Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2022-2024 Russo-Ukrainian War

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • TopHatter
    replied
    Su-57 Felon Struck Deep Inside Russia, Ukraine’s Spy Agency Claims
    Both Ukrainian and Russian sources say that for the first time an Su-57 Felon, Moscow’s most advanced combat aircraft, was struck.

    At least one and maybe two Su-57 Felon fighters, Moscow’s most advanced warplanes, were struck by drones at an airbase deep inside Russia, the Ukrainian Defense Intelligence Directorate (GUR) claimed. GUR posted satellite images on social media it says show one of the aircraft was damaged. The extent of that damage is unclear at the moment, but it would be the first known instance of these aircraft being damaged or destroyed as a result of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

    “On June 8, 2024, a Su-57 multi-purpose fighter of the aggressor state was hit on the territory of the Akhtubinsk airfield in the Astrakhan region of the Russian Federation, located 589 kilometers (365 miles) from the line of combat,” GUR wrote on its Telegram channel Sunday. “The pictures show that on the seventh of June the Su-57 was standing intact, and on the eighth, there were ruptures from the explosion and characteristic spots of the fire caused by the fire damage near it.”


    Before and after satellite images published by the Ukrainian Defense Intelligence Directorate (GUR) of a strike on a Russian Su-57 Felon new-generation fighter. GUR
    The imagery shows an Su-57 sitting under a framework for a shelter without any covering and what appears to be at least one major blotch on the tarmac right next to it. This, along with what may be a small crater, could be indicative of a strike. Another possible impact area is seen just above and to the right of the first, although this area was partially discolored prior to the supposed strike. The Su-57 also has large white blotches on its upper fuselage near where the primary blast would have occurred. It isn't clear what this is, but it appears unusual. Tarps covering damage are a possible explanation. While the aircraft appears intact, the blast and especially the shrapnel from such a nearby detonation would have very likely riddled it with holes and caused other damage.
    _________

    Leave a comment:


  • Albany Rifles
    replied
    Originally posted by jlvfr View Post

    True. But this may also put in place people who are more "obedient" than "efective"...
    Yeah...more likely to get more Jodls & Keitels than Manteufels & Beyerleins.

    Leave a comment:


  • jlvfr
    replied
    Originally posted by Monash View Post

    Unfortunately removing patently corrupt or otherwise incompetent leaders from senior positions also has a tendency to 'send a message' both to their replacements and their undeings i.e. do your job or else!.

    Stalin may have kept shooting generals until he started seeing results but arresting and jailing them will probably work just as well for Putin. So given the choice? I'd have preferred to see the old guard who ran the peace time armed forces stay in place so they could continue to frustrate reform efforts.
    True. But this may also put in place people who are more "obedient" than "efective"...

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
    Meanwhile, in the Kremlin, Putin is clearing/purging house... not quite Stalin-level, but 5 military VIPs gone in one month, it's not a bad score.
    Unfortunately removing patently corrupt or otherwise incompetent leaders from senior positions also has a tendency to 'send a message' both to their replacements and their undeings i.e. do your job or else!.

    Stalin may have kept shooting generals until he started seeing results but arresting and jailing them will probably work just as well for Putin. So given the choice? I'd have preferred to see the old guard who ran the peace time armed forces stay in place so they could continue to frustrate reform efforts.

    Leave a comment:


  • jlvfr
    replied
    Meanwhile, in the Kremlin, Putin is clearing/purging house... not quite Stalin-level, but 5 military VIPs gone in one month, it's not a bad score.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ironduke
    replied
    Ukraine took out a Russian early warning radar installation in the Krasnodar region. Apparently it didn't/couldn't detect whatever it was Ukraine used to take it out.

    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Nice but hopefully Ukraine is budgeting for the use of as many unitary ATACMs as it thinks it may need to take out a very important bridge.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ironduke
    replied
    Reports that two Russian ships have been sunk/destroyed, perhaps using the ATACMS with the 470 lb unitary warhead. Tsiklon, a Karakurt-class guided missile corvette, and the minesweeper Kovrovets, are reported to have been hit at Sevastopol.

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
    Beyond shooting down the aircraft, forcing them to stay grounded, or re-locate out of range? I don't think so. The glide bombs cannot really be intercepted.
    Well not easily that's for certain. What Ukraine needs to tackle the problem is what it's always needed i.e. longer ranged systems, both ground attack and air defence. That and precise, real time intelligence on the location of Russian launch platforms. Give them that? They'll be a long way towards defeating the problem.
    Last edited by Monash; 20 May 24,, 14:34.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ironduke
    replied
    Originally posted by statquo View Post
    Is there an answer to the Russian glide bombs?
    Beyond shooting down the aircraft, forcing them to stay grounded, or re-locate out of range? I don't think so. The glide bombs cannot really be intercepted.

    Leave a comment:


  • statquo
    replied
    Is there an answer to the Russian glide bombs?

    Leave a comment:


  • statquo
    replied
    Russians moving on Vovchansk

    Also:

    Estonia ‘seriously’ discussing sending troops to ‘rear’ jobs in Ukraine: Official

    The national security advisor to the Estonian president is the latest NATO nation official to weigh into the debate over the wisdom of foreign forces in Ukraine, while a senior British officer said it's still "not a path that the [UK] Prime Minister wants to go down."

    TALLINN — The government of Estonia is “seriously” discussing the possibility of sending troops into western Ukraine to take over non-direct combat, “rear” roles from Ukrainian forces in order to free them up to fight on the front, Tallinn’s national security advisor to the president told Breaking Defense.

    Madis Roll said the executive branch is currently undertaking an analysis of the potential move, and though he said Estonia would prefer to make any such move as part of a full NATO mission — “to show broader combined strength and determination” — he didn’t rule out Estonia acting in a smaller coalition.

    “Discussions are ongoing,” he said on May 10 at the presidential palace here. “We should be looking at all the possibilities. We shouldn’t have our minds restricted as to what we can do.”

    He also emphasized that it’s “not unthinkable” that NATO nations opposed to such a move would change their minds “as time goes on.”

    Roll’s boss, Estonian President Alar Karis, holds a position with many ceremonial duties relative to the nation’s prime minister, Kaja Kallas, but he is ultimately Estonia’s commander-in-chief and is a key figure in foreign policy.

    Roll’s comments came after the head of Estonia’s defense forces, Gen. Martin Herem, told Breaking Defense earlier last week there had been discussions in the military months ago about sending troops to western Ukraine to take on jobs like medical services, logistics or air defense for some western cities, but the air had gone out of those talks after the idea became a public lightning rod.

    Herem was likely referring to the outcry that followed French President Emmanuel Macron’s declaration that Western nations must be open to discussing sending their troops in to aid Ukraine. (Kallas, the Estonian PM, in March appeared to defend Macron’s statement, noting that he wasn’t talking specifically about sending ground troops into combat. “In the exact same way, I can assure you that our soldiers will not go there to fight,” she said.)

    Echoing Herem and Roll, a key Estonian lawmaker, Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Marko Mihkelson, previously told Breaking Defense that European nations “have to start thinking about a coalition of the willing” to more directly help Kyiv, potentially with direct combat forces. (The Estonian officials spoke last week to an audience from the Kaplan Public Service Foundation; Breaking Defense accepted accommodation in Estonia from KPSF.)

    The willingness of different nations to send some forces into Ukraine is a potential dividing line inside NATO. Although each member of the alliance is free to send forces where it feels it must for its national interests, some nations have been clear they see more risk than reward in doing so.

    Notably, Germany and the US have flatly rejected the idea of sending in troops. The US Ambassador to Estonia, George Kent, pointed Breaking Defense to the Biden administration’s policy of aiding Ukraine through significant aid packages, but a firm commitment not to send in American soldiers.

    Asked May 9 in Washington how Russia could react to NATO-nation forces being in Ukraine, British Chief of Defense Adm. Sir Tony Radakin was evasive, saying, “I won’t go into too much commentary on your question, if you don’t mind … The UK position is very clear in terms of, that’s not a path that the Prime Minister wants to go down.

    However, he emphasized that the UK position is not “being governed by how Russia will react.” Instead, he said, it is based around what the UK views as the best approach overall: “I think that what you’ve seen all the way through, is a UK that has done the right thing, based on its judgment of what’s needed to be done.”

    In contrast, there is Macron’s statement, as well as Lithuanian prime minister Ingrida Šimonytė who recently told the Financial Times she was open to sending Lithuanian troops into Ukraine to train Kyiv’s forces there. The FT wrote that Šimonytė predicted Russia could see the move as an escalation, but added, “If we just thought about the Russian response, then we could not send anything. Every second week you hear that somebody will be nuked.”

    Šimonytė added that to this point, Ukraine has not requested its troops.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ironduke
    replied
    Shoigu has been dismissed as defense minister, re-assigned as "Secretary of the Security Council."

    Leave a comment:


  • Amled
    replied
    Originally posted by rj1 View Post

    to be fair, the U.S. has not been at war for 79 years
    You’re right of course.
    Korea was a special situation being a UN action, but Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and even Panama could fall under the term “Special Military Operations”.
    This is ignorance asking: “Why”? Why don’t nations declare war, this whether it’s the US or Russia.
    Or, if Russia won’t declare war on Ukraine, why doesn’t Ukraine declare war on Russia? Is it the WMD angle?



    Leave a comment:


  • Ironduke
    replied
    The news is two days old at this point, but there's been a Russian incursion into the Kharkiv Oblast from the Belgorod region. Looks like the attack is through difficult terrain, lots of forests, hills, rivers, etc., not open terrain whatsoever. Reports there might be 5000 Russian troops involved. May be a diversionary attack to force Ukraine to divert units away from other fronts.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X