There's some contradictory info out there, maybe Tom can help set things straight, because at the same time theres rumors that AFU troops complain they don't see the supposed aid incoming.... yet the clearly better UA defenses and RU complains would indicate it is at least partially true. Maybe we can file the first part as disinfo, or its the simple reality that not all troops could have been resupplied so fast, or perhaos they material aid they received is not in line with their expectations.
That's not easy to explain because it only takes 2 troops in 2 different units to report entirely different things. It's all about specific people's point of view (and indeed: their 'field of view').
For example: one I've caught on the social media said, they are sent to capture Kharkiv. Then comes back a few days later to say out of 22 in his squad, 20 were killed in the first attack. Obviously, his reporting is going to say Ukrainians have a crazy artillery advantage. Artillerists supporting that attack are going to promptly agree, because, a battery trying to support it but lost 10-12 pieces and 20-30 people in a matter of one hour and the others survived only because they quickly stopped firing and run away to hide. Then there's a video showing 6-7 T-72s grinding through an Ukrainian minefield, their commander pushing them all the time, and they lose 3 tanks well before reaching Ukrainian positions...
And still, it's very likely the Ukrainian unit facing that attack is complaining because it hasn't got enough artillery ammunition - even if the artillery brigade supporting it killed 100+ Russians that day, and others were blown up on minefields or by FPVs well before these have reached the positions of that Ukrainian unit.
....and all that depends on 2-3 Ukrainian trucks carrying resupply artillery ammo reaching their destination on time.
....and then mind: that would be just that one, narrow sector: one Russian and one Ukrainian unit. It's similar or different on 10-15 other sectors of the frontline. And that's changing some 20-30 times a day.
Thus, it's hard to gauge precisely how is it where, when, even on what time of the day.
"battery trying to support it but lost 10-12 pieces and 20-30 people in a matter of one hour and the others survived only because they quickly stopped firing and run away to hide"
Good, have no mercy to orcs, Tom.)))))
Seriously , with such attrition rate RU artillery should be gone in two weeks.
Because it's got so much stored from the times of the Cold War.
Moreover, quite ironic you complain about this statement of mine, but ignore the fact that the VSRF is meanwhile replacing its tube artillery with (much more mobile) MRLS' and attack UAVs like Lancets and FPVs - which are also more precise than its worn out and/or old tubes.
Massive MLRS usage was a part Soviet doctrine since WW2. So, neither howitzers nor MLRS replace each other, just supplement. And RU artillery losses are lesser than 1 or 1.5 years ago when UA successfully introduced Himars and Excaliburs. Since Russian EW got stronger, the former and, especially, the latter got times less useful. Archers and Caesars are good, no doubts, but there are too few of them and numerous Lancets pressed them into "shoot and run" tactic.
The Russian and Ukrainian artillery loss rate has been pretty consistent throughout the war. Conversations with you would be more interesting if you dealt with actual facts.
Ok, graphs and tables based on Oryx data. Oryx is indeed the best source available, but well-known for understating UA losses. However, even the link you provided indicates that loss ratio of artillery is improving in RU favour in 2024. Effectively, losses are roughly equal today thanks to ubiquitous Lancets and Krasnopols.
I can´t imagine how the Ukrainians can organize a big counteroffensive capable of significant strategic achievements in some months (as the Americans I guess would like to have before the elections) with all the drones and mines the russians can deploy... And even if they wait for ammo supremacy next year how can they survive a battlefield in attack overcrowded by drones... I am so depressed at the moment...
I don't get the impression that anyone is pushing Ukraine to launch a major offensive anymore. Ukraine may or may not conduct a local counter attack as opportunity and capabilities allow but I don't expect a major offensive this year.
Electronic Warfare is an ever-changing environment. A lot can change in three months, let alone one or two years.
War is all about a battle of the wills. That includes not just everyone risking their life on the battlefield, but everyone that supports them off the battlefield. Stay strong. Ukraine is tough and they will prevail.
It's not how attritional warfare works. You've got to let go of the idea that a counteroffensive will somehow win the war. Many conflicts have been won by grinding down the enemy. Russia's on a downwards trajectory. It cannot hope to replace all the materiel it has lost which is why buggies and seventy-year old armoured tractors are replacing BMP-3s on the battlefield. Meanwhile, Ukraine is on an upwards curve. It's losses are being replaced by more modern, better gear. Russia's running out of time. Ukraine can wait.
Same as everywhere else, either 4 or 6. 4 if the battery (company in Nato) is part of a battalion of a Mechanized Brigade or 6 if it's part of a battalion of a Artillery Brigade. Artillery Battalions of a Artillery Brigade are stronger than their correspondent from a Mechanized Brigade.
in NATO an artillery company is also called a battery, and includes two rings of four guns, makes 8. Plus suppurting vehicles like supply trucks etc. should be at least 12 to 15, so its plausible to destroy 10 to 12 pieces.
First of all, you are wrong. In Nato, as in Russia, a battery, called company in Nato, has either 4 or 6 guns. I explained already when there are 4 and when there are 6. Only 120 mm mortar companies have more pieces but that's another issue. Russians consider them artillery also. Secondly, usually, when you talk about pieces and artillery battery in the same phrase, you think about guns. Nobody sane thinks about pieces of supply trucks or tents or loaves of bread.
Thank you very much. I have a feeling that the tide will never turn ... But Don and you are always teaching me what war means when I am totally desperate.
Agree with this…it is never cut and dried in war. I am saddened that the US and Europe didn’t go in and assist to help defend Ukraine in a way that would fully destroy Russia but I guess that was a pipe dream?
I fully believe the longer this goes on the more power Putin has. Idk -thanks though for your work!
Eu and Us interfering was unlikely indeed. But Putins power is a slipper concept. He collects it and hoards it, but he cannot be seen losing it at all. Possible but difficult. And the more power he has the more everything is his responsibility. Will someone hold him accountable? Needs to be at gun point, but what Else is new in Russia?
I think we should bear in mind that after months of having transitioned to war economy and also received a shitload of ammunition from North Korea, with their adversary getting their supply mostly dried up, the Russians are still attacking what are essentially the fringes of the country, and that with a lot of destruction, but very limited progress.
Long terms means lot of dead and wounded people in Ukraine, so it's hard to call "favor". More dead will be in Russia, but they are expendable because nobody cares about them, neither their relatives. And that's the Russian advantage - they can waste half of the nation for a few square km of territory and still feel victorious.
Compare the military help Ukraine received in the 1st 2 years of the war to what they are receiving now. Compare the massive popular response of the people in the beginning with loads of volunteers with today's images of deserted streets with men trying to avoid mobilization.
The country is going downhill fast.
The only possibility I see of them surviving in the medium term is if they come up with some massive AI drone capability to keep the Russians at bay.
Russian equipment is being destroyed faster than it can be produced or refurbished. The refurbished vehicles come from stockpiles that will generally be depleted sometime in 2025. 2/3 of their replacement vehicles come from those stockpiles. They only produce 50 artillery barrels a year and most of the artillery pieces in storage already have had their barrels removed. As the barrels wear, their range and accuracy is reduced and eventually the barrel bursts.
In the first two years, the US provided $75 billion in aid. This year alone they are spending $61 billion. For four months, when Ukraine wasn't receiving any significant amount of ammo, Russia drastically underperformed considering the circumstances. They now have as much as they did last October and those amounts will continue to climb over the next two years.
Providing the 165 km and 300 km ATACMS missiles has enhanced Ukraine's ability to strike deep and that has already paid dividends. If the US ever provides permission to use its weapons inside Russia it will greatly hamper Russia's war effort.
The Russian economy is already under a huge strain in terms of manpower and producing income. The attacks on the refineries are reducing their income.
The AI for terminal guidance on FPV drones is being tested in battlefield conditions right now. The Wild Hornets leader plans on operational deployment this summer. If terminal guidance is deployed on strategic drones then any Russian aircraft within 1500 km is at risk.
I think your analysis of the challenges facing Russia. However, the fact that Russia can spend lives carelessly to gain some hedges or villiges is a problem for Ukraine, because constant loss and constant withdrawals are psychologically challenging. And so was the lack of support for months. If the Orkanger menace gets back in the White House, another challenge. So there are some troublesome long term challenges for Ukraine. But the factors you list against Russia are certainly important. And we definetly need to put our money where our mouth is (here I am thinking about our government.)
As of February, the US committed 0.32% of its GDP towards Ukrainian aid. I'm not advocating for a 40% effort, as it was for WW2, but just imagine if the US dedicated 2% towards stopping Russian aggression and the implications it might have on other authoritarian governments. I think it's worth that level of effort.
There are many advantages to empathy. One of the challenges of empathy is to deal with the pain of difficult times. We know from history that many people have survived difficult times and endured the pains that come with them. We will do the same.
And that's just a US perspective. European aid matches the US so far. And it's increasing. ALL the F-16s donated are from Europe. Munition production lines are gearing up across Europe. Ukraine is not going to suffer again the shortages inflicted on it by the Republicans.
If one side is running out of a resource, the solution is a combination of conservation, increased efficiency, substitution, increased production and imports.
They've been saying that Russia was running out of barrels since 2022.
It will not happen, just as Ukraine is not going to run out of ammo.
A crucial resource you can't just print, is soldiers. Russia has no issues with recruitment. Ukraine on the other hand, does.
"And if these stop for a minute, the place is hit by dozens of FPV and Lancet strikes."
Must make a correction, Tom. Lancets seldomly used against stationary targets. And, I guess, these rare cases occur when intial primary targets (armour, howitzers) got vanished/escaped from tracking and in order not to lose precious drone in vain, re-direction to secondary stationary targets take place.
It's a good link to show us what the Russians want us to see - which is videos showing Lancet-strikes on mobile targets.
However: reality is that such strikes are minority in comparison to how is the majority of Lancets deployed. Namely: to strike Ukrainian positions (because the Russian artillery is not precise enough to do that job).
Only козломордий dumbass like you can take lostarmour as a proof of anything real. It can only be used to prove how stupid ruzzians are how deep their fakes are
Thanks Tom and Don for so a painful but very valuable work. Even the worst of info is better when didn’t come from BS Putin fans or Western Miopic Media.
Still hoping to read that the much vaunted western aid is finally in Ukrainian hands.
I wondered if you have any info on developments in anti drone warfare - in particular forms which don't rely on jamming (which won't work with AI based attack drones)? Eg drones which hunt enemy drones; radar & longer-range guns or vectored lightish aircraft well behind zero line; EMP; ....
Most of the drone vs. drone combat is Russian drones hunting Ukrainian drones. But that is some fraction of 1% of the drone activity.
In Part 4 of the Weekly I posted an update from the Wild Hornets leader that spoke about AI, and I expanded on the interview that Tom posted on FB regarding EW and drones.
Regarding Sodol: The press needs to write something. If there is nothing known and not enough time to research, they are just writing that their readers will most likely buy.
As non of the generals is most likely young enough to be his entire career trained according to NATO standard, it's buy able. So just go with it as people never change...
That said: if there would be 'heavy' losses, that would become known - at least 'indirectly'.
See the losses of the 115th Mech, during the Russian breakthrough at Ocheretyne: 20-30 killed and 100+ wounded became known. See the 72nd losses to UMPK-strike: less than 10 killed, but dozens wounded, and it became known.
Thank you for another candid and comprehensive update. It does feel that the Russians are pushing very hard currently and grasping for any small gains.
Combining perfectly your social engagment with your great character and additionally gives a perfect answer to people that don't understand how the Russian government is communicating.
Because the Russian window of opportunity is fast closing, they are pressing everywhere for a breakthrough. But I don't think that they can utilise such a breakthrough anymore, as they're spread too thin
That's my own interpretation of the situation, judging from data and my prejudices (yes, I admit that I am prejudiced). But, as a technically trained guy, I tend to think in numbers and capabilities, and I am trying to keep my prejudices at a low level.
Of course, there may be currently a collapse somewhere across the 1.000+ km front. I don't know. But that's the reason both sides keep reserves, in order to fix/repair the damage. If Ukraine has the will to win, the tools will be found to support them. After all, supporting a conventional war against Russia is peanuts for the NATO countries in financial terms, and the violence unleashed in 2022 made more easy to gear up and produce more munitions and equipment in the West.
That's my reading, too. Theoretically, I would expect them, to have found a "schwerpunkt" - a pressure point where they would throw all their available resources, in order to achieve a breakthrough (and exploit it).
But the battlefield is so transparent to drones it's almost impossible to concentrate enough heavy forces and equipment in a sector without the enemy noticing.
thank you Tom, this sarcasm in the morning is like a breath of fresh air
Thanks for all this information. Does this mention of Ukrainian artillery advantage constitute a ray of hope? I could certainly do with one of those
There's some contradictory info out there, maybe Tom can help set things straight, because at the same time theres rumors that AFU troops complain they don't see the supposed aid incoming.... yet the clearly better UA defenses and RU complains would indicate it is at least partially true. Maybe we can file the first part as disinfo, or its the simple reality that not all troops could have been resupplied so fast, or perhaos they material aid they received is not in line with their expectations.
That's not easy to explain because it only takes 2 troops in 2 different units to report entirely different things. It's all about specific people's point of view (and indeed: their 'field of view').
For example: one I've caught on the social media said, they are sent to capture Kharkiv. Then comes back a few days later to say out of 22 in his squad, 20 were killed in the first attack. Obviously, his reporting is going to say Ukrainians have a crazy artillery advantage. Artillerists supporting that attack are going to promptly agree, because, a battery trying to support it but lost 10-12 pieces and 20-30 people in a matter of one hour and the others survived only because they quickly stopped firing and run away to hide. Then there's a video showing 6-7 T-72s grinding through an Ukrainian minefield, their commander pushing them all the time, and they lose 3 tanks well before reaching Ukrainian positions...
And still, it's very likely the Ukrainian unit facing that attack is complaining because it hasn't got enough artillery ammunition - even if the artillery brigade supporting it killed 100+ Russians that day, and others were blown up on minefields or by FPVs well before these have reached the positions of that Ukrainian unit.
....and all that depends on 2-3 Ukrainian trucks carrying resupply artillery ammo reaching their destination on time.
....and then mind: that would be just that one, narrow sector: one Russian and one Ukrainian unit. It's similar or different on 10-15 other sectors of the frontline. And that's changing some 20-30 times a day.
Thus, it's hard to gauge precisely how is it where, when, even on what time of the day.
"battery trying to support it but lost 10-12 pieces and 20-30 people in a matter of one hour and the others survived only because they quickly stopped firing and run away to hide"
Good, have no mercy to orcs, Tom.)))))
Seriously , with such attrition rate RU artillery should be gone in two weeks.
Two weeks? Nope. But in two years.
Because it's got so much stored from the times of the Cold War.
Moreover, quite ironic you complain about this statement of mine, but ignore the fact that the VSRF is meanwhile replacing its tube artillery with (much more mobile) MRLS' and attack UAVs like Lancets and FPVs - which are also more precise than its worn out and/or old tubes.
Massive MLRS usage was a part Soviet doctrine since WW2. So, neither howitzers nor MLRS replace each other, just supplement. And RU artillery losses are lesser than 1 or 1.5 years ago when UA successfully introduced Himars and Excaliburs. Since Russian EW got stronger, the former and, especially, the latter got times less useful. Archers and Caesars are good, no doubts, but there are too few of them and numerous Lancets pressed them into "shoot and run" tactic.
The Russian and Ukrainian artillery loss rate has been pretty consistent throughout the war. Conversations with you would be more interesting if you dealt with actual facts.
https://github.com/leedrake5/Russia-Ukraine
Ok, graphs and tables based on Oryx data. Oryx is indeed the best source available, but well-known for understating UA losses. However, even the link you provided indicates that loss ratio of artillery is improving in RU favour in 2024. Effectively, losses are roughly equal today thanks to ubiquitous Lancets and Krasnopols.
I can´t imagine how the Ukrainians can organize a big counteroffensive capable of significant strategic achievements in some months (as the Americans I guess would like to have before the elections) with all the drones and mines the russians can deploy... And even if they wait for ammo supremacy next year how can they survive a battlefield in attack overcrowded by drones... I am so depressed at the moment...
I don't get the impression that anyone is pushing Ukraine to launch a major offensive anymore. Ukraine may or may not conduct a local counter attack as opportunity and capabilities allow but I don't expect a major offensive this year.
Electronic Warfare is an ever-changing environment. A lot can change in three months, let alone one or two years.
War is all about a battle of the wills. That includes not just everyone risking their life on the battlefield, but everyone that supports them off the battlefield. Stay strong. Ukraine is tough and they will prevail.
It's not how attritional warfare works. You've got to let go of the idea that a counteroffensive will somehow win the war. Many conflicts have been won by grinding down the enemy. Russia's on a downwards trajectory. It cannot hope to replace all the materiel it has lost which is why buggies and seventy-year old armoured tractors are replacing BMP-3s on the battlefield. Meanwhile, Ukraine is on an upwards curve. It's losses are being replaced by more modern, better gear. Russia's running out of time. Ukraine can wait.
"battery trying to support it but lost 10-12 pieces" 10-12 pieces of what ? That must have been a hell of a battery, maybe even a Grande Batterie.
Aha. What's the nominal complement of a VSRF battery of D-30s or D-20s?
Same as everywhere else, either 4 or 6. 4 if the battery (company in Nato) is part of a battalion of a Mechanized Brigade or 6 if it's part of a battalion of a Artillery Brigade. Artillery Battalions of a Artillery Brigade are stronger than their correspondent from a Mechanized Brigade.
So make that "2-3 batteries trying to support..."
Radio Erevan style.
in NATO an artillery company is also called a battery, and includes two rings of four guns, makes 8. Plus suppurting vehicles like supply trucks etc. should be at least 12 to 15, so its plausible to destroy 10 to 12 pieces.
First of all, you are wrong. In Nato, as in Russia, a battery, called company in Nato, has either 4 or 6 guns. I explained already when there are 4 and when there are 6. Only 120 mm mortar companies have more pieces but that's another issue. Russians consider them artillery also. Secondly, usually, when you talk about pieces and artillery battery in the same phrase, you think about guns. Nobody sane thinks about pieces of supply trucks or tents or loaves of bread.
Thanks. Another great update.
Thank you very much. I have a feeling that the tide will never turn ... But Don and you are always teaching me what war means when I am totally desperate.
Agree with this…it is never cut and dried in war. I am saddened that the US and Europe didn’t go in and assist to help defend Ukraine in a way that would fully destroy Russia but I guess that was a pipe dream?
I fully believe the longer this goes on the more power Putin has. Idk -thanks though for your work!
Eu and Us interfering was unlikely indeed. But Putins power is a slipper concept. He collects it and hoards it, but he cannot be seen losing it at all. Possible but difficult. And the more power he has the more everything is his responsibility. Will someone hold him accountable? Needs to be at gun point, but what Else is new in Russia?
I think we should bear in mind that after months of having transitioned to war economy and also received a shitload of ammunition from North Korea, with their adversary getting their supply mostly dried up, the Russians are still attacking what are essentially the fringes of the country, and that with a lot of destruction, but very limited progress.
And the long term trends favor Ukraine.
Long terms means lot of dead and wounded people in Ukraine, so it's hard to call "favor". More dead will be in Russia, but they are expendable because nobody cares about them, neither their relatives. And that's the Russian advantage - they can waste half of the nation for a few square km of territory and still feel victorious.
You speak the truth.
Unfortunately they can indeed waste lives like ther is no tomorrow. But somewhere there is a breaking point. Where I dont know.
"long term trends favor Ukraine. "
???
Is this a joke ?
Compare the military help Ukraine received in the 1st 2 years of the war to what they are receiving now. Compare the massive popular response of the people in the beginning with loads of volunteers with today's images of deserted streets with men trying to avoid mobilization.
The country is going downhill fast.
The only possibility I see of them surviving in the medium term is if they come up with some massive AI drone capability to keep the Russians at bay.
No, it's not a joke.
Russian equipment is being destroyed faster than it can be produced or refurbished. The refurbished vehicles come from stockpiles that will generally be depleted sometime in 2025. 2/3 of their replacement vehicles come from those stockpiles. They only produce 50 artillery barrels a year and most of the artillery pieces in storage already have had their barrels removed. As the barrels wear, their range and accuracy is reduced and eventually the barrel bursts.
In the first two years, the US provided $75 billion in aid. This year alone they are spending $61 billion. For four months, when Ukraine wasn't receiving any significant amount of ammo, Russia drastically underperformed considering the circumstances. They now have as much as they did last October and those amounts will continue to climb over the next two years.
Providing the 165 km and 300 km ATACMS missiles has enhanced Ukraine's ability to strike deep and that has already paid dividends. If the US ever provides permission to use its weapons inside Russia it will greatly hamper Russia's war effort.
The Russian economy is already under a huge strain in terms of manpower and producing income. The attacks on the refineries are reducing their income.
The AI for terminal guidance on FPV drones is being tested in battlefield conditions right now. The Wild Hornets leader plans on operational deployment this summer. If terminal guidance is deployed on strategic drones then any Russian aircraft within 1500 km is at risk.
I think your analysis of the challenges facing Russia. However, the fact that Russia can spend lives carelessly to gain some hedges or villiges is a problem for Ukraine, because constant loss and constant withdrawals are psychologically challenging. And so was the lack of support for months. If the Orkanger menace gets back in the White House, another challenge. So there are some troublesome long term challenges for Ukraine. But the factors you list against Russia are certainly important. And we definetly need to put our money where our mouth is (here I am thinking about our government.)
As of February, the US committed 0.32% of its GDP towards Ukrainian aid. I'm not advocating for a 40% effort, as it was for WW2, but just imagine if the US dedicated 2% towards stopping Russian aggression and the implications it might have on other authoritarian governments. I think it's worth that level of effort.
There are many advantages to empathy. One of the challenges of empathy is to deal with the pain of difficult times. We know from history that many people have survived difficult times and endured the pains that come with them. We will do the same.
And that's just a US perspective. European aid matches the US so far. And it's increasing. ALL the F-16s donated are from Europe. Munition production lines are gearing up across Europe. Ukraine is not going to suffer again the shortages inflicted on it by the Republicans.
If one side is running out of a resource, the solution is a combination of conservation, increased efficiency, substitution, increased production and imports.
They've been saying that Russia was running out of barrels since 2022.
It will not happen, just as Ukraine is not going to run out of ammo.
A crucial resource you can't just print, is soldiers. Russia has no issues with recruitment. Ukraine on the other hand, does.
It's hard to have a conversation if you're not willing to accept facts based on satellite imagery. Come back in two years and maybe we can talk then.
Today's images of deserted streets with men trying to avoid mobilization is a good joke for anyone living in Ukraine, thank you for making my day. :D
"And if these stop for a minute, the place is hit by dozens of FPV and Lancet strikes."
Must make a correction, Tom. Lancets seldomly used against stationary targets. And, I guess, these rare cases occur when intial primary targets (armour, howitzers) got vanished/escaped from tracking and in order not to lose precious drone in vain, re-direction to secondary stationary targets take place.
That's simply not true. They hit stationary primary targets all the time.
Dear Don, as I always advise, see lostarmour.info for Lancet hits.
https://lostarmour.info/tags/lancet
It is a good link to understand the number of hits on UA artillery as well.
It's a good link to show us what the Russians want us to see - which is videos showing Lancet-strikes on mobile targets.
However: reality is that such strikes are minority in comparison to how is the majority of Lancets deployed. Namely: to strike Ukrainian positions (because the Russian artillery is not precise enough to do that job).
Dear Tom! Stop responding to this Russian troll "Tupolev" and let him rid us all of his Putin propaganda.
Sorry, Tom, wrong. For stationary targets FFVs are mainly used. Lancets are for mobile targets.
Only козломордий dumbass like you can take lostarmour as a proof of anything real. It can only be used to prove how stupid ruzzians are how deep their fakes are
is that one of that sources that found out russia destroyed all 50 of the 20 HIMARS one month before them got delivered quite a while ago?
Sodol is not a commander of the Group Tavriya, it's Group Khortytsia
Thx. Corrected!
Thanks Tom and Don for so a painful but very valuable work. Even the worst of info is better when didn’t come from BS Putin fans or Western Miopic Media.
Still hoping to read that the much vaunted western aid is finally in Ukrainian hands.
I wondered if you have any info on developments in anti drone warfare - in particular forms which don't rely on jamming (which won't work with AI based attack drones)? Eg drones which hunt enemy drones; radar & longer-range guns or vectored lightish aircraft well behind zero line; EMP; ....
Have posted something at the end of my last update, back on 18 May.
Other than that: sorry, lacking time to track that too (already too busy just with tracking the air war - and that within context of the ground war).
Most of the drone vs. drone combat is Russian drones hunting Ukrainian drones. But that is some fraction of 1% of the drone activity.
In Part 4 of the Weekly I posted an update from the Wild Hornets leader that spoke about AI, and I expanded on the interview that Tom posted on FB regarding EW and drones.
Thanks Tom
Regarding Sodol: The press needs to write something. If there is nothing known and not enough time to research, they are just writing that their readers will most likely buy.
As non of the generals is most likely young enough to be his entire career trained according to NATO standard, it's buy able. So just go with it as people never change...
Is there a estimate about Ukranian losses in the recent days? its good to read that the russian are bleeding but how much ukraine is too?
None I would know about.
That said: if there would be 'heavy' losses, that would become known - at least 'indirectly'.
See the losses of the 115th Mech, during the Russian breakthrough at Ocheretyne: 20-30 killed and 100+ wounded became known. See the 72nd losses to UMPK-strike: less than 10 killed, but dozens wounded, and it became known.
Thank you for another candid and comprehensive update. It does feel that the Russians are pushing very hard currently and grasping for any small gains.
Dear Tom,
I have a suggestion for a new summer outfit:
https://www.qwertee.com/shop/tees/sharkasm-778
Combining perfectly your social engagment with your great character and additionally gives a perfect answer to people that don't understand how the Russian government is communicating.
Thanks for the update. This all out offensive is concerning, but lets see what comes out of it.
Because the Russian window of opportunity is fast closing, they are pressing everywhere for a breakthrough. But I don't think that they can utilise such a breakthrough anymore, as they're spread too thin
Well that would be my rational analysis too, but me fear is not rationale. But good to see others think the same way.
That's my own interpretation of the situation, judging from data and my prejudices (yes, I admit that I am prejudiced). But, as a technically trained guy, I tend to think in numbers and capabilities, and I am trying to keep my prejudices at a low level.
Of course, there may be currently a collapse somewhere across the 1.000+ km front. I don't know. But that's the reason both sides keep reserves, in order to fix/repair the damage. If Ukraine has the will to win, the tools will be found to support them. After all, supporting a conventional war against Russia is peanuts for the NATO countries in financial terms, and the violence unleashed in 2022 made more easy to gear up and produce more munitions and equipment in the West.
Thanks for the report Tom
This is Kremlin logic to push as hard as possible on all fronts before Kyiv gets the shells and other weapons.
That's my reading, too. Theoretically, I would expect them, to have found a "schwerpunkt" - a pressure point where they would throw all their available resources, in order to achieve a breakthrough (and exploit it).
But the battlefield is so transparent to drones it's almost impossible to concentrate enough heavy forces and equipment in a sector without the enemy noticing.
Thanks for the update!!