would be the biggest deterrent against NATO, which is missiles, air defense, and nukes. They upgraded their Navy to be able to swing out a lot of modern cruise missiles. Pretty clear their ground attack craft and a lot of their planes are lacking the latest technology.

They have a few new models of modern fighters and multirole aircraft, but their ability to field them and maintain in great numbers with the latest technology is limited. They appear to be struggling with guided and standoff air to ground munitions. We think we know this because the SU-34 is capable of doing both of those things but instead seem to be making low pass attack runs leaving vulnerable to shorter range ground to air systems. There was some analysis posted earlier in this thread about how they were struggling to get the appropriate guided munitions targeting pods on their planes. When you are throwing out unguided munitions and trying to hit a military target, you often to fly lower and slower. If there is cloud cover, good luck.
wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ATX_AG_08 said:

That's prob gonna leave a mark




Unfortunately that might be what it takes for some of these guys to flip on Putin.
deddog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Captain Positivity said:

From a strategic standpoint, they've prioritized the development of better missile and naval technology. They have a far more limited budget then the United States, so upgrading all aspects of their armed forces was just out of the question. They chose to modernize what would be the biggest deterrent against NATO, which is missiles, air defense, and nukes. They upgraded their Navy to be able to swing out a lot of modern cruise missiles. Pretty clear their ground attack craft and a lot of their planes are lacking the latest technology.

They have a few new models of modern fighters and multirole aircraft, but their ability to field them and maintain in great numbers with the latest technology is limited. They appear to be struggling with guided and standoff air to ground munitions. We think we know this because the SU-34 is capable of doing both of those things but instead seem to be making low pass attack runs leaving vulnerable to shorter range ground to air systems. There was some analysis posted earlier in this thread about how they were struggling to get the appropriate guided munitions targeting pods on their planes. When you are throwing out unguided munitions and trying to hit a military target, you often to fly lower and slower. If there is cloud cover, good luck.
Also keep in mind, that no one trains like the US or NATO.
Our forces do stuff that's really really hard, and make it look really easy. Using guided munitions isn't trivial. We've just been spoilt by US armed force badassery - I grew up in a very militarized 3rd world country and the most complex op our air force ever carried out would be routine for the USN or USAF
And it was not successful
JFABNRGR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
deddog said:

ATX_AG_08 said:


dang... those guys are in a great position, i mean the launcher is the only thing visible, about 1/2 a mile away - missile had ~ 8 second flying time
Likely didn't even mount the weapon until after they passed. It looks like there is a cluster of trees that would have blocked both views, giving them time to do this, after they passed directly in front. There is a lot more time to E&E and very possible any other vehicles have no idea where the shot came from.

It looks like there is only one spare munition on the roof. They were lite ready to take off very quickly if needed.

So far I have been very impressed. We really only see very little actual attacks, huge OPSEC+, and when we do there very short meaning they are busy with the business at hand and we rarely see any UKR equipment. They seem to be treating POWs decently, same with looters, and the messaging has been stellar. If their PR person survives this there is a big job waiting for them in a Fortune 500 company.

Hopefully this continues and they don't get complacent with their success. Its far from over.

I wish I would have kept up with daily equipment loss changes https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html. Today at 8AM CST it was 870 pieces of russian equipment lost now its 902.

aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

From a strategic standpoint, they've prioritized the development of better missile and naval technology.
Haven't seen where their naval technology has been that helpful, despite Ukraine being a state that borders the Black Sea. If they could launch cruise missiles that are guided into Kiev, why are they not doing that?

Why haven't they made a serious attempt to take Odessa?

Went down a short rabbit hole today about the Russian sub, The Kursk, from back in 2000, when Putin was first in office. He was at his dacha on the Black Sea when it went down after explosions. His Navy lied to him that rescue was imminent so he did not return to Moscow for several days. He was trashed over that and learned the political mistake. He apparently did not learn the "military will lie to him" lesson.
deddog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

Quote:

From a strategic standpoint, they've prioritized the development of better missile and naval technology.
Haven't seen where their naval technology has been that helpful, despite Ukraine being a state that borders the Black Sea. If they could launch cruise missiles that are guided into Kiev, why are they not doing that?

Why haven't they made a serious attempt to take Odessa?

Went down a short rabbit hole today about the Russian sub, The Kursk, from back in 2000, when Putin was first in office. He was at his dacha on the Black Sea when it went down after explosions. His Navy lied to him that rescue was imminent so he did not return to Moscow for several days. He was trashed over that and learned the political mistake. He apparently did not learn the "military will lie to him" lesson.
Could be a few things:
1. Intelligence: I suspect, very strongly, that the Russians just don't have enough targets. They hit a lot of static Ukrainian targets to begin with, and assumed Ukraine would fold. Ukraine didn't fold, Russian intelligence was faulty, and you can't send missiles against guerillas.
2. Cost. These are state of the art (for Russia) missiles and are expensive
3. Inventory: They might not have enough. Russia needs to maintain stocks in case of other conflicts
4. Logistics - it's a heck of a lot harder to reload ships at sea

Russia tried to fight a war like America and failed miserably.
ATX_AG_08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This is pure gold.

RebelE Infantry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

Quote:

From a strategic standpoint, they've prioritized the development of better missile and naval technology.
Haven't seen where their naval technology has been that helpful, despite Ukraine being a state that borders the Black Sea. If they could launch cruise missiles that are guided into Kiev, why are they not doing that?

Why haven't they made a serious attempt to take Odessa?

Went down a short rabbit hole today about the Russian sub, The Kursk, from back in 2000, when Putin was first in office. He was at his dacha on the Black Sea when it went down after explosions. His Navy lied to him that rescue was imminent so he did not return to Moscow for several days. He was trashed over that and learned the political mistake. He apparently did not learn the "military will lie to him" lesson.


It appears that Odessa is very well defended, and the adverse weather has prevented an amphibious landing so far. It could be that they are happy to tie down the Ukrainian forces there and keep them from reinforcing other areas of the front.
ATX_AG_08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ATX_AG_08 said:

That's prob gonna leave a mark




Supposedly this gets worse for them.



Translation:

Mr. Business
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mr. Business
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mr. Business
How long do you want to ignore this user?
First Page Last Page
Page 276 of 1388
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.