Tom maybe it's time to take a break from reviews of the war in Ukraine. Nothing changes here anyway, as you pointed out, you can turn on the acceleration of 4x.
I think Tom you might need decaf or a strategically-timed supply of cat photos or something to keep your personal morale ok. It's horrible to watch the casualties in real time, but with half your command staff going "new school" and the other half still clearly Soviet-trained, PLUS the usual insanity-and-inanity from the High Priest Vulture Elite skeksis types in the west, the egregious errors and bad decision-making (and yes, bad decision-making created by political circumstances) is simply baked into this cake. If you keep watching how the (human) sausage is getting made TOO closely, this is gonna do absolutely nothing for your emotional health.
Well done Tom and Don. Excellent detail as always. As i said in another comment, deeply frustrating to see what is happening, in detail as well as in general.
At the very least NATO should be learning what the russian military is morphing into. I hope someone there is doing so 🤷🏼♂️
A healthy operational cycle is determining what really happened, figure out what went right and what went wrong, alter and improve procedures, try it again and see what happens.
There are some successful Ukrainian units that do exactly that. It requires honesty and accountability.
I am not getting it, being an amateur. Maybe some of the pros have an answer:
Russia is running out of artillery and armour. It seems, the only way (unaffected by Ukraines efforts) to support infantry higly effective is UMPKs.
Air defense is not working/used against glide bombs, so the only option available seems UAV strikes.
Why isn’t Ukraine throwing all their long range UAV capabilities against Russian airbases trying to destroy as many SU-34/35s as possible.
I mean, they should have the necessary intel when the planes are at which airbases. They should be able to overwhelm ADs by sending hundreds of drones to selected airbases.
What you say is logical and would help on the fronts. For some reason that seems to defy logic and tactics, targeting is literally all over the map. They hit airbases, then refineries, then ammo dumps, then airbases, etc. A concentrated action against the glide bombers hasn't happened.
Tom is so negative these days that i hope he is a doubble agent trying to spread negative news to ucrainians to make them want to loose their will to resist. If he is not, then something shold be done to improve the situation.
Some news from my country: Norway just orderd 400 amraam today, on top of what we already orderd. (can be launched from NASAMS)
"Simply because just like the ZSU, the mass of NATO forces has no response to UMPKs, even less so to FPVs, and the least of all to the Russian tactics of dozens of infiltrations and infantry assaults run around the clock."
NATO certainly has counters to UMPKs and to some degree Russian infantry/FPV :
1. Entire NATO doctrine is based on gaining rapid air superiority. Counters to Su-34 UMPK + Su-35/MiG-31 escort are F-22s, F-35s and Meteor equipped Eurofighters guided in by AWACS and dedicated SEAD units equipped with EA-18G, Tornado EDS and F-16CJ as well as long range strikes on Russian air bases using stealth (eg B-2 or AGM-158) or barrage weapons (Tomahawk cruise missiles).
I suspect presence of F-22s and F-35s alone would make even 50 km behind Russian frontlines extremely dangerous for Su-24/34s.
2. With regards to Russian infantry + FPVs, that is connected to above.
With NATO aircraft and long range strike neutralising Russian airpower and shutting down Russian IADS, the Russians become vulnerable to air attack but also NATO's far better air-ground surveillance systems ala JSTAR (or its E-11 replacement in the future).
It becomes difficult for Russians to amass any kind of troops or keep them supplied.
3. NATO has a few other counters here too - eg large numbers of highly skilled special operations units that can reconnoitre behind Russian lines and coordinate strikes (and NATO's kill chain is far more rapid than anything Ukrainians or Russians can do).
NATO has access to far better communications, command and control than either Russians or Ukrainians as well as access to things like guided weapons, night vision equipment, satellite recce, ELINT etc etc.
It quickly becomes hard for Russians to move at the front especially in terms of logistics.
4. NATO can also force Russians to redeploy and disperse air defence assets by attacks on Russian assets across Russia eg strike missions against North or Pacific fleet bases. St Petersburg is also highly vulnerable but as we've seen so is Moscow.
Russian IADS is already damaged and a large chunk of it technologically dated and compromised (eg recent Israeli strikes against Iranian S300s but even the performance of S400s against ATACMS).
Russian assets are also heavily outnumbered against any NATO forces. Kaliningrad is small and isolated. Aside from submarines, the Russian navy is a negligible threat. NATO's airpower is absolutely dominant in terms of numbers - US alone has over 2,900 combat jets compared to Russia's 900.
'sustained defensive successes by the 46th Airborne, further'
I would like to say a few words about our successful defensive actions, but I do not want to talk later to counterintelligence. I'll just say the saying 'not all that glitters is gold'
Sorry, but I completely disagree with 'it’s quite likely that it would work ‘even’ against NATO. Simply because just like the ZSU, the mass of NATO forces has no response to UMPKs' The response is simple: destroy the aircraft which launch them. I have little doubt that between TLAMs, PrSM, B2s, F35 & SF, there would not be much left of the delivery platforms after 72hrs. Just look at what the IDF achieved in a limited strike against an S300 equipped adversary.
Thanks
Thanks Don!
Tom maybe it's time to take a break from reviews of the war in Ukraine. Nothing changes here anyway, as you pointed out, you can turn on the acceleration of 4x.
Indeed. Just one more update on the Rickshaws, tomorrow, then I'll be away for the rest of this and the next week.
I does get to you. Especially when you see so much of the conflict and know so much of the background. It absolutely frustrates the hell out of me.
But we here are allowed the luxury that Ukraine does not. We can rest from this, they cannot 🙁.
But in the resting we come back and we try and do what we can. Analysis, debate, donate, try and influence. Try and do something.
Enjoy, hopefully it is vacation
You phrased it better than I did.
Thanks, both of you!
I think Tom you might need decaf or a strategically-timed supply of cat photos or something to keep your personal morale ok. It's horrible to watch the casualties in real time, but with half your command staff going "new school" and the other half still clearly Soviet-trained, PLUS the usual insanity-and-inanity from the High Priest Vulture Elite skeksis types in the west, the egregious errors and bad decision-making (and yes, bad decision-making created by political circumstances) is simply baked into this cake. If you keep watching how the (human) sausage is getting made TOO closely, this is gonna do absolutely nothing for your emotional health.
I forgot to comment that in video (@bayraktar_1love) more seems "advanced auto-targeting" to the real use of "IA" as a final guide. . .
Well done Tom and Don. Excellent detail as always. As i said in another comment, deeply frustrating to see what is happening, in detail as well as in general.
At the very least NATO should be learning what the russian military is morphing into. I hope someone there is doing so 🤷🏼♂️
NATO?
Sorry mate: they can't learn to open windows and let some fresh air in.... ah, sorry: that was the Pentagon Syndrome, too... ;-)
Недавно український експерт Костянтин Криволап дуже влучно сказав:- у росіян комплекс Чорнобаївки.
Читаючи Тома, робиться висновок що в українців:-патологічна впертість= комплекс...
Бо ніхто не хоче брати на себе відповідальність?!
A healthy operational cycle is determining what really happened, figure out what went right and what went wrong, alter and improve procedures, try it again and see what happens.
There are some successful Ukrainian units that do exactly that. It requires honesty and accountability.
Admittedly after reviewing NATO doctrine...damn it but Tom you're right!
No references to opening windows at all 🤦🏼♂️😬🤦🏼♂️😬🤦🏼♂️
I am not getting it, being an amateur. Maybe some of the pros have an answer:
Russia is running out of artillery and armour. It seems, the only way (unaffected by Ukraines efforts) to support infantry higly effective is UMPKs.
Air defense is not working/used against glide bombs, so the only option available seems UAV strikes.
Why isn’t Ukraine throwing all their long range UAV capabilities against Russian airbases trying to destroy as many SU-34/35s as possible.
I mean, they should have the necessary intel when the planes are at which airbases. They should be able to overwhelm ADs by sending hundreds of drones to selected airbases.
Any thoughts?
What you say is logical and would help on the fronts. For some reason that seems to defy logic and tactics, targeting is literally all over the map. They hit airbases, then refineries, then ammo dumps, then airbases, etc. A concentrated action against the glide bombers hasn't happened.
Keep attacking the airbases as primary, not a sometimes target. Force a VKS pullback, to increase sortie distance and time.
Tom is so negative these days that i hope he is a doubble agent trying to spread negative news to ucrainians to make them want to loose their will to resist. If he is not, then something shold be done to improve the situation.
Some news from my country: Norway just orderd 400 amraam today, on top of what we already orderd. (can be launched from NASAMS)
"Simply because just like the ZSU, the mass of NATO forces has no response to UMPKs, even less so to FPVs, and the least of all to the Russian tactics of dozens of infiltrations and infantry assaults run around the clock."
NATO certainly has counters to UMPKs and to some degree Russian infantry/FPV :
1. Entire NATO doctrine is based on gaining rapid air superiority. Counters to Su-34 UMPK + Su-35/MiG-31 escort are F-22s, F-35s and Meteor equipped Eurofighters guided in by AWACS and dedicated SEAD units equipped with EA-18G, Tornado EDS and F-16CJ as well as long range strikes on Russian air bases using stealth (eg B-2 or AGM-158) or barrage weapons (Tomahawk cruise missiles).
I suspect presence of F-22s and F-35s alone would make even 50 km behind Russian frontlines extremely dangerous for Su-24/34s.
2. With regards to Russian infantry + FPVs, that is connected to above.
With NATO aircraft and long range strike neutralising Russian airpower and shutting down Russian IADS, the Russians become vulnerable to air attack but also NATO's far better air-ground surveillance systems ala JSTAR (or its E-11 replacement in the future).
It becomes difficult for Russians to amass any kind of troops or keep them supplied.
3. NATO has a few other counters here too - eg large numbers of highly skilled special operations units that can reconnoitre behind Russian lines and coordinate strikes (and NATO's kill chain is far more rapid than anything Ukrainians or Russians can do).
NATO has access to far better communications, command and control than either Russians or Ukrainians as well as access to things like guided weapons, night vision equipment, satellite recce, ELINT etc etc.
It quickly becomes hard for Russians to move at the front especially in terms of logistics.
4. NATO can also force Russians to redeploy and disperse air defence assets by attacks on Russian assets across Russia eg strike missions against North or Pacific fleet bases. St Petersburg is also highly vulnerable but as we've seen so is Moscow.
Russian IADS is already damaged and a large chunk of it technologically dated and compromised (eg recent Israeli strikes against Iranian S300s but even the performance of S400s against ATACMS).
Russian assets are also heavily outnumbered against any NATO forces. Kaliningrad is small and isolated. Aside from submarines, the Russian navy is a negligible threat. NATO's airpower is absolutely dominant in terms of numbers - US alone has over 2,900 combat jets compared to Russia's 900.
'sustained defensive successes by the 46th Airborne, further'
I would like to say a few words about our successful defensive actions, but I do not want to talk later to counterintelligence. I'll just say the saying 'not all that glitters is gold'
Sorry, but I completely disagree with 'it’s quite likely that it would work ‘even’ against NATO. Simply because just like the ZSU, the mass of NATO forces has no response to UMPKs' The response is simple: destroy the aircraft which launch them. I have little doubt that between TLAMs, PrSM, B2s, F35 & SF, there would not be much left of the delivery platforms after 72hrs. Just look at what the IDF achieved in a limited strike against an S300 equipped adversary.
Thank you.