Russian special military operation in Ukraine #50

How is Andiivka offensive going?

Karl Haushofer wrote:How is Andiivka offensive going?

Yuri Podolyaka:

Avdeevka: situation at 13.00 10/22/23

"Today, by lunchtime, near Avdeevka, the enemy’s plan to neutralize the threat of encirclement of the Ukrainian Armed Forces group in this city began to emerge.

All day yesterday his artillery hammered at the southern Russian pincer. In the evening, with an unexpected attack, he managed to advance along the reservoirs to Peski. And today in the first half of the day there is an attack on Opytnoye and pressure continues in the direction of Pesok.

Obviously, the enemy’s plan is to cut off the base of the Russian southern claw in the area of Opytny and Pesok and force us to retreat to the positions of a year ago, which will certainly remove the threat of encirclement of his group.

Let's keep our fingers crossed for our guys."

Karl Haushofer wrote:How is Andiivka offensive going?

Slow, big losses, UA counterattacks on Terrakon, but moving.

Russian problem in my opinion is getting Ukrainian artillery under control. When this is done, it will be bad for Ukraine and losses will go to Russian favour.

Many conflicting reports, especially from Ukrainian side. It takes weeks for such operation to show signs where it is going

Karl Haushofer wrote:How is Andiivka offensive going?

Much better than the Ukrainian Counteroffensive.

sepheronx wrote:

Yes, US has thousands. Possibly less than you think they do.  

A while ago a number of operational Tomahawks was revealed.
The entire US stock was about 2000 pcs.
It was quite a blow, as it is the only weapon system they can use in a theatre depth.
And proved shockingly ineffective if confronted with reliable forces.
Just for the records, the number of precision guided long range missiles Russkie have used in 404 is more than 3000 pcs, excluding Gerans.
We are not talking about guided bombs and MLRS.

Russia manufactures every bit of the Kalibr from the rivets to the electronics.

America sources major components of the Tomahawk like engine alloys and electronics from abroad, from places like Russia and China.

There is no contest here.

American ATACMS missiles turned out to be ineffective due to countermeasures by the Russian military, writes the Spectator.

“The majority of ATACMS missiles appear to have been intercepted, deceived, or otherwise missed their target,” the post said.

The article notes that Russia has demonstrated a willingness to adapt to any weapons supplied to Kyiv, from long-range missiles to naval drones.

In addition, increasing aid from the West and supplying Ukraine with more missiles will not change the course of the conflict. The Ukrainian Armed Forces failed the counter-offensive and received a heavy blow, the author believes.

“The Ukrainian military did not complete the task, but the Russians built a formidable defensive line and turned out to be more decisive and adaptable than expected,” the material summarized.

https://t.me/iEarlGreyTV/7743

This should not be a surprise. The ATACMS is a ballistic missile system. It has no maneuvering ability. Russian AD systems are
designed to handle maneuvering missiles so they exceed the specs needed to handle ballistic missiles. As for the initial performance
after the first encounter, this is going to be a fact of life. The radar signature of the HIMARS had to be acquired, and this is the
case for the ATACMS. We also do not know what EW tricks are involved in theater.

With the ATACMS we had the same game changer drivel for the past year and half. It was supposed to be some sort of super missile
that the US was "too afraid" to give to their Ukr proxies because it would escalate the conflict. I recall this 300 km range missile
system being described as a big threat to Russia on its own territory. Assuming Russia did not have the AD systems to handle this
wonder waffle, it would have been an issue only for Crimea. Of course, civilian targets inside Russia to a depth of 300 km would have
been exposed. But this was all just a demented wet dream of NATzO swine.

The entire US stock was about 2000 pcs.

Back in the Iraq war the US fired 800 Tomahawks at targets, after that the depots were nearly empty
and Bush had to give a special order to remove 500 or so cruise missiles from the strategic stockpile,
usually kept back for a little nuclear exchange with Russia.

turned out to be more decisive and adaptable than expected,

No surprise when western Generals believe their own lies about Russia.

Results of a Ukrainian attack in the Verbovoye area.

sepheronx wrote:Are you on doomer mode again.

Anyway, why rely on telegram channel's and Twitter? Remember Rybars constant dooming?

How many Russians actually died so far? Is it accurate and proven?

I seriously wonder, do you and others like Ark go through this like a woman on her period every month or is this a weekly thing?

Haha f you. I never tactically doom. I sometimes question the larger strategy. Ukraine is a very impressionable pseudo country. They are just following orders. If the orders changed, and they were told to stop, they would stop. Russia isn't really taking advantage of this.

Backman wrote:

Haha f you. I never tactically doom. I sometimes question the larger strategy. Ukraine is a very impressionable pseudo country. They are just following orders. If the orders changed, and they were told to stop, they would stop. Russia isn't really taking advantage of this.

You and I both know what the Russians are doing. They are attempting to bleed not just Ukraine, but the west. Yes, Russia loses men in this, but they still have a large population, a large (and growing since this year) military and advancing their technology.

Russia is using this to learn how their enemy operates, thinks and its overall capabilities.  And with this, the west has thrown itself in such a dissaray that now everyone isn't onboard with project Ukraine.  Slowly, but surely Russia gains positions while Ukraine loses men left and right and as desperation grows, so will mistakes.

There isn't a rush, but as you noticed, while US is now concentrating hard on Israel situation; the Russians have been moving faster.

If Russia took Kiev, I imagine it would be a massive blow to Ukraine and the west. But it may also quickly drum up demand for intervention which Russia doesn't want.  So Russia is looking to, I believe, do this in a way to slowly get it done, to the point they can single out Kiev and then strike hard last.

Norwegian campaign 1940 price for the Germans was a heavy cruiser, two light ones, ten destroyers, six submarines, and some two dozen of other ships and vessels.
And 250 planes.
For the Allies, we are talking about a carrier, 2 cruisers, 10 destroyers, 3 subs, and around a hundred commercial hulls.
Plus 100+ planes.
We are talking about a two month long struggle against a country that had a THREE MLN population at a time.
Involving maybe a 200k armed men both sides.
It is considered one of the most spectacular examples of great German strategy so much known early in the war.

C'mon my doomer team, impress me with the numbers collided with the Ukrainian punitive operation that runs for 20 months with some 1.5 mln men by now  

Or reconsider STFU because you are dumb or something?

-reposted-

If Russia took Kiev

Wouldn´t matter. The capital of Banderastan is Washington. The puppet regime would move to Lviv or even more westwards.

demand for intervention

There will never be a direct intervention from NATO states. "Ukraine" is great for laundering money, but no one in the west takes
the whole proxy war serious enough to risk a direct war with Russia.

Regular wrote:Some shitty Leopard tanks, Bradleys, MRAPs, Motorolla walkie-talkies mean F all for Russia.
Not to mention, NATO strips equipment given to Ukrainians of crucial components, hence why Ukrainians have walkie-talkies inside tanks, no intercoms, no battle management systems....

Those "shitty" Leopard 2s and Bradleys are still the best NATO has. Examining their chassis will mean proper tactics to attack them will be devised. As for NATO not sending anything recent of consequence, they did send the Storm Shadow and SCALP. Which are the most modern stealth cruise missiles that European NATO has. Plus the ADM-160 MALD decoys. Also, since they are using NASAMS, it is quite likely that Russia will capture examples of the AMRAAM. They are also basically handing out the warheads of the Excalibur and the GMLRS, and now the ATACMS. Which means their guidance systems will be hacked and spoofed. Their HARM missile also proved to be useless against Russian defenses.

As for them getting Russian IFF transponders, that means little, since most modern such systems can be reprogrammed with software. It is pretty easy to make changes.

They also have not captured any Su-57 or T-14 systems. So what they are capturing means little. It does not represent the most advanced Russian technology either.

Regular wrote:Yes, but both sides lose men and this leads to slow down and freezing, be it temporary. Attacking in this war is very costly for both sides. Attrition favours Russia. This is not even a mistake on the Ukrainian part, it's the reality. Eventually, when they will crack open mobilization for pre-25 year olds, be it in a year or two, it will be demographic suicide.

Bullshit. There is plenty of video and photographic evidence of Ukrainian minors fighting in Bakhmut. So much for mobilization not applying to pre-25 year olds. The truth is, the 18-25 demographic is underrepresented because much of the working age population of Ukraine had already emigrated before the conflict started. They had been doing it for at least two decades.

Instead of dooming, best to see this realistically.

sepheronx wrote:

You and I both know what the Russians are doing. They are attempting to bleed not just Ukraine, but the west.

The Russian political objective is to remove Ukrainians from Donbas. Their military objective is to eliminate the UAF. Which one is first - depends on the willingness of Ukrainians to engage in negotiations.

Ukrs under the age of 25 who have not left are still not being conscripted offer still large pool of recruits if Ukraine chooses to suicide by Russia instead of negotiating.

Also bleeding NATO is not Russian choice, Russia didn't ask for NATO and US lackeys to send all the weapons to Ukraine. Would be less painful without this. n.

NATO is losing foreign manpower that they don't have much care (and even called it cheap) and artillery ammunitions.

Yes, Russia loses men in this, but they still have a large population, a large (and growing since this year) military and advancing their technology.

Yes, compared to Ukraine Russia is impressive. Russia is also more impressive than Ukraine in terms of manpower, although it doesn't matter in a nuclear conflict with NATO.
Problem for NATO is that their war economy is weak and to run Ukrainian war machine they have to convert some EU shithole into a factory, because outsourcing artillery shells is not enough. If we consider possible China and Russia as a military alliance, it's not good news for NATO, but China is currently playing it safe and smart.

Russia is using this to learn how their enemy operates

Not really.
But if we got this way, it's not in Russian favor.

Ukrainians operate differently from NATO and won't survive to become like them.

NATO's learning is mostly one-sided. They have untouchable ISR capabilities, they conduct SIGINT flights, collect data on the latest Russian equipment, and maintain continuous satellite coverage over Russia. They even plan strikes on Crimea.

NATO collects crucial information such as Russian friend-foe systems, command and control structures, and the latest Russian combat vehicles like the T-90M. They also inspect drones, SHORADs, walkie-talkies, combat management systems, and more. All of this captured in various states, plenty of intact.

Capturing some shitty NATO equipment as a trophy is not equivalent. The Leopard tanks, Bradleys, CV90s, MRAPs, and Motorolla walkie-talkies are of little significance to Russia. Moreover, NATO removes essential components from equipment supplied to Ukrainians. Very vissible when you see them using walkie-talkies inside tanks because they lack intercoms and battle management systems.

Slowly, but surely Russia gains positions while Ukraine loses men left and right and as desperation grows, so will mistakes.

Yes, but both sides lose men and this leads to slow down and freezing, be it temporary. Attacking in this war is very costly for both sides. But many doomers or Ukrainian fanatics forget, that attrition favours Russia.
This is not even a mistake on the Ukrainian part, it's the reality. Eventually, when they will crack open mobilization for pre-25 year olds, be it in a year or two, it will be demographic suicide.

There isn't a rush, but as you noticed, while US is now concentrating hard on Israel situation; the Russians have been moving faster.

Russians moved before Israeli situation, not sure how it will pan out. Don't be lulled by Israeli lobby, they will go at Russian throat as soon as they can.

If Russia took Kiev, I imagine it would be a massive blow to Ukraine and the west. But it may also quickly drum up demand for intervention which Russia doesn't want.  So Russia is looking to, I believe, do this in a way to slowly get it done, to the point they can single out Kiev and then strike hard last.

Forget about Kiev, nothing is even moving to that direction. Look at battles, Russia is going after Donbas.

They might try to force Ukraine out of the region, putting Ukraine in a tough spot. Because their counter did **** all, what happens next? Fight till the end of days? If Ukraine doesn't choose a path that's self-destructive and shows signs of wanting to negotiate, there could be a solution. But if Ukraine mobilizes its young people (under 25s as I mentioned) to fight against Russia, we might see big changes, because this will lead to irrecoverable destruction of the UAF, demographic suicide and a possible revolution, and a chance of NATO getting involved (although that's not likely).
Watch what Arestovich and co are weaseling about, they are rats that know how to swim.

Regular wrote:

Karl Haushofer wrote:How is Andiivka offensive going?

Slow, big losses, UA counterattacks on Terrakon, but moving.

Russian problem in my opinion is getting Ukrainian artillery under control. When this is done, it will be bad for Ukraine and losses will go to Russian favour.

Many conflicting reports, especially from Ukrainian side. It takes weeks for such operation to show signs where it is going

i am hearing that its heavily fortified and that Russia is working on undermining the fortifications. Why would they not try FAB 9K or FOAB?

The Russians started moving when the Ukrainian great counter offensive ran out of steam and stopped, so they got more active to prevent both sides settling in to a WWI type trench warfare scenario.

If Kiev had signed on the line a couple of months after the start of this conflict they might have gotten away with losing just Crimea, the Donbass, and Lugansk regions... with it going longer there are two more regions added to the list... the addition of ATACMs to their inventory means they now have to put Ukrainian forces 300km back from any Russian held territory, which likely means Odessa and cutting Ukraine from the Black Sea, but will also mean Russian territory reaching the Danube and also Moldova which is going to have interesting implications all round... and if they continue this much longer then there is going to be even less that is left...

But it is all the choice of Kiev... perhaps hitting that American embassy would be useful now... it is essentially running the country.

Regular wrote:

Karl Haushofer wrote:How is Andiivka offensive going?

Slow, big losses, UA counterattacks on Terrakon, but moving.

Russian problem in my opinion is getting Ukrainian artillery under control. When this is done, it will be bad for Ukraine and losses will go to Russian favour.

Many conflicting reports, especially from Ukrainian side. It takes weeks for such operation to show signs where it is going

Has Russia solidified her positions at the garbage dump in the northern wing ? It seems like the Maidan has been violently trying to contested it due to tactical importance of that highpoint.

mnztr wrote:


i am hearing that its heavily fortified and that Russia is working on undermining the fortifications. Why would they not try FAB 9K or FOAB?

Because the platform that can carry them if needed are highly vulnerable. God knows tho whether current Tu-95 is still compatible with them, considering they're likely built in 1990's and destined to either be a Tu-142 or New Tu-95MS that slings cruise missile.

Can make them glide yes.. but their range is doubtful. You would need to outrange Possible Patriot, this needs you to provide the bomb with at least L/D ratio of 16 assuming you drop from 10000 m or drop from 40 Km if the L/D of the bomb are 4 which a typical value.

The best bet is probably Kh-22 or a better Kh-32. The thing is of course whether the missile have appropriate warhead.

Stealthflanker wrote:You would need to outrange Possible Patriot, this needs you to provide the bomb with at least L/D ratio of 16 assuming you drop from 10000 m or drop from 40 Km if the L/D of the bomb are 4 which a typical value.

The Patriot missile batteries are near Kiev or at other places far from the front. It would be way more likely to find near Avdiivka either the NASAMS or a modified Buk.