Russian special military operation in Ukraine #21

The debate about pods for reloading is moot

I'd remind everything that the Tornado-S and Tornado-U, new Russian replacements for the Smerch and Uragan respectively - both use pods.
They're more convenient. Just snap a new pod into place with the reload vehicle and the launcher is ready to fire

Belisarius wrote: We have doubts about the claimed Ukrainian success of destroyed S-300 SAM launchers in the #Kherson Oblast

As can be seen in the video, the systems are in the open field, as if on a platter. We assume that the #Ukrainians fell for presented museum pieces; see the 3 pictures
https://t.me/Slavyangrad/3529?single

Where are S-300s supposed to be deployed then, if not on open fields?

Don't get the logic

And yes any such system will be vulnerable to MLRS or precision munitions. Point is to keep it out of range, and with SHORADs covering it. What's the bet that one of these two conditions wasn't fulfilled or perhaps both

Isos wrote:

Regular wrote:

Arkanghelsk wrote:And I argue even if reload take 20 minutes on bm27 versus  5 min in M142

Bm 27 got 32 missiles out

In the same time m142 with 5 min reload time got 24 missiles in 4 salvos

While Bm27 did it in 2

So Pods have their place, but it's to simplistic to say one thing is better than the other

Efficiency is important, but there are many factors which are important such as mobility, coverage of area , reload time, durability of chassis, suspension, powerplant

All those things factor in

What’s the difference in real life? 5 or 20 minutes. You shoot, then quickly drive the hell away and meet reloading vehicle. No one will reload in the field. After meeting reload vehicle It’s not that time sensitive from there, there might not be any targets to cover, planing place where to launch and etc.

People think it's like in game you push buttons and kill everything and if you get killed you respawn 200m away and do it again.

Rockets are not illimited in numbers. And finding targets takes time just like damage assesement.

Reloading can take 1 hour that won't change anything.

To your understanding maybe, but not hard to find targets while Himars gets its super quick reload, drops its load with pinpoint accuracy again and again and again unless you can find it right away

Better pics, so the grain silos are on the right side of the targets, not the left as the other source thought.

Lessons learned from coastal battles around Mariupol and Snake island.

At the rehearsal of the Navy parade:

RAPTOR with:

-KORNET Missiles
-Active anti tank missile system

Isos wrote:But that crew is dumb. The vehicles should be 500m from each other and covered with cammo when close to the front where you know enemy has long range rocket systems.  

It's something I've noted before in some of the footage of S-300 sites from their own drones. Vehicle spacing goes out the window sometimes. It's not surprising, repetitive work breeds shortcuts. Constantly relocating after letting off a few missiles would get to be pretty casual after awhile if I had to guess.

Regular wrote:New video from Razvedos that touches VDV and its present and the future. This might be interesting for Arkanghelsk

He references to this conflict and BMD/Sprut and VDV challenges they encountered in Ukraine.

VDV: End of an Era

(Please use auto-translate to language of your liking)

Pretty insightful analysis. TY

caveat emptor wrote:

Regular wrote:New video from Razvedos that touches VDV and its present and the future. This might be interesting for Arkanghelsk

He references to this conflict and BMD/Sprut and VDV challenges they encountered in Ukraine.

VDV: End of an Era

(Please use auto-translate to language of your liking)

Pretty insightful analysis. TY

I would say, this is true, obviously air assault is going to be preferable in this type of battle

But I disagree that mass landing by IL76 is gone or done for

In a friendly space, or a neutral space which is contested, you can do so

Like in an area where two expeditionary forces are fighting

In Kazakhstan IL76 delivered more than a brigade to the airport

In fact this is how they would arrive normally to ally states

As for para drop, I think it will still be done, in places where VDV is fighting an enemy which also has not had time to emplace himself,

So it is a place where enemy did not have time to deploy or prepare

It's a battlespace which is beginning to be contested

Or where a new crisis arose, and two sides are quickly deploying forces to the battlefield

In a zone where the defender obviously possesses AD or some other means it's not ideal

But I think IL76 air drop still has a time and a place

Ukraine is altogether an entirely different story , it is a bastion that is defended

Isos wrote:But that crew is dumb. The vehicles should be 500m from each other and covered with cammo when close to the front where you know enemy has long range rocket systems.  

Losses are expected, as said you don't fight a high intensity war thinking there are no casualties

It's not Iraq or Libya, without support

It's a NATO state with full NATO support

But the key here is the ratio of losses,

In a high intensity conflict there are 2 keys

1) production of equipment - industrial capacity , we see Kalibr and missiles are not problem for Russia to produce

In terms of economy replacing a S300 is easier than jets

2) Rotating losses or casualties, in a high intensity war, you will sustain casualties , but Russia is not mobilized, and Ukraine is

Ukraine shows ability to sustain catastrophic losses, of course Ukrainians are like Russians , same gene , same disposition to combat

But the lop sidedness is revealed in the scale of losses for both sides

Ukraine does not have the industry, and relies on western armament, and it fills the manpower

Russia has the industry, and uses a very small portion of overall manpower

It looks like a training session for the Russian army

Experimental mass combined arms combat

With trials and experimentation

But Russia hasn't started anything serious yet

Hole wrote:
Better pics, so the grain silos are on the right side of the targets, not the left as the other source thought.

You won't see that argument in Western media. They desperately try to use this to make Russia look untrustworthy. Euronews is even trying to push the narrative that Russia has admitted this incident after initially staying silent, which is obviously a stupid argument, since Russia commented on it just one day after the strike. Western media is beyond retarded.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

To your understanding maybe, but not hard to find targets while Himars gets its super quick reload, drops its load with pinpoint accuracy again and again and again unless you can find it right away

We hear about HIMARS rocket attack few times per week, not every 5 minutes. And they use them mostly at night and hide them 99.9% of the time. So its 5 minutes reload brings nothing over the 20 minutes of bm-30.

Kherson doing some instant-repairs after strikes on bridge.
Good job Ukraine, Munitions well spend.








Construction progress in Mariupol:















Turned to Fertilizer:






RF strikes Ukrainian army garrison building in Konstantinovka.



surrender of Ukrainians, location unknown.



RF neutralises ukrainian Artillery battery near Nikolaev.

Arkanghelsk wrote:

Isos wrote:But that crew is dumb. The vehicles should be 500m from each other and covered with cammo when close to the front where you know enemy has long range rocket systems.  

Losses are expected, as said you don't fight a high intensity war thinking there are no casualties

It's not Iraq or Libya, without support

It's a NATO state with full NATO support

But the key here is the ratio of losses,

In a high intensity conflict there are 2 keys

1) production of equipment - industrial capacity , we see Kalibr and missiles are not problem for Russia to produce

In terms of economy replacing a S300 is easier than jets

2) Rotating losses or casualties, in a high intensity war, you will sustain casualties , but Russia is not mobilized, and Ukraine is

Ukraine shows ability to sustain catastrophic losses, of course Ukrainians are like Russians , same gene , same disposition to combat

But the lop sidedness is revealed in the scale of losses for both sides

Ukraine does not have the industry,  and relies on western armament, and it fills the manpower

Russia has the industry, and uses a very small portion of overall manpower

It looks like a training session for the Russian army

Experimental mass combined arms combat

With trials and experimentation

But Russia hasn't started anything serious yet

Spreading your forces accross a wide area should be automatically done. We already saw russian tanks being engaged by artillery while driving one behind the other with no real spacing.

Now they keep a S-300 in one place when the vehicles can be 2km from each other. (Could still be a dummy however).

Spacing them means an attack can't take out plenty of vehicles at once.

Buying S-300/400 or sukhois isn't cheap. Training their new crew take a lot of time if the crew get killed.

Loosing hardware and soldiers because you don't apply basic rules is dumb and not normal.

SolidarityWithRussia wrote:

You won't see that argument in Western media. They desperately try to use this to make Russia look untrustworthy. Euronews is even trying to push the narrative that Russia has admitted this incident after initially staying silent, which is obviously a stupid argument, since Russia commented on it just one day after the strike. Western media is beyond retarded.

They kinda have a point as at first Russia denied it was them but then said it was but it was military targets nothing to do with the grain silos.

So these old, obsolete T-72 actually have military value to the Poles.

Tony
@Cyberspec1
·
22h

Poland has suspended the transfer of tanks to Ukraine due to the impossibility of replacing them with German ones due to Berlin's position.
They've only been promised 20 x Leopard-2A4 tanks at a very slow rate of 1 per month and from 2023, 3 per month

EDIT

Taking about oldies


Will Schryver
@imetatronink
·
5h
No doubt a Ukrainian victory is near at hand, given that they are seeking to raise the maximum age of service in the territorial defense forces to 70 years.

I mean ... this can't be a sign of extreme desperation ... can it?

Now trying enhanced fear tactics by burning Donetsk last night.

It is reported that after the failure of the offensive in the area of ​​Potemkino and Vysokopole, the enemy is again trying to attack the positions of the RF Armed Forces, now in the area of ​​Belogorka and Davydov Brod in the Krivoy Rog direction. Let's see what they can do this time.

----

Another suicide charge - let's see what they got

There are claims of two Russian S-300 destroyed in Kherson, is this confirmed or more Ukrop propaganda?

Arkanghelsk wrote:
I would say, this is true, obviously air assault is going to be preferable in this type of battle

But I disagree that mass landing by IL76 is gone or done for

In a friendly space, or a neutral space which is contested, you can do so

Like in an area where two expeditionary forces are fighting

In Kazakhstan IL76 delivered more than a brigade to the airport

In fact this is how they would arrive normally to ally states

As for para drop, I think it will still be done, in places where VDV is fighting an enemy which also has not had time to emplace himself,

So it is a place where enemy did not have time to deploy or prepare

It's a battlespace which is beginning to be contested

Or where a new crisis arose, and two sides are quickly deploying forces to the battlefield

In a zone where the defender obviously possesses AD or some other means it's not ideal

But I think IL76 air drop still has a time and a place

As i said in one of my previous posts on the subject, it might still be a possibility, but they don't need to have 4 divisions for that purpose. They can maybe keep 1 or 2 brigades for it.

Stealthflanker wrote:Poor S-300's seems 2-3 launchers and apparently 1 command vehicle destroyed.  This is from Kherson region.

https://twitter.com/War_cube_/status/1551216357454352387

But well given Russians typically deploy like 8 launchers and engagement radars which are nowhere to be seen. I assume they managed to escape.

How tf would Ukrainians score direct hits on SAM launchers with gps guided rockets without having a real time image feed of them? Theyre jot antiradiation missiles. This smells like BS. No way Ukrainians managed to send drones to give a live feed of the launchers.

Belisarius wrote: A large group of hohols surrendered to Russian forces
https://t.me/intelslava/33831

These are the smart ones. Not willing to die for Bidens bleak election chances.

limb wrote:

How tf would Ukrainians score direct hits on SAM launchers with gps guided rockets without having a real time image feed of them? Theyre jot antiradiation missiles. This smells like BS. No way Ukrainians managed to send drones to give a live feed of the launchers.

Or Ukrainian SSO behind the line does the job. Either way tho it's an unfortunate loss.

Well our Western media and twitter citizen friends will just promote their weapons. Like.. when Moskva lost.. there were claims of Harpoon, Brimestone, Penguin and TB-2's sinking her also Neptune which more widely accepted.

There are reports that the Armed Forces of Ukraine are trying to break through in the south near the Ingulets River (border of Kherson and Dnepropetrovsk regions), serious battles are on.

Also, as reported, after the failure of the offensive in the area of ​​Potemkino and Vysokopole, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are again trying to attack the positions of the RF Armed Forces, now in the area of ​​Belogorovka and Davydov Brod in the Krivoy Rog direction.

#kherson

@russianhead
----------

Battles raging in Kherson, General Staff should have seen these forces for a while

They should have sent forces there

On top of it the bridge was struck repeatedly

If Ukrainians break through, It will be a disaster for General Staff

Do they have the airforce in Kherson?

Use it or lose it