I must correct the author. Not 70% of the Ukrainian army were traitors in 2014, but a great part of the divisions situated in the parts of Donbass attacked by the separatists and by Russian army. The treason was supported by pro-Russian population that blocked military HQs and other buildings to prevent any resistance and attacked the police stations to get weapons. The case of the fleet based in Crimea is somewhat special because a great part of the marine officers originated from Russia. I advise to watch the film "Cherkassy" about the Ukrainian ship that did not want to surrender.
It's rushist propaganda to repeat the narrative about the pro-russian population. That is not true. A footage with few people blocking a Ukrainian tank in Donbass widespreaded over Ukraine and other countries doesn't prove this fake narrative. More than 2.5 millions of young people of Donbass after rushist invasion in 2014 have left their homes and relocated to other parts of Ukraine, most of elderly left in Donbass. Before the invasion putler used to send to cruise in Donbass 2-5 thousands of provocators and false protestants who arrived from russia by many buses to simulate mass dissatisfaction by the Ukrainian government, which unfortunately played along with that enemy plan.
I have been to Donbass (mainly Donetsk and Lugansk, but some other places too) very many times on business, last time in Donetsk in May, 2014, when public meetings were held in the center of the city in front of the building of the regional administration. Crowds of old people were moving there to take part, some of them like very aggressive speakers. All supporters of Russia were wearing Georgiy ribbons. The support of Russia and of Putin was based mainly on the hopes to obtain more money (salaries and pensions for the retired) and to some extent on the fear of "banderovites" (Ukrainians from Western Ukraine). To say the truth the support of Russian narratives in 2014 was nearly 40%. The factitious reasons for this support are complex but the main being the crisis in the mining industry.
All those meeting were held and organised by paid putin's tourers, so called hybrid invasion before military invasion. Yes, they were aggresive, wearing georgy russian tapes.
Because of Donbass hoped to obtain more money and feared of "banderovites" that's why it's pro-russian, it's a silly justification, don't you think?)
Donbass was one of the most subsidy region and received the most money than any other region in Ukraine because of unprofitable mining industry. Who made it unprofitable it's another issue.
If there really was 40% of occupant's supporters, they all would relocate to russia after its invasion and start of a war, but not to Ukraine)). You are promoting rushist's propaganda.
No, I am not promoting any propaganda. You may as well read Fukuyama about the "orphans of the progress" to understand the feeling of the Donbass miners when unprofitable mines were closed or they did not receive salary for months . Maybe you remember Margaret Thatcher's problems with miners in Great Britain.
Thank you for your feedback. For much of my information I have to rely on external sources. I try to be very careful regarding the intent of different articles. The author I relied upon for those figures sourced them to pretty reliable organizations. Reliable does not mean infallible, of course, and I make my own mistakes, as well. I appreciate the truth wherever it is found.
In general many problems of Ukrainian army in 2014 were caused by the fact that a significant part of the officers were born or educated in Russia. Ukraine was considered a good place to serve and to live, far better than most part of the Russian Federation. The links to Russia were strong in Donbass where in 1930-ies quite a lot of Russians took part in "industrialization" and especially strong in Crimea as a result of Stalin's deportation of the native Tatars and on very numerous retired Russian military men in Sevastopol. After the WWII thousands of Russians from Moscow, Urals, Siberia etc. came to live in Crimea. No wonder that they are anti-Tatar and anti-Ukrainian. Such were the results of the Soviet social engineering.
"Ukraine could ship it overland but that would cost $2.75 per mile while transporting by ship only costs $0.80 per mile. A ton of wheat is only worth $345, so long overland transits aren’t financially viable."
Something wrong woth this figure, it's means that no reason to transport wheat on distanse more than 125 miles.
Yes Canada ships wheat routinely by train over distances of 1,800km to the coast to be loaded onto ships. The farms are scattered, so grain has to be trucked to collection silo's. Plus the grain must be offloaded at receiving terminal, brought to a facility to be bagged and distributed.
Another aspect of the artillery ammunition issue is tube life. It affects both sides. Artillery tubes have a finite life. The more you fire, particularly at full charge, the shorter the life of the tube is. Very bad things can happen. By this time next year both sides may struggle to keep enough functioning artillery tubes in operation .
This is true and something that's concerned me since summer of 2022. I don't have facts for Ukrainian artillery of Soviet or western origin, only one anecdote: An M777 barrel is supposed to be changed out after 2,500 rounds, but one crew found that accuracy and range was being effected after 1,500 rounds so they have used four barrels for 6,000 rounds. I have no idea what the implications are for the rest of Ukraine's artillery but that suggests that there are enough barrels for the M777.
Barrels need to be made of super hard steel, but the method of making that isn't as cost effective as making standard steel. Because of this, the Russians shut down the last two factories that made steel strong enough for barrels and, to my knowledge, still cannot make any. At the same time, there are hundreds of Soviet era artillery pieces in storage and the barrels have been removed from a lot of them. I don't know if Russia is re-establishing factories to create barrels, but it does suggest that they might have issues in the future.
How often would the barrel survive a hit on its howitzer? I mean, when the Ukrainians report about 20 destroyed pieces of Russian artillery, how many barrels will the Russians recover?
There are a lot of unknowns in that question. Simply through extended use, a barrel can burst under the extreme pressures of firing a round. The further the round is fired, the more powder bags and the bigger the pressure (and the faster it wears out). A burst barrel may or may not hurt the crew.
If an artillery system is damaged enough to be destroyed, it is possible that the barrel itself is undamaged. It depends on the weapon used, where it impacted and luck. So that number could range from 0 to 20. I don't have any data on actual barrel recovery from the battlefield. I do know that it's less of a risk to salvage a functional wheel of a towed artillery piece than it is a barrel that may or may not have stressed a section of the barrel, but I'm sure it is done to some extent.
Not to mention cracks forming in the carriage or cradle. Failures of the recoil system. Thankfully I never had a failure on the gun I commanded, but my buddy had a failure going back into battery resulting in the gun flinging it's muzzle into the dirt and trails up in the air. Thankfully no one was hurt.
I have not heard of any foreigners buying land in Kyiv region. Also there were some rumors that selling land to foreigners would be forbidden for several years, but I did not take care to investigate the matter.
I'm suprised that was all they could find of fake experts here in the US but thanks for the share. Its a great initiative. Otherwise I'm hearing the commander of the Territorial Defence forces, Gen. Ihor Tantsyura has been fired and replaced with a one Maj. Gen. Anatoliy Barhylevych, I wonder what your thoughts on this are or its a nothing burger.
I must correct the author. Not 70% of the Ukrainian army were traitors in 2014, but a great part of the divisions situated in the parts of Donbass attacked by the separatists and by Russian army. The treason was supported by pro-Russian population that blocked military HQs and other buildings to prevent any resistance and attacked the police stations to get weapons. The case of the fleet based in Crimea is somewhat special because a great part of the marine officers originated from Russia. I advise to watch the film "Cherkassy" about the Ukrainian ship that did not want to surrender.
It's rushist propaganda to repeat the narrative about the pro-russian population. That is not true. A footage with few people blocking a Ukrainian tank in Donbass widespreaded over Ukraine and other countries doesn't prove this fake narrative. More than 2.5 millions of young people of Donbass after rushist invasion in 2014 have left their homes and relocated to other parts of Ukraine, most of elderly left in Donbass. Before the invasion putler used to send to cruise in Donbass 2-5 thousands of provocators and false protestants who arrived from russia by many buses to simulate mass dissatisfaction by the Ukrainian government, which unfortunately played along with that enemy plan.
I have been to Donbass (mainly Donetsk and Lugansk, but some other places too) very many times on business, last time in Donetsk in May, 2014, when public meetings were held in the center of the city in front of the building of the regional administration. Crowds of old people were moving there to take part, some of them like very aggressive speakers. All supporters of Russia were wearing Georgiy ribbons. The support of Russia and of Putin was based mainly on the hopes to obtain more money (salaries and pensions for the retired) and to some extent on the fear of "banderovites" (Ukrainians from Western Ukraine). To say the truth the support of Russian narratives in 2014 was nearly 40%. The factitious reasons for this support are complex but the main being the crisis in the mining industry.
All those meeting were held and organised by paid putin's tourers, so called hybrid invasion before military invasion. Yes, they were aggresive, wearing georgy russian tapes.
Because of Donbass hoped to obtain more money and feared of "banderovites" that's why it's pro-russian, it's a silly justification, don't you think?)
Donbass was one of the most subsidy region and received the most money than any other region in Ukraine because of unprofitable mining industry. Who made it unprofitable it's another issue.
If there really was 40% of occupant's supporters, they all would relocate to russia after its invasion and start of a war, but not to Ukraine)). You are promoting rushist's propaganda.
No, I am not promoting any propaganda. You may as well read Fukuyama about the "orphans of the progress" to understand the feeling of the Donbass miners when unprofitable mines were closed or they did not receive salary for months . Maybe you remember Margaret Thatcher's problems with miners in Great Britain.
Thank you for your feedback. For much of my information I have to rely on external sources. I try to be very careful regarding the intent of different articles. The author I relied upon for those figures sourced them to pretty reliable organizations. Reliable does not mean infallible, of course, and I make my own mistakes, as well. I appreciate the truth wherever it is found.
In general many problems of Ukrainian army in 2014 were caused by the fact that a significant part of the officers were born or educated in Russia. Ukraine was considered a good place to serve and to live, far better than most part of the Russian Federation. The links to Russia were strong in Donbass where in 1930-ies quite a lot of Russians took part in "industrialization" and especially strong in Crimea as a result of Stalin's deportation of the native Tatars and on very numerous retired Russian military men in Sevastopol. After the WWII thousands of Russians from Moscow, Urals, Siberia etc. came to live in Crimea. No wonder that they are anti-Tatar and anti-Ukrainian. Such were the results of the Soviet social engineering.
"When Russia annexed Ukraine, 70% of army units and 70% of its naval ships joined the Russian military."
- results almost like on referendum to join Russia!
Thanks for the additional update, Don!
"When Russia annexed Ukraine, 70% of army units and 70% of its naval ships joined the Russian military."
May be 70% of army units at Crimea area?
Yes, that was my intent. For some reason I wrote Ukraine instead of Crimea. I apologize.
"Ukraine could ship it overland but that would cost $2.75 per mile while transporting by ship only costs $0.80 per mile. A ton of wheat is only worth $345, so long overland transits aren’t financially viable."
Something wrong woth this figure, it's means that no reason to transport wheat on distanse more than 125 miles.
Yes Canada ships wheat routinely by train over distances of 1,800km to the coast to be loaded onto ships. The farms are scattered, so grain has to be trucked to collection silo's. Plus the grain must be offloaded at receiving terminal, brought to a facility to be bagged and distributed.
Your math makes sense.
Another aspect of the artillery ammunition issue is tube life. It affects both sides. Artillery tubes have a finite life. The more you fire, particularly at full charge, the shorter the life of the tube is. Very bad things can happen. By this time next year both sides may struggle to keep enough functioning artillery tubes in operation .
This is true and something that's concerned me since summer of 2022. I don't have facts for Ukrainian artillery of Soviet or western origin, only one anecdote: An M777 barrel is supposed to be changed out after 2,500 rounds, but one crew found that accuracy and range was being effected after 1,500 rounds so they have used four barrels for 6,000 rounds. I have no idea what the implications are for the rest of Ukraine's artillery but that suggests that there are enough barrels for the M777.
Barrels need to be made of super hard steel, but the method of making that isn't as cost effective as making standard steel. Because of this, the Russians shut down the last two factories that made steel strong enough for barrels and, to my knowledge, still cannot make any. At the same time, there are hundreds of Soviet era artillery pieces in storage and the barrels have been removed from a lot of them. I don't know if Russia is re-establishing factories to create barrels, but it does suggest that they might have issues in the future.
How often would the barrel survive a hit on its howitzer? I mean, when the Ukrainians report about 20 destroyed pieces of Russian artillery, how many barrels will the Russians recover?
There are a lot of unknowns in that question. Simply through extended use, a barrel can burst under the extreme pressures of firing a round. The further the round is fired, the more powder bags and the bigger the pressure (and the faster it wears out). A burst barrel may or may not hurt the crew.
If an artillery system is damaged enough to be destroyed, it is possible that the barrel itself is undamaged. It depends on the weapon used, where it impacted and luck. So that number could range from 0 to 20. I don't have any data on actual barrel recovery from the battlefield. I do know that it's less of a risk to salvage a functional wheel of a towed artillery piece than it is a barrel that may or may not have stressed a section of the barrel, but I'm sure it is done to some extent.
Thank you!
Not to mention cracks forming in the carriage or cradle. Failures of the recoil system. Thankfully I never had a failure on the gun I commanded, but my buddy had a failure going back into battery resulting in the gun flinging it's muzzle into the dirt and trails up in the air. Thankfully no one was hurt.
Thankfully. Everything's fine until it's suddenly not.
"Ukrainian grain shipments..." ...I wonder how much farmland Ukraine sold to foreigner companies so far...?
Here is some links and timeline of Ukraine bill that allow selling of the farmland to foreigners:
- 2019. "Why Landowners in Ukraine Can't Sell Their Own Property—And Why That Needs to Change"
- 2021. "Ukraine Allows Farmland Sales For First Time Since Independence" Radio "Free" Europe
- 2021. "Who Really Benefits from the Creation of a Land Market in Ukraine?"
https://fee.org/articles/why-landowners-in-ukraine-cant-sell-their-own-property-and-why-that-needs-to-change/
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-agriculture-farmland-economy-/31336984.html
https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/blog/who-really-benefits-creation-land-market-ukraine
I have not heard of any foreigners buying land in Kyiv region. Also there were some rumors that selling land to foreigners would be forbidden for several years, but I did not take care to investigate the matter.
Thanks Don for your very informative reoprts
Про танк это серьезно ...
Спасибо за работу
"When Russia annexed Ukraine, 70% of army units and 70% of its naval ships joined the Russian military." - I believe it's "annexed Crimea"
I'm suprised that was all they could find of fake experts here in the US but thanks for the share. Its a great initiative. Otherwise I'm hearing the commander of the Territorial Defence forces, Gen. Ihor Tantsyura has been fired and replaced with a one Maj. Gen. Anatoliy Barhylevych, I wonder what your thoughts on this are or its a nothing burger.