Scrutable

jdc wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 7:49 pm

I have no idea what is happening yet.

The Russians claim they were firing at partisans. So we can rule that out.

Partisans aren't likely to be firing autocannons, what with them being large, heavy weapons usually mounted to vehicles, aircraft or ships (they're pretty much machine guns scaled up to 20-40mm calibre, and decidedly not things that are easily carried or operated by people moving on foot).

That said, apparently September the 17th is a day for celebrating the city of Kherson, so if partisans were to do something, it would be a symbolic date for it.

Could be propaganda, and indeed I can't completely guarantee that the autocannon shot seen incoming wasn't a richochet from the vehicles seen firing.

Could be Russian units fighting each other. That's happened before a couple of times in Kherson, but not with vehicles.

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 7:41 pm

The fact I saw a spectator just filming it on his mobile was... Um..

I would want to get away from there

Yes, I saw one where the crouching camera operator crept partly out from behind cover to try to get a clearer shot down the street at whatever was happening. If they had any sense of what they would look like to the guys doing the shooting... Well, they wouldn't have been doing that.

Martin Y wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 8:05 pm

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 7:41 pm

The fact I saw a spectator just filming it on his mobile was... Um..

I would want to get away from there

Yes, I saw one where the crouching camera operator crept partly out from behind cover to try to get a clearer shot down the street at whatever was happening. If they had any sense of what they would look like to the guys doing the shooting... Well, they wouldn't have been doing that.

Unless they were working together to produce a propaganda film.

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 8:45 pm

Martin Y wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 8:05 pm

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 7:41 pm

The fact I saw a spectator just filming it on his mobile was... Um..

I would want to get away from there

Yes, I saw one where the crouching camera operator crept partly out from behind cover to try to get a clearer shot down the street at whatever was happening. If they had any sense of what they would look like to the guys doing the shooting... Well, they wouldn't have been doing that.

Unless they were working together to produce a propaganda film.

Yes, but what message would it send?

"The Russians don't have full control of central Kherson"?

Yes the Ukrainians might want to push that message, but if *they* staged it, it would be real.

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 9:18 pm

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 8:45 pm

Martin Y wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 8:05 pm

Yes, I saw one where the crouching camera operator crept partly out from behind cover to try to get a clearer shot down the street at whatever was happening. If they had any sense of what they would look like to the guys doing the shooting... Well, they wouldn't have been doing that.

Unless they were working together to produce a propaganda film.

Yes, but what message would it send?

"The Russians don't have full control of central Kherson"?

Yes the Ukrainians might want to push that message, but if *they* staged it, it would be real.

True. This is all speculation right now. Possibly "When partisans turn up the Russians fight them effectively"?, either for a domestic audience, or as security theatre to deter partisans and reassure collaborators.

And a fourth possibility is that a Russian unit got spooked and started firing at shadows/other Russians.

The incoming round most clearly visible is an autocannon round, with the same sort of tracer as that being fired by the Russian vehicle. Presumably, it's a 30mm then. As a rule, that's not a partisan weapon, nor any sort of infantry weapon. And Ukrainian troops are unlikely to have suddenly advanced 30km through a belt of Russian fortifications and turned up unannounced in the middle of Kherson city.

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 9:24 pm

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 9:18 pm

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 17, 2022 8:45 pm

Unless they were working together to produce a propaganda film.

Yes, but what message would it send?

"The Russians don't have full control of central Kherson"?

Yes the Ukrainians might want to push that message, but if *they* staged it, it would be real.

True. This is all speculation right now. Possibly "When partisans turn up the Russians fight them effectively"?, either for a domestic audience, or as security theatre to deter partisans and reassure collaborators.

And a fourth possibility is that a Russian unit got spooked and started firing at shadows/other Russians.

The incoming round most clearly visible is an autocannon round, with the same sort of tracer as that being fired by the Russian vehicle. Presumably, it's a 30mm then. As a rule, that's not a partisan weapon, nor any sort of infantry weapon. And Ukrainian troops are unlikely to have suddenly advanced 30km through a belt of Russian fortifications and turned up unannounced in the middle of Kherson city.

Haven't you seen the Russian propaganda about Ukrainian supersoldiers.

Maybe they thought Blaine was a wimp for only carrying a minigun in Predator?

Detailed thread on the Kharkiv offensive: https://twitter.com/chriso_wiki/status/ ... EY9qTXnBgQ

https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/statu ... ZfB_uRl63g

Russian recruitment poster advertising 10 days training prior to deployment with the 810th Guards Naval Infantry Brigade of the Black Sea fleet

What could go wrong?

The Ukrainian position on lasts night's events in Kherson seems to be that it was a staged propaganda event.

Given how quickly they had a journo on the scene and that the people filming on their mobiles were much more confident and steady than is usually the case, that seems plausible.

It doesn't seem connected to any conventional action of the Ukrainian forces. This was ~30km from the front lines, and Ukrainian sabotage raids into Kherson only exist in the claims of a certain Canadian fantasist.

Russia may have been seeking to reassure collaborators that they do fight against partisans after the death of a noted Quisling in Luhansk the day before, as well as several other killings of collaborators.

That said, this is still just speculation based on limited information. Whatever it was seems to have stopped as quickly as it started.

I'm seeing suggestions that the Russians are deploying Iranian-made drones with some success. Anyone got any info?

sTeamTraen wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 18, 2022 4:10 pm

I'm seeing suggestions that the Russians are deploying Iranian-made drones with some success. Anyone got any info?

Russia has inflicted serious damage on Ukrainian forces with recently introduced Iranian drones, in its first wide-scale deployment of a foreign weapons system since the war began, Ukrainian commanders say.

Over the past week, Shahed-136 delta-wing drones, repainted in Russian colors and rebranded as Geranium 2, started appearing over Ukrainian armor and artillery positions in the northeastern Kharkiv region, said Col. Rodion Kulagin, commander of artillery of Ukraine’s 92nd Mechanized Brigade.

In his brigade’s operational area alone, the Iranian drones—which usually fly in pairs and then slam into their targets—have destroyed two 152-mm self-propelled howitzers, two 122-mm self-propelled howitzers, as well as two BTR armored infantry vehicles, he said.

Before the current wide-scale use of the Shaheds, Russia carried out a test last month, striking a U.S.-supplied M777 155-mm towed howitzer with the drone, Col. Kulagin said. Another Iranian drone malfunctioned and was recovered, he said.

So far, the Iranian drones seem to have been mostly deployed in the Kharkiv region, where the 92nd Brigade and other Ukrainian forces carried out a major offensive this month, retaking some 8,500 square kilometers, or roughly 3,300 square miles, of land occupied by Russia and seizing or destroying hundreds of Russian tanks, artillery pieces and armored carriers.

“In other areas, the Russians have overwhelming artillery firepower, and they manage with that. Here, they no longer have that artillery advantage, and so they have started to resort to these drones,” Col. Kulagin said.

Independent experts who examined photographs of recent drone wreckage from the Kharkiv region say that it appears to be Shahed-136, the latest evolution of Tehran’s delta-wing design.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russias-us ... 1663415140

Doesn’t seem like a war winning weapon so far. The key information that we don’t know is how many drones it took to make those hits.

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 18, 2022 6:04 pm

sTeamTraen wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 18, 2022 4:10 pm

I'm seeing suggestions that the Russians are deploying Iranian-made drones with some success. Anyone got any info?

Russia has inflicted serious damage on Ukrainian forces with recently introduced Iranian drones, in its first wide-scale deployment of a foreign weapons system since the war began, Ukrainian commanders say.

Over the past week, Shahed-136 delta-wing drones, repainted in Russian colors and rebranded as Geranium 2, started appearing over Ukrainian armor and artillery positions in the northeastern Kharkiv region, said Col. Rodion Kulagin, commander of artillery of Ukraine’s 92nd Mechanized Brigade.

In his brigade’s operational area alone, the Iranian drones—which usually fly in pairs and then slam into their targets—have destroyed two 152-mm self-propelled howitzers, two 122-mm self-propelled howitzers, as well as two BTR armored infantry vehicles, he said.

Before the current wide-scale use of the Shaheds, Russia carried out a test last month, striking a U.S.-supplied M777 155-mm towed howitzer with the drone, Col. Kulagin said. Another Iranian drone malfunctioned and was recovered, he said.

So far, the Iranian drones seem to have been mostly deployed in the Kharkiv region, where the 92nd Brigade and other Ukrainian forces carried out a major offensive this month, retaking some 8,500 square kilometers, or roughly 3,300 square miles, of land occupied by Russia and seizing or destroying hundreds of Russian tanks, artillery pieces and armored carriers.

“In other areas, the Russians have overwhelming artillery firepower, and they manage with that. Here, they no longer have that artillery advantage, and so they have started to resort to these drones,” Col. Kulagin said.

Independent experts who examined photographs of recent drone wreckage from the Kharkiv region say that it appears to be Shahed-136, the latest evolution of Tehran’s delta-wing design.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russias-us ... 1663415140

Doesn’t seem like a war winning weapon so far. The key information that we don’t know is how many drones it took to make those hits.

It's worth pointing out that the Shahed-136 is only marginally a drone. It's probably better to view it as a variety of cruise missile. It doesn't have optical sensors, so it can't be used like a more normal loitering munition. The concern is that the strikes are hitting targets that shouldn't be stationary for long, and the Shahed-136 is usually used to attack point targets. On the other hand, it's got very long range, and thus long endurance. It could be they are circling on standby and directed to the target when a target is identified by something like an Orlan-10 recon drone.

Unlikely to change the war much, but could cause quite a bit of unpleasantness. Supply of arms to Russia to aid their invasion is one more reason not to normalise relations with Iran's abhhorent regime.

Per Ukraine Weapons Tracker, we have the first capture of a Russian T-90M main battle tank, the most advanced and modern tank actually in Russian service. The heat and radar absorbing shroud covering it presumably did not protect it against abandonment by its own crew.

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:07 pm

Per Ukraine Weapons Tracker, we have the first capture of a Russian T-90M main battle tank, the most advanced and modern tank actually in Russian service. The heat and radar absorbing shroud covering it presumably did not protect it against abandonment by its own crew.

Presumably NATO experts will be interested in having a look at that...

sTeamTraen wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:33 pm

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:07 pm

Per Ukraine Weapons Tracker, we have the first capture of a Russian T-90M main battle tank, the most advanced and modern tank actually in Russian service. The heat and radar absorbing shroud covering it presumably did not protect it against abandonment by its own crew.

Presumably NATO experts will be interested in having a look at that...

I would expect so. ZSU should offer to trade it for some Abrams or Leopards...

https://twitter.com/bradyafr/status/157 ... 9htDPP20Nw

A tweet with an embedded video map showing the change in control since the invasion started

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 18, 2022 9:14 pm

https://twitter.com/bradyafr/status/157 ... 9htDPP20Nw

A tweet with an embedded video map showing the change in control since the invasion started

Shows how long the stalemate lasted after the initial battle for the north - that map doesn't change for a long time - but during that time the Russian forces and logistics were be degraded.

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:25 am

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 18, 2022 9:14 pm

https://twitter.com/bradyafr/status/157 ... 9htDPP20Nw

A tweet with an embedded video map showing the change in control since the invasion started

Shows how long the stalemate lasted after the initial battle for the north - that map doesn't change for a long time - but during that time the Russian forces and logistics were be degraded.

Exactly, and Kherson is key to that.

Good thread on it

https://twitter.com/WarintheFuture/stat ... 1wHkgLJR-w

There is a lot going on in #Ukraine at the moment. The macro story is that Russia appears to have lost the initiative at every level. But there is also an interesting story to be told about Ukrainian campaign planning. 1/24

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:25 am

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 18, 2022 9:14 pm

https://twitter.com/bradyafr/status/157 ... 9htDPP20Nw

A tweet with an embedded video map showing the change in control since the invasion started

Shows how long the stalemate lasted after the initial battle for the north - that map doesn't change for a long time - but during that time the Russian forces and logistics were be degraded.

The losses suffered by the Russians as they repeatedly assaulted defended positions in the Donbas left them with insufficient manpower to hold the entire line even before significant numbers of troops were lured across the Dnipro. That inevitably means there will be areas held too lightly, and in Kharkiv oblast, the Ukrainians found one. This in turn inflicted further losses, both in killed, wounded and captured personnel, and enormous losses in materiel. Meanwhile, Ukraine's got a (western) brigade's worth of troops trained in Britain alone, and their army is growing quickly while Russia resorts to recruiting from penal colonies.

Found (and then lost - sorry) a Russian side (but not pro-war) analysis. They made one point that resonated with me - the "Russian" forces are actually a mixture of Russian Army, Navy, border polilce, Donbas/Luhansk militias and Wagner type PMC's. The Kharkiv offensive hit a join between 2 of these contingents, which maximised operational confusion on the Russian side. Its also classic Napoleon stuff -attacking the join between allies.

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 19, 2022 10:04 am

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:25 am

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 18, 2022 9:14 pm

https://twitter.com/bradyafr/status/157 ... 9htDPP20Nw

A tweet with an embedded video map showing the change in control since the invasion started

Shows how long the stalemate lasted after the initial battle for the north - that map doesn't change for a long time - but during that time the Russian forces and logistics were be degraded.

The losses suffered by the Russians as they repeatedly assaulted defended positions in the Donbas left them with insufficient manpower to hold the entire line even before significant numbers of troops were lured across the Dnipro. That inevitably means there will be areas held too lightly, and in Kharkiv oblast, the Ukrainians found one.

An interesting question for the historians is whether this was part of a preplanned strategy, or whether Ukraine took the opportunities offered to it by Russia. In particular I'm thinking of the first use of HIMARS. That happened soon after Russia had exhausted its self in the Donbas attacks. Its possible that the Ukrainians didn't use HIMARS earlier so as to avoid giving Russia a reason not to exhaust its self and hold forces in reserve.

Imrael wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 19, 2022 11:28 am

Found (and then lost - sorry) a Russian side (but not pro-war) analysis. They made one point that resonated with me - the "Russian" forces are actually a mixture of Russian Army, Navy, border polilce, Donbas/Luhansk militias and Wagner type PMC's. The Kharkiv offensive hit a join between 2 of these contingents, which maximised operational confusion on the Russian side. Its also classic Napoleon stuff -attacking the join between allies.

Perhaps this one: https://twitter.com/chriso_wiki/status/ ... EY9qTXnBgQ

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 19, 2022 11:30 am

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 19, 2022 10:04 am

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:25 am

Shows how long the stalemate lasted after the initial battle for the north - that map doesn't change for a long time - but during that time the Russian forces and logistics were be degraded.

The losses suffered by the Russians as they repeatedly assaulted defended positions in the Donbas left them with insufficient manpower to hold the entire line even before significant numbers of troops were lured across the Dnipro. That inevitably means there will be areas held too lightly, and in Kharkiv oblast, the Ukrainians found one.

An interesting question for the historians is whether this was part of a preplanned strategy, or whether Ukraine took the opportunities offered to it by Russia. In particular I'm thinking of the first use of HIMARS. That happened soon after Russia had exhausted its self in the Donbas attacks. Its possible that the Ukrainians didn't use HIMARS earlier so as to avoid giving Russia a reason not to exhaust its self and hold forces in reserve.

It's hard to say. I think it's mostly likely that Ukraine's leaders are exploiting Russia's poor strategy and poor operational execution.

Ukraine couldn't really force Russia into a series of costly frontal assaults against prepared positions - characterised by a certain Russian war criminal as beating their heads against a wall to knock it down. Obviously Ukraine's armed forces put a lot of work into prepared positions, but that's because they are useful to have regardless - this is an area where the post WWII orthodoxy is dead wrong.

We can see decisions made with the aim of maximising attrition, though. A good example was the counter-attack in Severodonetsk. If maximising territory held was the aim, those reserves would have gone to the area south of Lysychans'k, to hold there and allow the frontline to stabilise on the Severskyi Donets river. On the other hand, sending the reserves, including the Internationals, into Severodonetsk forced the Russians into an extended urban battle in an evacuated city against veteran light infantry. The close proximity of the opposing forces meant the Russians could not use their substantial artillery advantage, and over a period of a few weeks, Russian losses were enormous. By the time the attack south of Lysychans'k finally forced Ukrainian forces to withdraw - which they did in good order - multiple Russian brigades had to be pulled back for replenishment.

However, while Ukrainian troops inflicted very heavy losses on Russian troops in this period, it was also the worst period for Ukrainian losses. That changed with the introduction of HIMARS and the crippling of the Russian logistics system. Ukraine wouldn't have wanted to wait for that to happen, and from what I can tell about when training started on the system and so on, I think HIMARS went into action the moment the first launchers reached Ukrainian soil. Ukraine's multiple and public requests for western MLRS before this point make it quite clear they wanted those launchers and rockets as soon as they could get them. The American delay - though M270s were provided by Britain and Germany, it took American permission to provide them and the ammunition - on providing that system cost Ukraine heavily, both in the lives of their soldiers and civilians, and in the territory and cities that had to be evacuated and were destroyed by the Russian way of war.

@Woodchopper yes, thats the one.

It's not from a remotely trusted source, but there's rumours about Slovenia sending a few dozen M-55S tanks to Ukraine. These are old T-55s that have been radically upgraded with new engine, armour, electronics and an L7 105mm gun. IF, and I emphasise IF this happens, they won't be for frontline service, but it might put pressure on Germany to part with its remaining Leopard 1s. One of the arguments for not doing so was that the L7 was allegedly useless and there was no ammunition for it - though America's chosen the L7 to arm it's new "Light"* tank, which rather puts at least the former of those claims in doubt.

*No tank weighing almost fifty tonnes - as much as a Warsaw Pact MBT - has any business calling itself a light tank