Russian special military operation in Ukraine #41

>Hunting for Leopards
Nibba just aim low and slightly to the right. That glacis hasn't been updated since the fall of the Berlin wall. There's really not much to it.

Somewhere around Artemovsk


Niobium-SV radar

More info to Arrows post: Kh-29 missile launched by a Su-34. Bridge is in Sumy region.

The Russian Armed Forces destroyed the storage of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with 70 thousand tons of fuel, 04.09.2023.

Defense Ministry: Russian Armed Forces destroyed Ukrainian storage facility with 70,000 tons of fuel.

MOSCOW, April 9 - RIA Novosti. The Russian military destroyed a fuel storage facility for the Ukrainian group of troops in the Donbass, the Defense Ministry said.

"In the area of ​​the city of Zaporozhye, a high-precision missile strike destroyed a storage facility with 70,000 tons of fuel accumulated to support the operations of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Donbass," the report says.

In addition, it was possible to liquidate the warehouses of rocket and artillery weapons and ammunition of the 102nd Territorial Defense Brigade and the 72nd Mechanized Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine near Orekhov in the Zaporozhye region and Vuhledar in the DPR. In the Veliky Burluk area, Russian units hit the forward command post of the Kharkiv task force of Ukrainian troops.

Kupyanskoe direction

The Zapad group of troops, with the support of aviation and artillery, attacked units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine near the settlements of Olshana, Ivankovka, Timkovka and Krakhmalnoe in the Kharkiv region, as well as Stelmakhovka in the Luhansk People's Republic. In addition, in the areas of Sinkovka in the Kharkiv region and Novoselovsky in the LPR, it was possible to stop the activities of two groups of Ukrainian saboteurs.

https://ria.ru/20230409/khranilische-1864068729.html

The Russian Armed Forces destroyed the storage of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with 70 thousand tons of fuel

Fuel, food, medical supplies, water, all commodities that support life and industry in NATO occupied Ukraine needs to be destroyed and obliterated. It won't matter if Ukraine amasses 100k or even a 1 million army for an offensive, if there is no food and water, they will all starve to death.

90% of Bakhmut is under Russian control according to Mercouris.

How the Russian military will destroy NATO tanks in Ukraine, by Daria Volkova for VZGLYAD. 04.09.2023.

Experts spoke about the work of special groups to destroy Western tanks in Ukraine.

"Our best anti-tank units will be sent to where the use of the most modern enemy tanks is expected." With these words, military experts comment on the statements of the Ministry of Defense on the creation of special groups to combat the armored vehicles of NATO countries supplied to Ukraine. How and with what weapons will these groups operate?

The Russian Ministry of Defense announced the creation of groups to combat Western tanks. It is noted that the corresponding task was set at the direction of the Deputy Minister of Defense of Russia, Colonel-General Yunus-Bek Yevkurov.

The head of the Combat Training Center of the Russian Armed Forces, Yevgeny Arifulin, on the air of the Military Acceptance program on the Zvezda TV channel, said that the Main Directorate of Combat Training had developed methodological recommendations and organized a methodology for their implementation, and the Combat Training Center carried out and put these events into practice. As Arifulin noted, the creation of such groups is a big state system work.

In early April, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg  announced that the first Leopard and Challenger 2 tanks were already in Ukraine. The TASS agency has calculated that according to the data at the beginning of April, Ukraine received only 19% of all the tanks promised by the West. Kyiv received 57 tanks out of 293 announced, with 43 Leopard vehicles transferred by Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Poland, Norway and Portugal, and 14 Challenger 2 sent by the UK.

Analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of NATO tanks, Lenta.ru noted that the American M1A2 Abrams, the British Challenger 2 and the German Leopard 2 are serious combat vehicles. They are equipped with modern surveillance and fire control systems, have impressive armor, high mobility and survivability.

At the same time, Western tanks have already managed to acquire not the best reputation. So, Leopard's anti-advertising was their use by Turkey in Syria. The first reports of losses among these tanks began to arrive just a few days after the start of their official use.

In turn, the United States lost more than 80 of its Abrams tanks during the two years of the Iraqi war. In addition, American tanks are more expensive than German counterparts, difficult to repair and maintain, and also consume a lot of fuel. As for the British Challenger tanks, they are significantly slower than their German and American counterparts. It is also the heaviest NATO tank, depending on the modification, its weight can reach 75 tons, which not every bridge can withstand.

The military observer of Komsomolskaya Pravda Viktor Baranets among the shortcomings of the German Leopard tanks calls their large size, which makes them easier to detect and defeat. In addition, "another disadvantage is the general booking." “The hull is the most vulnerable, and the strongest place is the left side of the forehead of the tower,” he argues. Among the shortcomings of the Abrams, Baranets notes the sides with weak armor, which are vulnerable even to old grenade launchers. “And the back of the tank is even for BMP cannons,” he points out. Speaking about the characteristics of the British Challenger, Baranets points to the low reliability of the machine, the inconvenience of the crew and the archaic fire control system.

“There are a lot of varieties and modifications of tanks that NATO countries transfer to Ukraine. They have both traditional vulnerabilities - for example, the top of the tower, engine compartment or tracks, as well as the nuances of specific models.

All this is now in the field of view of our specialists, so that the Russian army can give a confident rebuff. It was on this, in my opinion, that the decision to create groups to fight Western tanks was based, ”military analyst Mikhail Onufrienko tells the VZGLYAD newspaper.

In response to the decision of NATO member countries to transfer their tanks to Ukraine, the Russian military-industrial complex is preparing to produce 1,500 armored vehicles this year and thereby present a powerful armored fist to the West. Increasing the production of domestic tanks is an important, but not the only task of the RF Armed Forces in terms of countering the tanks of NATO countries in Ukraine. It is equally important to strengthen the work of anti-tank units based on information about the vulnerabilities and advantages of Western vehicles.

“I suppose that the groups created in the Ministry of Defense to fight Western tanks will include the most equipped units with the most modern types of anti-tank weapons. Our best anti-tank units will be sent to where the use of the most modern enemy tanks is expected. In addition, they will be additionally trained to fight modern tanks from NATO countries, taking into account their designs and tactics of use,” Vasily Kashin, director of the Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the National Research University Higher School of Economics, told VZGLYAD newspaper.

“Currently, the Armed Forces of Ukraine receive several types of Western tanks at once. Some of them may be relatively outdated, such as the Leopard 2A4, while others are quite modern and surpass everything that the enemy had before. In addition, often they can even be better than what is used at the front by our troops,” he said.

“If we talk about the advantages of Western armored vehicles, then the most modern of them in relation to Soviet models have superiority in frontal armor, and are also equipped with more modern means of guidance and fire control. I think these and other factors were taken into account during the development of new tactics for the work of our anti-tank groups,” said Kashin.

“On the other hand, before Western tanks were used mainly in the Middle East. There, the terrain makes it possible for a greater combat distance, so the advantages of these vehicles were fully revealed. How they will behave in Ukraine, we have yet to find out,” he believes.

“The Russian Ministry of Defense perceives Western technology as a real threat and, from my point of view, uses absolutely correct methodological, to some extent even scientific approaches. I assume that the new units will become a kind of methodological center for studying and analyzing the available data on Western tanks, as well as summarizing the information already obtained in practice, ”Vadim Kozyulin, head of the Center for Global Studies and International Relations of the Institute of Actual International Problems of the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation.

“As for the means that will be used to counter Western tanks, I think they will not invent anything new here. Today, the most effective of these are man-portable anti-tank systems and drones, which allow strikes from above, where the protection of the tank is weaker. In addition, it is important to link strike assets in working with reconnaissance in order to obtain coordinates about the location of objects,” he said.

In turn, the expert of the Center for Analysis, Strategies and Technologies Sergey Denisentsev, speaking about the possible means that will be used against NATO tanks, noted that "they are generally universal, regardless of the type of armored vehicle." So, in his opinion, the most effective anti-tank weapons are mines, as well as artillery, which hits armored vehicles while they are in the concentration area and in parking lots.

“In addition, anti-tank guided missiles, primarily aviation, loitering ammunition, infantry anti-tank weapons and the tanks themselves, show high efficiency,” he noted.

“In order to stop an offensive with the massive use of armored vehicles, all of the listed means must be used in a complex, within the framework of an organized defense system using anti-tank obstacles,” the source added.

As has been repeatedly stated , the Armed Forces of Ukraine are preparing a large-scale offensive against the positions of Russian troops in the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions. The decisive role in this offensive should be played by tanks, which for about a hundred years have been the main striking force of the ground forces of any country. The Ukrainian leadership has repeatedly stated the need to create large armored groups of hundreds of vehicles. It can be assumed that it is precisely to combat this threat that new special forces of the Russian army are being created in the first place.

https://vz.ru/politics/2023/4/9/1206770.html

The end result of taking Bakhmut is going to be hardened elite shock troops. My highlight


Bakhmut: Some UA sources report that ours breached the railroad tracks. Yes, that's true, but they haven't been able to attach themselves to the other side until now. That's why I haven't written anything about it yet. You have to wait a bit here now, as soon as they could hold their territory on the other side I will write more about it. The fact is: the station area is boiling. Unusually fierce battles rage on into the night again. In this area Wagner fights hand in hand with RU special units against Ukrainian elite units.
763 views Rémy Lind, 19:42


https://t.me/s/remylind21

Arrow, I would not be shocked if the number was somewhere in that range. As they are the attacking force, will be going in with a poor logististics system (50 gas and repair trucks isn't going to cut it), no air support, and a battle hardened and dug in foe that enjoys a well developed logistics network, can quickly establish air superiority and can hit Ukraine at the front and the rear support areas equally I think we are going to see Russian losses at 10 to 20 percent (dead and wounded) and Ukrainian losses at 40 to 50 percent. Russia will yield a few towns but all those dead Ukes for little to no strategic gains? That may actually be the best thing to happen to Russia since the war began.

Spriter
@Spriter99880
·
5h
The result of the destruction of the bridge in the Chernihiv region. The strike was carried by an air-to-surface missile X-29TD.

This is the one that previously had an IR video. Believed to be the location of a couple of HIMARS and a M-777 etc

Spriter
@Spriter99880

Smart bomb" flew into the ammunition depot of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Kherson region

During a massive strike, the Russian Aerospace Forces destroyed an enemy military facility in the Berislav region, where the Armed Forces of Ukraine concentrated equipment and ammunition.

Meanwhile this is today

Spriter
@Spriter99880
·
10m
Ukrainian media reports about an explosion in the Kyiv region, after which a fire started

They have volcanoes in Kiev?

Prigozhin said Ukr has accumulated 200.000 soldiers for counteroffensive and should not be underestimated. If true that’s indeed a huge number.

Sure if NATO launches a full assault through Poland and Romania Russia will stop it and extract a fearsome toll.

You are missing the point.

When HATO sits in the background giving advice and weapons to Kiev then Russia just has to defeat Kiev, which means nukes are not justifiable.

If a HATO force crosses into the Ukraine with the intention of fighting Russians then they are fair game... I would say Russia would probably nuke the hell out of the western territory they are moving into... no need to nuke their bases because where are they going after nukes fall around them and in front of them... they wont send any more troops into the Ukraine after the first wave gets nuked.

The nukes will essentially stop that attack and any future involvement.

The nukes exploding on Ukrainian territory will wreck an area Russia is probably not interested in anyway... when Germany invaded Poland at the start of WWII Hitler only took western Poland... the Poland they didn't take is now western Ukraine which they didn't want.

Ironically it is probably the bit Russia does not want either now.

And HATO will have no grounds to attack Russia directly because the troops that entered Ukraine can be killed by Russia in self defence... an attacking HATO force cannot demand its other members help it via article 5 because article 5 is about being attacked on your own territory... which is why Turkey can't use Article 5 to demand HATO fights the Kurds in Syria... ironically many HATO countries fight on the side of the Kurds...

it should really not be that hard to spot the fuel. It has to be moved by tanker truck.

Are you really that naive?

Iraq drove Scud missiles around its country launching dozens of missiles each week for long periods and the US military with total air control didn't hit a single Scud launcher before it launched its missile. They disguised them as school buses and all sorts of other vehicles like container trucks etc etc so from a distance there didn't appear to be any Scud missile launcher vehicles at all.

You can bet your arse that school busses and ambulances and all sorts of other vehicles will be modified to carry fuel and ammo and weapons under cover so aircraft and satellites can't see them... if you think it is so easy to stop how do drug cartels keep getting drugs into the US despite all the border security?

The should be able to spot and track these to asssembly depots to the main source then deliver a FAB 1500 glide bomb or 3. then FAB 500 all the depots. Screw the tanker trucks. If they have no fuel to move they are worthless.

Civilian populations require enormous numbers of trucks carrying water and fuel and oil and milk and all sorts of other things as well as food and supplies just to live... it would be very easy to mingle military material in with all of that stuff and then extract it and divert it to military formations as it gets closer to the front line.

Experts spoke about the work of special groups to destroy Western tanks in Ukraine.

I wonder if those special groups will only be tasked with destroying western tanks or if their role extends to trying to capture some intact... or just recover the bodies so to speak...

The result of the destruction of the bridge in the Chernihiv region. The strike was carried by an air-to-surface missile X-29TD.

The Kh-29 missile uses a 320kg warhead, but it is actually shaped charge and designed to destroy the foundations of heavy concrete structures.

The minimal obvious damage belies the fact that much of the damage will be under the structure... a bit like looking at the small hole an RPG-7 warhead makes and thinking it wont do too much damage to a tank.

Prigozhin said Ukr has accumulated 200.000 soldiers for counteroffensive and should not be underestimated. If true that’s indeed a huge number.

It is better he over estimates than under estimates I think.

i would be very sad if russia lost as many as 10-20% casualties. This would strike me as incompetence.

Yeah, that makes sense... some guy on the internet makes a guess as to the outcome of something that has not happened yet and another guy on the internet claims the Russian military are incompetent to get such casualty figures.

To use large forces you need to concentrate large forces which makes such large forces vulnerable to air power and artillery, but then their plan might be to launch large forces split up into small groups and overwhelm them with more targets than they can handle at once.

A desperate last move of a force with not much left in the tank hoping some uber weapons will save the day... and this time the guy in charge is not hitler... it is biden.

My estimates about casualties are not about competency, but because this is the final chance Ukraine has to win something, anything, for their NATO masters. They will fight until they are ground to powder that Zelensky and his pimps will roll up and snort with their cocaine. As such I expect Russian casualties to be bad, but I expect Ukrainian losses to be catastrophic. If I am wrong about Russia's losses (and I hope I am, then wondeful). Ukraine's losses? I do expect them to lose half their forces in this and a lot of their new NATO wonderwaffles. If Russia holds all or even most of the territory they will be defending then this war is probably over within a year.

Well, glide bombs are the real gamechanger it seems. Evident by Ukrainians crying that high troop concentrations can be problematic, staging areas have to be moved back and hidden. It’s not just that Ukrainian AD is degraded, VKS could have used them during early stages as well.

Airforce has much more impact now and the solution is fairly cheap and simple. It’s not easy to shoot down gliding bombs, Ukraine only had few tunguskas and current limited SHORAD is all around capital… MANPAD proliferation means very little against such threats. Ghaypards are too few and they would need to be literally at the receiving end for them to intercept