I would have hoped that OpSec was far better than what has just been clearly described here, especially with describing weaknesses in French Mirage aircraft and weaponry available. I'm sure people are keenly interested in these things especially those in Moscow...
Mirages are known by decades already. All the info displayed here are available in multiple channels, but masterly crafted and put "white over black" by Tom. Are You serious?
Dear Tom, thank you! Some notes as I am reading, it seems that in Tver' besides drones and jet-drones, UA balistics was used. Have no more details on that. And unitial earthquake was 2.8 and there was up to 20 to follow, various strength, the latest being 15 hours later, also 2.8. Also there was one blast seemingly rated at 3.2, but later corrected to lower number. By comparison Beirut blast was rated to 3.3
Many of the bunkers face each other which was a very bad idea as the site was operating around the clock and a berm inbetween gives only partial protection. Allegedly the bunkers often had their blast doors left open. Don't forget that the major detonation was not the beginning of the attack. It was videoed by multiple people, some standing at a road block. So the police had time to close roads before the blast. Maybe some well-timed 50kg warheads flown into the open doors of multiple bunkers could trigger a chain reaction. It would be a very impressive feat of timing.
Yes, this is how I think 5 big open storages were destroyed in UA pre 2022. With fire going from one place to another.
But this one is a new construction, started in 2013. Besides open storage, there were 62 reindorced concrete storage sites, with 2.5 meter roof slabs, 75% of them are fully destroyed.
I have no idea how is this possible, I am sure many ru generals are shocked by the fact.
There were at least 20 detonations registered seismically, varying in strength, from say 100 tons to 1000 (1 kt) tons yield. Bear in mind that you can not use direct TNT energy equivalents, since ground blast produces completely different results. Use Beirut blast as a reference, quoted at 2.75 kt producing 3.3 richter.
One ton yield is equivalent of around 100 artillery shells (calibre 152mm, each one having 6.4 kg A-IX-2, arount equivalent if 10kg TNT. So my estimation a total loss in this single event could be an equivalent of around 500K to 1500K (0.5-1.5M) artillery shells.
Today luck smiled again on the Ukrainians, 2 warehouses were destroyed. With such luck we should go to Las Vegas and beat all the casinos. We'll have money to buy weapons.
"Of course, this wouldn’t be particularly popular in Kyiv (and even less in the West)"
Just a quick question on this statement Tom, always appreciate your updates and views: You're suggesting here that the re-organisation of the GenStab-U so that they effectively deliver what they're supposed to, and enable the lower levels to deliver what they are supposed to, would not be welcomed by the west? My impression has been that NATO generals etc. have been quietly grinding their teeth in frustration that Ukrainian forces are not updating quickly enough in these areas. Am I missing something, are you thinking more at the western political level than the military professionals? Thanks, Joe
- immediate end of war at cost of Ukraine (i.e. Ukraine cedes whatever it takes to make Pudding happy), so the West can return to business as usual with Russia, or
- never-ending war. Essentially, another version of Arabs-vs-Israel.
And re. NATO generals: my impression is that they cannot cope with the situation at all. Even experienced Ukrainian officers and NCOs say, NATO training is good for novice troops, and newly-established units up to the battalion level, but NATO lacks combat experiences of the ZSU.
Thanks for clarifying, that's helpful. It's hard to argue that they care more than they do, given the apparent apathy- except for the Baltics and Poland for example.
Your comment on the NATO generals leads me to another question, apologies and I won't be offended if you decide you don't have time to answer this one too: You criticise the staff-level Ukrainian officers for not implemented appropriate changes that would bring them essentially in line with the broader principles of western/NATO militaries. But you also state that NATO generals can't cope with the situation- implying that the NATO system isn't good either. Unless I misunderstand. While NATO generals may not have the experience to be providing lots of tactical or strategic advice because they haven't been in the fight in the same way that the Ukrainians have, I would expect that they could still provide input on the systemic changes that Ukraine's military need to go through to become effective in the way you and others describe in posts.
Is this where NATO's reported frustration is: that Ukraine isn't listening to them where they could be of help, because they don't want to change / don't think NATO advice is worthwhile at all if they can't help with tactics? Or is NATO not looking to change that at all, and only giving combat advice that doesn't fit Ukraine's situation?
This is just a comment from the sidelinje. I think NATO has some good operational procedures, and the idea of learning from your mistakes is certainly one of them. I think Ukraine could benefit from instituionalising such procedures. Tom has explained it earlier. But while NATO has no objection to Ukraine following NATO procedure it doesnt want aukraine to win too decisivly. So, follow our procedures, but if you are too succesful we need to reduce support.
To me, the whole idea of not supporting Ukraine to win the war conclusively sounds quite strange. If giving western weapons and munitions and training to Ukraine results in demolition of the Russian armed forces, wouldn't that be a vindication of western weapons?
You are a little harsk on the West, also ignoring the the West is not monolitic. While the two solutions mentioned are perfectly acceptable, maybe even preferred the West would be happy with a negotiated Solution that gave Ukraine its borders (or most of it) as long as Russia doesnt collapse. Yes, we want to do business in Russia, but those uppitty Russians can of course loose. Provided the federation doesnt collapse.
Personally, I feel that a collapse of the Russian federation would be a good thing. As long as they are such a large country, they'll be trying to expand their empire (the Romanovs were successful empire builders during the three centuries of their reign, with an average expansion rate of 142 square kilometres per day (55 sq. miles per day)
I liked reading this, thank you Andrew! And tthanks Tom for pointing to it. It relays well the feeling of the growing chaos. But I would like to add two things for the perspective.
Somehow it happened that many people of Jewish decent were settled in the territories of currrent Poland and Ukraine in early 20th century. So the lives of these nations are somehow closely intertwined, in a very complex pattern: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_of_Settlement
On the other hand, I would like to point to a growing usage of "psycho warfare", I was made aware of this when someone suggested, many years ago, me learning the story of 2008 Georgian war, and also I was explained some first hand, high rank, miltary experience, and how this all started. I watched this and all, already then, was clear. Try and see if auto-translate works for you well: https://youtu.be/0B8R8423em4?feature=shared
Generally, having this perspective, I find it difficult to understand how US considers itself being part of everything, in every part of the world, even in Asia, yet not going really to understand how things worked out on a deep level. And thus destinied to be despised by every party of the equation. So in the end of the day, US forges good "commercial" relations, which being "win-win" till it suits every party. By sooner or later, this relaltions are expected to be broken. Even Israel, I believe, does not consider its relationship with US as "friendly".
I honestly do not understand this comment. At no point did NATO, at least officially, try to provide advanced training to the ZSU, at a large scale. The entire point was explicitly to provide basic training to help the ZSU with its insufficient capacity. I have never heard of a large scale officer training in NATO countries, have you?
The problem that the ZSU has is not at the tactical level. It is at the operational and strategic level. They are absolutely dire and incompetent at the former and basically do not have the latter. None of those can be fixed by NATO basic training, nor through NATO advisors at the genstab-U.
This just sounds like hearsay and, sorry to say, bullshit.
'NATO' - as such, didn't. USA (see: The Pentagon) - very much did. That's what led to the last-year's counteroffensive.
Obviously, they did so at 'strategic', instead of operational- and/or tactical level. So, yes, you're right: NATO never tried large-scale officer training of the ZSU.
Did the USA put entire unit staffs through their officer training courses? What is known publically is that the US advised whoever was in charge of that offensive, apparently not Zaluzhny but Syrskyi, and have done some wargaming. That doesn't constitute training in any shape or form. Also, surely the first bloody advice was not to tell the whole world where, when and with what they were planning to attack. Neither the ZSU, nor the UA gov, heeded even that basic recommendation.
The only way NATO could improve the ZSU officer corps, would be to take at least a division and train it entirely from top to bottom. That hasn't happened yet and it's not looking like it ever will. As things stand, these are two soviet armies fighting each other.
Another note, it is 4 months since gen. Popov is sacked. And I now even more firmly believe, that it was beacuse he rejected to start Vagner style attacks. Ever since ru offensive started in Oct. 2023 losses of armored tech to soldiers were 1 to 25. These 4 months those went to 1 to 50. Exactly as in Vagner times, Jan. to May 2023. This meant then that ru is "saving tech" for offensive, now it is most probably mean we would see more and more tech assaults and general intensification. So I do not know how much keeping reserves for that may play in what UA does, means using only bare minimum of reserves necessary.
Not sure, too good to be true. By all various factors and evidence, it is a deliberate strategy of saving mech component for Sep.-Nov. intensification of assaults. They still have at least 5000 of various armors, including tanks and IFVs, already near frontlines, not in storage. And it is still massively more then UA has or would have in the nearest future. Once they are down to say 2000, we can speak about UA having advantage and perspective of long term breakthroughs.
They're running very low on APCs & IFVs, It is showing in loss ratios, and is why, for the last few months, most of the assaults are in golf-carts and pit bikes. One estimate I saw recently actually had Ukraine head in operational tanks, 1600 to 1500. Ukraine's tank claims, and the numbers of Russian tank losses reported by Andrew Perpetua, have dropped noticeably over the last 6 months, because they're rarerer, while soft-skinned vehicles and golf carts have increased.
Well, all of Tom's comments and criticisms are well-founded and fair. We, Ukrainians, have seen all this criminal incompetence, looting and outright sabotage since 2014. We are not even surprised by this. Why? Because this system, like Putin's, cannot work in any other way. There is only one way to change it, but it is not very humane and tolerant of looters. Tom was right when he said that a fish rots from the head. That is, the root of the problem is in the system itself. The main and main problem of Ukraine is the oligarchy. Since Ukraine is divided among a narrow circle of owners, they will not allow the system to be changed and to release and punish their people. The oligarchy is afraid of unsystematic and disloyal people. Between competent and loyal, they will always choose loyal and incompetent. The Ukrainian oligarchy uses all possible methods and schemes to make the most of this war. The Ukrainian generals are also trying to make money in symbiosis with the oligarchy. Give you a real example? The well-known Bogdan self-propelled guns will be manufactured by MP Maksym Yefimov, who owns 98% of the shares of the Kramatorsk Machine Tool Plant, which was moved to Western Ukraine. This Yefimov was in Yanukovych's party and is a good friend of Poroshenko, who was also one of those who created the "Party of Regions". Together, these two connected to the scheme their old friend Serhii Pashynskyi, who owns the factory "Ukrainian armor".
They lobbied and won government tenders to supply it to the Ukrainian army. They were helped in this by Dana Yarova, who is an adviser to the Deputy Minister of Defense in the Public "Anti-Corruption" Council under the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine. She is Poroshenko's and Pashinsky's person. Nothing is supplied to the Ukrainian army if none of the interested people make money from it. They usually make money on schemes to inflate prices for goods and on technical documentation.
Good these self-propelled guns can only be said by the military who directly control them, and even then not on camera. But all the same, the main question remains the same as before: where was all this nine years ago? Who will be responsible for the fact that nothing was done, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians? I think the answer is obvious, that the whole rotten system is to blame, which is now successfully making money from the deaths of Ukrainians
Bankrupcy in UA (for oligarchs) means simply no obligation to pay bills and loans. Production facilities are still there, so it doesnt matter what to produce: buses, cars or SPA
By the way, I want to enlighten someone here at the expense of the publication "Ukrainian Pravda". Owner: Olena Prytula. This site is the most vivid example of selling journalistic services. They work for all oligarchic groups without exception. All journalists and all bloggers are gathered there only to present a purely oligarchic point of view and make money. You will not find independent journalists there, you will not find an independent opinion there. Therefore, you decide whether to trust this resource or not at your own peril and risk. I personally do not trust them, because I know and have read many journalists from this publication. For 15 years, I have developed immunity.
Tom, I don't blame you for anything. I'm just warning those who don't know the policy of this information resource in advance. Sometimes good articles appear even on such trading resources, but this happens very, very rarely. Here you need to know well the author of the article and what mill he is trying to throw water at.
This is true of all journalists. Balancing UP, KP, KI, Euromaidan Press, NV, and Euro Pravda is kind of my every morning. Then leaven with US sources for some humor.
Makes sense that UP is oligarchy owned and operated - explains their move to get ads past my blocker. I have to cut/paste pieces into a text editor to not be distracted... whatever makes the cash, I suppose.
Yes, all the media lie. We all get our information from the media, who get paid for their lies. Moreover, even all of us lie sometimes looking each other in the eye. There is no person who would not lie in his life. Therefore, in order to get objective information, you need to have some experience, to be able to filter lies and get to that 10% of the truth. Believe me, I know very well which oligarchs own certain Ukrainian media, these or other journalists, and which media holding they work for.
I wanted to drop you a good article on this topic about the Ukrainian mass media, but to my surprise I found that it was deleted.
Firefox has a reader mode which usually works pretty well. On iPhone, it’s the document icon to the right of the URL. I’m not sure how to invoke it on desktop.
I use uBlock Origin in place of AdBlock Plus since years now, but around 2015 I used the latter. On both you have a button to select and block definitevely (in uBlock Origin, you also can block temporarily) any section of a web page.
From a technical standpoint, it actually creates automatically the correct code line in the blocking rules option.
The Guardian article doesn’t on my reading say that the Ukrainians had been all that indiscreet. The Russians observed something that made them worry and were aware of their own weak points but evidently not enough to lead them to take serious precautions. That may not amount to a serious failure on the Ukrainian side.
Заміна бригад це завжди важко, і завжди супроводжується проблемами. Передача позицій триває не один день. Але новим піхотним підрозділам потрібен час, щоб вивчити місцевість. А таким підрозділам, як РЕР і РЕБ треба час щоб розгорнутись. Окопний РЕБ про який пише журналіст в Українській правді то дрібниця яка не має значення. Не РЕБ проблема, а невідповідність рівня підготовки і забезпечення підрозділів які виходять, і які заходять їм на заміну. Згідно статуту оборону можуть тримати навіть обмежено боєздатний підрозділ. Але ж якщо на важкій ділянці яку тримає сильний боєздатний підрозділ з напруженням усіх сил, замість нього поставити обмежено боєздатний підрозділ, тобто слабший, як за якістю засобів так і за кількістю і рівнем підготовки особового складу, то чи варто дивуватись подальшим відступам.
It's on top commanders to teach brigade- and battalion commanders to report sincerely. If they do not teach them this, then the brigade- and battalion commanders are explaining nonsense, on basis of which top commanders are bringing wrong decisions.
Безумовно. Ніхто не ставить під сумнів необхідність підзвітності. Але ВСІХ рівнів командири часто не готові чути правдиві звіти знизу. І я не думаю, що це проблема притаманна виключно і тільки для української армії.
Татаригами вірно висвітлює один з аспектів проблем. Але це надто спрощений погляд на проблему. Все складніше. І пов'язане зокрема зі зміною характеру війни, домінуванням таких компонентів, як дрони. Які повністю змінили тактику бойових дій. Як наслідок мала б змінитись і методика оцінки боєздатності підрозділів, не на основі особового складу і кількості піхоти. А на основі забезпеченості підрозділів засобами РЕБ, рівнем навченості екіпажів БПЛА, кількості дронів на день і тд. Наразі це не може враховуватись при плануванні бо банально не передбачене статутами, але недооцінка цієї складової забезпечення бригад призводить до фатальних помилок. Такі ж фатальні помилки ми бачимо і у противника.
Це все так, але як часто пише Том останнім часом, доктрину і статути вже давно пора оновити. Невже Генштаб чи МінОборони не може знайти команду притомних офіцерів-технократів щоб оновити статути (додати інформацію про дрони і т д)?
Thanks Tom! Who is in control of Apanosovka and Vnezapnoe? In your previous update you mentioned that ZSU was back to them but now tou are saying that the Russians are from Korenevo to the border. Just trying to confirm….
These famous Ukrainian drones.... It doesn't look like ordinary blow up of ammo storage. It's very suspicious how so much of scattered by separated locations ammo detonated almost simultaneously to produce 2.8 Richters earthquake. Couldn't stop thinking of these very strictly prohibited by USA strikes on russian soil.
I do wonder how can an UAV with 50kg (if as much?) warhead penetrate a bunker actually made to survive a hit from at 500kg bomb.... but, then, 'System Putin' came to my mind... plus the VSRF's (and VKS') practice of stocking ammo in its wooden crates outside the bunkers, too...
I am still a bit skeptical about UAVs, Palianytsia and similar official versions. Voyentorg version or some kind of newly developed/upgraded UA missiles make more sense for me...
Slowly the magnitude of Syrskyi's challenge is revealing itself. Zaluzhnyi did not do the hard job of visiting every frontline unit to discover what the area level commanders aren't telling him.
This, the Ukrainska Pravda piece, and an interview with a TDF Brigade officer in Ukrinform paint a telling portrait. UAF has plenty of good battalion/company leaders, a few decent generals, and a lot of Soviets brought in during mobilization.
Okay. This is fixable. It's a matter of pushing resources after demonstrated success and starving poor performers. Could explain the constant establishment of new brigades - this makes sense *if* good leaders are culled from under-performing brigades and paired with the top new recruits.
But you can't expect the dwindled remnants to hold a full sector... and Syrskyi isn't getting the data to know which brigades are deteriorating.
Anyway, so the 21st finally showed up again. Neat! Sorry about the Leo that just got burned... hurry up, Sweden, send another!
Wonder how many months it would take for someone to convert a Mirage 2000 to fire Meteor AAMs, if it's even possible...
Rafale-integrated, so maybe, given months of work behind the scenes? In theory, a Swedish AWACS could handle all targeting through Link-16, making the jet itself just a big booster. 200km+ range...
Around 2019, Indian Air Force wanted to integrate Meteor on its Mirage 2000 fleet, but didn't follow up in the end due to the high costs involved and the degraded efficiency of the missile on a lower-capacity fighter like the Mirage 2000. Indeed, it would have been necessary to replace the Mirage's RDY radar with a recent version of the Rafale's RBE2 radar to take full advantage of the Meteor's capabilities, which would have further increased costs.
The good news is that France, through the DGA (Direction Générale de l'Armement = Directorate General of Armament), knows how to do it because this has been done at least on one jet, the Mirage 2000 B501, which is a testbed aircraft for the Rafale and its successive upgrades (from F1 to the future F5).
The bad news is France is seriously indebted with a failing economic model (see our insane trade deficit. Regarding the GDP growth, it has essentially been artificially maintained by government indebtedness over several decades) and, on top of that, a chaotic political situation since the dissolution of the National Assembly last June... So I don't expect any integration of the Meteor on Mirage 2000-5F delivered to Ukraine.
I think so too, particularly true for the Gripen which is perfectly suited to take-off from a road section, so virtually from anywhere, but I guess Macron just wanted to make his usual PR in order not to appear stingy in his material support to Ukraine.
After all, France hasn't given that much. Certainly, on the whole it's pretty good in terms of quality, because there are at least three state-of-the-art weapons systems (CaESAr howitzers and their related shells, HAMMER bombs, SCALP-EG missiles) that few countries can supply and produce over time and, ice on the cake, they seem to be really usefull and please Ukrainians. In the (near?) future, jet fighters like Mirage 2000-5F will surely be added to this list. But in terms of mass, French aid isn't up to the task, so Macron tries to compensate with the bare minimum.
Thanks for the update. You wrote: «But, don’t worry: help is underway. The Ukrainian Parliament has dismissed ‘crazy’ Maryana Bezuhla from the National Security Committee. Now everything is going to be instantly better… indeed: much, much, much better…» Hmmmm my sarcastometer sense is Tingeling here. Needs to have it checked again.
Hello Tom and thanks for all your great work, especially on Ukraine war!
I wanted to mention something about SCALP-EG and the planes which can use them. You said SCALP-EG can only be shot by two-seat aircrafts: Mirage 2000D and two-seat Rafale (i.e. Rafale B, for "biplace", meaning two-seater in french).
I'm far to have your expertise in military aeronautics and on military affairs in general, but it seems to me that SCALP-EG are employed since many years by single-seaters Rafale versions.
I was even going to mention that Mirage 2000-9 aircrafts of the United Arab Emirates can also fire Black Shaheen (the local name/version for the SCALP-EG/Storm Shadow missile), but I don't know if they can be only used by their two-seaters Mirage 2000-9 or also by their single-seaters Mirage 2000-9.
But for Rafale C (C for "chasseur" = fighter) and Rafale M (M for "Marine" = Navy, so the carrier-ready version) which are both single-seaters versions (a two-seater Rafale M was once considered, sometimes called Rafale N, but finally canceled for budgetary reasons), we can find on the web that SCALP-EG can be deployed on those two variants, so also shot by the sole pilot during missions I guess, otherwise I don't see the point ^^
Rafale C can carry up to two SCALP-EG whereas Rafale M can carry only one (on the hardpoint at the center of the fuselage, because of asymmetry risk during landing on carrier if only one of the two missiles have been fired in flight. So it's purely a regulatory limitation, not a technical one).
Indeed, in reaction to my 'de-facto question' about single-seat Mirage 2000s and SCALP-EGy, I've received a very good explanation. Going to explain this a the next opportunity.
I would have hoped that OpSec was far better than what has just been clearly described here, especially with describing weaknesses in French Mirage aircraft and weaponry available. I'm sure people are keenly interested in these things especially those in Moscow...
Mirages are known by decades already. All the info displayed here are available in multiple channels, but masterly crafted and put "white over black" by Tom. Are You serious?
Thanks Tom, clear as usual.
Dear Tom, thank you! Some notes as I am reading, it seems that in Tver' besides drones and jet-drones, UA balistics was used. Have no more details on that. And unitial earthquake was 2.8 and there was up to 20 to follow, various strength, the latest being 15 hours later, also 2.8. Also there was one blast seemingly rated at 3.2, but later corrected to lower number. By comparison Beirut blast was rated to 3.3
I think a small technology transfer was made some months before. Or Western Voyentorg (Military wholesale shop) was opened somewhere somehow.
attack of 100 UAVs carrying 50 kg explosives each could hardly provoke 2.8 earthquake. By all respect to my beloved UAV teams.
Many of the bunkers face each other which was a very bad idea as the site was operating around the clock and a berm inbetween gives only partial protection. Allegedly the bunkers often had their blast doors left open. Don't forget that the major detonation was not the beginning of the attack. It was videoed by multiple people, some standing at a road block. So the police had time to close roads before the blast. Maybe some well-timed 50kg warheads flown into the open doors of multiple bunkers could trigger a chain reaction. It would be a very impressive feat of timing.
You don't need smth big or special to set to explosions the big piles of ammunition idiotically kept open on the ground.
Yes, this is how I think 5 big open storages were destroyed in UA pre 2022. With fire going from one place to another.
But this one is a new construction, started in 2013. Besides open storage, there were 62 reindorced concrete storage sites, with 2.5 meter roof slabs, 75% of them are fully destroyed.
https://x.com/tochnyi/status/1836902699486306619
I have no idea how is this possible, I am sure many ru generals are shocked by the fact.
There were at least 20 detonations registered seismically, varying in strength, from say 100 tons to 1000 (1 kt) tons yield. Bear in mind that you can not use direct TNT energy equivalents, since ground blast produces completely different results. Use Beirut blast as a reference, quoted at 2.75 kt producing 3.3 richter.
One ton yield is equivalent of around 100 artillery shells (calibre 152mm, each one having 6.4 kg A-IX-2, arount equivalent if 10kg TNT. So my estimation a total loss in this single event could be an equivalent of around 500K to 1500K (0.5-1.5M) artillery shells.
Ooh, I was not the first. Estonian intelligence estimates it to be 750K.
https://rus.err.ee/1609466362/kiviselg-masshtab-uchenij-vmf-rf-byl-znachitelno-menshe-chem-soobwalos-ranee
Indeed, an amazingly lucky UA strike! I have no proper words to describe the incompetence of the related RU generals.
The problem for you is that the Ukrainians keep being lucky day after day.
Today luck smiled again on the Ukrainians, 2 warehouses were destroyed. With such luck we should go to Las Vegas and beat all the casinos. We'll have money to buy weapons.
Why do you shoot and abuse Ukrainian prisoners of war? Are you going to answer or not?
Why so many convicts died in the Tver blast? Do Russians use convicts to operate ammunition magazines?
200 men is not too much for an object 3,5sq km
perfect place for convicts, nothing special actually
Moving / handling munitions is heavy work, especially if they don’t use pallets or forklifts.
"Of course, this wouldn’t be particularly popular in Kyiv (and even less in the West)"
Just a quick question on this statement Tom, always appreciate your updates and views: You're suggesting here that the re-organisation of the GenStab-U so that they effectively deliver what they're supposed to, and enable the lower levels to deliver what they are supposed to, would not be welcomed by the west? My impression has been that NATO generals etc. have been quietly grinding their teeth in frustration that Ukrainian forces are not updating quickly enough in these areas. Am I missing something, are you thinking more at the western political level than the military professionals? Thanks, Joe
The West prefers two solutions:
- immediate end of war at cost of Ukraine (i.e. Ukraine cedes whatever it takes to make Pudding happy), so the West can return to business as usual with Russia, or
- never-ending war. Essentially, another version of Arabs-vs-Israel.
And re. NATO generals: my impression is that they cannot cope with the situation at all. Even experienced Ukrainian officers and NCOs say, NATO training is good for novice troops, and newly-established units up to the battalion level, but NATO lacks combat experiences of the ZSU.
Thanks for clarifying, that's helpful. It's hard to argue that they care more than they do, given the apparent apathy- except for the Baltics and Poland for example.
Your comment on the NATO generals leads me to another question, apologies and I won't be offended if you decide you don't have time to answer this one too: You criticise the staff-level Ukrainian officers for not implemented appropriate changes that would bring them essentially in line with the broader principles of western/NATO militaries. But you also state that NATO generals can't cope with the situation- implying that the NATO system isn't good either. Unless I misunderstand. While NATO generals may not have the experience to be providing lots of tactical or strategic advice because they haven't been in the fight in the same way that the Ukrainians have, I would expect that they could still provide input on the systemic changes that Ukraine's military need to go through to become effective in the way you and others describe in posts.
Is this where NATO's reported frustration is: that Ukraine isn't listening to them where they could be of help, because they don't want to change / don't think NATO advice is worthwhile at all if they can't help with tactics? Or is NATO not looking to change that at all, and only giving combat advice that doesn't fit Ukraine's situation?
This is just a comment from the sidelinje. I think NATO has some good operational procedures, and the idea of learning from your mistakes is certainly one of them. I think Ukraine could benefit from instituionalising such procedures. Tom has explained it earlier. But while NATO has no objection to Ukraine following NATO procedure it doesnt want aukraine to win too decisivly. So, follow our procedures, but if you are too succesful we need to reduce support.
To me, the whole idea of not supporting Ukraine to win the war conclusively sounds quite strange. If giving western weapons and munitions and training to Ukraine results in demolition of the Russian armed forces, wouldn't that be a vindication of western weapons?
The longer the war goes on, the more of the Russian armed forces is demolished.
armed forces and economy...
You are a little harsk on the West, also ignoring the the West is not monolitic. While the two solutions mentioned are perfectly acceptable, maybe even preferred the West would be happy with a negotiated Solution that gave Ukraine its borders (or most of it) as long as Russia doesnt collapse. Yes, we want to do business in Russia, but those uppitty Russians can of course loose. Provided the federation doesnt collapse.
Personally, I feel that a collapse of the Russian federation would be a good thing. As long as they are such a large country, they'll be trying to expand their empire (the Romanovs were successful empire builders during the three centuries of their reign, with an average expansion rate of 142 square kilometres per day (55 sq. miles per day)
I find I can't be too harsh on the West. Simply no way.
Should there be doubts, please, check this:
https://roguesystemsrecon.substack.com/p/ukraine-taiwan-israel-the-collapsing
I enjoy Andrew Tanners writing. Including this. Still not agreeing on everything.
I liked reading this, thank you Andrew! And tthanks Tom for pointing to it. It relays well the feeling of the growing chaos. But I would like to add two things for the perspective.
Somehow it happened that many people of Jewish decent were settled in the territories of currrent Poland and Ukraine in early 20th century. So the lives of these nations are somehow closely intertwined, in a very complex pattern: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_of_Settlement
On the other hand, I would like to point to a growing usage of "psycho warfare", I was made aware of this when someone suggested, many years ago, me learning the story of 2008 Georgian war, and also I was explained some first hand, high rank, miltary experience, and how this all started. I watched this and all, already then, was clear. Try and see if auto-translate works for you well: https://youtu.be/0B8R8423em4?feature=shared
Generally, having this perspective, I find it difficult to understand how US considers itself being part of everything, in every part of the world, even in Asia, yet not going really to understand how things worked out on a deep level. And thus destinied to be despised by every party of the equation. So in the end of the day, US forges good "commercial" relations, which being "win-win" till it suits every party. By sooner or later, this relaltions are expected to be broken. Even Israel, I believe, does not consider its relationship with US as "friendly".
I honestly do not understand this comment. At no point did NATO, at least officially, try to provide advanced training to the ZSU, at a large scale. The entire point was explicitly to provide basic training to help the ZSU with its insufficient capacity. I have never heard of a large scale officer training in NATO countries, have you?
The problem that the ZSU has is not at the tactical level. It is at the operational and strategic level. They are absolutely dire and incompetent at the former and basically do not have the latter. None of those can be fixed by NATO basic training, nor through NATO advisors at the genstab-U.
This just sounds like hearsay and, sorry to say, bullshit.
'NATO' - as such, didn't. USA (see: The Pentagon) - very much did. That's what led to the last-year's counteroffensive.
Obviously, they did so at 'strategic', instead of operational- and/or tactical level. So, yes, you're right: NATO never tried large-scale officer training of the ZSU.
Did the USA put entire unit staffs through their officer training courses? What is known publically is that the US advised whoever was in charge of that offensive, apparently not Zaluzhny but Syrskyi, and have done some wargaming. That doesn't constitute training in any shape or form. Also, surely the first bloody advice was not to tell the whole world where, when and with what they were planning to attack. Neither the ZSU, nor the UA gov, heeded even that basic recommendation.
The only way NATO could improve the ZSU officer corps, would be to take at least a division and train it entirely from top to bottom. That hasn't happened yet and it's not looking like it ever will. As things stand, these are two soviet armies fighting each other.
It seems that ZSU doesn't even operate at the division level, only up to brigade level.
A division is a very large scale formation, hard to operate and unwieldy even for experienced armies today, from what I understand
Correct, that's why it could be a watershed moment if nato actually trained a full division. It isn't going to happen though.
Another note, it is 4 months since gen. Popov is sacked. And I now even more firmly believe, that it was beacuse he rejected to start Vagner style attacks. Ever since ru offensive started in Oct. 2023 losses of armored tech to soldiers were 1 to 25. These 4 months those went to 1 to 50. Exactly as in Vagner times, Jan. to May 2023. This meant then that ru is "saving tech" for offensive, now it is most probably mean we would see more and more tech assaults and general intensification. So I do not know how much keeping reserves for that may play in what UA does, means using only bare minimum of reserves necessary.
Russia is running out of armour, so using less of it to support each assault.
Not sure, too good to be true. By all various factors and evidence, it is a deliberate strategy of saving mech component for Sep.-Nov. intensification of assaults. They still have at least 5000 of various armors, including tanks and IFVs, already near frontlines, not in storage. And it is still massively more then UA has or would have in the nearest future. Once they are down to say 2000, we can speak about UA having advantage and perspective of long term breakthroughs.
They're running very low on APCs & IFVs, It is showing in loss ratios, and is why, for the last few months, most of the assaults are in golf-carts and pit bikes. One estimate I saw recently actually had Ukraine head in operational tanks, 1600 to 1500. Ukraine's tank claims, and the numbers of Russian tank losses reported by Andrew Perpetua, have dropped noticeably over the last 6 months, because they're rarerer, while soft-skinned vehicles and golf carts have increased.
Well, all of Tom's comments and criticisms are well-founded and fair. We, Ukrainians, have seen all this criminal incompetence, looting and outright sabotage since 2014. We are not even surprised by this. Why? Because this system, like Putin's, cannot work in any other way. There is only one way to change it, but it is not very humane and tolerant of looters. Tom was right when he said that a fish rots from the head. That is, the root of the problem is in the system itself. The main and main problem of Ukraine is the oligarchy. Since Ukraine is divided among a narrow circle of owners, they will not allow the system to be changed and to release and punish their people. The oligarchy is afraid of unsystematic and disloyal people. Between competent and loyal, they will always choose loyal and incompetent. The Ukrainian oligarchy uses all possible methods and schemes to make the most of this war. The Ukrainian generals are also trying to make money in symbiosis with the oligarchy. Give you a real example? The well-known Bogdan self-propelled guns will be manufactured by MP Maksym Yefimov, who owns 98% of the shares of the Kramatorsk Machine Tool Plant, which was moved to Western Ukraine. This Yefimov was in Yanukovych's party and is a good friend of Poroshenko, who was also one of those who created the "Party of Regions". Together, these two connected to the scheme their old friend Serhii Pashynskyi, who owns the factory "Ukrainian armor".
https://mil.in.ua/uk/articles/ukrayinska-bronetehnika-novyj-zavod-bilshe-bogdan-ta-novatoriv-varta-2-ta-problemy-opk/#google_vignette
They lobbied and won government tenders to supply it to the Ukrainian army. They were helped in this by Dana Yarova, who is an adviser to the Deputy Minister of Defense in the Public "Anti-Corruption" Council under the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine. She is Poroshenko's and Pashinsky's person. Nothing is supplied to the Ukrainian army if none of the interested people make money from it. They usually make money on schemes to inflate prices for goods and on technical documentation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/12/world/europe/ukraine-arms-dealer-serhiy-pashinsky.html
Kramatorsk heavy machinery and Bohdana production was moved to Bohdan Motors facilities somewhere in Western UA btw.
I must admit: very good artillery piece and certain amendments made recently have made it much more better.
Good these self-propelled guns can only be said by the military who directly control them, and even then not on camera. But all the same, the main question remains the same as before: where was all this nine years ago? Who will be responsible for the fact that nothing was done, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians? I think the answer is obvious, that the whole rotten system is to blame, which is now successfully making money from the deaths of Ukrainians
....and that primarily thanks to Danish financing.
Is actually a prototype for similar solution: pay Ukrainians to build-up their own arms industry.
You know, Tom - political issues always beat every sense, especially in UA
You know, Tom - political issues always beat every sense, especially in UA
Bohdan motors was bankrupted before the war and hasn't produced a single vehicle since 2019.
Are you sure about that information?
Bankrupcy in UA (for oligarchs) means simply no obligation to pay bills and loans. Production facilities are still there, so it doesnt matter what to produce: buses, cars or SPA
There was 1 Bohdan Motors factory in the Western Ukraine. I guess this is about it. I'm just curious how nobody ever mentioned this except here.
I prefere not to go deeper into details. Sorry
By the way, I want to enlighten someone here at the expense of the publication "Ukrainian Pravda". Owner: Olena Prytula. This site is the most vivid example of selling journalistic services. They work for all oligarchic groups without exception. All journalists and all bloggers are gathered there only to present a purely oligarchic point of view and make money. You will not find independent journalists there, you will not find an independent opinion there. Therefore, you decide whether to trust this resource or not at your own peril and risk. I personally do not trust them, because I know and have read many journalists from this publication. For 15 years, I have developed immunity.
Fair enough.
Mind, I'm not 'advertising' UP. Rather pointing at a very specific article - which is excellently researched.
As they say, 'even a broken watch is showing the correct time' (and that twice a day).
Tom, I don't blame you for anything. I'm just warning those who don't know the policy of this information resource in advance. Sometimes good articles appear even on such trading resources, but this happens very, very rarely. Here you need to know well the author of the article and what mill he is trying to throw water at.
This is true of all journalists. Balancing UP, KP, KI, Euromaidan Press, NV, and Euro Pravda is kind of my every morning. Then leaven with US sources for some humor.
Makes sense that UP is oligarchy owned and operated - explains their move to get ads past my blocker. I have to cut/paste pieces into a text editor to not be distracted... whatever makes the cash, I suppose.
Yes, all the media lie. We all get our information from the media, who get paid for their lies. Moreover, even all of us lie sometimes looking each other in the eye. There is no person who would not lie in his life. Therefore, in order to get objective information, you need to have some experience, to be able to filter lies and get to that 10% of the truth. Believe me, I know very well which oligarchs own certain Ukrainian media, these or other journalists, and which media holding they work for.
I wanted to drop you a good article on this topic about the Ukrainian mass media, but to my surprise I found that it was deleted.
It’s alright, the English language coverage from Ukraine gives a really good sense of things.
Most of us lie to ourselves, so I don’t blame media outlets for having a perspective. Just have to know what they’re pushing.
Here I found her. Who owns the Ukrainian mass media. The article is in Ukrainian, so if you are interested, use a translator.
https://archive.ph/C09c6
Firefox has a reader mode which usually works pretty well. On iPhone, it’s the document icon to the right of the URL. I’m not sure how to invoke it on desktop.
Thanks. Private mode + adblock plus usually handles things, but every now and again an outlet gets greedy.
I use uBlock Origin in place of AdBlock Plus since years now, but around 2015 I used the latter. On both you have a button to select and block definitevely (in uBlock Origin, you also can block temporarily) any section of a web page.
From a technical standpoint, it actually creates automatically the correct code line in the blocking rules option.
It's the same icon in the same place on the desktop version of Firefox.
The Guardian article doesn’t on my reading say that the Ukrainians had been all that indiscreet. The Russians observed something that made them worry and were aware of their own weak points but evidently not enough to lead them to take serious precautions. That may not amount to a serious failure on the Ukrainian side.
Thanks for all this information!
Заміна бригад це завжди важко, і завжди супроводжується проблемами. Передача позицій триває не один день. Але новим піхотним підрозділам потрібен час, щоб вивчити місцевість. А таким підрозділам, як РЕР і РЕБ треба час щоб розгорнутись. Окопний РЕБ про який пише журналіст в Українській правді то дрібниця яка не має значення. Не РЕБ проблема, а невідповідність рівня підготовки і забезпечення підрозділів які виходять, і які заходять їм на заміну. Згідно статуту оборону можуть тримати навіть обмежено боєздатний підрозділ. Але ж якщо на важкій ділянці яку тримає сильний боєздатний підрозділ з напруженням усіх сил, замість нього поставити обмежено боєздатний підрозділ, тобто слабший, як за якістю засобів так і за кількістю і рівнем підготовки особового складу, то чи варто дивуватись подальшим відступам.
Yesno.
It's on top commanders to teach brigade- and battalion commanders to report sincerely. If they do not teach them this, then the brigade- and battalion commanders are explaining nonsense, on basis of which top commanders are bringing wrong decisions.
That's why I recommend reading Tatarigami...
Безумовно. Ніхто не ставить під сумнів необхідність підзвітності. Але ВСІХ рівнів командири часто не готові чути правдиві звіти знизу. І я не думаю, що це проблема притаманна виключно і тільки для української армії.
Татаригами вірно висвітлює один з аспектів проблем. Але це надто спрощений погляд на проблему. Все складніше. І пов'язане зокрема зі зміною характеру війни, домінуванням таких компонентів, як дрони. Які повністю змінили тактику бойових дій. Як наслідок мала б змінитись і методика оцінки боєздатності підрозділів, не на основі особового складу і кількості піхоти. А на основі забезпеченості підрозділів засобами РЕБ, рівнем навченості екіпажів БПЛА, кількості дронів на день і тд. Наразі це не може враховуватись при плануванні бо банально не передбачене статутами, але недооцінка цієї складової забезпечення бригад призводить до фатальних помилок. Такі ж фатальні помилки ми бачимо і у противника.
Це все так, але як часто пише Том останнім часом, доктрину і статути вже давно пора оновити. Невже Генштаб чи МінОборони не може знайти команду притомних офіцерів-технократів щоб оновити статути (додати інформацію про дрони і т д)?
Thanks Tom! Who is in control of Apanosovka and Vnezapnoe? In your previous update you mentioned that ZSU was back to them but now tou are saying that the Russians are from Korenevo to the border. Just trying to confirm….
Yes, the ZSU was back to Apanasovka around 14-15 September, then, seemingly, lost it again, to one of last attacks by the 106th VDV (Division).
Thanks
These famous Ukrainian drones.... It doesn't look like ordinary blow up of ammo storage. It's very suspicious how so much of scattered by separated locations ammo detonated almost simultaneously to produce 2.8 Richters earthquake. Couldn't stop thinking of these very strictly prohibited by USA strikes on russian soil.
I do wonder how can an UAV with 50kg (if as much?) warhead penetrate a bunker actually made to survive a hit from at 500kg bomb.... but, then, 'System Putin' came to my mind... plus the VSRF's (and VKS') practice of stocking ammo in its wooden crates outside the bunkers, too...
I am still a bit skeptical about UAVs, Palianytsia and similar official versions. Voyentorg version or some kind of newly developed/upgraded UA missiles make more sense for me...
Slowly the magnitude of Syrskyi's challenge is revealing itself. Zaluzhnyi did not do the hard job of visiting every frontline unit to discover what the area level commanders aren't telling him.
This, the Ukrainska Pravda piece, and an interview with a TDF Brigade officer in Ukrinform paint a telling portrait. UAF has plenty of good battalion/company leaders, a few decent generals, and a lot of Soviets brought in during mobilization.
Okay. This is fixable. It's a matter of pushing resources after demonstrated success and starving poor performers. Could explain the constant establishment of new brigades - this makes sense *if* good leaders are culled from under-performing brigades and paired with the top new recruits.
But you can't expect the dwindled remnants to hold a full sector... and Syrskyi isn't getting the data to know which brigades are deteriorating.
Anyway, so the 21st finally showed up again. Neat! Sorry about the Leo that just got burned... hurry up, Sweden, send another!
Wonder how many months it would take for someone to convert a Mirage 2000 to fire Meteor AAMs, if it's even possible...
Rafale-integrated, so maybe, given months of work behind the scenes? In theory, a Swedish AWACS could handle all targeting through Link-16, making the jet itself just a big booster. 200km+ range...
Hm... actually, along what I've just got to hear: not long at all!
I'll explain this at the next opportunity.
Around 2019, Indian Air Force wanted to integrate Meteor on its Mirage 2000 fleet, but didn't follow up in the end due to the high costs involved and the degraded efficiency of the missile on a lower-capacity fighter like the Mirage 2000. Indeed, it would have been necessary to replace the Mirage's RDY radar with a recent version of the Rafale's RBE2 radar to take full advantage of the Meteor's capabilities, which would have further increased costs.
The good news is that France, through the DGA (Direction Générale de l'Armement = Directorate General of Armament), knows how to do it because this has been done at least on one jet, the Mirage 2000 B501, which is a testbed aircraft for the Rafale and its successive upgrades (from F1 to the future F5).
The bad news is France is seriously indebted with a failing economic model (see our insane trade deficit. Regarding the GDP growth, it has essentially been artificially maintained by government indebtedness over several decades) and, on top of that, a chaotic political situation since the dissolution of the National Assembly last June... So I don't expect any integration of the Meteor on Mirage 2000-5F delivered to Ukraine.
I guess that it would be much better to just order Rafale or Gripen instead...
I think so too, particularly true for the Gripen which is perfectly suited to take-off from a road section, so virtually from anywhere, but I guess Macron just wanted to make his usual PR in order not to appear stingy in his material support to Ukraine.
After all, France hasn't given that much. Certainly, on the whole it's pretty good in terms of quality, because there are at least three state-of-the-art weapons systems (CaESAr howitzers and their related shells, HAMMER bombs, SCALP-EG missiles) that few countries can supply and produce over time and, ice on the cake, they seem to be really usefull and please Ukrainians. In the (near?) future, jet fighters like Mirage 2000-5F will surely be added to this list. But in terms of mass, French aid isn't up to the task, so Macron tries to compensate with the bare minimum.
That's how I see it, anyway.
Thanks for the update. You wrote: «But, don’t worry: help is underway. The Ukrainian Parliament has dismissed ‘crazy’ Maryana Bezuhla from the National Security Committee. Now everything is going to be instantly better… indeed: much, much, much better…» Hmmmm my sarcastometer sense is Tingeling here. Needs to have it checked again.
Removing and silencing critique... how opportune, isn't it?
Indeed. Lets hope somebody else picks it up. And thank you for adjusting my sarcastometer sense, seems to work just fine.
Hello Tom and thanks for all your great work, especially on Ukraine war!
I wanted to mention something about SCALP-EG and the planes which can use them. You said SCALP-EG can only be shot by two-seat aircrafts: Mirage 2000D and two-seat Rafale (i.e. Rafale B, for "biplace", meaning two-seater in french).
I'm far to have your expertise in military aeronautics and on military affairs in general, but it seems to me that SCALP-EG are employed since many years by single-seaters Rafale versions.
I was even going to mention that Mirage 2000-9 aircrafts of the United Arab Emirates can also fire Black Shaheen (the local name/version for the SCALP-EG/Storm Shadow missile), but I don't know if they can be only used by their two-seaters Mirage 2000-9 or also by their single-seaters Mirage 2000-9.
But for Rafale C (C for "chasseur" = fighter) and Rafale M (M for "Marine" = Navy, so the carrier-ready version) which are both single-seaters versions (a two-seater Rafale M was once considered, sometimes called Rafale N, but finally canceled for budgetary reasons), we can find on the web that SCALP-EG can be deployed on those two variants, so also shot by the sole pilot during missions I guess, otherwise I don't see the point ^^
Rafale C can carry up to two SCALP-EG whereas Rafale M can carry only one (on the hardpoint at the center of the fuselage, because of asymmetry risk during landing on carrier if only one of the two missiles have been fired in flight. So it's purely a regulatory limitation, not a technical one).
Indeed, in reaction to my 'de-facto question' about single-seat Mirage 2000s and SCALP-EGy, I've received a very good explanation. Going to explain this a the next opportunity.
As far as I know, also the Greek Rafales (which are single seaters) can carry a pair of SCALP-EGs