Please, Explain us why comparation with Iran-Iraq is ridiculous. I ma interested why the "techological" level of armament is so much important, when it is entirelly about Managerial skills. But if you have better explanation...
"3. I will add one more factor - completely different potential of industry and finance, the population of the Russian Federation and Ukraine. Iran and Iraq did not differ so much."
Your entire posts smell rotten racism & sectarism. But this part is especially so wild. You are obviously sprouting nonsense out of compulsive bigotry.
Iran and Iraq population have never been comparable. Funnily enough their relative difference back in the 1980s and still to this day is comparable to Russia & Ukraine ...
Likewise, Iran and Iraq have never been comparable in economic terms.
At this point you should just cut the BS and openly admit you consider every non-western white people to be the same sub-human insects. At least you would be sincere.
Iran and Iraq armed forces equipment were as similar as NATO and Warsaw Pact forces. But *curiously you would never suggest NATO and Warsaw Pact forces were similar.
Point 1) only serious superiority in technology is in case of their Iskander SSM´s and some other LACM´s. The UMPK´s are product of mid-level managers invented out of necessity.
Point 2) As I wrote it, this is about managerial skills in military and civilian sector. Motivation is diffrent for UA and for Russians, but there is a lot to compare as both sides now and then see this as their fight for survival.
Point 3) potential of industry and finacial sector: it is not directly coparable, but both side now face their own set of dilemas.
Ukraine simply makes more mistakes then Iranians and Iraqis combined.
Management: "...try to hold the front line relatively stably for almost three years under such conditions. Although most “analysts” predicted the fall of Ukraine in a month..."
Ah yes. Standard exculpation of incompetent Ukraine leadership - "hey look, we are still here". And yes, you are still here but loosing - mostly because your own mistakes.
"effectiveness of glide bombs is determined by absolute superiority in aviation"
UMPK - the weapons which were cobbled together as a desperation move to give VKS SOMETHING to use with enough range to keep them from getting shot down. In your mind these are a reflection of absolute superiority. That's some PHD level military analysis right there!
FYI: when VKS have absolute aviation superiority they carpet bomb from medium altitude with dumb bombs and level towns flat in days or weeks - like in Syria or over Mariupol after the front line got moved out of SAM range. A good indicator of whether VKS has air superiority or not is looking at how they employ their most vulnerable tactical bombers (Tu-22m). If they have air superiority, they are carpet bombing. Without air superiority, they are shooting Kh-22 missiles from hundreds of km away, so as not to get killed.
As far as your earlier comment about Iran and Iraq in 79 both being "religious dictatorships", that's worth another PHD, this time in History.
Religious in the fanatic aspect I guess. Also the superiority of russia in planes and weapons (AA and AG) gives them total air superiority for ground troops support. Which is the thing that matters. Also, unfortunately, the number of GG missiles the russia can deploy is much greater than the Himars/Neptunes the Ukr can. The only superiority the Ukrainians can show is on the sea control but this cannot prevent commercial ships to be hit. Or maybe can if they start hitting the commercial ships directed to russia.
Going to be honest, I dont entirely agree with you but you have debated well. Some good points and others I dont agree with. Criticism of Zelensky is now warranted considering some serious mistakes he's made that people have been calling out since even before 2022.
we are talking about managerial skills of Officers and civilian managers of Oil industry, armament production and ability to lessons-learned. Iranians are much better then nowadays Ukraine elites.
That's about the primary difference. Even if minor. After all, it was the IRIAF that smashed the Iraqi oil industry, in October 1980. Just like the VKS helped smash the Ukrainian oil industry, in March-June 2022. And it had F-14s with their long-range air-to-air missiles, to which the Iraqis had no response (not even once they've started acquiring Mirages from France) - just like the Russians have MiG-31s and Su-35s armed with R-37Ms.
That said, the fault for lacking an effective air force is almost entirely on successive Ukrainian governments. Indeed, soon after being elected, Zelensky slashed the flight time of PSU's pilots from 45 hours a year, to mere 20-30 hours (for orientation: 'minimum necessary' to keep a fighter pilot current is considered at something like 160-240 hours a year).
Before getting Mirages, Iraqiees already had Foxbats with R-40s. With a limited numbers of Phoenix around, R-40s were more than a match for Sparrows.
Sounds absurd from my side, but I protest accusing UA authorities. They did much more within 2014-2022 period if compared with their RU peers. Is it UA fault that Soviets era Fulcrums and Flankers are inferior to Su-35s? Surely, not, no matter how many flight hours you do.
Zelensky slashed the defence budget in years preceding the invasion. It would not have made much of a difference in the early stage, but it did set the thinking and planning of the state, army and the industry. There are a 100 things the UA gov could have done after the invasion, to plan ahead, but they did nothing instead.
Erm, nope. MiG-25PDs entered operational service with IrAF only two years after Mirages did. And while they were a 'match for Sparrows', the type was such a one-way-interceptor, that it never outmatched the F-14.
The Lutch has a design for an AAM (and SAM, based on 'same chassis') on its boards for around 10 years. Which is no surprise considering it was Ukrainian enterprises that were manufacturing the mass of parts for R-77 before 2014, and Russia had no production of that missile before early 2017.
The Ukrainian governments simply refused to finance it. That's ending the discussion about 'they couldn't do anything about their inferior MiG-29s and Su-27s'.
Mig-25PDs came to Iraq in 1979, whilst first Mirages in 1980. So, they saw action roughly in the same time. Should I mention thar the first supplied Mirages were different from the ones delivered in 87-88?)
As per R-77. If Russia had no production before 2017, who'd been arming Chinese, Indian, and other Flankers with Amraamski for almost 15 years?)))
As per UA authorities refusing to finance their own R-77. First of all, they had theit own rather successful production of R-27s.
R-77 is a different story. Most likely, UA factories participated in initial R-77 development back in Soviet times. However, 30 years passed, and many things changed. Very likely that UA was unable to do smth worthy with that regard. Do not forget about massive "brain drain" from Ukraine.
Another thing is that to just produce new missile is not enough. You need to modernise Fulcrums&Flankers electronics as well.
All in, a lot of investments with umpredictable outcome.
Thank you for regularly bringing up that conflict, in the context of this war. Not only is it a fascinating read, but it also forces rabid UA fans to face an uncomfortable truth. How come these "desert subhumans" were so much more competent 40 years ago, than we are today. So far, other than whataboutism and racism, they haven't produced an answer. Maybe one day.
I wish I knew more about that conflict because every time I hear details of it, they seem the most directly relevant to this war. I should read your book.
Most replies here suggest that the "camel riders" are too inferior to learn from. Also, the West has either never fought a real war or it did it badly, so cannot learn from them either. Apparently nobody in human history has ever fought a war that the great ZSU can learn from. Truly a unique conflict, fought by unique states. One could call it the battle of unicorns and dragons.
Zelensky was not the primary destructor of the PSU (or the ZSU). His predecessors destroyed or sold off about 60-70% of the USSR stocks of everything. Shit, it was Yushenko in the 2000s (iirc) who decided to shrink the artillery forces by 3/4 and disband/sell/destroy most of UA's rocket artillery brigades. Among other weapons.
In UA's defense, it's impossible keeping a Soviet arsenal worthy of invading NATO and driving to Germany in 1988 on a $6billion military budget.
All I am saying is that it wasn't Zelly who did most of the voluntary disarmament. It was his predecessors. I can blame him for a lot of things, but this isn't one of them
Correct. In peacetime (24 years of peace), in a relatively poor country it is a high ask for a politician to push through large defense budgets. Money isn't free. It comes from increasing taxes or cutting social programs for grandma and grandpa, who are living close to poverty.
Thank you, once again, for giving us the report, Tom. And as usual, things are shaping up to get only worse before it even gets better (if it gets better at all...)
About the "video evidence of 1000 soldier loss per day"
I'm sorry but I'm not sure to understand. The link you show is depicting material losses, as far as I can see iit doesn't show any human losses.
And the source says more than 5 000 alleged dead in 54 days... that's just 10 times less than 1000 per day right?
I'm just skeptical about the methodology because if there would be thousand of death per day... wouldn't the Ukrainians be so happy to score PR victory by showing thousands of dead russians ?
I mean when they show a video of a biiigggg Russian attack being repelled there's like 6 to 10 vehicles being destroyed or damaged and at best a few dozen killed and injured.
And we know those kind of big style assault aren't happening everyday.
So I'm just very skeptical about this number that's circulating for months now because I have yet to see a convincing methodology to prove it😅
Thank you in advance for your reply and thank you for your reports as always!
re:Kupyansk there were rumors of ru army trying to establish bridgehead on the other side of Oskil. If that is a precise statement, then the only way I can see this happening is that they control the bridge.
re:UAV it seems not the commander of unit, but head of staff of unit.
re: KABs, it seems increase comes at the times of some decrease in artillery, as if trying to replace it (including MLRS). Some say the potential is up to 250 per day. So we may see new heights these days. Safely 50%+ is in Kursk area.
Don has shown in one of his reports recently UAV automatically following and striking human target. I was not aware that this technology is developed. This may be the only solution for "reformed" ru army.
KAB (Korretiruemoya Aviazionnaya Bomba) is the generic Russian term for all guided bombs. But in the current war it's usually used to talk about various guided glide bombs, since those are the only ones that RF can employ without risking getting shot down.
Appreciate your update. As always, harsh but necessary critique of the way this war is being perperated.
I was wondering about something and I hope that you have enough insight into a situation to provide some clarity here. Few months ago we saw Ukrainian drones striking refineries, with and everyone talked how this will be a big strategic change. We then moved to reports about strikes on heating plants, and then drones started hitting ammo depos and airfields. Now as you noted, we're back to strikes on heating plants.
My impression is that the teams responsible for drone strikes are one of the more competent branches in Ukrainian army and special forces, and I was wondering if the choice of the targets was more deliberate and a part of a longer campaing, that had the airfields in mind at the start.
My assumption is, that the strikes at the oil and heating infrastructure were meant to force russian anti-air to protect those assets (as damage to those put pressure on Putin from his oligarchs to actually "do something") leaving other areas, such as airfields more susceptible to this sorts of attacks. Essentially, firstly create a necessity for VKS to spread themselves thin, and then use the gaps in the AA defense to strike the militarily important targets.
I'm, really interested in your thoughts on this one.
It's always the same like everywhere else in the ZSU.
People designing and building such drones, plus those operating them = no problem. They're great. Working quickly, with minimal resources, producing great things.
But, those telling them what to hit... and that's the 'generals' = oh dear...
They have not even a concept about what do they want to hit and what effects they want to cause. The 'refineries' campaign barely began in serious, before 'they' have stopped it. Then they've switched over to powerplants, hit a few, stopped doing that. Then they switched to air bases, hit a a few.... and the same story again.
Eventually, they're happy if they can find somebody in the media capable of 'explaining' what are they trying to do...
But hey: there's so much 'fire and smoke'... Reminds me of Saddam's micromanagement during IrAF's operations against Iran, in 1980-1986 period, or Putin's against Ukraine, in February-September 2022...
Link to Andrew video is confirming visualy 93 deaths per day ( 5000 in 54 days) while UAF is claiming 80.000 in 54 days.Are you trying to tell that casualties are 16 times higher?
... not sure that I could understand that part correctly but the official 'DailyDeadRussian' number published by the Ukrainian Defense Ministry or whatever got several pretty good confirmations along the way. Cumulative it's excepted to be within the +-20% range, and that's quite a thing.
The way I understand this is that losing soldiers = losing combat capability. It is not always dead soldiers, but wounded members removed from combat too.
Last official info from UA side about number of missing UAF soldiers stand 37.000 in April 2024, 43.000 in July 2024 and 55.000 in September, 28.000 more of missing soldiers in 6 months , not mentioning dead or wounded....not so optimistic figures at all. You know Tom very well that for each missing soldier , number of dead is 5-8 times higher
Of those 80K around 25K are kills, the rest are wounded. Andrew counts kills only. Some kills are impossible to show, like a position hit with bomb, artillery or even fpv. Some videos are never released. Some never get traction to be noticed. The actual number, as considered by some field commanders is 20% higher, that in total would mean around 45K per month.
As for the drones on the fiber optic wire. There, the principle is the same as in anti-tank guided missile systems of the "Fagot" type. All the same, only at the end of the cable is not a rocket, but an FPV drone. There should be no obstacles between the operator and the target, because the cable is easily broken, after which the connection is immediately lost. Therefore, such drones can be used only in certain places suitable for their use. This does not mean that the Russians are now not sensitive to radio electronic warfare systems. 98% of drones still stay on radio because it provides flexibility and variability Also, fiber-optic drone operators will need to be closer to the collision line, because the cable is not endless. It is about 5-7 kilometers. Also, they will need to constantly be at heights where they will become an easy target.
Its not the same as Fagot, more like Spike or Almas ATGM, the fiber optic cable works two-way: drone vide feed is sent to the operator, and command from the operator to the drone, in real time. You do not need line of sight, the target can be over a hill as long as the trajectory is smooth, constant speed and there are no really sharp objects between. The wire can rest on grass or trees as long as it is slack.
First, the operators of such a drone are close to their enemy, 5-7 kilometers. This in turn makes them vulnerable to detection. One cluster munition and that's it. Agree that there is a big difference between an operator who uses radio communications and flies 30+ kilometers, and a drone operator who flies 5-7 kilometers. Obviously the difference is colossal. Second, the fiber optic cable breaks easily if, for example, it gets caught on tree branches. Accordingly, you need to look for elevation and those areas where there are no obstacles for the cable itself.
I have some doubts. Those are no cables, just barely the fiber itself: very light, very flexible and dispensed very loosely. Sure, losses due broken connection is expected but compared to the high ratio of losses due jamming it's acceptable - especially since jamming usually means high value targets nearby.
Last time those Ukrainin drone operators lost because due the jamming they had to be close to the events. Close, that's less than a km as I heard.
Also, that 5-7km in this case is not exactly range (as distance from launch site): it's cumulated flight time, just to be precise.
A spool of 10 km of fiber optic cable weighs about 3 lbs./1.3 kg. That means the warhead must be lighter by the same amount. Another spool for 20 km means an even smaller warhead.
The closer you are to the front line, whether it's 5, 7 or 30 km, the more likely you will be detected.
There is no single set scenario for the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of jamming. There are too many factors involved. For every action the drone operator or jammer takes, there is a counter. Then there are counters to the coutners.
- the first mention I could find about fiber optic controlled drones is actually from the Ukrainian side...
- as the drones in use getting closer to the required mil-standard capability set, they are losing that 'cheap' allure they started with and what whipped up the hype so much
- I wonder why they are still not using bridges: with real (optical) cables? Awful lot of good drone operators lost in the last few days...
Just an opinion of a Ukrainian here. Your sarcasm and negativity towards UA govt and UAF decision makers is becoming counter productive, Tom. When you previously joked slightly on the underperformance of certain figures, I for one could understand that it's important and you are not saying everything you want to say. But now you sound like another desperate Ukrainian who realized the depth of problems in the country.
And sometimes I see typical "zrada" statements that are popular amongst Ukrainians, but are wild assumptions in the reality. If you talk to 10 Ukrainians sources and they mostly have one idea, it doesn't make it fact based.
Think what you try to achieve by discussing UA problems at length. The immediate reaction would be - why should we help UA when there are so many issues there. It takes someone battered with zrada to actually not lose the motivation to push for more help.
Can I make a suggestion. Regardless of the criticism of Ukraines leadership-fitting, as many have confirmed- its clear that you 100% believe we should still support the guys and gals on the ground. Perhaps after such sections of criticism, add a small section along the lines of "BUT we should continue to support Ukraine because X and that is why I am running/promoting the fundraisers Y&Z"
Exactly. Looking at the broad picture of your posts, its clear you are in no way advocating abandoning support for Ukraine by criticizing its leaders. But it is unfortunately human nature to 'believe the latest thing you hear'- although having read 95% of your posts, even i had to stop and think sometimes what your motives were after such sobering reports. To be clear, this is not your fault. Perhaps I am impressionable, but I think that's common. I'm just saying one or two sentences at the end of such sobering commentary along the lines of "but we should continue to support Ukraine..." would go a long way
As a Ukrainian officer in active service, able to watch both govt/MOD and top- to brigade-level HQ decisions, I'd say Tom's level of criticism is rather soft. The level of stupidity and irresponcibility on the top is awful and just rising.
30-40% of brigade-level HQs are good or at least adequate. There are some bright spots even above brigade level. The higher - the worse, because the officers there are generally post-soviet indifferent dumbheads.
What of other 60-70% of brigade HQs? Also post Soviet dumbheads? Lack of leadership experience due to rapid army expansion? Also, i know it may be too late for the current conflict, but do you see an improvement due to the good guys rising up through the ranks (and incompetent retiring), or would the culture persist?
Is it worth to focus on this? Will it help somehow? Would they read Tom's reports and start doing something differently? If there is a chance that this critics will help, I'm all for it. I'm just afraid that it will only cause more harm.
There is an old adage that a war is lost when a country or a military starts lying to itself.
UA leadership did an amazing job of lifting the fighting spirit of the country in the first few days and months by lying and flooding the zone with BS peremoga propaganda. It was unfortunate but necessary. Problem is - they never stopped, and we live in an environment where telling the truth about difficulties and problems is considered "disloyal" or "doing harm". But facing the reality of events is a necessary first step to fixing the problems, while staying in an endless cycle of BS is just letting problems continue.
The thing with reality is, it always becomes apparent to everyone, sooner or later. Successful organizations make that difficult realization early and marry to adjust. Unsuccessful ones don't face reality until failure.
Oh how I hate people dismissing criticism as "counter-productive". Words have meaning, they are not just feces to throw at something you don't like. On top of it, even if you really believe what you say, focus on the part where the criticism is true and come up with the productive suggestions yourself.
As an outsider reading this I have now problem understanding Tom. He wants Ukraine to win, and his criticism is towards the leadership of Ukraine (and the West), not towards Ukrainia. I understand that for a Ukrainian it is extremely difficult and frustrating to read. However the support of Tom towards Ukraine is never in doubt by a redder of his blog. If you disagree with his analysis I think that is fine. Hell, if sudenly Ukraine pulled a major victory somewhere along the front I am pretty sure Tom would be happy. As would ai.
There's an insane amount of learned helplessness. The biggest reason you see so much volunteering is because people don't even attempt at fixing "the system".
How can someone writte a 30 minute long post about a “dreamland” and at the same time claim that Ukrainian losses in Kursk are only 400+ KIA while Russia lost 20.000 there alone, and 54.000 dead in the past 2 months?
You folks need to understand that people nowadays are more sensitive on losses than they were back in WW1/2, and the Russians are no exception.
Sure, they are definitely more tolerant than people are in the west… which, when you take into consideration how much Russia suffered during WW2 (only 80 years ago) isn’t that odd… they are kinda used to it, but western propaganda, together with pro-Ukrainian “experts” which offer “alternative” views, used this to portray the Russian army and society as if these are exactly the same today.
Yes, many things are the same or similar, but many are not.
For the last decade or two Russia is living comfortable, materialistic “western style” of life and that period was more than enough to change many peoples perspective about topics such as war and losses… As someone coming from small ex-communist, Slavic, orthodox country with profound relations with Russia for the last 200 years… from a country that fought five wars (including two World wars and one civil war in which entire western world was against it) over the last 100 years and has been “subjected” to western way of life and thinking for the past 24 years, I know what I’m talking about. People in my country are tired of war, and so are the Russians, but they are much bigger and more powerful so that, if needed, they’ll fight anyway…
Think for a second - if thousands were getting killed and wounded every day, we would have seen by now mass desertions and complaints from soldiers themselves on media every single day, but that’s simply not what is happening. We get to see that kind of stuff only from time to time, occasionally.
Now, let’s take a look at how many Russian troops have gonne through Ukraine and how big their losses might be.
Before the partial mobilization took place in September 2022. Russia had no more than 300.000 boots on the ground combined (RuAF, LDNR, Wagner); with another 300.000 newly mobilized and 50.000 recruited prisoners in the ranks of PMC Wagner, we get to around 630.000 troops…
Now, on contrary to what many people think, there were no 30.000 volunteers a month joining the Russian army but rather a few thousand… of course, many people from seized Ukrainian territories (later integrated into Russia), as well as those from smaller republics within Russia, have been mobilized this way or another (under the radar if you like), but even in that case there was not a point reached where Russian forces exceeded much more than 700.000 troops.
So, how big their losses could be?
At most, given how big the frontline is and the fact that Russia is on the offensive practically everywhere for almost a full year, we could be speaking of 350.000 man, but more realistic figure would be anywhere between 200 and 350 thousand.
Remember, Ukraine lacks EVERYTHING - from manpower and artillery (shells) to airplanes… and these problems do not exist from yesterday, but ever since the 2023. counteroffensive ended (failed)…
My question goes: how is Ukraine able to inflict such massive losses on the Russians? With what weaponry? With what personnel?
There are few importan factors that enabled Ukrainian army to withstand Russian assaults relatively successful in the past (until the start of this year):
1) lack of troops in Russian army (not only Russia failed to achieve a neccessary 3:1 ratio advantage, or even 2:1, but Ukraine was able to surpass during initial phase of the war and consequently reclaim Kharkiv and Kherson… so Russia was forced to shift to a new strategy of systematically destroying the enemy relying on more numerous artillery and other means, hoping that by doing so it will change the ballance in their favour… the result of this strategy we see today);
2) drones (I still remember the words of a Ukrainian soldier saying that, if there weren’t for drones…)
3) it being the defending side, making it (at least in theory) easier to inflict casualties;
4) NATO support;
5) Poor Russian tactics and inability (thanks to incompetence and corruption) to use sophisticated weapons to full potential (one of the best examples were the Su-34 bombers using “dumb” unguided rockets during opening months of the war)
Since drones are Ukraine’s main tool in this war, they are usually being used to strike Russian vehicles from which, when getting imobile, infantry dismounts and tries to retreat or continue commencing attack, but eventually gets chased by other drones (and artillery)… in such cases we wittness no more than few dozen Russian casualties, sometimes even less… knowing that Russia rarely conducts such mechanized assaults, or better said, it rarely performs simultaneous assaults of that type on multiple fronts, there is no way their daily losses exceed a couple of hundred man… and Tom should know this, since he often likes to remind us how Russia has lost the potential to carry out large mechanized assaults and how it is limited to such small scale offensives.
Also, how is that Ukrainian unit “smashing” Russians in Selidove when videos emerged yesterday depicting almost intact city, meaning there were no fierce fighting in it?
> how much Russia suffered during WW2 (only 80 years ago)
Reminder that only a couple percent of Russian territory were occupied by Germany while 100% of Ukraine was. Most losses per-capita were Belarussian then Ukrainian. Russians steal everything even the victimhood.
As for the rest: that which is asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
Questionable claims followed by "you should know this" is such top-tier debating technique, I'm in awe.
If we focus purely on total numbers and not per capita losses, ethnic Russians still lost many millions of people in WW2. From a per capita perspective much more than Americans or British or those who mainly didn't fight but were occupied like France or Belgium.
There is no reliable data on this. Soviet Union and its predecessor did not count local ethnicities the way is done nowadays in democratic countries. A lot of those "ethnic Russians" night not think of themselves as Russians.
Some of your conclusions are well observed. However, many czech and slovak volunteers who activelly fight there (mostly on UA side but few from Russian side) say thet there is big discrepancy between regular pre-war kontrakt soldiers and mobilised since 20222-2023. Many of recently mobilised are guys from wery poor sectors of society, like construction workers adjusted to daily hardship.
I am not sure is Serbia is really fully comparable to Russia. What would cause fatigue in Serbia does not mean that it cause same in Russia.
RE: loses
Confirmed by graves and obituaries is around 74.000 KIA for russian side. Nobody knows how many are in oficial statistics as "missing" or how many were permanently disabled from Armed forces because of injury. My own estimate of russian loses is 80-100 KIA a day. With final counting 125-135.000 permanently lost (KIA/Missing/injured and disabled).
I can agree that they lose that much KIA, because as I said, Ukraine lacks everything - artillery and shells - to produce heavy casualties, so what favours them is that they are defending and using drones as their most valuable asset… and these are getting jammed/shot down in great numbers and we only get to see the ones that “pass”, and even than not to many Russians are put out of action, because simply they don’t conduct large scale attacks (in hundred let alone thousands)… mostly their armored vehicles suffer…
Please, Explain us why comparation with Iran-Iraq is ridiculous. I ma interested why the "techological" level of armament is so much important, when it is entirelly about Managerial skills. But if you have better explanation...
"3. I will add one more factor - completely different potential of industry and finance, the population of the Russian Federation and Ukraine. Iran and Iraq did not differ so much."
Your entire posts smell rotten racism & sectarism. But this part is especially so wild. You are obviously sprouting nonsense out of compulsive bigotry.
Iran and Iraq population have never been comparable. Funnily enough their relative difference back in the 1980s and still to this day is comparable to Russia & Ukraine ...
Likewise, Iran and Iraq have never been comparable in economic terms.
At this point you should just cut the BS and openly admit you consider every non-western white people to be the same sub-human insects. At least you would be sincere.
Thanks for confirming my accusations.
Iran and Iraq armed forces equipment were as similar as NATO and Warsaw Pact forces. But *curiously you would never suggest NATO and Warsaw Pact forces were similar.
What a clown
You dont know much about Iraqi army and Iranian army 1980-88. Sorry its not my fault.
Point 1) only serious superiority in technology is in case of their Iskander SSM´s and some other LACM´s. The UMPK´s are product of mid-level managers invented out of necessity.
Point 2) As I wrote it, this is about managerial skills in military and civilian sector. Motivation is diffrent for UA and for Russians, but there is a lot to compare as both sides now and then see this as their fight for survival.
Point 3) potential of industry and finacial sector: it is not directly coparable, but both side now face their own set of dilemas.
Ukraine simply makes more mistakes then Iranians and Iraqis combined.
Management: "...try to hold the front line relatively stably for almost three years under such conditions. Although most “analysts” predicted the fall of Ukraine in a month..."
Ah yes. Standard exculpation of incompetent Ukraine leadership - "hey look, we are still here". And yes, you are still here but loosing - mostly because your own mistakes.
"effectiveness of glide bombs is determined by absolute superiority in aviation"
UMPK - the weapons which were cobbled together as a desperation move to give VKS SOMETHING to use with enough range to keep them from getting shot down. In your mind these are a reflection of absolute superiority. That's some PHD level military analysis right there!
FYI: when VKS have absolute aviation superiority they carpet bomb from medium altitude with dumb bombs and level towns flat in days or weeks - like in Syria or over Mariupol after the front line got moved out of SAM range. A good indicator of whether VKS has air superiority or not is looking at how they employ their most vulnerable tactical bombers (Tu-22m). If they have air superiority, they are carpet bombing. Without air superiority, they are shooting Kh-22 missiles from hundreds of km away, so as not to get killed.
As far as your earlier comment about Iran and Iraq in 79 both being "religious dictatorships", that's worth another PHD, this time in History.
Religious in the fanatic aspect I guess. Also the superiority of russia in planes and weapons (AA and AG) gives them total air superiority for ground troops support. Which is the thing that matters. Also, unfortunately, the number of GG missiles the russia can deploy is much greater than the Himars/Neptunes the Ukr can. The only superiority the Ukrainians can show is on the sea control but this cannot prevent commercial ships to be hit. Or maybe can if they start hitting the commercial ships directed to russia.
Going to be honest, I dont entirely agree with you but you have debated well. Some good points and others I dont agree with. Criticism of Zelensky is now warranted considering some serious mistakes he's made that people have been calling out since even before 2022.
its sad, but UA political elites and military hierarchy are making the same mistakes, they were doing in march-april 2022.
" millions of people of draft age have left Ukraine abroad, "
Millions? Bullshit.
Same for Russia, except most estinates show higher numbers of Russians which makes sense as Russia is a larger country
Yeah. a typical reaction. Thanks for confirming me.
Oh, but sure. Just: how many books based on original Iranian or Iraqi _documentation_ have you read?
(I'll not even try to ask about how many have you researched that way and written.)
we are talking about managerial skills of Officers and civilian managers of Oil industry, armament production and ability to lessons-learned. Iranians are much better then nowadays Ukraine elites.
Sure. Why seriously study war, when the topic is war...
He is right though, Iraq and Iran actually had air forces, not the PSU cosplay.
That's about the primary difference. Even if minor. After all, it was the IRIAF that smashed the Iraqi oil industry, in October 1980. Just like the VKS helped smash the Ukrainian oil industry, in March-June 2022. And it had F-14s with their long-range air-to-air missiles, to which the Iraqis had no response (not even once they've started acquiring Mirages from France) - just like the Russians have MiG-31s and Su-35s armed with R-37Ms.
That said, the fault for lacking an effective air force is almost entirely on successive Ukrainian governments. Indeed, soon after being elected, Zelensky slashed the flight time of PSU's pilots from 45 hours a year, to mere 20-30 hours (for orientation: 'minimum necessary' to keep a fighter pilot current is considered at something like 160-240 hours a year).
Before getting Mirages, Iraqiees already had Foxbats with R-40s. With a limited numbers of Phoenix around, R-40s were more than a match for Sparrows.
Sounds absurd from my side, but I protest accusing UA authorities. They did much more within 2014-2022 period if compared with their RU peers. Is it UA fault that Soviets era Fulcrums and Flankers are inferior to Su-35s? Surely, not, no matter how many flight hours you do.
Zelensky slashed the defence budget in years preceding the invasion. It would not have made much of a difference in the early stage, but it did set the thinking and planning of the state, army and the industry. There are a 100 things the UA gov could have done after the invasion, to plan ahead, but they did nothing instead.
This!!
Erm, nope. MiG-25PDs entered operational service with IrAF only two years after Mirages did. And while they were a 'match for Sparrows', the type was such a one-way-interceptor, that it never outmatched the F-14.
The Lutch has a design for an AAM (and SAM, based on 'same chassis') on its boards for around 10 years. Which is no surprise considering it was Ukrainian enterprises that were manufacturing the mass of parts for R-77 before 2014, and Russia had no production of that missile before early 2017.
The Ukrainian governments simply refused to finance it. That's ending the discussion about 'they couldn't do anything about their inferior MiG-29s and Su-27s'.
Mig-25PDs came to Iraq in 1979, whilst first Mirages in 1980. So, they saw action roughly in the same time. Should I mention thar the first supplied Mirages were different from the ones delivered in 87-88?)
As per R-77. If Russia had no production before 2017, who'd been arming Chinese, Indian, and other Flankers with Amraamski for almost 15 years?)))
As per UA authorities refusing to finance their own R-77. First of all, they had theit own rather successful production of R-27s.
R-77 is a different story. Most likely, UA factories participated in initial R-77 development back in Soviet times. However, 30 years passed, and many things changed. Very likely that UA was unable to do smth worthy with that regard. Do not forget about massive "brain drain" from Ukraine.
Another thing is that to just produce new missile is not enough. You need to modernise Fulcrums&Flankers electronics as well.
All in, a lot of investments with umpredictable outcome.
Thank you for regularly bringing up that conflict, in the context of this war. Not only is it a fascinating read, but it also forces rabid UA fans to face an uncomfortable truth. How come these "desert subhumans" were so much more competent 40 years ago, than we are today. So far, other than whataboutism and racism, they haven't produced an answer. Maybe one day.
It's directly comparable in so many regards, it's amazing. Could be used as the best example on how and what to do and what not - for Ukraine.
It just isn't. Because people prefer to remain ignorants (if not even racists)...
I wish I knew more about that conflict because every time I hear details of it, they seem the most directly relevant to this war. I should read your book.
Most replies here suggest that the "camel riders" are too inferior to learn from. Also, the West has either never fought a real war or it did it badly, so cannot learn from them either. Apparently nobody in human history has ever fought a war that the great ZSU can learn from. Truly a unique conflict, fought by unique states. One could call it the battle of unicorns and dragons.
Zelensky was not the primary destructor of the PSU (or the ZSU). His predecessors destroyed or sold off about 60-70% of the USSR stocks of everything. Shit, it was Yushenko in the 2000s (iirc) who decided to shrink the artillery forces by 3/4 and disband/sell/destroy most of UA's rocket artillery brigades. Among other weapons.
In UA's defense, it's impossible keeping a Soviet arsenal worthy of invading NATO and driving to Germany in 1988 on a $6billion military budget.
All I am saying is that it wasn't Zelly who did most of the voluntary disarmament. It was his predecessors. I can blame him for a lot of things, but this isn't one of them
Also, to be fair, none of this was done against the will of the people. (Although it's leader's job to be smarter than that, but that's dreamland).
Correct. In peacetime (24 years of peace), in a relatively poor country it is a high ask for a politician to push through large defense budgets. Money isn't free. It comes from increasing taxes or cutting social programs for grandma and grandpa, who are living close to poverty.
In this (and many) cases a ‘like’ does not mean ‘like’ at all…..
A hint: you're on the blog named 'Sarcastosaurus'. ;-)
Thank you, once again, for giving us the report, Tom. And as usual, things are shaping up to get only worse before it even gets better (if it gets better at all...)
It's not a report. It's an incoherent 4am ramble. 1/2 of it baseless and unsupported.
Exactly.
BTW, what are you doing here?
Please, don't tell me you're reading an incoherent 4AM ramble, half of which is baseless and unsupported?
Thank you, as always, Tom: a sober assessment even if it requires a few drinks afterwards!
I assume you didn't say for a reason, but I'll ask anyway: what's the catastrophic issue you mention at the start?
Ukraine losing control over 25 km of front line
meh, sucks but no big deal imo
About the "video evidence of 1000 soldier loss per day"
I'm sorry but I'm not sure to understand. The link you show is depicting material losses, as far as I can see iit doesn't show any human losses.
And the source says more than 5 000 alleged dead in 54 days... that's just 10 times less than 1000 per day right?
I'm just skeptical about the methodology because if there would be thousand of death per day... wouldn't the Ukrainians be so happy to score PR victory by showing thousands of dead russians ?
I mean when they show a video of a biiigggg Russian attack being repelled there's like 6 to 10 vehicles being destroyed or damaged and at best a few dozen killed and injured.
And we know those kind of big style assault aren't happening everyday.
So I'm just very skeptical about this number that's circulating for months now because I have yet to see a convincing methodology to prove it😅
Thank you in advance for your reply and thank you for your reports as always!
The reports are satire
Not always on a large scale, but it happens constantly in small groups. For example, like this "successful attack" . https://t.me/k_2_54/372
real numbers are closer to this: https://x.com/AndrewPerpetua/status/1849052520225677360 about 60-80 KIA a day. Sometimes 90-100.
Dear Tom, thank you for report!
re:Kupyansk there were rumors of ru army trying to establish bridgehead on the other side of Oskil. If that is a precise statement, then the only way I can see this happening is that they control the bridge.
re:UAV it seems not the commander of unit, but head of staff of unit.
re: KABs, it seems increase comes at the times of some decrease in artillery, as if trying to replace it (including MLRS). Some say the potential is up to 250 per day. So we may see new heights these days. Safely 50%+ is in Kursk area.
Don has shown in one of his reports recently UAV automatically following and striking human target. I was not aware that this technology is developed. This may be the only solution for "reformed" ru army.
What are KABs? Cable-guided drones?
It is guided avia bombs, just a UA abbreviation transliterated.
KAB (Korretiruemoya Aviazionnaya Bomba) is the generic Russian term for all guided bombs. But in the current war it's usually used to talk about various guided glide bombs, since those are the only ones that RF can employ without risking getting shot down.
Hi Tom,
Appreciate your update. As always, harsh but necessary critique of the way this war is being perperated.
I was wondering about something and I hope that you have enough insight into a situation to provide some clarity here. Few months ago we saw Ukrainian drones striking refineries, with and everyone talked how this will be a big strategic change. We then moved to reports about strikes on heating plants, and then drones started hitting ammo depos and airfields. Now as you noted, we're back to strikes on heating plants.
My impression is that the teams responsible for drone strikes are one of the more competent branches in Ukrainian army and special forces, and I was wondering if the choice of the targets was more deliberate and a part of a longer campaing, that had the airfields in mind at the start.
My assumption is, that the strikes at the oil and heating infrastructure were meant to force russian anti-air to protect those assets (as damage to those put pressure on Putin from his oligarchs to actually "do something") leaving other areas, such as airfields more susceptible to this sorts of attacks. Essentially, firstly create a necessity for VKS to spread themselves thin, and then use the gaps in the AA defense to strike the militarily important targets.
I'm, really interested in your thoughts on this one.
It's always the same like everywhere else in the ZSU.
People designing and building such drones, plus those operating them = no problem. They're great. Working quickly, with minimal resources, producing great things.
But, those telling them what to hit... and that's the 'generals' = oh dear...
They have not even a concept about what do they want to hit and what effects they want to cause. The 'refineries' campaign barely began in serious, before 'they' have stopped it. Then they've switched over to powerplants, hit a few, stopped doing that. Then they switched to air bases, hit a a few.... and the same story again.
Eventually, they're happy if they can find somebody in the media capable of 'explaining' what are they trying to do...
But hey: there's so much 'fire and smoke'... Reminds me of Saddam's micromanagement during IrAF's operations against Iran, in 1980-1986 period, or Putin's against Ukraine, in February-September 2022...
we must do more advertising of our Books about Iran-Iraq wars :)
It is unbelievable, that people repeat the wery same mistakes.
Link to Andrew video is confirming visualy 93 deaths per day ( 5000 in 54 days) while UAF is claiming 80.000 in 54 days.Are you trying to tell that casualties are 16 times higher?
... not sure that I could understand that part correctly but the official 'DailyDeadRussian' number published by the Ukrainian Defense Ministry or whatever got several pretty good confirmations along the way. Cumulative it's excepted to be within the +-20% range, and that's quite a thing.
The way I understand this is that losing soldiers = losing combat capability. It is not always dead soldiers, but wounded members removed from combat too.
That's a war-long debate around the meaning of the word 'eliminated' in the official report. I've always thought about that as 'dead'.
Nope, that includes also the severely injured which aren't able to fight anymore
Do you have a source for that?
It's generally accepted that those are casualties and I didn't hear any corrections to that interpretation from any officials. But that's about it.
The word used in reports is "losses". And the "recoverable/irrecoverable losses" are terms for wounded / severely-wounded-or-killed.
https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-lists-42-000-missing-persons/
Andrew is reviewing 150-200 videos a day, and comes up with 93 deaths 'on average'.
Now think about all the videos he doesn't get...
Yes, OSINT numbers are always just the bottom limit.
Traditionally the 'official' numbers are kind of the top limit (one should check on the numbers reported by Russian authorities...).
It's quite exceptional that the numbers by Ukrainian authorities can be considered as .... well, 'around that'.
Last official info from UA side about number of missing UAF soldiers stand 37.000 in April 2024, 43.000 in July 2024 and 55.000 in September, 28.000 more of missing soldiers in 6 months , not mentioning dead or wounded....not so optimistic figures at all. You know Tom very well that for each missing soldier , number of dead is 5-8 times higher
https://ualosses.org/ can't vouch for it, but looks reasonable.
It's this again mixing "soldiers" with "persons"? Meaning the number includes civilians. This was already discussed in the comments some time ago.
Question: is thre link to "...Last official info from UA side about number of missing UAF soldiers stand 37.000..."???
Of those 80K around 25K are kills, the rest are wounded. Andrew counts kills only. Some kills are impossible to show, like a position hit with bomb, artillery or even fpv. Some videos are never released. Some never get traction to be noticed. The actual number, as considered by some field commanders is 20% higher, that in total would mean around 45K per month.
As for the drones on the fiber optic wire. There, the principle is the same as in anti-tank guided missile systems of the "Fagot" type. All the same, only at the end of the cable is not a rocket, but an FPV drone. There should be no obstacles between the operator and the target, because the cable is easily broken, after which the connection is immediately lost. Therefore, such drones can be used only in certain places suitable for their use. This does not mean that the Russians are now not sensitive to radio electronic warfare systems. 98% of drones still stay on radio because it provides flexibility and variability Also, fiber-optic drone operators will need to be closer to the collision line, because the cable is not endless. It is about 5-7 kilometers. Also, they will need to constantly be at heights where they will become an easy target.
Its not the same as Fagot, more like Spike or Almas ATGM, the fiber optic cable works two-way: drone vide feed is sent to the operator, and command from the operator to the drone, in real time. You do not need line of sight, the target can be over a hill as long as the trajectory is smooth, constant speed and there are no really sharp objects between. The wire can rest on grass or trees as long as it is slack.
First, the operators of such a drone are close to their enemy, 5-7 kilometers. This in turn makes them vulnerable to detection. One cluster munition and that's it. Agree that there is a big difference between an operator who uses radio communications and flies 30+ kilometers, and a drone operator who flies 5-7 kilometers. Obviously the difference is colossal. Second, the fiber optic cable breaks easily if, for example, it gets caught on tree branches. Accordingly, you need to look for elevation and those areas where there are no obstacles for the cable itself.
I have some doubts. Those are no cables, just barely the fiber itself: very light, very flexible and dispensed very loosely. Sure, losses due broken connection is expected but compared to the high ratio of losses due jamming it's acceptable - especially since jamming usually means high value targets nearby.
Last time those Ukrainin drone operators lost because due the jamming they had to be close to the events. Close, that's less than a km as I heard.
Also, that 5-7km in this case is not exactly range (as distance from launch site): it's cumulated flight time, just to be precise.
A spool of 10 km of fiber optic cable weighs about 3 lbs./1.3 kg. That means the warhead must be lighter by the same amount. Another spool for 20 km means an even smaller warhead.
The closer you are to the front line, whether it's 5, 7 or 30 km, the more likely you will be detected.
There is no single set scenario for the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of jamming. There are too many factors involved. For every action the drone operator or jammer takes, there is a counter. Then there are counters to the coutners.
Sure. But, just for the log, without context:
- the first mention I could find about fiber optic controlled drones is actually from the Ukrainian side...
- as the drones in use getting closer to the required mil-standard capability set, they are losing that 'cheap' allure they started with and what whipped up the hype so much
- I wonder why they are still not using bridges: with real (optical) cables? Awful lot of good drone operators lost in the last few days...
Thanks for the update!
Just an opinion of a Ukrainian here. Your sarcasm and negativity towards UA govt and UAF decision makers is becoming counter productive, Tom. When you previously joked slightly on the underperformance of certain figures, I for one could understand that it's important and you are not saying everything you want to say. But now you sound like another desperate Ukrainian who realized the depth of problems in the country.
And sometimes I see typical "zrada" statements that are popular amongst Ukrainians, but are wild assumptions in the reality. If you talk to 10 Ukrainians sources and they mostly have one idea, it doesn't make it fact based.
Think what you try to achieve by discussing UA problems at length. The immediate reaction would be - why should we help UA when there are so many issues there. It takes someone battered with zrada to actually not lose the motivation to push for more help.
No problem. If you like, criticise them 'after' - once the war is lost.
Can I make a suggestion. Regardless of the criticism of Ukraines leadership-fitting, as many have confirmed- its clear that you 100% believe we should still support the guys and gals on the ground. Perhaps after such sections of criticism, add a small section along the lines of "BUT we should continue to support Ukraine because X and that is why I am running/promoting the fundraisers Y&Z"
Mate, what am I doing here?
https://substack.com/home/post/p-150553371
Exactly. Looking at the broad picture of your posts, its clear you are in no way advocating abandoning support for Ukraine by criticizing its leaders. But it is unfortunately human nature to 'believe the latest thing you hear'- although having read 95% of your posts, even i had to stop and think sometimes what your motives were after such sobering reports. To be clear, this is not your fault. Perhaps I am impressionable, but I think that's common. I'm just saying one or two sentences at the end of such sobering commentary along the lines of "but we should continue to support Ukraine..." would go a long way
That with my motives is simple: I've got none.
BTW, if you think I'm 'harsh' or even 'counterproductive', check this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0ZljdsOlIw
In the end, I see the responsibility lies with the readers to be mature. Especially since you are so busy with everything going on.
As a Ukrainian officer in active service, able to watch both govt/MOD and top- to brigade-level HQ decisions, I'd say Tom's level of criticism is rather soft. The level of stupidity and irresponcibility on the top is awful and just rising.
That's quite disheartening, I have to say. No hope above the battalion level, I suppose?
30-40% of brigade-level HQs are good or at least adequate. There are some bright spots even above brigade level. The higher - the worse, because the officers there are generally post-soviet indifferent dumbheads.
What of other 60-70% of brigade HQs? Also post Soviet dumbheads? Lack of leadership experience due to rapid army expansion? Also, i know it may be too late for the current conflict, but do you see an improvement due to the good guys rising up through the ranks (and incompetent retiring), or would the culture persist?
Fifty-fifty. I think the younger officers are much better, the Soviet culture will die with this generation.
Is it worth to focus on this? Will it help somehow? Would they read Tom's reports and start doing something differently? If there is a chance that this critics will help, I'm all for it. I'm just afraid that it will only cause more harm.
Yes. It needs to be fixed, or we'd lose the war. Rise the questions from the West - and the chances will rise.
There is an old adage that a war is lost when a country or a military starts lying to itself.
UA leadership did an amazing job of lifting the fighting spirit of the country in the first few days and months by lying and flooding the zone with BS peremoga propaganda. It was unfortunate but necessary. Problem is - they never stopped, and we live in an environment where telling the truth about difficulties and problems is considered "disloyal" or "doing harm". But facing the reality of events is a necessary first step to fixing the problems, while staying in an endless cycle of BS is just letting problems continue.
The thing with reality is, it always becomes apparent to everyone, sooner or later. Successful organizations make that difficult realization early and marry to adjust. Unsuccessful ones don't face reality until failure.
Not "marry to adjust" but "make adjustments" lol
You have only chance by admitting that problems are there and must by solved urgently. Or there would be "no tomorrow" or "after the war".
Oh how I hate people dismissing criticism as "counter-productive". Words have meaning, they are not just feces to throw at something you don't like. On top of it, even if you really believe what you say, focus on the part where the criticism is true and come up with the productive suggestions yourself.
Or if you disagree explain why. There is a difference between diasagreeing with criticsm and compliaining.
As an outsider reading this I have now problem understanding Tom. He wants Ukraine to win, and his criticism is towards the leadership of Ukraine (and the West), not towards Ukrainia. I understand that for a Ukrainian it is extremely difficult and frustrating to read. However the support of Tom towards Ukraine is never in doubt by a redder of his blog. If you disagree with his analysis I think that is fine. Hell, if sudenly Ukraine pulled a major victory somewhere along the front I am pretty sure Tom would be happy. As would ai.
Despite all your pessimistic conclusions and prognoses Ukraine has no way out except fighting. So glory to Ukraine and its defenders!
as the Ukraine is facing enemy at least 4-time (numerically) stronger - your only chance is to fight smarter.
Oh these wise advises from home-made experts! The means to fight smarter - Ukraine is dramatically short of them because of the Western advisers.
True, but one could wish for some changes.
Normally in stressed situations, organisations rapidly iterate and innovate to resolve large issues.
Is there a tradition of deference in Ukraine that stops this?
Iterate and innovate - or die. And the majority of organisations rapidly dies.
There's an insane amount of learned helplessness. The biggest reason you see so much volunteering is because people don't even attempt at fixing "the system".
Nothing of that kind. On the contrary, the 'establishment' is insistent on bolstering failures, and can't care less about consequences.
Who the hell is Colonel Halaburda and why appointing him is a good news ?
Probably the point he's better than who was originally planned
https://t.me/marybezuhla/2196
How can someone writte a 30 minute long post about a “dreamland” and at the same time claim that Ukrainian losses in Kursk are only 400+ KIA while Russia lost 20.000 there alone, and 54.000 dead in the past 2 months?
You folks need to understand that people nowadays are more sensitive on losses than they were back in WW1/2, and the Russians are no exception.
Sure, they are definitely more tolerant than people are in the west… which, when you take into consideration how much Russia suffered during WW2 (only 80 years ago) isn’t that odd… they are kinda used to it, but western propaganda, together with pro-Ukrainian “experts” which offer “alternative” views, used this to portray the Russian army and society as if these are exactly the same today.
Yes, many things are the same or similar, but many are not.
For the last decade or two Russia is living comfortable, materialistic “western style” of life and that period was more than enough to change many peoples perspective about topics such as war and losses… As someone coming from small ex-communist, Slavic, orthodox country with profound relations with Russia for the last 200 years… from a country that fought five wars (including two World wars and one civil war in which entire western world was against it) over the last 100 years and has been “subjected” to western way of life and thinking for the past 24 years, I know what I’m talking about. People in my country are tired of war, and so are the Russians, but they are much bigger and more powerful so that, if needed, they’ll fight anyway…
Think for a second - if thousands were getting killed and wounded every day, we would have seen by now mass desertions and complaints from soldiers themselves on media every single day, but that’s simply not what is happening. We get to see that kind of stuff only from time to time, occasionally.
Now, let’s take a look at how many Russian troops have gonne through Ukraine and how big their losses might be.
Before the partial mobilization took place in September 2022. Russia had no more than 300.000 boots on the ground combined (RuAF, LDNR, Wagner); with another 300.000 newly mobilized and 50.000 recruited prisoners in the ranks of PMC Wagner, we get to around 630.000 troops…
Now, on contrary to what many people think, there were no 30.000 volunteers a month joining the Russian army but rather a few thousand… of course, many people from seized Ukrainian territories (later integrated into Russia), as well as those from smaller republics within Russia, have been mobilized this way or another (under the radar if you like), but even in that case there was not a point reached where Russian forces exceeded much more than 700.000 troops.
So, how big their losses could be?
At most, given how big the frontline is and the fact that Russia is on the offensive practically everywhere for almost a full year, we could be speaking of 350.000 man, but more realistic figure would be anywhere between 200 and 350 thousand.
Remember, Ukraine lacks EVERYTHING - from manpower and artillery (shells) to airplanes… and these problems do not exist from yesterday, but ever since the 2023. counteroffensive ended (failed)…
My question goes: how is Ukraine able to inflict such massive losses on the Russians? With what weaponry? With what personnel?
There are few importan factors that enabled Ukrainian army to withstand Russian assaults relatively successful in the past (until the start of this year):
1) lack of troops in Russian army (not only Russia failed to achieve a neccessary 3:1 ratio advantage, or even 2:1, but Ukraine was able to surpass during initial phase of the war and consequently reclaim Kharkiv and Kherson… so Russia was forced to shift to a new strategy of systematically destroying the enemy relying on more numerous artillery and other means, hoping that by doing so it will change the ballance in their favour… the result of this strategy we see today);
2) drones (I still remember the words of a Ukrainian soldier saying that, if there weren’t for drones…)
3) it being the defending side, making it (at least in theory) easier to inflict casualties;
4) NATO support;
5) Poor Russian tactics and inability (thanks to incompetence and corruption) to use sophisticated weapons to full potential (one of the best examples were the Su-34 bombers using “dumb” unguided rockets during opening months of the war)
Since drones are Ukraine’s main tool in this war, they are usually being used to strike Russian vehicles from which, when getting imobile, infantry dismounts and tries to retreat or continue commencing attack, but eventually gets chased by other drones (and artillery)… in such cases we wittness no more than few dozen Russian casualties, sometimes even less… knowing that Russia rarely conducts such mechanized assaults, or better said, it rarely performs simultaneous assaults of that type on multiple fronts, there is no way their daily losses exceed a couple of hundred man… and Tom should know this, since he often likes to remind us how Russia has lost the potential to carry out large mechanized assaults and how it is limited to such small scale offensives.
Also, how is that Ukrainian unit “smashing” Russians in Selidove when videos emerged yesterday depicting almost intact city, meaning there were no fierce fighting in it?
> how much Russia suffered during WW2 (only 80 years ago)
Reminder that only a couple percent of Russian territory were occupied by Germany while 100% of Ukraine was. Most losses per-capita were Belarussian then Ukrainian. Russians steal everything even the victimhood.
As for the rest: that which is asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
Questionable claims followed by "you should know this" is such top-tier debating technique, I'm in awe.
If we focus purely on total numbers and not per capita losses, ethnic Russians still lost many millions of people in WW2. From a per capita perspective much more than Americans or British or those who mainly didn't fight but were occupied like France or Belgium.
There is no reliable data on this. Soviet Union and its predecessor did not count local ethnicities the way is done nowadays in democratic countries. A lot of those "ethnic Russians" night not think of themselves as Russians.
Some of your conclusions are well observed. However, many czech and slovak volunteers who activelly fight there (mostly on UA side but few from Russian side) say thet there is big discrepancy between regular pre-war kontrakt soldiers and mobilised since 20222-2023. Many of recently mobilised are guys from wery poor sectors of society, like construction workers adjusted to daily hardship.
I am not sure is Serbia is really fully comparable to Russia. What would cause fatigue in Serbia does not mean that it cause same in Russia.
RE: loses
Confirmed by graves and obituaries is around 74.000 KIA for russian side. Nobody knows how many are in oficial statistics as "missing" or how many were permanently disabled from Armed forces because of injury. My own estimate of russian loses is 80-100 KIA a day. With final counting 125-135.000 permanently lost (KIA/Missing/injured and disabled).
I can agree that they lose that much KIA, because as I said, Ukraine lacks everything - artillery and shells - to produce heavy casualties, so what favours them is that they are defending and using drones as their most valuable asset… and these are getting jammed/shot down in great numbers and we only get to see the ones that “pass”, and even than not to many Russians are put out of action, because simply they don’t conduct large scale attacks (in hundred let alone thousands)… mostly their armored vehicles suffer…
I agree with you.