This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 25-Jun by Murpat
Latest 25-Jun by graylion
Latest 25-Jun by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 22-Jun by roguetechie
Latest 22-Jun by graylion
Latest 19-Jun by stancrist
Latest 18-Jun by roguetechie
Latest 17-Jun by roguetechie
Latest 17-Jun by roguetechie
Latest 15-Jun by roguetechie
Latest 12-Jun by 17thfabn
Latest 11-Jun by autogun
Latest 10-Jun by stancrist
Latest 8-Jun by autogun
Latest 1-Jun by schnuersi
Latest 31-May by gatnerd
Latest 30-May by stancrist
Latest 27-May by gatnerd
Latest 27-May by autogun
Latest 26-May by roguetechie
Latest 26-May by schnuersi
3 part video inside a captured RU T80-MVM; apparently their ammo was had 'training' fuzes installed.
"'training' fuses". So the Russians don't trust their troops with live ammo, or is the supply system even more screwed up than we already thought?
the latter I think. They have no functioning corps of noncoms.
I agree, the latter is the most likely, plus the general rush to war - whose nature had been kept secret from the troops and most leaders until just before attack.
Spectacular quadcopter kill of a tank; ironically the much maligned 'cope cage' probably would have prevented this.
If this list is complete, it looks like the Russians use HE rounds with inert fuzes for target practice, instead of having inert TP ammunition in the inventory.
If that is indeed the case, then such a mistake is perhaps understandable considering the stress and chaos of the "general rush to war" noted by gatnerd.
Looks like one of the Raptor boat or boats hit twice by a Bayraktar
Additionally, Russian forces sufffered quite a few casualties already - probably the most experienced ones - so the folks running the show now are rookies.
That would be a problem already in peace, in war it's a liability.
British intelligence assesses that Russia has committed some 65% of their forces to the war (directly or indirectly), and that of those forces, Russia had some 25% losses - if both figures are correct, the losses amount to >15% in some 65 days.
These levels are unsustainable.
That said, we don't have the Ukrainian figures, but it's hard to believe that their losses have been low, so it's very likely we'll see a stalemate soon.
We do not have any numbers aside from what is produced for propaganda purposes
Casualty numbers are fog of war right now , but aside from the initial total boondoggle when they marched right in and i guess expected to hold a parade in Kyiv, the casualties have likely been far worse on the Ukrainian side , artillery and airpower advantages are just to great. What you are seeing is an intense propaganda war that is not waged just by Ukraine and Russia but by most of the western media.
British or any other intelligence assessment published must always be taken with a bucket load of salt particularly Brits that form the core of propaganda force in this war.
What is sustainable is in the view of Putin / Russia.
I am always amazed at the casualty figures of the USSR and Germany in World War II. And yet they kept on fighting. At least Germany did until 1945.
Russia / Putin have to decide how much they are willing to sacrifice for the Ukrainianan adventure.
Putin is probably willing to sacrfice more Russian lives, blood and treasure than we think is logical.
He may strip forces from other areas that military analyst say is unwise to deploy to Ukraine Drafties that were said to be exempt from service in Ukraine may be "volenteered" to go. He could go old school and strip Naval and Air units of personnel. They would be useful as support logistical personnel.
To our eyes Putin's moves may seem illogical. It doesn't matter what our view is. The question is how much is Putin willing to sacrifice?