Page 100 of 110 FirstFirst ... 509099100101 ... LastLast
Results 3,466 to 3,500 of 3821

Thread: Ukraine

  1. #3466
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Central Coast, Ca
    Posts
    34,230

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Pretty soon someone is going to announce they are sending troops...

  2. #3467
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    6,912

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Russia has been taking land inch by inch in Georgia using whatever tactics they can. I can see them doing that in Ukraine going forward.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/russi...89ODFFZFIybiBp
    Will

  3. #3468
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    27,354

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Russian T62 tanks seen on the move by train in Crimea.







    The T-62 doesn’t have an auto loader so it requires a crew of four.

    (I had carelessly mis-labelled these as T-65s - thanks John.)
    Last edited by Andrew Craig-Bennett; 05-25-2022 at 03:11 PM.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  4. #3469
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    29,147

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Russian? Gosh.... it'd be a shame if that got blown up....
    There's a lot of things they didn't tell me when I signed on with this outfit....

  5. #3470
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,081

    Default Re: Ukraine

    So the Russians upgrade from a coffin for three comrades to a coffin for four comrades.
    /Erik

  6. #3471
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    30,681

    Default Re: Ukraine

    T65s? LOL. Literally, cannon and drone fodder.

    Hell, throw in some T34s for good measure, they can get some from the North Koreans, what the hell.
    Gerard>
    Albuquerque, NM

    Every Republican is an obstacle to progress.

  7. #3472
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    28,396

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Lew Barrett View Post
    The unwillingness of Ukrainian leadership to withdraw when salients threaten to collapse is, I think, the biggest tactical risk and mistake the UA takes in general. Understandable at Mariupol when events moved faster than troops could respond, retreats under fire while exceptionally dangerous, are still an important tool under certain conditions. Itís been speculated that UA forces donít yield ground because it is so very costly to regain it, but the cost in troops and the risks of being surrounded should perhaps be balanced against the value of holding firm. I havenít watched the news this morning so perhaps things have eased up but I went to bed last night with a knot in my stomach. A very concerning situation indeed.
    The Russians are doing their best to make retreat impossible by constant shelling and taking out bridges. The question is, can Ukraine bring relief to the besieged city before it falls.

  8. #3473
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    28,396

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett View Post
    Russian T65 tanks seen on the move by train in Crimea.







    The T65 doesn’t have an auto loader so it requires a crew of four.
    t-62s?

  9. #3474
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    27,354

    Default Re: Ukraine

    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  10. #3475
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    15,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnw View Post
    t-62s?
    Could those be T-55s from the 1950s pulled out of mothballs?
    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. ó P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  11. #3476
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    28,396

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicholas Carey View Post
    Could those be T-55s from the 1950s pulled out of mothballs?
    Korshak says T-62s. Seems more likely.

  12. #3477
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    19,753

    Default Re: Ukraine

    I was reading somewhere that bringing in the T-62's complicates logistics as they don't use the same rounds as the other tanks that Russia has deployed. Also the vehicle itself is a different platform, so spare parts are different.

    On top of that, they're slower, supposedly use more fuel and require a larger crew - 4 instead of 3 because the tank doesn't have an auto-loader. They have ancient fire-control systems, lack communications, thinner armor and more vulnerable munitions storage. Lastly, they seem to be fodder for every single anti-armor weapon in the Ukrainian inventory.

    Russia is sounding desperate.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  13. #3478
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    27,354

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Correct: they use a 115mm smooth bore round, not used by any more modern Soviet tank. Korschak thinks they may be issued to second line forces.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  14. #3479
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    27,354

    Default Re: Ukraine

    A nice essay from the Atlantic Council:

    https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blog...-with-ukraine/
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  15. #3480
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    28,396

  16. #3481
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    35,028

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Reading about the BMP-T Terminator. Multiple weapons platform that sounds really good, but probably not good enough. There are a number of issues with it apart from the fact that there are not a lot of them.
    https://medium.com/the-dock-on-the-b...kYz_C9UlzTv_Ag
    I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned


  17. #3482
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Topeka, KS
    Posts
    1,970

    Default Re: Ukraine

    It was this forum that has consistently made an argument that tanks are technologically obsolete due to missiles. I don't really include Dragon or export TOW atgm missiles in tipping the balance, but the new more useable and effective missiles that need very little training to hit targets (unlike Dragon's and TOWs). However there is a finite supply of the new technology and no country can produce enough of them.

    I have argued in this forum that you need main battle tanks and armored personnel carriers for big units to cross terrain in a full intensity conflict (where the villages are getting destroyed by the artillery like everything else in the grid square). However if you show me pictures of Russians moving trainloads of T62's or even T55's (Enver Hoxa is dead and buried just kidding about T55's) today, given what I am reading, I speculate they are planning to use them in urban fighting where they have more than 80% of their original utility. Crossing streets under small arms fire and bringing high explosive artillery like rounds in direct fire line of sight being controlled by the infantry units they are actually with and being directed by plain old copper wires to the head set of the squad leader walking with them. World War II style with no electronic jamming vulnerability. See this article about simple WWII tanks in urban warfare:THE WORLD WAR II CAPABILITIES WE NEED FOR TODAY’S URBAN BATTLEFIELD Charles Knight | 12.06.19

    “Ironically, there were weapons systems available in 1944 that were better suited to the problems of urban combat than those we have today…Attacking Soviet infantry forces were not only accompanied by tanks but closely followed by medium and heavy guns to provide the direct fire that could systematically destroy buildings used as strongpoints. The Allies learned the same technique: after surrendering Aachen, the German garrison commander said, “When the Americans start using 155s as sniper weapons it’s time to give up… By this stage in the war, the Germans were now usually on the defensive, for which they had discovered their simple, tough self-propelled guns were a force multiplier in both urban defense and counterattack. They proved particularly valuable in the latter, by reducing the requirement to conduct infantry counterassaults against determined defenders in buildings, which invariably caused heavy casualties. During the battles in the Netherlands to eject British and Polish airborne forces from Arnhem and Oosterbeek, or in Warsaw to destroy the Polish Home Army, the Germans learned to bring the self-propelled guns up and systematically destroy each defended building from the roof downwards. In the same battles they also used fire, deliberately burning large parts of the Dutch towns to variously evict the paratroopers or turn them into hot ruins that could not be occupied.
    The assault and engineering vehicles and some specialist infantry weapons that were available in 1944 might still prove remarkably useful if modern military forces had them today...The Germans developed the Sturmpanzer IV with a potent 150-millimeter short-barreled gun, but the forty-three-ton Soviet ISU-152 assault gun was probably the best of its class. It had thick frontal protection and was reliable and relatively agile. The 152-millimeter high-velocity gun could punch shells through substantial concrete walls to detonate its twelve-pound explosive payload within. It proved a devastatingly effective close-support weapon in the urban battles up to and including Berlin.”

    https://mwi.usma.edu/world-war-ii-ca...n-battlefield/

    T-62s on trains is not a good sign for Ukrainians and it can only be possible because the Ukrainians can no longer stop large Russian units moving across open terrain. Read about how the First Infantry Division ended up using its organic armor units in the Gulf War. The worst of World War II style tactics ended up being overwhelmingly effective up close in the modern era, https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-...959-story.html
    Last edited by Landrith; 05-25-2022 at 08:27 PM.

  18. #3483
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    30,665

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by George. View Post
    Not yielding besieged cities also ties up lots of Russian troops and artillery at a low cost. If you yield one city they move on to the next, and that's worse.
    Sometimes there are no good options. I understand why they don't want to yield ground but I'd also be concerned about the creation of cauldrons if the defenders should get cut off. This looks increasingly possible.
    One of the most enduring qualities of an old wooden boat is the smell it imparts to your clothing.

  19. #3484
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    30,665

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by johnw View Post
    The Russians are doing their best to make retreat impossible by constant shelling and taking out bridges. The question is, can Ukraine bring relief to the besieged city before it falls.
    That's the issue as there's almost no safe route out of the city now. The Ukrainians would have to mount a significant operation to break through should the Russians fully tighten the noose. Giving up garrisons city by city is not going to win the war. I wish it were otherwise.

    Deploying Suez era tanks on the other hand can't be spun as a positive with a straight face but that doesn't mean somebody won't try. Unfortunately we are not yet supplying Ukraine with sufficient munitions.
    Last edited by Lew Barrett; 05-25-2022 at 09:12 PM.
    One of the most enduring qualities of an old wooden boat is the smell it imparts to your clothing.

  20. #3485
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    28,396

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Lew Barrett View Post
    That's the issue as there's almost no safe route out of the city now. The Ukrainians would have to mount a significant operation to break through should the Russians fully tighten the noose. Giving up garrisons city by city is not going to win the war. I wish it were otherwise.

    Deploying Suez era tanks on the other hand can't be spun as a positive with a straight face but that doesn't mean somebody won't try. Unfortunately we are not yet supplying Ukraine with sufficient munitions.
    Ukraine is getting those M-113 personnel carriers. I understand a .50 cal. machine gun can turn them into a colander pretty quickly, but they are sovereign against handguns and small knives.

  21. #3486
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Waikato. NewZealand
    Posts
    3,442

    Default Re: Ukraine

    I read somewhere that Ukraine supplies 90% of the water and electricity used by Crimea.
    Seeing that train loaded with Tanks with power lines alongside makes me wonder.............
    Why hasn't the water and electricity been cut off?
    I once thought I was wrong, but I was wrong, I wasn't wrong.

  22. #3487
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    28,396

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbie 2 View Post
    I read somewhere that Ukraine supplies 90% of the water and electricity used by Crimea.
    Seeing that train loaded with Tanks with power lines alongside makes me wonder.............
    Why hasn't the water and electricity been cut off?
    I think Russia may have taken the reservoir & hydroelectric dam.

  23. #3488
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Topeka, KS
    Posts
    1,970

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by johnw View Post
    Ukraine is getting those M-113 personnel carriers. I understand a .50 cal. machine gun can turn them into a colander pretty quickly, but they are sovereign against handguns and small knives.
    The M-113 does the job in battlefield transport and some limited chemical protection. Carries all the food and rounds needed to go a few days. It is also small enough to fit on village roads and cottages. Its real range is much better than the Bradley (especially the improved upgrades that the US Army didn't go with but other allies did), without the bridge weight problems, no complex systems to break down, a timelessly reliable engine already understood and competently maintained by Ukrainians in other applications.

    Oh, and the unofficial main weapon of the M113 https://nara.getarchive.net/media/am...rsonnel-72fd98 http://www.atroop412cav.com/tools/ACAV/, a 50 cal Browning was also the Rhodesian Army solution to Soviet armor. https://selousscouts.tripod.com/rhod...red_corps_.htm Surprisingly effective on Russian armored personnel carriers. And what you really do with your own armored personnel carriers is bury them. You get to tactical positions, and bull doze or dig them into at least hull down positions and spread out the squads and weapon systems the APC carried. Then each team digs arm pit deep holes and builds overhead cover from artillery. The idea of an APC being an armored fighting vehicle and carrying troops is a myth the MIC has repeatedly used to con taxpayers. It is the other side of the reality this forum has been observing with how quickly Russia lost armored vehicles around Kiev to Ukrainian infantry squads on the ground.
    Last edited by Landrith; 05-25-2022 at 11:54 PM.

  24. #3489
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    sweden
    Posts
    81

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbie 2 View Post
    I read somewhere that Ukraine supplies 90% of the water and electricity used by Crimea.
    Seeing that train loaded with Tanks with power lines alongside makes me wonder.............
    Why hasn't the water and electricity been cut off?
    Russia built new power and water supply transit from Russia when they constructed the new bridge to Crimea.

  25. #3490
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    6,912

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Olga Reznikova returns to her home in Kiev. She's one of many.

    Will

  26. #3491
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    6,912

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenBauer View Post
    This is the Russian salvage ship Kommuna:

    Attachment 109872

    Attachment 109873

    Kommuna is a submarine salvage ship in service with the Russian Navy's Black Sea Fleet. A double-hulled catamaran, she was laid down at the Putilov Factory (now the Kirov Factory) in St. Petersburg in November 1912 as Volkhov. The ship was launched the following year, and commissioned on 14 July 1915. She was renamed Kommuna on 31 December 1922. Kommuna has served in the Russian Imperial, Soviet, and Russian Federation navies through the Russian Revolution and two World Wars.




    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russ...e_ship_Kommuna
    I found a nice documentary length video on the Kommuna.

    Will

  27. #3492
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,081

    Default Re: Ukraine

    The T62 tanks the Russians are sending to the Ukraine war have a 115 mm cannon, as already mentioned. I thought this was an odd calibre as I'm somewhat acquainted with the T55 (100 mm) and T72 (125 mm) and consulted my friend Google. The follow up to the T62, the T64 tank, also has a 125 mm cannon. The 115 mm cannon is a smooth bore cannon, as is the 125 mm cannon. The earlier 100 mm cannon was rifled. It seems to me that the 115 mm was a step in the development of the 125 mm cannon, an oddity that is used in no other tank than T62.
    Why is Russia deploying T62s to Ukraine? It must complicate the logistics. My guess is that Russia is out of functioning T72s that they can spare for the Ukraine war. The T62s along with the 115 mm ammunition is something they can spare and probably don't mind very much if they lose them in the war. They'll be vulnerable to almost every anti tank weapon the Ukrainians have.
    /Erik

  28. #3493
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    28,396

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Here's a very good site for tracking the military realities of the war:

    https://understandingwar.org/

    It seems the Russians have given up on trying to cut off big chunks of the Ukraine military and are concentrating on creating 'smaller cauldrons.' From today's post on that site:

    https://understandingwar.org/backgro...essment-may-25
    Today’s statement by DNR Militia Head Eduard Basurin explaining that Russian forces would focus on creating “smaller cauldrons” rather than on a single large encirclement is likely in part a response to a critique that surfaced both in the milblogger space and in the Russian Duma that Russian forces had failed to form and reduce “cauldrons” of the sort they used in 2014.[3] Basurin’s statement, along with other changes in the ways in which Russian officials have spoken about cauldrons and Russian operations in the east following those critiques suggest that the Russian and proxy leadership is sensitive to shifts in this information space.[4]

  29. #3494
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    61,271

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by ERGR View Post
    The T62s along with the 115 mm ammunition is something they can spare and probably don't mind very much if they lose them in the war. They'll be vulnerable to almost every anti tank weapon the Ukrainians have.
    They maybe can spare the tanks, but surely trained tank crews are valuable, not available in huge numbers and take time to train? Even if they don't care at all about sending the poor schlubs into battle in tanks 'vulnerable to almost every anti tank weapon the Ukrainians have', that doesn't seem a great idea.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  30. #3495
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Topeka, KS
    Posts
    1,970

    Default Re: Ukraine

    I think it is mistaken to evaluate Russia's current use of the T-62 as a lesser main battle tank to engage Ukrainian tanks. I think they see it as a modern and much improved version of the WWII Soviet ISU-152 assault gun. And they have virtually unlimited stockpiles of 115mm high explosive fragmentation rounds. Very little skill is required for conscripts to bore sight apartment house floors from across the street in urban warfare. They are moping up Maripol and seeing battles like that in other cities and this is the tool they are planning to use to succeed in that environment. Its out of my understanding, not the maneuver and minimum casualties General Colin Powel taught after Vietnam, but instead pure Clauswitz WWII attrition, city destroying stuff. We will never be forgiven for the expansion of NATO at the cost of Ukrainian cities.

    As far as I can tell, T-62's were armored enough to withstand RPG7's , the only incident where one succeeded was an open driver's hatch shot or something. Later generations of RPG's look like they were optimized for increased range and accuracy not a bigger shaped charge.

  31. #3496
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Poznań, Poland
    Posts
    3,151

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Draghi talked with putin. He said that

    Russia is ready to help fight the food crisis sparked by the war in exchange for sanctions being revoked
    Also some ramblings about sanctions being politically motivated etc.
    Holding third world hostage this way is beyond immoral. I don't even feel anger at orcs on this topic, I feel disgust.

    Yet another heinous crime everybody has foreseen but silently hoped to be wrong
    WszystekPoTrochu's signature available only for premium forum users.

  32. #3497
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    35,028

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Landrith View Post
    I think it is mistaken to evaluate Russia's current use of the T-62 as a lesser main battle tank to engage Ukrainian tanks. I think they see it as a modern and much improved version of the WWII Soviet ISU-152 assault gun. And they have virtually unlimited stockpiles of 115mm high explosive fragmentation rounds. Very little skill is required for conscripts to bore sight apartment house floors from across the street in urban warfare. They are moping up Maripol and seeing battles like that in other cities and this is the tool they are planning to use to succeed in that environment. Its out of my understanding, not the maneuver and minimum casualties General Colin Powel taught after Vietnam, but instead pure Clauswitz WWII attrition, city destroying stuff. We will never be forgiven for the expansion of NATO at the cost of Ukrainian cities.

    As far as I can tell, T-62's were armored enough to withstand RPG7's , the only incident where one succeeded was an open driver's hatch shot or something. Later generations of RPG's look like they were optimized for increased range and accuracy not a bigger shaped charge.
    The general feeling in Ukraine is the T 62 crews are likely to be somewhat brittle in combat because they know their tanks are no match for the antitank weapons the Ukrainians now possess.
    I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned


  33. #3498
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Gulgong. Central west N.S.W. Australia
    Posts
    5,881

  34. #3499
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    in Orygun
    Posts
    3,463

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Putin has certainly taken a page out of the Tsars' (and Stalin's) playbook by depopulating the Ukraine:

    https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26/polit...sia/index.html

    next, the Russian homestead act.


    Can only hope that this will help:
    https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26/polit...lrs/index.html

  35. #3500
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    27,354

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Things not good for Ukraine; outnumbered 7:1 in men and something like that in artillery.

    https://medium.com/@Stefan.Korshak/m...o-dc78bd1e43a0
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •