re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Video of SU30 going down in Irkusk, hit a house

Video in link
https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1584139536057401344

quote:

---

Best video of Russian Su-30 crash in Irkutsk so far
/4

---

Video in link
https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1584108205822849026

quote:

---

Newly published epic video of the crash of Russian Su-34 in Yeysk from 10/17/2022

---

Rybar on Eastern front

https://twitter.com/rybar_en/status/1584157638992228353

quote:

---

?????????? Situation in Starobilsk direction
as of 13:00 Kyiv Time on October 23, 2022

??In the Kupyansk sector, units of the AFU 14th mechanized brigade conduct reconnaissance of the positions of the Russian troops at the line Lyman 1 - Pershotravneve - Kyslivka.
The Ukrainian command expects an attack by Russian Armed Forces from the direction of Horobivka. On the southern outskirts of Sinkivka and near Petropavlivka, the 65th and 202nd battalions of the 103rd Territorial Defense Brigade have taken up defenses.

??In the Svatove sector, Ukrainian formations of the 64th battalion of the 103rd brigade, reinforced by several units of armored vehicles, conducted reconnaissance battle at the Raihorodka-Kovalevka line.
The attack was repulsed with concentrated artillery fire from Russian forces. The AFU units suffered losses. Due to difficulties in the movement of armored vehicles and a shortage of fuel and lubricants, the enemy withdrew its tanks to the Borova area.
Once the weather conditions improve, attempts to storm the Russian borders will resume. Special forces assault squads have been redeployed to Borova to reinforce the group.

??In the Lyman sector, the AFU continue preparations for a large-scale attack on Kreminna from the Torske-Terny line. Additional units are being redeployed to the Lyman area. Ukrainian assault groups plan to attempt to capture the village of Nevske and then reach Chervonopopivka to provide a favorable bridgehead before the offensive.

---

This is a pretty crazy video of very close combat between a Ukrainian tank, a Russian convoy, and dismounted Ukrainian troops. The Ukrainian tank commander is a lucky man.


Video at link
https://twitter.com/TheDeadDistrict/status/1584084551915122690

quote:

---

Russian convoy consist of howitzer towed by Ural and MT-LB runs straight into the Ukrainian 25th brigade fighting near Kherson. Also on the insane video is clear visible the ukr infantry supporting the tank.

---

I've seen other references to this incident, from other sources (I will add to this post as I come back across them)

https://twitter.com/TheDeadDistrict/status/1584077653606219776

quote:

---

I don't know how authentic the video is:
"Dozens of mobilised soldiers have staged an extraordinary mutiny telling how they have no respect for the authorities in Vladimir Putin's Russia."

---

Video in Link w translation
https://twitter.com/TheDeadDistrict/status/1584077653606219776/video/1

Wargonzo apparently stepped on a land mine of some type.
https://twitter.com/markito0171/status/1584212420930678784

quote:

---

???? "WarGonzo" Semyon Pegov injured ??

---

Translated: 4 Urgently 4 Semyon Pegov wounded near Donetsk 4
Details coming soon.
@wargonzo
104.3K 17:32




Translated: Military commissar Semyon Pegov was hospitalized
at the Republican Trauma Center of Donetsk. Open
fracture of two toes of the right foot and lacerations of
the plantar part of the foot. Blown up on the
"Petal". There is no threat to life.

That AA gun looks just like the triple 20mm guns the Japs used in WW2

Not sure what they’re hoping to shoot down with that antique

One of the things we've discussed is the impact of the lessons learned from this war on future US force structures. It's still a bit early for those papers to come out; however, here is a bit of evidence that people are thinking about it.

quote:

---

Today I had some time to ponder a few of the lessons of the war in Ukraine for NATO armies.

Doesn't mean I am 100% correct and everyone will draw different conclusions, but here are mine:

1) Main Battle Tanks (MBT) are indispensable. russia has lost more than 2,000 so far,but this doesn't mean they are obsolete. Quite the contrary. Ukrainians use them competently and have shown that during an offensive nothing can replace tanks.

However due to the massive proliferation of Anti-Tank Guided Missiles ALL (!) armored vehicles now require Hardkill

Active Protection Systems (HAPS). Without APS armored vehicles that cost $10m will be lost to $200k ATGMs.

And it is imperative that these HAPS will be able to detect, identify and destroy loitering munitions (aka suicide drones). Air defense has no chance to shoot down all

enemy suicide drones. This makes HAPS essential and - compared to the costs of surface-to-air missiles or self-propelled anti-aircraft guns - the cheapest solution to protect armored forces.

Even then NATO forces need a lot more Maneuver Short Range Air Defense (M-SHORAD).

Self-propelled Anti-aircraft Guns (SPAAG) like the German Gepard need to make a comeback, as i.e. Stinger missiles are too expensive to tackle cheap drone swarms.
The Swiss and Germans already work on a wheeled Gepard successor, but other options need to be explored, from 35mm autocannons like the Swiss and Germans use, to 76mm ship artillery the Italians experimented with, to Direct Energy Lasers the US Army experiments with, to cheap laser-guided AGR-20A APKWS rockets, to jammers etc.

This capability is also needed to deny the enemy the use of reconnaissance drones over NATO territory. If the enemy can't recon, then he can't acquire targets.

As recon drones fly much higher than suicide drones air defense systems are needed... although I believe the best solution would be air-combat drones armed with air-to-air missiles, like this US Air Force MQ-9 Reaper armed with an AIM-9X Block 2 Sidewinder missile.

Such drones could also shoot down enemy cruise missiles and low flying helicopters. Cheaper laser-guided AGR-20A APKWS rockets might also work against enemy recon drones.

But NATO armies will also need point defense systems to defend critical infrastructure, cities, and key logistic and command locations against enemy air and cruise missile attacks.

IRIS-T SLM, NASAMS 3, Sky Sabre, VL MICA - NATO has the tech, but we need to buy a lot of these systems. Ukraine alone needs now 30+ systems to defend its main cities and critical infrastructure... and SPAAGs nearby to shoot down cheap suicide drones.

To round out air defense longer range systems like Patriot PAC-3 MSE or SAMP/T NG are needed, also because

both systems have an anti-ballistic missile capability.

Now let's go on the offensive: besides tanks also infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs) are indispensable - either tracked or wheeled and with large caliber guns. Wheeled Ukrainian BTR-4 IFVs with their 30mm cannons shot up and destroyed russian BMP IFVs.
In my view 30mm is the minimum for future autocannons... but France and the UK are already moving to 40mm and the US to 50mm cannons (photo), both of which should be able destroy older russian tank models.

Beefing up the firepower of light formations (infantry, paratroopers, etc.) is also needed: i.e. adding 30mm chain guns to Tactical Vehicles (like this JLTV) will massively improve the changes of light units if they encounter medium or heavy enemy formations.

For the same reason I am in favor of adding tank destroyers to light and medium formations. ATGMs cost a lot more than 120mm APFSDS anti-tank rounds fired by a tank destroyer, which also has a higher rate of fire.
Italy's Army is currently buying the Centauro 2, while the US Army is adding a battalion of Griffin II mobile protected firepower vehicles to its light divisions... but with a far less powerful 105mm gun.

Besides more gun firepower light forces also need more ATGMs. And the longer the range of these ATGMs, the better.

Fire-and-Forget ATGMs like the French Akeron MP, the American Javelin and the Israeli Spike can currently destroy every type of enemy armored vehicle... but NATO nations must invest into successor systems, which will be able to deceive or evade HAPS systems.

I would also add quite a few Non-Line-Of-Sight (NLOS) ATGM launch vehicles to all light formations, to allow units to strike enemy armor, which is far behind the frontline.
The newest Spike NLOS missiles can hit targets 50 km away, deep in the enemy rear.

I would also add a lot more self-propelled artillery at every level of NATO forces.

Towed howitzers will likely become a niche capability, while wheeled howitzers, like the French CAESAR, will become the new standard... however I believe that we will see a move to fully automated systems like the German WSPH or RCH 155, or the Swedish Archer, or the Slovak Zuzana 2.

These systems can shoot-and-scoot faster than the CAESAR, have a higher rate of fire, and their crews do not have to exit the armored cabin to operate the howitzer.

For heavy forces more systems like the AHS Krab or PzH 2000 need to be acquired.

Artillery is much cheaper to procure than fighter jets, much cheaper to operate, and uses much cheaper ammunition... even if it is precision guided ammo like the M982 Excalibur or Vulcano GLR. Pairing self-propelled howitzers with precision guided ammo, recon drones and suicide drone swarms will allow NATO artillery to destroy enemy vehicles and troops deep in the enemy rear.
This is the reason I would add suicide drone battalions to NATO artillery brigades, which
should field recon and suicide drones, self-propelled howitzers, counter battery radars and lots of M142 HIMARS and/or M270A2 MLRS - with GMLRS, ER-GMLRS and ATACMS (or PrSM) missiles.
I want the tools to strike every enemy position from the front to 500 km in the rear.

And if I had a say then I would want ASAP an AGM-88 HARM anti-radiation missile that can be fired from a HIMARS and will scan for, detect and attack automatically enemy jammers, air defense radars, counter battery radars, signal stations, electronic warfare systems, etc.

Last but not least: mortars.
Firstly, like with everything that makes loud booms, I want more of them. But while I would change nothing about 60mm and 81mm mortars (sorry infantry - you still have to carry them), I would motorize all the 120mm mortars. Mount them on jeeps, on wheeled platforms or tracked vehicles. They will be faster in and out of action, with better aim and a higher rate of fire; and (unlike towed 120mm mortars) we can mount HAPS on them to protect them from suicide drones.

And like with self-propelled howitzers, the trend goes to automated, fully enclosed and armored systems to protect the crew.

What are everyone else's thoughts about the lessons NATO forces need to draw from the war in Ukraine?

I am eager to hear your views.

---

Look how rusted the inside of that barrel is. I think if I was a Ukrainian tank crew that they tried to hand a T-62 over to me I would kindly say I’ll take my chances as a foot soldier unless I hey had a shitload of reactive armor to coat the entire tank with. Still might take my chances on the ground.

A lot of these you have outlined are already in the works. The U.S. has been experimenting with drone swarms and anti-drone weaponry for a good little while now but the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan didn’t require the need for them so they weren’t put into full go mode but now that the war in Ukraine has shown what the future of war is going to be I expect it to be on the front burner now. I believe a deal is already all but done with BAE to start producing the Archer for our military with a few adjustments from the current model. The army has also decided on a new light tank that could be in our forces by the end of 2023 and will start production in the next 2-3 weeks. It is built by General Dynamics and is purposely being built so that the interior and workings of the tank is almost identical to that of the Abrams so new training will be at a minimum for tank crews. It’s much lighter than the Abrams but still packs the punch to knock out main battle tanks supporting infantry and can easily be airlifted where it needs to go. Oshkosh is already delivering upgraded Stryker vehicles with a new turret and 30 mm cannon. I saw a picture of what the new generation of Abrams tanks will look like and all I could say was DAMN! They look like mean MFers!

As it pertains to Ukraine I’m a pilot so I’m biased that nothing can come close to superior air power and it’s months past time for the west to decide on what fighter they want to send to Ukraine. The F-16 is the obvious choice in the long term but the Gripen is the better one for right now as it can operate on shitty runways that the F-16’s landing gear just can’t handle. Another advantage of the Gripen is maintenance. They can land on roadways or even fields in very extreme cases and their engine can be swapped out completely in just an hour using basic tools so it would t take near as long training Ukrainian ground crews as the F-16 would. Sweden also badly wants to to sell the Gripens too as they were very pissed when Switzerland backed out of ordering them in favor of the F-35. Make a deal to buy 2 squadrons of Gripens and have the U.S. send Super Cobra attack helos that were recently retired. I also think we should have already been sending them Bradley IFVs.

Sure the F-16 can land on a great maintained highway or interstate no problem but Ukraine has terrible roads and the F-16’s landing gear is just nowhere near as strong as the Gripens. You are correct though about pure numbers. This is why it will 99% be the F-16 as the choice because there are so many and so many countries close to Ukraine fly them so parts are easy to obtain. From a pure tactical standpoint if this conflict though the Gripen would be the best choice. It is a very good aircraft and I’m surprised it hasn’t been made in larger numbers and bought by other militaries. The best solution in the short term would of course be to find Mig-29s or Su-27s that Ukraine already can jump in and fly (looking at you Poland) but eventually they will need to transition to a western airframe. The Mig-29s are very outdated and make up the majority of Ukraine’s fighters so it’s a testament to how good their pilots are to still be effective with them.