Russia Ukraine Update Thread - part 2

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

Looks ADMIRAL MARKOV is about to be promoted from frigate to submarine and join the MOSKAVA plumbing the depths of the Black Sea

a reply to: firerescue

Looks ADMIRAL MARKOV is about to be promoted from frigate to

A Junk.

a reply to: firerescue


Various media outlets are saying that Makarov is still burning, but no idea if that's actually true.

If so, the ship is likely unsalvageable.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

Wasnt a lucky hit just a very poor design. Russians did not have the naval comat experience so to be nice they designed very bad ships. There biggest prolems are lack of departmentalization on a US navy ship an area can quickly be sealed off starving it of oxygen and makes spreading difficult. This isnt the first time a fire destroyed a Russian ship the US navy has fires as well however they never lead to the ship sinking.

The next problem more is not always better. Look at Russian ships they have missiles on every available deck space this was the cold war and they thought the more missiles they can fire the more damage they can do. They did not however think of what would happen if they were hit with all those rockets and missiles setting on the deck unprotected.

The Russian navy thought of their ships as spears used for one huge strike the US navy looks at ships as reusable platforms so survivailty is important russians couldnt have cared less.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

So in other words:

Executive Officer Martin T. 'Marty' Pascal: I feel I need a tetanus shot just from looking at it. The only thing holding her together, are the bird droppings, sir.

deleted

a reply to: dragonridr


"Wasnt a lucky hit just a very poor design"


Agreed.

A direct hit on a serious russian design flaw.

I was trying to go easy on the russians now that the ship is gone.

ANother one bites the dust...another one bites the dust...

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

Sent you a couple pm's.

Ukraine launches offensive to drive out Russian forces in Northeast

Ukraine launched an offensive Friday to drive out Russian troops in the northeast part of the country.

The two militaries have been engaged in an arduous battle with neither side able to gain the upper hand, The New York Times reported.

However, Ukrainian troops are rallying to form an offensive against the Russian forces, which are pushing toward key cities in the northeast including Kharkiv and Izium.

“There are fierce battles going on, as well as the transition from defensive operations to offensive actions in the Kharkiv and Izium areas,” Ukrainian Commander in Chief Valeriy Zaluzhnyi said Thursday, according to the Times.

click link for article..


Ukraine going on the offense was predicted a few months ago. Analysts said if Ukraine can hold out until April / May that they would be in a position to go on the offense.

* - Belarus military units spotted heading towards border of Ukraine.
* - Russian talking heads on tv using verbal gymnastics to define nazi'ism while playing the "poor Russia" card.
* - The US is providing intelligence to Ukraine but is not involved in Ukrainian targeting decision.
* - Russia is lying to their people by claiming relatives have died in training exercises.
* - Russian has stolen 400k tons of Ukrainian grain (Russia/USSR/Stalin created a man man made famine in Ukraine in 1930-1933).
* - War crime document for Russia - attacking a town north of Kiev that had zero military present.

* - Kharkiv - Russia tried to launch a counter attack - failed.
* - Large Russian assault force moving towards Slovyansk area / Severodonesk

* - Mayor of Mariupol - 10k civilians killed by Russia
* - British MoD says Russia has suffered 15k+ deaths. Ukraine claims 23k+ russian deaths.


Reminder about civilian deaths - The moment a civilian picks up a weapon / attacks the enemy they are considered valid military targets per the Geneva Conventions / Laws of War.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Ukraine going on the offense was predicted a few months ago. Analysts said if Ukraine can hold out until April / May that they would be in a position to go on the offense.

Pardon my ignorance X, what, if any, was the reasoning for waiting until Apri/May to go onto any offensive?

a reply to: JinMI

It's not ignorance, it is a good question actually. When Russia started the invasion Ukraine's top focus was to protect their Capital and stop Russian advances. Taking into account the fog of war / etc it takes time for battle lines to be defined and to accurately figure out the game plan of the enemy.

Once Ukraine forced Russian forces to stop their advances, planning can begin for where Ukraine needs to attack Russian positions that make the most sense strategically.

So with Kiev and West Ukraine relatively safe from Russian land forces, Ukraine can focus on the Northeast, East and the South. The video by Truth touches on some issues Russia has - namely Ukraine forces are where they need to be while Russian forces are not. They have to be brought in country and placed where Russia needs them per their battle plan. Ukraine, already being present can watch where Russian forces are being sent and plan accordingly.

The moment Russia lost their momentum was essentially Russia opening the door for the entire Ukraine Army to look in and enter through the door.

Now, Ukraine winning the war is not a guarantee but things are looking up for them.


ETA - If someone else who has military experience please jump in and add / correct / refute what I said please.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Is there more of a tactical advantage in the NE vs say the southern regions? Keeping Odessa safe, maybe interuptting supply lines to Crimea (Ukraine has already demonstrated that russias navy is vulnerable), while gaining ground?

I guess what im trying to get at is proximity to russia. Further away seems like the best option for an offensive.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Xcathdra

Is there more of a tactical advantage in the NE vs say the southern regions? Keeping Odessa safe, maybe interuptting supply lines to Crimea (Ukraine has already demonstrated that russias navy is vulnerable), while gaining ground?

I guess what im trying to get at is proximity to russia. Further away seems like the best option for an offensive.

Distance from the russian border doesn't matter as much as you might think, since most of russia's remaining troops, equipment and supplies are thousands of miles away from there, and mostly have to be moved by easy to ambush trains and convoys.

Geograohy does play a big part though, the south & east are mostly muddy plains at the moment, and russia didn't bring the right equipment for fighting in muddy plains.

russia had been relying on moskva, and then makarov, for cruise missiles and air defense in the south, but they're both currently corral reef beds.

Not to mention that losing the south, deprives Ukraine of access to the Black Sea (and the rest of the world through it). a reply to: JinMI

a reply to: SgtEsquire

Indeed.

Although they have the full support of Poland. Air, rail and road.

In my armchair tactician mind, taking back the south, crimea and mariupol, would be paramount.

Id even venture to claim that it would draw putin to the table again.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

Geograohy does play a big part though, the south & east are mostly muddy plains at the moment, and russia didn't bring the right equipment for fighting in muddy plains.

russia had been relying on moskva, and then makarov, for cruise missiles and air defense in the south, but they're both currently corral reef beds.

More reason that it makes sense to mount an offensive from the south.

Im just not seeing the reasoning for striking in the NE.

Im open to hear other opinions or if there are any sources.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: SgtEsquire


In my armchair tactician mind, taking back the south, crimea and mariupol, would be paramount.

Id even venture to claim that it would draw putin to the table again.

In process now, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for putin to 'negotiate' anything with anyone.

Though he will eventually be forced to surrender and remove russian troops from Ukraine.



russia had hoped to take the entire NE, and were still attacking there until the recent counter offensive started pushing them back to russia, which is especially concerning for russia because this will put Ukrainian forces within easy striking range of russia's main staging base inside russia.

The base that supplies all russian operations in the south.

It also puts Ukrainian forces in the rear area of russia's huge assault force near Izyum.

a reply to: JinMI

The goal of any offense in this situation is to kick the opposing military so hard they run back to their own country and leave Ukraine's. The idea is to make the enemy pay such a high price that they have second thoughts of trying to invade again.

The northeast is important because of Kharkiv. It is the like the 4th largest city in Ukraine, the largest city in the Slobozhanshchyna region and is the administrative capital for the Kharkiv Oblast.

The entire East of Ukraine is where Donetsk and Luhansk are, 2 regions Russia says are independent. It is also where Russia has most of their forces located.

The South part of Ukraine is a target for Russia. They want the entire coast to claim the Black Sea areas as well as grab the oil / gas deposits Ukraine located in their territorial waters. They have Crimea, which leaves Mariupol. Kherson and Odessa. Historically Odessa is important because the city was established by Katherine the Great of the Russian Empire.

With Russia's navy being hit hard the chance of Russia taking Odessa is slim if not impossible. The dock portion of Odessa is located directly in the city center. Russia would need a joint land and sea invasion and thus far a sea invasion looks like it wont happen anytime soon.

This is where Ukraine's offensives come into play. Knowing what the Russian primary targets are Ukraine can adjust their strategy accordingly. For example russia has not been able to really push west of Kherson. The population there is tying up Russian forces. In turn Mykolaiv (city west of Kherson) deploys Ukraine forces to positions Russia will take heavy casualties if they try to take that city. Factor in the bridges that have been blown up, any Russian advance is going to be hit hard from ambushes, drones air assets, etc.

The goals for Ukraine is to retake all land that is theirs - to push all Russian forces out of Ukraine territory. Thats means the north east, the east, the south, including Crimea.

That in turns forces Russia into a defensive stance, further stopping Russian advances.

As for supply lines Russia is taking a beating trying to secure their supply lines. Right now I dont believe Russia has an adequate supply line to effectively make a push to Odessa. Even using their troops in Transnistria is not enough to pry the force Ukraine has in the area out of position.

Sure the further an invading army has to advance the further the supply lines. Ukraine on the other hand does not need to go far for their supply lines.

The biggest issue Russia has right now is supply lines, morale and lack of competent leadership. Unlike armies in the West, Russia relies heavily on their officer corps. They have noncoms (sergeants etc) but they are not used like the wests (in the west noncoms are the backbone of the military). Russia, in typical soviet mindset, does not want rank and file troops exercising judgement and independent thought. Thats why when Russian columns get hit and the officer are killed, the units have to wait for another officer to take over to resume their push. That is also the one of the reason Russian Generals / senior officers keep getting killed. Because they have to micromanage the officers, it brings them to the front lines.

The only expectation of the Russian rank and file is to die. Sounds glib of course but if you do some research on the military history of Russia and the USSR, you can see what I am talking about.

Sorry for the wall of text.