Let’s start with Bakhmut this time, and extrapolate out from there, since Bakhmut is the current central point of the war from which everything flowers outward. Firstly, Zelensky has just given his most candid answer in an interview, about the true importance of keeping Bakhmut. It strikes a harsh contrast to all the previous propaganda, including from him, that Bakhmut was a city of ‘little strategic importance’:
As always great work!!! Thank you so much!!
Very informative. I always look forward to your updates.
120 mm mortar is a very versatile weapon, heft and range!!!
the russians may have shot down a ground launch missile kluged together a guided rocket body to a guided piece of ordnance such as a small diameter bomb.
this approach is much easier than integrating a guided weapon to a soviet designed fighter platform. one does not merely hang the smart weapon on the loading points and fly off. several ways: a unique display hardwired to the weapon (space on the control panel in the cockpit), and wiring around the aircraft, or run a unique software package through the aircraft data bus.... either requires unique integration, design and detailed engineering info on the aircraft.... then you modify a jet and do tests. the us' classified budget has had 8 years to do some of this, but!
unless the motor has excess fuel the fighter would need to launch from altitude at distance which gives a lot of time and aspect to track and engage.
usa seems to have trouble with hyper-sonics; boeing's entry failed long ago, lockheed seems to be able to keep a loser prototype going better. see f-35!
Excellent analysis as always. I cannot commend you enough for your work. What is horrifying to me? That my country with a NSA/CIA/Homeland Security budget bigger than many countries entire budgets cannot do this. But of course, they get the analysis that they want. Not the truth.
Great info. I saw somewhere for their spring offensive Ukraine bought 1000s of Chinese drones and was putting bombs on each one. If Ukraine can buy Chinese drones, why can't Russia, and how do you fight a thousand drones except with EW? Is high volume drone warfare the wave of the future, or can they be conveniently disarmed?
A lot of Fog of War, and endless disinformation daily, primarily from the Ukrainians and the West, who have a fanatical need to control the airwaves, which they will inevitably regret. Commentators like MSC are only able to focus on daily tactical battles based on territory movement, missing the whole point of the SMO from Russia's standpoint. Its clear Russia is patiently building up and waiting for the West's next move or escalation, and they will respond very powerfully. You don't win a war losing 10 times the number of men as your opponent, especially when your opponent has only committed a small fraction of their fighting capacity to date. Ukraine will launch their offensive and lose their last Army. My guess is that the West wants an offensive so they can then declare "victory", when they have in fact lost, and agree to Russia's terms and spin it as their win. Ukraine will get memory holed in the West and forgotten.
Thanks for this top sitrep even if a bit alarming in terms of our ammo capacities. About the date for their 'offensive' as these idiots only live in a virtual P R mode believing war is a video game and only happens on twitter or CNN, the best P R (for them maybe?), would be of course the 9th of May..Victory day becoming 'defeat day' (for us, keep on dreamin ZE)...I bet you a good bottle of champagne that it will be their choice.At the start of the SMO (and probably a few weeks or months before), up to 254 P R com, agencies were taking care of the public propaganda on all msm + SM.I heard that this nr has been vastly decreased but, one overpaid Madison Avenue genius will sell ZE that 'victory/defeat day' option, and he will be paid 1 million for this fantastic idea.
nb: one question about North Korea..I saw on twitter and tm channels talks about KIM was willing to send (if asked and if China ok)between 50 and 250k men to reinforce Wagner.I guess this is pure desinfo probably?
nb2: any news of Iran or China weapons deliveries? Not heard anything about Iranian 'ballistic' missiles, which have been talked about during the winter and massive ammo from Beijing.
That UA column was a mess with only a few shots. If that's Gran 120mm every company should have a crew or 2. Mustve been drone guided. Spotter on high ground never hurts but he wasn't even calling coordinates in & with no obvious laser or drone controls, he basically just cheered the accuracy. Regardless of what was used, it worked.
Great Article. I would say though that Russia is under any pressure to end that war. A recent call from Erdogan to Putin confirmed he wants it over. I don't know what China and India are saying, but I suspect it is much the same. Certainly that is the case with India who is under constant pressure from the US to break with Russia and impose sanctions.
I might be in a minority, but I found Russia firing 50,000 to 60,000 shells a day to be somewhat wasteful. Certainly it was never followed up by any big advancements. Put me in the camp of getting a bigger bang for less.
It is interesting to read the differing views on the value of Bakhmut. Politically it has, unfortunately for the Ukrainians, become important -- we can't afford to lose it! Look how much we have put into it!
Look how bravely our soldiers are fighting! Realistically, it makes tactical and operational sense to defend it "for a while": it is a built up area on a river which increases the natural advantage of the defender. But I think "for a while" has expired and the Ukrainians will soon be forced to withdraw or to lose substantial forces. Again realistically the loss of Bakhmut is not much. Its only advantage is that it is relatively easy for Ukraine to defend. Otherwise it is of little value. Given how stable the rest of the front has been for the last several months, I don't expect much to change after Bakhmut's fall.
ukraine will desperately use depleted uranium in their offensive. I hope that Russia is ready to retaliate in kind to those who supplied them
Sharing with you this good analysis from a non military specialist.
USA is the central battlefield in the global total war
Even as the shooting war rages in Ukraine, the main show is in the United States
There can be little doubt that we are at war, except it's not quite like in the movies. This war is unlike any others about which we learned in school where two opposed forces meet in a battlefield and fight it out until one side prevails. That kind of war is happening in Ukraine, but that’s only a part of the conflict that's engulfed nearly all the rest of the world. It manifests in different and seemingly unrelated ways, but it is part of the same conflict.
Some analysts like to use the phrase "hybrid" or "asymmetrical" to describe it, by which they mean that in addition to shooting, the conflict has information, cultural, economic and financial dimensions. But I think that the war is still bigger than that: it is global and total - perhaps it should be called total global war. The “Trans Day of Vengeance” planned in Washington DC, is only the latest and weirdest part of it.
"To have 2:1 advantage perhaps might still not be enough, seeing as how even with 5:1 previous advantage Russia was still not achieving massive break throughs. "
Except Russia wasn't trying for massive breakthroughs. They were trying to attrition Ukrainian forces.
Once the Ukraine forces manage to lose their third reconstituted army, then the Russians will make moves. Whether they will be massive or more incremental remains to be seen.
I think artillery production rates in 2024 and beyond are relevant only if one expects a war between NATO and Russia. Ukraine is going to be done by then. And if there is a war between NATO and Russia, Russia will not rely on its artillery. It will rely on its stand-off weapons to damage NATO drastically before NATO even gets onto the field. One missile takes out NATO Brussels HQ... A few more and NATO doesn't have any field HQ. A few more from the Russian Fleet and NATO doesn't have any carriers. A few more and NATO doesn't have any aircraft. Who cares about artillery and ground troops at that point?
As Scott Ritter and others have pointed out, NATO is a paper tiger. They don't have anything to match Russia and won't for at least several years, and that's assuming the EU economies even allow for military expansion, which is problematic. The EU is talking a big game, but there is zero evidence they can produce.