very good update. Please could you provide your analysis of the situation where Sweden was told not to supply Gripen fighter jets so that Ukraine can concentrate on get F16s active. But then France will supply Mirage jets to Ukraine which will not stop Ukraine from getting F16s ready. Why are French Mirage jets for Ukraine OK but not Swedish jets? Is this just French posturing. Even if it is it has stopped very good low maintenance easy to implement and protect Gripen jets, which can land and park in diverse and hidden places, plus are more low cost and faster to re-arm, refuel, maintain and service.
France posturing is at least part of it. Swedish fightere? From some small country who havent fougth a war since the days of Napoleon? Cant possible be any good you know.
Tranquilo, es falso la noticia de los Super Etendard, igual que la supuesta donación de dos Mi-171E (todavía siguen almacenados cerca de mí ciudad), mí triste gobierno finge apoyar a Ucrania pero dicen boludeces.
Regarding KABs, probably went unnoticed ZSU started to publish daily stats. You can find those in first operational report of the day:
"According to detailed information, yesterday the enemy launched a total of 3 missile strikes using 4 missiles, 66 air strikes (in particular, dropped 94 KABs), launched more than 3,800 artillery strikes, 100 of them from MLRS."
This is from update that comes at 10am (sometimes later). Structure is more or less the same, sometimes FPVs, Lanc, etc are also reported. But not every time. The last time FPV strikes mentioned it was around 1500 strikes for the day. It is growing, was 1000 just 2 weeks ago. Maybe counting approach evolves. By the way here: https://lookerstudio.google.com/reporting/dfbcec47-7b01-400e-ab21-de8eb98c8f3a Ragnar has kindly included back a page with air strikes historical reporting.
I terms of KABs to airstrikes ratio, it seems to fluctuate. There should be more like at least 2 KABs per 1 strike perhaps. But that is not the case. Most of the days much lower. And I think that air strike is pair of airframes at once.
That can be probably attributed to usage of unguided munitions. So I am wondering whether unguided munitions are considered to be effective on par with KABs, whether it is lack of KABs, or whether it is lack of KAB ready airframes?
"Avdiivka-Pokrovsk… The last 7-10 days, the VSRF reinforced its assaults in this sector. In the north, they are assaulting from Novopokrovske and Kladovyshche"
Kladovyshche is not a village, it means "cemetery"
Good update. Interesting about the CO of the 1st Tank. From what I know, that unit has done a pretty good job during the war. I'd normally wonder if it was an issue of putting an armored unit in the defense as I've seen a lot of tankers who don't do so hot at that (much more maneuver focused and "Charge" mentality), but since the UA has been on the defense so much that doesn't make sense here. Is the commander the same guy since the start or newer?
Must admit, I'm surprised about critique of that officer. Yes, he did excellent while defending Chernihiv. But then... well, nobody is perfect, and nobody said the same officer must always be 100% successful: a lot water went down the Dnipro, the last two years...
Maybe a stupid question, but isn't there a way to protect operating airports from reconnaissance drones? Eg by a propeller Yakovlev airplane orbiting over the airport and ready to shoot down the drones present?
I have no idea. In general I would think that tar book on «How to defend against drones» hasnt been written and that if I were defending I would experiment. Still that idea seems a little resource draining. But maybe.
Yesno: the PSU has Yak-52s armed with machine guns and flying 'combat air patrols' over its forward operating bases, but that's too little. They can't 100% find and shot down every single UAV.
That's why you patrol over "sensitive" areas (of course, that also may attract more reconnaissance drones later). You cannot cover 1.000+ km of a war front
For reasons described earlier: the area was too close to Russia, so the Russian artillery could've hit the construction workers - while Ukraine was prohibited from deploying Western weaponry to hit back into Russia.
That's also why Ukraine didn't hit at the Russians even as it was watching them preparing for attack.
Nope: foremost because the Russians do not care about wasting their troops to get killed while digging their trenches - while Ukraine is even critically short on trench-digging equipment... (so much so, multiple brigades are collecting to buy excavators).
Thanks for the update. You write about the Kharkiv offensiv by the Russians: «Principal aim was (and remains) to distract the ZSU enough from its efforts further east. Indeed, meanwhile it’s sure that the Ukrainians are re-directing the mass of their reinforcements and – especially – supplies in artillery shells to northern Kharkiv, which in turn enables the VSRF to continue grinding forward in the East. « I have no reason to disagree with this analysis and it seems like they are succeeding. However, apart from probably irritating tEurope/Us enough to begin lufting weapons restriction on Russiam areas, it would seem that the front now may be difficult to kaintain for Russia. If the Ukrainians push the Russian troops baclwards, will Putin be able to avoid reinforcing it?
I think Putin’s goal is to give the appearance that Russia is winning in the western press. That will give pro-Russia politicians political cover to cut funding for Ukraine.
Because, if the western populace thinks Ukraine is with the back to the wall, then demand politicians do something to help Ukraine (more weapons, equipment, etc).
We still don't know who were responsible for letting the Russian troops enter Ukraine from Crimea essentially unopposed in 2022... No destroyed bridges, no delaying fight, nothing.
And now Ukraine is paying with lots of blood trying to dislodge these troops from their land.
That can be interpreted also as "old crimes cannot be excused because of today's atrocities".
There's an acronym about that behaviour : CYA (cover your ass). All institutions exhibit that behaviour, in more or less degree. And military and public companies often suffer from that too much
The money will be a $50B 'loan' Ukraine must pay back, BUT the interest from Russian money will pay back the loan directly, and Ukraine can accelerate this by paying as well, or just let the loan be repaid via the interest per annum.
very good update. Please could you provide your analysis of the situation where Sweden was told not to supply Gripen fighter jets so that Ukraine can concentrate on get F16s active. But then France will supply Mirage jets to Ukraine which will not stop Ukraine from getting F16s ready. Why are French Mirage jets for Ukraine OK but not Swedish jets? Is this just French posturing. Even if it is it has stopped very good low maintenance easy to implement and protect Gripen jets, which can land and park in diverse and hidden places, plus are more low cost and faster to re-arm, refuel, maintain and service.
France posturing is at least part of it. Swedish fightere? From some small country who havent fougth a war since the days of Napoleon? Cant possible be any good you know.
NLAW, Charlie G, subs that the US cannot detect. Lots of excellent military equipment from Sweden
We are not disagreeing. But its hard for big nations to wrap their heads around these facts.
And now we are reading about Argentina wishing to unload their ancient Super Etendards to Ukraine... It's starting to become ridiculous.
Tranquilo, es falso la noticia de los Super Etendard, igual que la supuesta donación de dos Mi-171E (todavía siguen almacenados cerca de mí ciudad), mí triste gobierno finge apoyar a Ucrania pero dicen boludeces.
Dear Tom, thank you for the update!
Regarding KABs, probably went unnoticed ZSU started to publish daily stats. You can find those in first operational report of the day:
"According to detailed information, yesterday the enemy launched a total of 3 missile strikes using 4 missiles, 66 air strikes (in particular, dropped 94 KABs), launched more than 3,800 artillery strikes, 100 of them from MLRS."
https://www.zsu.gov.ua/category/news/
This is from update that comes at 10am (sometimes later). Structure is more or less the same, sometimes FPVs, Lanc, etc are also reported. But not every time. The last time FPV strikes mentioned it was around 1500 strikes for the day. It is growing, was 1000 just 2 weeks ago. Maybe counting approach evolves. By the way here: https://lookerstudio.google.com/reporting/dfbcec47-7b01-400e-ab21-de8eb98c8f3a Ragnar has kindly included back a page with air strikes historical reporting.
I terms of KABs to airstrikes ratio, it seems to fluctuate. There should be more like at least 2 KABs per 1 strike perhaps. But that is not the case. Most of the days much lower. And I think that air strike is pair of airframes at once.
That can be probably attributed to usage of unguided munitions. So I am wondering whether unguided munitions are considered to be effective on par with KABs, whether it is lack of KABs, or whether it is lack of KAB ready airframes?
Thanks Zenith!
Thank you Tom.
One note:
"Avdiivka-Pokrovsk… The last 7-10 days, the VSRF reinforced its assaults in this sector. In the north, they are assaulting from Novopokrovske and Kladovyshche"
Kladovyshche is not a village, it means "cemetery"
Well, it is fitting for the Russians to hold a cemetary - they're providing the occupants...
Good update. Interesting about the CO of the 1st Tank. From what I know, that unit has done a pretty good job during the war. I'd normally wonder if it was an issue of putting an armored unit in the defense as I've seen a lot of tankers who don't do so hot at that (much more maneuver focused and "Charge" mentality), but since the UA has been on the defense so much that doesn't make sense here. Is the commander the same guy since the start or newer?
Must admit, I'm surprised about critique of that officer. Yes, he did excellent while defending Chernihiv. But then... well, nobody is perfect, and nobody said the same officer must always be 100% successful: a lot water went down the Dnipro, the last two years...
Thanks Tom another interesting report
Maybe a stupid question, but isn't there a way to protect operating airports from reconnaissance drones? Eg by a propeller Yakovlev airplane orbiting over the airport and ready to shoot down the drones present?
I have no idea. In general I would think that tar book on «How to defend against drones» hasnt been written and that if I were defending I would experiment. Still that idea seems a little resource draining. But maybe.
Yesno: the PSU has Yak-52s armed with machine guns and flying 'combat air patrols' over its forward operating bases, but that's too little. They can't 100% find and shot down every single UAV.
That's why you patrol over "sensitive" areas (of course, that also may attract more reconnaissance drones later). You cannot cover 1.000+ km of a war front
Still, I don't understand - why Ukraine didn't build defensive fortifications and trenches in front (north) of Vovchansk?
That would permit Ukrainians to delay the Russian army and avoid the nasty battle inside the city, which is not the best case for the defenders.
I am reading that Russians are now digging trenches just a kilometer away from Vovchansk...
For reasons described earlier: the area was too close to Russia, so the Russian artillery could've hit the construction workers - while Ukraine was prohibited from deploying Western weaponry to hit back into Russia.
That's also why Ukraine didn't hit at the Russians even as it was watching them preparing for attack.
I don't see that stopping Russians digging trenches NOW, in the middle of battle, and just a kilometer north of Vovchansk...
But probably under attack, which may motivate the Work, But definetly makes it more difficult.
Nope: foremost because the Russians do not care about wasting their troops to get killed while digging their trenches - while Ukraine is even critically short on trench-digging equipment... (so much so, multiple brigades are collecting to buy excavators).
Thanks for the update. You write about the Kharkiv offensiv by the Russians: «Principal aim was (and remains) to distract the ZSU enough from its efforts further east. Indeed, meanwhile it’s sure that the Ukrainians are re-directing the mass of their reinforcements and – especially – supplies in artillery shells to northern Kharkiv, which in turn enables the VSRF to continue grinding forward in the East. « I have no reason to disagree with this analysis and it seems like they are succeeding. However, apart from probably irritating tEurope/Us enough to begin lufting weapons restriction on Russiam areas, it would seem that the front now may be difficult to kaintain for Russia. If the Ukrainians push the Russian troops baclwards, will Putin be able to avoid reinforcing it?
I think Putin’s goal is to give the appearance that Russia is winning in the western press. That will give pro-Russia politicians political cover to cut funding for Ukraine.
yes, i agree, part of it. But this puts him in a position where we cannot retreat because he will then loose the support.
This might backfire spectacularly.
Because, if the western populace thinks Ukraine is with the back to the wall, then demand politicians do something to help Ukraine (more weapons, equipment, etc).
That happened now. The western populace was rather stressed when Putin attacked Kharkiv.
but was advanced in rank to that of a general - what BS is this, sad
Eager to know the name of the "hero" responsible for the failure in Staromaiorske.
We still don't know who were responsible for letting the Russian troops enter Ukraine from Crimea essentially unopposed in 2022... No destroyed bridges, no delaying fight, nothing.
And now Ukraine is paying with lots of blood trying to dislodge these troops from their land.
Crimes of today are not diminished by the crimes of yesterday.
That can be interpreted also as "old crimes cannot be excused because of today's atrocities".
There's an acronym about that behaviour : CYA (cover your ass). All institutions exhibit that behaviour, in more or less degree. And military and public companies often suffer from that too much
Tom,
RE: the Russian interest money to Ukraine.
The money will be a $50B 'loan' Ukraine must pay back, BUT the interest from Russian money will pay back the loan directly, and Ukraine can accelerate this by paying as well, or just let the loan be repaid via the interest per annum.
Hope this helps clarify.
Marc