Russian special military operation in Ukraine #53

Tsavo Lion wrote:
if nothing else, it could still be made into a long endurance CG or intel ship- 2 were lost/damaged in the BS a while

Jesus bloody Christ, can any admin call this helpless case to be sane?
Which will solve the goal as most of his links hardly hit the case?

Tsavo Lion wrote:
Overall, the Russian losses r more in tonnage than Ukrainian:

Of course, country 404 did not have a proper navy

Their largest ship, lost at the beginning of the SMO, was originally built as Soviet KGB cost guard patrol ship.

They cannot lose something that does not exist

Ukrainian AD always finds the apparent building.

But western MSM will claim that it was the Evil Russkies who attacked peaceful buildings.

5 armored vehicles

Just 5? Not much left, it seems.

Extremely expensive method of laying anti tak mines

ISDM is the way.

including within the most crucial fortified area of the enemy, known as the 9th quarter or the Citadel position.

If you know where it is, you can bomb it.

In all, everything is proceeding according to the general staffs plan

Of course it is.

Zelensky doesn’t give them any actual trench-digging machines

Such machines are quite expensive.
Women are cheaper (at least in Banderaland, the beacon of civilization, democracy and human rights).

Good job Gerasimov

Some of us here never doubted him.

how much does russia have left to cover to full capture avdiivka now?

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:

Tsavo Lion wrote:
Overall, the Russian losses r more in tonnage than Ukrainian:

Of course, country 404 did not have a proper navy

still, the Russian losses r not something to be proud of.
The RN lost a few ships in the S. Atlantic, but at least Argentina had a real navy; the Ukrainians OTH use UA/SVs, CMs & AshMs with the help of NATO intel.

Tsavo Lion wrote:
Of course, country 404 did not have a proper navy

[/quote]

They don't anymore.
As for a Black Sea Fleet, his navy has been delivering deadly strikes for two years in a row, being 200 km away from the solid shore where all of NATO R&D developed its laboratories.
With hundreds of missiles hitting the targets.
You can't be so dumbed, so my guess it is a deliberate.

ALAMO wrote:

This navy has been delivering deadly strikes for two years in a row, being 200 km away from the solid shore where all of NATO R&D developed its laboratories.
With hundreds of missiles hitting the targets.
You can't be so dumbed, so my guess it is a deliberate.

Not only, but compare it to the USN which cannot open the red sea

My guess is the USN would fare worse against real missiles , not the houthi ones that have effectively crippled 2 carrier groups

Actually after seeing that garage built missile penetrate Aegis and get into CIWS range

I have no doubt that kh35 would make a direct hit in a Salvo at Arleigh Burke

Westerns are just very nervous of what they are seeing in the black sea

The repulsing of the entire doctrine of western standoff tactics means if they started facing real missiles, it would be a lot worse than losing some soviet Era ships

We would see the pride of the US navy at the bottom of the ocean

This navy has been delivering deadly strikes for two years in a row,..

with many CMs shot down, & lately those ships carrying them had to leave their Seavastopol & Feodosia bases for safety.

..the houthi ones that have effectively crippled 2 carrier groups..

only 1 CVN is there, & it's conducting airstrikes almost daily, while its escorts shooting down UAVs & BMs.

Actually after seeing that garage built missile penetrate Aegis and get into CIWS range

It's possible they decided to use the CIWIS instead of more expencive SAMs; in any case, it performed well.
The USN also has a SSGN there with 154 LACMs, while the BSF has only 5-6 SSKs that must use torpedo tubes to launch theirs.

Tsavo Lion wrote:

only 1 CVN is there, & it's conducting airstrikes almost daily, while its escorts shooting down UAVs & BMs.

Both the Eisenhower and the Ford are incapable of stopping the Houthi attacks

That's 2 CSG that are completely useless against a non-state force, that's a lot worse than Russia fighting NATO

Tsavo Lion wrote:
It's possible they decided to use the CIWIS instead of more expencive SAMs; in any case, it performed well.

Aegis failed and they had to intercept with CIWS within 2km of the ship, we are talking about a garage built missile operated by non-state forces without any ISR capabilities

Tsavo Lion wrote:
The USN also has a SSGN there with 154 LACMs, while the BSF has only 5-6 SSKs that must use torpedo tubes to launch theirs.

It doesn't help that we are effectively watching an Iranian backed militia effectively tie down 2 carrier strike groups and their destroyer escorts with nothing except some coastal missiles that are fired without any serious target capability

IMO the Russian navy does quite well against NATO C4ISR replete with the most modern missiles like storm shadow and Scalpel

The situations are mirror opposites of the other

And makes the USN look really bad - god forbid they ever are targeted by a Kinzhal or a Zircon

..an Iranian backed militia effectively tie down 2 carrier strike groups and their destroyer escorts..

FYI, unlike the CVN-69 CSG, the Ford CSG never entered the Red Sea & is now back in Norfolk.
I would say that the BSF should have 1.5-2x more ships larger than a corvette & subs than normally needed, since it operates in the closed sea with only 1 Turkish controlled deep strait that may be blocked to warships for long periods of time.

Some sort of explosion in a ballistic missile factory in Udmurtia?

That dude is silent when Russia makes advances, yet somehow he always shows up when something bad happens.

Tsavo Lion wrote:
Overall, the Russian losses r more in tonnage than Ukrainian:

Probably due to the large number of inflatable vessels in the "Ukrainian Navy"

Ukrainian forces are reportedly evacuating Avdeevka through dirt fields towards Severne under immense artillery fire. It is also reported that aviation is actively working on the these retreat corridors. The road conditions out of town are likely poor due to constant rain and +40F degree temperatur
es.

ucmvulcan wrote:

Karl Haushofer wrote:Some sort of explosion in a ballistic missile factory in Udmurtia?

Yeah and it was the Urinians I'm sure.  Do you like vomiting up western propaganda and then expecting us to lap it up?

There is not much info out there I can find apart from it being conflicting information. It seems that a powerful explosion was reported in the area of the 29th shop of the Votkinsk plant. The Ministry of Emergency Situations said that the cause of the fire was technical work at the Votkinsk machine-building plant.

Votkinsk plant has apparently two sites, the factory which produces components within the city and the assembly plant outside the city, initial reports were that the plant itself was hit.

As above, the official Russian version is that this was regular technical work, e.g. rocket fuel disposal, but why would you do that in the evening and without any warning during wartime? There have been explosions in the past there, but usually during the day. This could be sabotage or possibly a drone but there were apparently no warnings.

Not sure what they assemble there but if the plant has suffered serious damage it could be a problem.

Looks like all hell let lose at Avdiivka tonight. Make of it what you will but in general they will know by now exactly what they are putting the bombs down onto. This will be a real surprise to both Kiev and NATO, only the US is supposed to be able to do this.

Russians With Attitude
@RWApodcast
Half of Donetsk is shaking like from an earthquake because AFU positions in Avdeevka are being bombed so hard

#from_the_battlefield, #opinion
Sofa General Staff

FAB party in Avdeevka continues. In an hour and a half from 22.30 to 00.00, at least 26 FABs arrived.

The last series was especially strong, perhaps more than 500s - more like 1500s

The main concentration of FAB strikes means Russian forces will try to take over the whole strip down to the main supply route

Ukrainian and Russian sources report Russians are dropping an insane number of FABs on the remaining AFU positions in Avdeevka - more than 40 counted in the last hours - while RF have now basically FULL fire control on the remaining supply route - looks like AFU will be wiped out there in the next 48h - or they will call VOLGA


MD
@distant_earth83
This had never happened before in this war, 66 fab bombs since 4 pm

BREAKING: US Marine Helicopter Missing, Search Teams Scramble Near San Diego – AP citing authorities
https://t.me/DDGeopolitics/100889

More Western officers died in Ukraine

Strange, I have said for probably 6 years that the only Ukie troops that will be shown no mercy are the artillerymen firing at Donetsk. It could be coming true over the next 48 hours.

GEROMAN -- time will tell - --
@GeromanAT
.
25m
I also think AFU will try to break out - but the current mood in the Russian ranks there is as follows:

"Those bastards shelled Donetsk for the last 10 years - we will trap them - and if they do not call VOLGA - we will wipe them out" - and the FABs prove me right.

Plus there was last night and maybe more tonight. More details on last nights strikes in Ukraine.


Sounds like a lot of vital stuff was hit, including:

-another merc/Nato instructor base
-airfield at Ivano-Frankivsk preparing to host F-16
-command posts, a barracks in Kharkov
-workshops
-troops around Kupyansk trying to cross the river
-AFU marines in Kherson, an anti-air missile launcher
-an industrial facility
-oil refinery in Lwow
-Yavorovsky training ground (foreign mercs hit)
-a shipyard assembling naval drones
-positions in Zaporozhye
-Mirgograd airfield
-workshops and warehouses of military enterprise Radar in Kiev (repairs radars and air defense systems)
-AA launchers in Kiev.

https://southfront.press/military-overview-on-february-7-2024-russia-resumed-massive-strikes-on-ukrainian-military-facilities/

1)"Russians wouldnt know if that HIMARS launcher has GMLRS, has GLSDB or if it had ATACMS"

-I dont think it would even matter since they are use to intercepting GMLRS missiles that are slightly more difficult targets to intercept as supersonic missiles compared to slow glide bombs. If they did identify the HIMARS with reconaissance it would be a target to artillery, drone or airstrikes in which why should they care what it would carry if it gets destroyed? Its either the russians find and destroy it or use their air defense to intercept whatever it fires.

2)"if you are the russians and have the air defenses pointed at one sector, you might not be looking at every direction once"

-Well this is true Nebo-m has like a 90 degree sector for tracking 1m2 targets at 480kms but the radar also has a 360 degree sector option for tracking 1m2 targets at 400kms and the surface area of these glide bombs for being 4 meters in length with wings looking like 2 meters long seem to have a bigger surface area then 1m2. Modern IADS nowadays allow main radars and control stations to control or slave short range air defenses to use the radar tracking information to intercept these drones no matter what direction. Even if there was no long range air defenses present or takes a long while to move active and passive radars with the launchers and control stations, etc Pantsir and Tor-M2 short range air defenses can move to whatever direciton they want immediately and some of them cover more radar coverage then 90 degrees as well.

3)"so you take that ability to glide to a target, and then you attach that rocket engine to the back, and all of a sudden you got range and youve got a little more speed"

-So what is he referencing as in a little more speed is he talking about the GMLRS missiles or the glide bombs launched from current aircrafts that can carry them? The 80kms achieved by HIMARs is that it's just an engine with a warhead that flies usually in volleys at supersonic speeds to their designated target areas in a ballistic trajectory. The wings on the glide bomb with the supersonic speeds and G-loads of turning would rip the wings apart so he is probably referencing glide bombs from aircrafts in comparison to the ones getting ground launched by HIMARS. The 1st stage engine launches the glide bomb at the highest point of the ballistic trajectory while the wings allow it to glide at 150kms. But the problem is its high in the air and moving very slow, its not like some of the agile drones that are smaller offering less radar reflection then a bigger target for stealth and fly low enough to not be spotted by radars in which current russian small range air defenses already intercept these targets and will make cheap mass produced new short range 1 meter sized missiles to intercept them. The glide bombs are just easier targets to intercept than kamikaze drones.

4)"price is unknown they cost far less than other long range systems like the ATACMS"

- notice they are comparing costs to ATACMS which is 1.7 million dollars but not to costs like the GMLRS missiles. A single GMLRS missile costs 100,000 dollars but the glide bomb itself cost 40,000 dollars not taking account of the cost of the 1st stage missile that launches it to trajectory. pantsir missiles intercepting these missiles are far cheaper and the newest quadpacked midget missiles would allow the pantsir to carry from 12 to 48 missiles with the intention of those missiles being made cheaper than the drones they will be intercepting. Even if the U.S. somehow speed runs 2030 to an earlier date beating the russians using drones that have neural networking before the izdeliye-53 gets used in battle to make EW systems be ineffective against them, the Russians would already have enough quad packed missiles to deal with swarms.

5)"perhaps you might launch your slower weapons 1st, they start coming in from different angles, and than you time your faster moving ballistic GMLRS or ATACMS to come in and everything arrives in at the same time"

-in order to have the option of GMLRS, ATACMS and GLSDB the target has to be 80kms away, in order to have the option of GLSDB and ATACMS to work the target has to be 150kms away and anything passed 150kms only the ATACMs would work. If you pair modern long range air defenses with short range air defenses they will track and engage these targets simultaneously but lets do the other fun long explanation anyways. If there is a Pantsir-SM 80 kms away this air defense would have a radar range of 75kms with a max SAM missile range of 40kms to intercept HIMARS missiles and the speed of these 12 missiles are said to be like 2km/s or mach 6 dealing with aerial targets in which it can deal with 2 HIMARS. However, lets say it is not paired with a long-range air defense system leaving its targeting and engagement to be limited in engaging a smaller number of targets at a time then 12. in order for all 12 missiles to reach the target at the same exact time the subsonic GLSDB will be launched 1st, supersonic GMLRS will be launched 2nd and hypersonic ATACMs will be launched last. the subsonic glide bombs will be hit at the 40km pantsir missile killzone, the supersonic missiles at that range will be engaged next leaving the hypersonic missiles as the last targets. Reason you need to launch at different time intervals is because they have different speeds arriving at the same location, if you launched them all at the same time to the same target the faster speed targets will be engaged 1st before the slower speed targets at a distance.

6)"although it is unclear how many GLSDB the U.S. will deliver, We're taking stuff that is lying around in inventory and putting it together in an innovative way. Excess-surplus bombs and marrying them with rockets that we have lying around. Now we will probably will need to produce more of the rockets to be sure but the good news is we have alot of these GLSDBs its look for the good enough solution"

-If the weapon was considered useful serial production for glide bombs would happen then just using stockpiles and for the rocket engine production what was said was, "probably" in that sentence. That does not sound like enough confidence for a game changer weapon.