Russian special military operation in Ukraine #14

Big_Gazza wrote:

RTN wrote:Eventually an admission......Russia lacks missiles of caliber

https://twitter.com/RSS_40/status/1518507916990775296?s=20&t=JW3R5_hJ8y1ZUZ1aL4HFZA

Wow... how much of a retard does someone need to be in order to spin this tweet into a "Russian missiles are shit" diatribe?

this is most likely a speech about the topic "Calibr-M". From the known characteristics, the weight of the warhead will approach a ton, while the range will increase to 4,500 km.

Arkanghelsk wrote:

Ispan wrote:Ok, now I feel stupid.

I thought Yuri Podoliak (yurasumy) the guy that does youtube videos and Andrey Chervonets are the same person, but now there are two LiveJournal accounts, one for yurasumy?

Are they the same person as I thought or two different people?


Also, how truthful and accurate is this? I was surprised that it takes weeks sometimes to clear a town like in the case of Rubezhnoe, or that Maryinka and Avdeyevka are impregnable and the ukrainians are never thrown out, but in the second case I put it down to fortificacions, and in general I figure out that city fighting is just a manner of shooting every building to pieces until the enemy gives up and withdraws, no infantry assaults like in Stalingrad. Basically I thought the advances were slow or none at all because a desire to save lives and there was no real attemtp to storm the place, just fixing enemy troops in it,

But i find this account really shocking, I didn't think the militia fought so badly, after eight years of training  

https://leon-spb67.livejournal.com/1457295.html

I already have said the lack of aviation is devastating

There are no civilians there ,

That account could be real, or fake, the commenter are bunch of hohol scum

Again, those zones have almost no civilians

They should be razing the area to the ground

I saw a video of guys one after another jumping out to fire RPGs at a target. I was wondering WTF...no air strike or artillary?

owais.usmani wrote:

https://twitter.com/Angelo4justice3/status/1519571870911066114

Yep, I would love to see them try!

In the place of the Russians, I would perform a REAL NUCLEAR TEST (with real warheads), as they were a few decades ago, just to remind the West what nuclear weapons are.
The United States is realistically the greatest evil that has ever existed.
Blame Russia for Ukraine. To drag Poland into a conventional war with Russia, maybe Romania, and then probably the Baltic banana states, and then Sweden and Finland and thus present Russia as worse than Hitler.
One real nuclear test with a Topol missile armed with a real thermonuclear warhead would be enough.

"I saw a video of guys one after another jumping out to fire RPGs at a target. I was wondering WTF...no air strike or artillary?"

Seems like you are jumping to conclusions. I cant figure out how legit that blogpost was but it reeks of demoralization. Russia is well aware that Ukrainian fighters are essentially guided and given Intel by the west, and that there is a large portion of foreign fighters. I would not assume Russians would overestimate their abilities or underestimate those of their enemies. Until further info can he gleaned it is best to view all accounts with a skeptical eye.

Briefing by the Russian Defence Ministry

The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation continue the special military operation in Ukraine.

High-precision air-launched missiles of the Russian Aerospace Forces have neutralised 4 military facilities of Ukraine overnight.

The neutralised facilities include 2 areas of manpower and military equipment concentration of the enemy, 2 artillery-missile armament munitions depots near Barvenkovo and Ivanovka.

Operational-tactical and army aviation of the Russian Aerospace Forces have neutralised 67 military facilities of Ukraine over the past 24 hours.

The neutralised facilities include 2 company strongpoints, 2 large artillery-missile armament and fuel depots in Preobrazhenka and Orekhov, as well as 55 manpower and military equipment concentration points of the enemy.

The attacks have resulted in the elimination of more than 300 nationalists and up to 40 armoured and motor vehicles.

Missile troops and artillery have performed 408 fire tasks overnight.

The neutralised targets are 18 command posts and 383 manpower and Ukrainian military equipment concentration points.

Russian air defence means have shot down 1 Su-24 aircraft of the Ukrainian Air Force over Nikolaevka, Lugansk People's Republic.

5 Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles have been destroyed near Veselogorovka, Zatishnoe, Novomikhaylovka, Lyubimovka and Kharkov.

In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the destroyed military equipment includes 142 aircraft, 111 helicopters, 614 unmanned aerial vehicles, 276 anti-aircraft missile systems, 2,623 tanks and other armoured combat vehicles, 299 multiple rocket launchers, 1,146 field artillery and mortars, as well as 2,431 special military motor vehicles.

On April 27, at about 23:00 (MSK), the Ukrainian Armed Forces have launched a massive attack using Tochka-U ballistic missiles and multiple rocket launchers at residential areas of the central part of Kherson.

The indiscriminate missile attack launched by the nationalists targeted kindergartens, schools and various social facilities in residential areas near Ushakova avenue.

Russian air defence units have repelled the attack of the Ukrainian troops launched at the residential areas of Kherson.

12 high-powered projectiles of a multiple rocket launcher and 2 Ukrainian Tochka-U ballistic missiles have been shot down over the city. The fragments of one of the Ukrainian Tochka-U missiles has landed in Shevchenkovsky Park.

The Kiev nationalist regime's indiscriminate attacks on residential areas of Izyum and Kherson are a war crime and a gross violation of international humanitarian law.

#MoD #Russia #Ukraine #Briefing
@mod_russia_en

Both Kalibre and Iskander have proved to be quite effective so far. So it would be interesting to find out on what basis Russia is choosing these missiles. IOW, why not use Iskander or Kaliber exclusively?

I understand time critical targets, i.e targets that are constantly shifting locations will probably be targeted by AShMs. Waiting to see which targets will be hit with a Yakhont/Onyx and other such similar missiles.

Iskander is nice. But rather than Kalibr I have been more surprised with the Kh-101.
They just keep pummeling targets regardless of the air defenses the Ukrainians have.

I heard someone mention that weapons from Ukraine have already shown up with criminal gangs in France.

lancelot wrote:Iskander is nice. But rather than Kalibr I have been more surprised with the Kh-101.
They just keep pummeling targets regardless of the air defenses the Ukrainians have.

Kh-101 and kalibr are very long range weapons designed to fight NATO. They need more tactical cruise missiles like kh-59 and kh-35 which can have >500km ranges with modern tech which are cheaper and better against a lonely country.

According to russian wikipedia, kh-59 and kh-35 cost around 400k$ each. That's still very expensive to use only missiles in this war, imagine the price of kh-101 and kalibr. That's why you can't just rely on missiles. Flight hour of jets is also expensive. If they don't switch from using missiles to dumb bombs they will have difficulties continuing the war.

Hunt for buks should be a priority.

Sujoy wrote:Both Kalibre and Iskander have proved to be quite effective so far. So it would be interesting to find out on what basis Russia is choosing these missiles. IOW, why not use Iskander or Kaliber exclusively?

I understand time critical targets, i.e targets that are constantly shifting locations will probably be targeted by AShMs. Waiting to see which targets will be hit with a  Yakhont/Onyx and other such similar missiles.

Almost certainly there will be an element of 'everyone gets a chance of having a go' about the way the Russian military are doing it. After all, actually firing the missile is just the tip of the iceberg. There are all kinds of functions behind that, all of which are getting some practice and experience, that are being spread widely. Not least of which is the morale issue.

This is another reason why NATO will really not want to push things over the edge, as they watch the Russians honing their skills as they look at the very patchiness of theirs.

Mind you, there is some good experience earned on the NATO side as well in logistics along with a lot, the intel aircraft and data stream, that would be irrelevant and is probably giving them a false sense that a next war will be like, as they forget that those assets would have to be so far back to be almost meaningless and not there after a couple of days anyway.

They should tell Poland and Bulgaria that their long term contracts and pricing are now null and void. If they wish to reinstate gas supply they will have to purchase at considerably higher spot market prices.

When Poland and Bulgaria have not purchased the amount of gas they agreed to buy from Russia it will be them breaking the contract.

In the mean time the gas they get will be reverse flow from Germany... which is Russian gas anyway, so even if they totally cancel their gas contracts with Russia they will still be buying Russian gas but will be paying Germany for transit fees too.

this is most likely a speech about the topic "Calibr-M". From the known characteristics, the weight of the warhead will approach a ton, while the range will increase to 4,500 km.

I don't know what RTN is thinking... I suspect he thinks they think they need a new missile because they can't afford to keep using current missiles at this rate, but the facts of the matter are that they are looking at the success of the current missiles and talking about what their next generation of missiles might be able to do... they probably want longer range and bigger warheads for certain targets that are not so close as Ukraine, but they likely will also want smaller lighter missiles with smaller warheads and much shorter ranges that can be made and carried in even larger numbers yet still be effective at taking out a wide range of targets.

They might even be planning a custom designed bunker buster version of Kinzhal and Zircon because their flight speed makes them very very efficient in such roles where kinetic energy is very very useful.

Replacing a 300kg warhead with a 150kg cone shaped piece of strong metal as a penetrator with a 150kg charge of HE behind it (metal is dense and so 150kgs of metal takes up a lot less warhead space than 150kgs of HE so a 300kg HE penetrating warhead can be much smaller than a 300kg HE blast warhead where the penetrating warhead has 150kgs of steel and 150kgs of HE and the HE blast warehead is just 300kgs of HE.

A penetrating warhead coming in at very high speed can penetrate into buildings or bunkers before exploding inside to devastating effect.

Yep, I would love to see them try!

I can't believe how fucking dumb they are.... it is mind blowing...

They are looking back through history to find things that really scared Russia.... what the **** for.... Russia has already invaded the Ukraine and is fighting a war it does not want to fight... Russia is not the US or the west and only fights wars it absolutely has to... it is fighting in Syria because it knows if it didn't and US backed forces won there that taking the caliphate to Russia would be the next step so if there has to be a war it makes sense for Russia to fight it in Syria and it also helps them out too and prevents them enduring what Libya is going through. In the Ukraine, it was nazis, bio weapons, tactical nuclear weapons in the hands of a nazi jewish clown and the fact that they were going to invade anyway to take back Crimea.

The US doesn't understand it has already pushed Russias buttons... Russia is never going to back down... it makes more sense for them to kill everyone with WWIII than to surrender to the west... they understand there is no winning WWIII but nuclear weapons have been mentioned.

Sometimes suicide is the best option.

If the US wants to test that then they have to understand Russia is going to take you with them and even now with you fucking over all your friends and pushing countries away from the west and towards alternative global systems you still have things much better than you will after WWIII is over... and with Thunderbird and Poseidon who knows when the nukes will stop exploding in the US...

Both Kalibre and Iskander have proved to be quite effective so far. So it would be interesting to find out on what basis Russia is choosing these missiles. IOW, why not use Iskander or Kaliber exclusively?

Different missiles have different advantages and capabilities.

Iskander is fast and difficult to intercept... Kalibre is low flying and difficult to spot or track or engage with air defences... flying at about 800km/h it is flying at a significant fraction of the speed of sound so by the time you hear it it is very very close and moving at 800km/h it blows past very quickly... probably too fast to follow with a shoulder launched missile and as it is flying away you try to get a lock and it might already be behind buildings and trees.

Various weapons like Kh-35 are light weight and have decent range and good accuracy and a smaller warhead but with precision a huge warhead is only useful against a few types of targets.

Deep bunkers or strongly built buildings then Iskander and Kinzhal and Zircon make sense because of their impact speed, but a fuel dump and a Kh-35 would be fine.

Another factor is different weapons have different launch platforms so they can come from anywhere and in mixes of types and potentially in enormous numbers too.

There are lots of anti ship missile types that wouldn't be good for hitting a modern british destroyer because that is defended and has SAMs ready to shoot down low flying supersonic missiles, but against a fuel depot in the Ukraine it is as good as any other missile... why not use some of the old missiles up?

More importantly you could launch some SS-N-2 Styx subsonic anti ship missiles at targets... if the Ukrainian air defence want to shoot it down then they will need to use BUK or S-300 because it will fly too high for MANPADS or OSA so using up a SAM and revealing their position to Russian forces means even if they do shoot it down it is an obsolete missile that would only be good for hitting civilian shipping. If they don't shoot it down then when it lands on its target it 750kg warhead is going to do some damage to fortifications or groups of vehicles or an HQ or comms centre or whatever they hit with it.

Iskander is nice. But rather than Kalibr I have been more surprised with the Kh-101.
They just keep pummeling targets regardless of the air defenses the Ukrainians have.

Not really surprising... this is what Kh-101 is for. Kh-102 with the nuclear payload and slightly longer range is for HATO and WWIII.

Kh-101 and kalibr are very long range weapons designed to fight NATO. They need more tactical cruise missiles like kh-59 and kh-35 which can have >500km ranges with modern tech which are cheaper and better against a lonely country.

This is what Kh-101 and Kalibr were designed for... current model Kalibr (export name Club) is a 2,500-3,000km range missile... the next versions are going to be increased in size to better fit the UKSK launch tubes and match the Kh-101 in range at about 5K km.

They have mentioned the Kh-50 with a range of 1,500km but half the size of the Kh-55 so they can be carried in much larger numbers.

And if Russia puts on its pants and deepens its alliance with Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, China, etc.
That is, if she brings technology, weapons and such to these countries. In particular the smallest, to achieve a truly multipolar world.

An important part of the west cutting ties with Russia is also greatly diminishing their influence as well... Russia is not going to consider western interests any more... so the west might start to realise how good they have had things for the last 30 odd years.

The west are actively supporting ISIS and the Kurds against Russian forces in Syria and Georgia in the SO conflict and now nazis in Ukraine... where has Russia actively supported and armed opponents of the west in all their interventions over the last 30 years?

This is going to be painful for the west because they have lots of fingers in lots of pies and slapping Russias hand like this is going to backfire on them massively going forward... even without malicious intent on the side of Russia... it isn't going to go out of its way to hurt the west the way the west has tried with Russia and any country that is allied with Russia... despite US accusations of bounties on US soldiers in Afghanistan... maybe they should announce the details of these criminals in the Ukraine and start posting bounties on their heads dead or alive to get the Ukrainians to start rooting them out and cleaning house for themselves...

The worst thing they could do is mistreat Russian prisoners... which they are already doing...

Almost certainly there will be an element of 'everyone gets a chance of having a go' about the way the Russian military are doing it.

Another factor is that some targets are static and you can hit them any time you like and perhaps hitting them at night might reduce casualties, whereas hitting a head quarters while it is managing an operation the timing might be critical and a 2,000km range subsonic cruise missile takes more time to reach its target than a mach 2.5 anti ship missile flying less than half that distance.

Soft targets and hard targets might be better destroyed with different warheads.

Different levels of local air defence might mean a cruise missile might get shot down but a mach 7 Iskander wont... and its cluster warhead might be good for dealing with an ammo depot where ammo is spread out to prevent one explosion setting it all off... lots of small explosives scattered around an enormous area might be rather more effective... a cluster warhead released at 500m in the air might give enough spread to get it all. with runway penetrating munitions that burrow through metres of concrete and then explode to destroy the underlying foundations might punch through the roof of an arms depot and then explode inside amongst the ammo making it all go up.

It is all about checking the toys with some real scenarios.
Plus they have stocks that need disposal, so why not ... ?

Both valid reasons too...

Oleg Kozhemyako, going to Donbass to help

A video from Maryinka

https://topwar.ru/195171-reportazh-iz-vzjatyh-nm-dnr-ukrainskih-okopov-v-marinke.html

Seeing that there are still houses standing after eight years of war and that there is not so much saturation of shell craters, it seems to me that these strong points of the front are not any Stalingrad, if not minor affairs fights of a few companies, I do not believe that the Ukros can placet entire brigades in a village that had like ten thousand inhabitants, or so

Of course I might be underestimating the destruction and the artillery bombardments because due to my interest in the Great War I am used to insane amounts of shelling being the norm. Artillery bombardments like that were seldom equalled and never exceeded in the second world war.

Also from a video from yesterday, I realize now that perhaps the village was mostly undamaged as the ukrops held it all these years and now the Donetsk militia has been shelling the undamaged western portion.


Avdeyevka being an industrial city, I do imagine that it will be much harder to crack, due to the number of air attacks that the "Rooks" have made (Sukhoi 25)

I get the impression that the offensive capacity of most of the militias is very poor, and that at points like this it is really not worth taking a lot of ruins by storm, so everything is limited in firefights from one trench to another and shelling until the enemy gets tired and withdraws from a position because it is too exposed and maintaining it costs him a continuous stream of casualties.

As the Ukros have superior numbers and can rotate troops, it's a neverending game, still, I cannot understand why they cling so tenaciously to this outpost. Specially if they already lost the waste mound, the commanding height as observation post for artillery wich is the only valuable terrain feature.

A strange war.

Well, USA means of sovereign.

"Washington, Warsaw Discuss 'Reunification' of Poland & Western Ukraine - Russian Foreign Intel Chief"
Sputniknews.

Isos wrote:

lancelot wrote:Iskander is nice. But rather than Kalibr I have been more surprised with the Kh-101.
They just keep pummeling targets regardless of the air defenses the Ukrainians have.

Kh-101 and kalibr are very long range weapons designed to fight NATO. They need more tactical cruise missiles like kh-59 and kh-35 which can have >500km ranges with modern tech which are cheaper and better against a lonely country.

According to russian wikipedia, kh-59 and kh-35 cost around 400k$ each. That's still very expensive to use only missiles in this war, imagine the price of kh-101 and kalibr. That's why you can't just rely on missiles. Flight hour of jets is also expensive. If they don't switch from using missiles to dumb bombs they will have difficulties continuing the war.

Hunt for buks should be a priority.

They´re using "dumb" weapons. But why fly all the way to Lviv to drop some FAB-500´s if you can use a Kaliber missile? It all depends on the target and where it is.

Donations to the DPR forces

Hole wrote:They´re using "dumb" weapons. But why fly all the way to Lviv to drop some FAB-500´s if you can use a Kaliber missile? It all depends on the target and where it is.

There is no need to risk ambush by AD, NATO has constant airspace monitoring over Western Ukraine and even if the bulk of Ukrainian SAMs are destroyed, a few Buks scattered around and properly cued are still perfectly capable of steadily shooting Russian planes down, which will lead to non acceptable losses in a war that can continue for months and years. Low flying, small CMs are indeed more expensive than dumb bombs, but very difficult to counter for everything but a very dense AD network and still cheap enough for Russia to keep producing them indefinitely. In any case, Russians are not in a rush and proceeding slower allows them to get good intelligence and concentrate on priority targets for a better economy of resources. Basically they have no problem with this approach, but indeed countering NATO surveillance by DEW (what about really powerful land based microwave sources used vs AWACS), EW or stealthier aircraft would be a good improvement and allow a faster degradation of the enemy capabilities. Some of Russia's projects (like Kh-50, Kh-69, Su-57, LTS or PAK-DA for instance) make more and more sense considering this kind of proxy wars vs. NATO that form the context in which Russia will likely need to fight from now onwards.