124 Comments
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

It is interesting how the Russians have been adapting, they have improved the UMPK Kit, they are doing SEAD, they have destroid the Patriot systems and in some cases maneuver warfare, I read other analysts and they see with some hope the arrival of the MLU VIpers, something that already you analyzed in the saga "It's a stupid range", Thanks again Tom

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

no need to under/overestimate russians. they are smart, fast learning and adapting enemy with huge financial leverage, but still too weak in techs, they are able to recover USSR programs, but have not enough think-tanks to develop or even back-engineering new products

Expand full comment

Agree MaxN, 👌

Expand full comment
Mar 26·edited Mar 26

Lancets?

UMPKs?

Zircons?

Orlans?

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

Lancets - theoretically yes. all other stuff - replica/license or ex-USSR programs. nothing new

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

Sullivan has already ensured Ukraine will probably get a few F16s so the Russians can adapt to them. Unfortunate circumstances really

Expand full comment

The problem are not the planes, right now there are 12 each available from Holland, Denmark and Norway. The problem are the pilots (only 12 in training now) and the maintainers.

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

2 years ago when we clamored for sending everything they said the problem is it would take 2 years to train the pilots, F16s were too advanced etc, etc, and in 2 years time the war could be over. The point is to send as much as possible, train as many as possible and pivot defence industry as quickly as possible to defeat the Russians as quickly as possible before they adapt. Thank God the UK led the way

Expand full comment

The problem with pilots is war itself. In normal circumstances Ukraine would send it's best pilots to train on F-16's but the ongoing war means that they cant simply take their best pilots out of the service because this could mean bigger losses, accidents etc due to less experienced pilots replacing them - even if temporarily.

This means that at least some pilots sent abroad may well have to start "basic flight" on small training aircraft (not F-16). Also in some cases supposedly they have to learn English too which adds another barrier. But it is necessary because ultimately Ukraine will fully transfer to F-16's in the future regardless if there's a war or not.

As more and more countries swap out their F-16's for more modern fighters then these F-16 can be sent to Ukraine. Also it's best to have more aircraft than pilots for spares and in case a pilot manages to eject before the place itself is totaled. Or in case Russia manages to destroy some in one location on ground.

Expand full comment

So you're saying since there werent enough pilots with basic training yet not in active services so the solution was to delay the training of cadets to 2 years later? I think you missed my point. Its inevitable Ukraine is eventually going to get most NATO weapons systems so best time is to start training and providing as much equipment as possible is today not tomorrow. Also for your information, we had here in the US 150 F16s and F15s in great condition available to be delivered to Ukraine by Feb 2022 holding other things constant. Eric Prince proposed to the White House to provide these aircraft along with volunteer pilots, maintenance staff and start training of Ukrainian pilots as soon as 2022, which the seasoned lawyers refused ofcourse. The issue again is delaying things then sending them in small bits so the Russians can adapt to them as well as not pivoting the defence industrial base to producing more equipment. This is the problem. Ukraine has barely done anything wrong if we're being honest. I dont know any NATO senior officer who would have wanted to fight the Russians with the equipment and resources Ukraine has.

Expand full comment

"Ukraine has barely done anything wrong if we're being honest." If we are really honest they f'ed up in a monumental way several times: the treason / idiotic mistake to leave the south entirely undefended on 24.02, grinding some of their best brigades in Bahmut in exchange for Ru convicts, not establishing industrial scale production of artillery and small arms ammo until well over a year into the war, not conducting full mobilization until now, to name just the most obvious and undisputable ones.

Expand full comment

I maybe should have worded it differently. Ukraine has done very well despite some blunders here and there. I dont think I'm in a position to criticize them looking at how things were stacked against them. They have done tremendously well but its us in the West who have failed them so far.

Expand full comment

It would be astonishing if Ukraine did *everything* perfectly

(the greatest blunder was the lack of troops covering the South - and such errors are being paid with lots of blood and tears).

But imagine the alternative: Kiev falling because there weren't enough troops in the North?

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

perfect analysis, but unfortunately no good news for UA. more bad news: HU and SK refused to take part in art ammo supply union (it was expected, but is still very unpleasant)

Zirkons seems to be launched from ground launchers based on standard sea 40Ft containers (similar art and fashion as Shakheds launcher), they use not liquid, but hard reactive fuel (RUMINT). Fortunately, production capacities are very limited. Hope, debils in the US are able at least to control sanctions regime, if not supporting UA with funds and ammos: almost 90% of chips and micro schemes are of US/Taiwan/EU origin

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

Thanks for report.

1. As I understood 2 Cyrkones were shot down. At least it is good, because otherwise it would be much worse

2. In your opinion, what is the most likely reason why Ukrainians stopped shot down VKS planes. You stated a few reasons yesterday but what is main, in your opinion?

3. Yesterday Crimea strike is claimed to be partially caused by Neptune's cruise missiles? Any ideas about type of launcher?

4. Can cruise missiles have cluster warhead?

Expand full comment

2. IMHO not enough launchers and missiles. Rare things to be kept safe, especially if have clear understanding they will not be replaced

3. Usual/standard Naptune launcher. Speciality - missile adopted to hit ground targets

Expand full comment

But the cost wise 2 Patriot launchers vs 10 ruzz bagels. What is winning?

Expand full comment

"...they will not be replaced..." - they will be, and most likely - has already been replaced.

Expand full comment
author

1.) 2 out of 8 is not even 'nice'. It only confirms that there are still big gaps in the PSU's air defence coverage.

2.) As explained yesterday: combination of the Russians releasing UMPKs from 60+km, lack of missiles, inability of firing units to survive if they move closer than 50km to the frontline.

3.) Nope. But, probably custom-tailored Neptune launchers.

4.) Yes, of course it can. See BGM-109D (aka TLAM-D).

Expand full comment

For cyrcons I meant that they are possible to be shotted down, because it is advertised as absolutely impossible to be shot down by existing SAMs, but Patriot or SAMP can do it, so it is a problem of quantity not principal inability to intercept .

About 2, as I understood your solution is more Patriots, missles to them and better cover of close range SAMs against drones, isn't it?

Expand full comment
author

Of course, yes: everything that's flying can be shot down, too. There are no exceptions in this regards.

Re. Patriots: yup, there are too few firing units but to expose them to the risk which would be necessary to force the VKS to drop UMPKs from 70+ km....

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

Inability of firing units to survive would be diminished significantly if they won't stay 3+ hours in one place (HUMINT).

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

The French Apache, father of the Scalp, has cluster munitions.

Expand full comment

Thanks Tom!

Several questions:

1. Wasn’t the strike at Odessa after Kyiv? At least that was the chronology of reporting in Ukrainian media.

2. You said Kyiv was lucky. Did they shoot down the missiles or they missed? That’s important - whether Patriot is effective or not.

Expand full comment

For 1. Yes. Odessa was the next target. As far as I know a missile didn’t hit anything in town. Just a lot of windows fell out, and some injuries, and that is according to the mayor of the city.

Expand full comment

And 3 ladies injured with a hit on the civil infrastructure. But I’m not sure if that is the strike Tom has in mind. My first impression was - the Russians couldn’t hit Kyiv, ok let’s strike something in Odessa just to please the bosses. But Tom says 4 missiles at Odessa - yet if something big was hit, it would have found its way in the media (including Internet) I think

Expand full comment

Truhanov, the mayor, spoke only about broken windows and a couple of injuries. You can sign up to his FB page. Oleg Kiper, the head of oblast war administration, also didn’t mention anything out of the ordinary.

Expand full comment
deletedMar 26
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Yes, that’s Oleg Kiper, the head, and he says the same thing.

Expand full comment
author

1.) Yes, have misunderstood related reporting - probably because that from Kyiv is always the fastest.

2.) Yes, they did. However, when something travels at such speeds like Zirkon... well, even small pieces remain lethal - and large are causing plenty of damage.

Expand full comment

Sometimes your reports sound overly pessimistic, sometimes overly (yet relatively) optimistic. I mean that has always been the case of Russian advances - send more people after the dead. And yet here we are with small changes in the front. That’s why I’ve been saying Russian will run first of people than weapons (and I had the same thought after reading Don’s optimistic piece yesterday about Russia going to run out of IFVs in 2025, artillery barrels, etc)

Expand full comment
author
Mar 26·edited Mar 26Author

Sounds like I'm doing the right thing, because I'm actually striving to keep my assessments realistic.

The rest is the matter of everybody's own interpretation.

And re. Don's assessment: is Ok. But, it's still nine months until 2025. And even then, he didn't say the Russians are going to run out of IFV at 00.01hrs of 1 January 2025.

Expand full comment

Do you think US just let Ukraine die?

No weapons until end of 2024?

Expand full comment
Mar 26·edited Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

Ukraine will survive without US aid, it will just suffer a lot more. Needlessly.

There are several possibilities of US aid being resumed before the end of 2024. Time will tell.

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

I'm reading that Mike Johnson is supposed to put the support bill to the floor, honest-to-god, once the House reconvenes. Since the MAGAng is looking to finish him off anyway, this could be believable.

Assuming the president has signed it, how much time would it be until the first batch of the most badly needed shells, missiles etc. reach the frontline? I assume they are not already bundled, gift-wrapped, and ready to be shipped, just waiting for the approval to happen?

Expand full comment

The Czech initiative shells are arriving by ship and many report June as the delivery date.

I don't know the details of loading a C-5, but it can carry 281k lbs. So, strictly by weight, it could theoretically carry 2800 rounds. Ukraine uses about 2000 rounds a day now and fired around 6,000 rounds a day during its offensive.

I don't know how many rounds are stored in Germany or Poland. Trains are the best way to move a large amount of ammo in terms of fuel and speed.

Expand full comment

Thanks!

Let's assume that the Czech-organized and Europe-manufactured stocks are a given, they will arrive somehow. What about the stocks provided specifically by the US (since these are the ones affected by the deadlock in Congress)? If a single C-5 carries a day's worth of ammo, then even a stockpile enough for weeks can be deployed pretty quickly, if it is available. But do we have any info on how long it takes, typically, to _pull_ these stocks from the US warehouses and pack them up for transportation, once the order is given? Would it take a week or two? Or a month or two?

Expand full comment

I'll believe Mike Johnson when the support bill enters the floor.

Not before.

(He looks like a very sneaky guy, always going to stall with false promises and delays)

Expand full comment

... well, he's a Young Earth creationist. He might believe God created the Speaker to be smarmy, Trump to be president, and Ukraine to be a Russian province.

Expand full comment
Mar 27Liked by Sarcastosaurus

Running out of refurbished equipment *some time* in 2025 puts a fairly hard constraint on Russia's war effort. I read that before that, money issues are going to make things very 'interesting' in Russia. This makes me think Russia is going to go all out to discourage the West this year (election meddling, threats, disinformation), i.e. that this year is the decider for Russia - discourage the West sufficiently, or lose.

Expand full comment

Here is a detailed description how the discouragement works https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/denying-russia%E2%80%99s-only-strategy-success

Expand full comment

That's a good and timely read, thanks

Expand full comment

The Russian economy is under severe pressure. They've taken a lot of measures to keep it running, but these measures cannot last. No one has set a date for when the economic bubble will burst, but this is what the head of Russia's Central Bank said: "If we try to drive faster than the car's design and push on the gas as hard as we can, then the engine will overheat sooner or later and we won't get far. We may go fast, but not for long."

Expand full comment

She said that as the defense for her decision to keep the interest rate at 15%. This is a strong counter-inflation measure that makes credits very expensive thus it slows down the economy. It draws back the money that the government pays to the military and to the families of deceased ones. Thus their economy is balanced, and they even stopped drawing from their reserve funds.

Their worst problem is too low unemployment rate which means businesses have hard time finding employees, thus they need to raise salaries which means all the goods gradually become more expensive.

Expand full comment

I've read several economists that say the pressures on the Russian economy keep building and that a lot of these measures will work for 'a while' but not indefinitely.

Something both Russia and Ukraine have in common is that the exodus of millions of people have hurt their economy, and the more people that join the army, the more their economies will suffer. Israel's economy reportedly suffered by the military call ups. External economic aid is also vitally important for Ukraine.

Expand full comment

Israel is 8M (10M?) with 1M? in the army.

Ukraine was 40M with 10M left, 1M in the army, 0.4M casualties and very bad demographics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine#/media/File:Ukraine_2023_population_pyramid.svg

Russia is 120M (140M?) with 0.5M left, 1M in the army and 0.4M casualties.

Expand full comment

And that's the thing. Ukraine will continue to receive aid, but Russia gets a good deal only from NK with their barter arrangement. The rest of the so-called 'strategic partners' are fleecing Russia for all they're worth, while they still can.

Expand full comment

The stockpiles are where Russia is getting 3/4+ of their new vehicles. When the stockpiles have been expended, the rate of replacement vehicles will drop significantly, even if production is increased by 100%. (Evidence suggests production has been increased by less than 50%).

The number of vehicles Russia (or Ukraine) has is always a function of production/aid minus losses. Russian losses have always been higher than their production, thus lowering the number of vehicles on hand. With a lower rate of production (near the end or after 2025), their number of vehicles in the army will be reduced much quicker.

Expand full comment

There has been videos of some assaults with DesertCross1000 cars - it could mean that some VSFR units were, at least temporarily, out of APCs/IFVs recently. E.g. see https://en.defence-ua.com/news/russian_forces_commence_offensive_using_golf_carts_due_to_armata_funding_shortage_and_bmp_shortages-9727.html

Expand full comment

The smaller and faster vehicles are less sure to be hit by a drone. IFVs just don't survive.

Expand full comment

Russia's assaulted Avdiivka a couple times in trucks and motorcycles back in October. They assault in these golf carts all the time and drones hit them all the time. One ran over a mine and launched one of the passengers 30 meters from the vehicle. I've seen them in Avdiivka and Krynky.

https://twitter.com/JulianRoepcke/status/1764693596291182747

Expand full comment

I also heard that Kharkiv is without electricity. Supposedly Russians hit an electric station that supplies the town and to fix it will take years. They’re getting electricity from other regions, but a lot of services are affected.

Expand full comment
author

Something like a third of the city is still without electricity, yes. And yes, the local power plant needs to be built a new.

Expand full comment

Kharkiv the second biggest city in Ukraine. Odessa is the third. ))

Expand full comment
author

Yes, I know. But, the mass of population fled, so current estimates are that around 700,000 are still living there.

Expand full comment

Looks like the Russians weaponized the missile debris and turned that debris into precision munition completely flattening the building SBU was using for their little gathering.

Expand full comment

Yeah, that's why there were so much (zero) security around the building while the emergency workers cleared the rubble and students waited to pull out their pictures and sculptures.

Expand full comment

Hello, I am from "the West" What should I do to help?

Expand full comment
author
Mar 26·edited Mar 26Author

1.) Be _extremely_ cautious whom are you electing.

2.) Whoever is in power: 'bombard' them with demands to support Ukraine.

3.) When you've 'bombarded' them with demands to support Ukraine, demand them to support Ukraine yet more.

4.) Remain constantly vigilant, don't trust any politicians, and cross-check 3-4 times everything they say (especially 2-3, 5, 12... months after they've said it).

5.) Repeat all of the above at every opportunity.

Expand full comment

If you have some money you can donate then donate them to UA. UA needs a lot of thing which can by bought on west.

For example drones or also medical stuff. Tom has also linked some good choices some weeks ago.

Expand full comment

You can donate here! That is what I do.

Individuals can still do the right thing.

https://twitter.com/Teoyaomiquu/status/1772676174235287957?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Expand full comment

Direct fundraisers such as those run by NAFO members can be very effective, as they are often responsive & efficient. However, beware - there are some scams around. Try to only donate to 'vetted' fundraisers or through trusted promoters. As I live in NZ, I decided to focus on fundraisers promoted by https://twitter.com/TanyaMykolaiv. united24 is a good choice too.

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

Thank you so very much. The "West" is so utterly idiotic, so hypocritical, so stuffy, so selfsatisfied , so arrogant ... I have lately looked at the reasearch programme of the Peace Research Institute in Hesse founded in 1970, one of the worst Stuhlkreis advisors of German politics at least since the 1990s. A look at their recent work and even a look at their new programmes is devastating. I wonder how much money the federal state still spends on it.. Utterly useless or even worse. But no trace of them reflecting on their positions.

Expand full comment

Yes, I think lot of the thinking on Russia is bad and outdated. I am unsure whether it is hypocritical or naive. I think it it is a mental problem. People in the «West» dosent really understand how a leader can behave the way Putin does. Think about what Tom writers. Russia just sends people into the mest grinder, takes the loss and grinds on. A loss of several hundred thousand soldiers in a war for conquest does not faze him at all. Ok, no surprise here for those of us who follow this blog, but for many others this attitude is totally un-understandable. Very many policy advisors dosent. And while they in principle dislike the Russian attack they are not directly threathened, they have no personal interest… you can call it idiotic and it is because they do not relate to the reality on the ground, but it is there. Please remember that for all the faults and problems with the western attitude ii is after all the same concerns about human life and freedom that provides any support. But I really really wish the West could learn a little QuickDraw.

Expand full comment

"you can call it idiotic and it is because they do not relate to the reality on the ground, but it is there" this. they are so trapped up in the world of diplomacy and 24/7 security and affluence and exposure that comes with appearing upright they have no conviction to take action but just to say words for sound bites.

Expand full comment

Idiotic is fair enough. Less sure about hypocritical.

Expand full comment

I wonder how would western Europe troops perform against the russians after a while... Troops and politics I mean... We are not ready for a real war, we are not ready to take casualties and even a good portion of our soldiers should have been moved by the exposition to the russian propaganda... And with all this, there is no single politician who goes on the TV and clearly debunks the thousends of lies that millions of citizens are convinced to be truth...

Expand full comment

Bad, because there won't be any reserves as we somehow decided that soldier is a profession that you choose and not get choose for.

The question is how much rage and anger while losing while motivate the population to resist.

Expand full comment

Currently there is no real political gain in debunking the lies. If a war started the situation would change. I would say that neither Russia not «The West» is currently ready for a bigger war.

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

A layman question: how exactly can it be harder to launch a missile from land (steady platform) than from sea (rocking platform, roughly same height, probably less obstacles around, but surely one can find a field on land too)?

Expand full comment
author

The point is that of transportation. Missiles like Zirkon are big and heavy. Thus not easy to transport. Even more so considering their electronics is sensitive to strong vibrations, like those caused by poor roads, just for example.

Then, there's the question of transporting their fuel, then that of providing them with power supply so they can start, and of course that of aiming. Aboard a ship, they're fuelled and stored inside their launch container, and these are then sealed until the missile is either launched, or brought back to the port and unloaded. That's it: the ship is providing them with power necessary to work them up, and also with targeting data.

When doing this on land, everything has to be done separately, and that's not as easy.

Expand full comment

Hmm, that leads to an interesting question: How were Zirkons transported to Crimea? By Black Sea Fleet ships (Ropukha-class?), by rail or by plane?

Expand full comment

I would guess by rail since they use that a lot.

Expand full comment

By bridge which Ukraine is not keen to destroy

Expand full comment

Come over and give a hand.

Expand full comment

To destroy a bridge for you? I regret to disappoint you, I'm not Joe Biden or Mike Johnson nor even Maluk unfortunately. Why haven't you done it in your last attack?

Expand full comment

Not your fkng business.

Expand full comment

Thank you for asking!

Expand full comment

Interesting update. Thank you Tom. Just few questions. Do you have any estimate about the production capacity of the Russian FABs? Can they keep up the current amount of bombing with new production, or are they drawing it from stocks. So, is the actual bombing campaign sustainable in mid term?

Expand full comment
author

It's similar like with their T-72s and T-90s: the new production is actually minimal, the mass of FABs they're dropping every day are left-overs from former Soviet stocks.

And yes: they can (easily) keep up the pace and sustain the bombing campaign. As can be seen the last few weeks, amid all the UMPKs, the ZSU to withdraw in order not to get hit. Otherwise, it would start suffering immense casualties.

Expand full comment

So what can we expect?

Ban on new patriot systems from US. Front is continue to collapse until they reach Dnipro in 1 year?

Expand full comment

Where do you find front collapse?

Expand full comment

I am just scared, to be honest. Thats why I am talking like that

Expand full comment

That's human. Hang on...

Expand full comment
author

Not collapsing, but withdrawal from one village after the other, just like right now.

To be more precise: places like Ivanivske, Berdychi, Krasnohorivka, and Robotyne can be considered for 'already lost'. The ZSU will be unable to remain there for much longer, simply because if it remains there , it's going to get hit by too many UMPKs.

Expand full comment

They have a lot of stockpiles. They have 8,000 S300s that are 'expired' so they are launching them as inaccurate ballistic missiles. At the current rate, they can do so until the end of 2025.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the update. Seems there are indeed gaps in the Ukrainian airdefence. Note to the West.

Expand full comment
Mar 26Liked by Sarcastosaurus

Thank you for the update. Major respect for Ukraine, fighting a better military than NATO prepared for without anywhere close to the military industrial base to support. The Russians have been able to adapt to the war, copy Ukrainian innovations as well as adapt to the "Mother of all Sanctions"(which turned out to be a nothing burger) that the Biden admin and Sullivan military geniuses imposed on them.

Expand full comment

Tom, I read that Ukraine requested AESA radar for the Vipers, I guess some ECIPS/CJS from the Danish inventory in their MLUs for EW, maybe that's not enough. ? understanding that they will have to support themselves with some Awacs Nato

Expand full comment

Can those old F16's even be upgraded with AESA? I would have thought that it needs other stuff from the block 70 to work, like glass cockpit

Expand full comment
Mar 27·edited Mar 27

AESA radars like the APG-83/84 can be installed on MLUs without any serious modification required, that's how they were designed from the start, and MLU already has Block 52 like glass cockpit. The benefits would be numerous, such as full engagement envelope for AIM-120 C-8 / D-3, resistance to countermeasures, LPI mode, nullifying adversary doppler notch / beaming maneuver. Highly doubt the US will let Ukraine cut into the line / backlog for APG-83 and doubt even more they are willing to supply it at all since it is / will be the radar for 600+ upgraded USAF F-16s, plus Singapore and is already in full service in Taiwan (and its unthinkable they would include the "war modes" in US use). I dont know the current status of the APG-84, that might be more acceptable from an OPSEC / political perspective, being basically an export only model for South Korea.

Expand full comment

So what should Ukrainians do to accept the reality?

Expand full comment

Pray

Expand full comment

God Emperor of Humanity?

Expand full comment
author

See the situation as it is. The last two days, everybody is fantasising and distracting about how many ships were hit in the latest strike on Sevastopol - even when it's crystal clear that perhaps one was damaged.

At the same time, the leadership is quiet, while the media and the public are ignoring the fact that Ivanivske, Berdychi, Krasnohorivka, and Robotyne are, de-facto, already lost. The ZSU can't remain there without risking too high casualties to UMPKs.

Expand full comment