@tthew, interesting. I wonder how easy it is to turn off and turn on wells - I'm guessing not easy.
I'd also expect production to start to drop as western equipment fails and can't be replaced - it may be possible to buy replacements from China but it won't be interchangeable so not quick. I'm guessing that the indigenous Russian equipment manufacturers use parts sourced from around the world so even they won't be imune.
This could develop into a significant problem for central Europe supplies if this is the first instance of similar failures. Self inflicted sanctions, love it.
It also means prices could skyrocket here, come the cap review in the autumn (what gas the Russians do sell could well be enough to offset the volume if the price rises enough)
With millions in UK being unable to afford heating their homes, it could be a grim winter
The non return of the Siemens Gas Compressors for repair as tthew said above is in the business pages of the Guardian
From the pages...
Gas prices rise on Gazprom problems
On the commodity markets, gas prices are rising while crude oil prices are little changed.
British wholesale gas for day-ahead delivery has risen more than 8% to 180p per therm.
Yesterday, Russia’s state monopoly Gazprom said it was cutting natural gas supplies to Europe via the Nord Stream 1 pipeline by 40%, according to Interfax. It said its capacity to supply gas was constrained by the delayed return of equipment that had been sent for repair by Siemens Energy.
Gazprom said:
Due to the delayed return of gas pumping units by Siemens from repair, testing of the service life of the GPUs [gas pumping units] and identified technical malfunctions of the engines, only three GPUs can now be used at the ‘Portova’ compressor station.
This has prompted Gazprom to reduce gas supplies to up to 100m cubic metres instead of the usual 167m cm.
Gazprom no longer exports gas westwards through Poland via the Yamal-Europe pipeline following Russian sanctions against EuRoPol Gaz, which owns the Polish section. Flows via Yamal-Europe continue eastwards from Germany to Poland.
There are also fears of liquefied natural gas shortages, after Freeport LNG, operator of one of the largest US export plants producing LNG, said it would shut for at least three weeks after an explosion at its Texas Gulf coast facility last week.
If this is accurate, it suggests Russia is really struggling to replace losses.
Anyone expecting anything from todays visit by Macron/Scholz/Draghi?
interesting. I wonder how easy it is to turn off and turn on wells – I’m guessing not easy.
For safety reasons, it's a quick and simple process to shut in or open up a well. Restarting the production plant for onward processing is the more complicated part.
I’m expecting France and Germany to make promises they fail to deliver on 🙁
Looks like another accident
I’m expecting France and Germany to make promises they fail to deliver on
Really? The French Ceasar artillery are apparently working really well for Ukrainians and I believe they've just delivered more
TWITTER.COM Really? The French Ceasar artillery are apparently working really well for Ukrainians and I believe they’ve just delivered more
A grand total of... 12
That's not necessarily a criticism, could just be linked to availability. Im not really that familiar with any military hardware beyond they are usually green, and usually have a tube out of which a thing that goes bang comes out of. But aren't 'most' western armies reliant on air power to mitigate an opponent with overwhelming artillery capabilities? Which is what Ukraine is facing, and they definitely dont have the air force for that.
All of which could mean, most of the western countries in Europe are limited on whats available to send?
Thats all questions, no statements from me just there.
To an extent , yes, but we also have lots of manoeuvre units on the ground as we won’t always be fighting with air superiority. Plus you might not always have a jet available the minute you need it.
You also need to physically hold and defend terrain. That requires boots on the ground, armour and artillery.
12 pieces of artillery aren’t going to change the battle space.
The French have been supplying Ukraine with a variety of materiel, you don't read much about Italy and the German effort has been worthy of a Python sketch
My opinion is that Germany doesn't have the kit to send; they've consistently under-delivered to NATO over many years and they're still flying around 90 Tornadoes. We binned ours in 2019 (sources Wikipedia)
The other side of the argument are the clear links to Russia that France, Germany and Italy have. Germany and Italy have a dependency on Russian energy supplies (1 and 2 in the European supply charts) and have been very slow in making their visit to Kyiv while buying from Russia. By contrast Ursula von der Leyen, on behalf of the EU, has visited twice
A grand total of… 12
A lot of this linked to supply. The French have 70-80 CAESAR (I'm not shouting, it's an acronym 🙂 )
They deployed 8 to Afghanistan and 4 to Mali and 4 to Iraq to support their own troops, so 12 is a decent number. Now, if everyone in Europe could do the same...
Ukraine has received 30/40 pieces of artillery, so far. That’s a fraction of what they need.
What does it mean with the EC approving Ukraine as a member state in principal? Any military implications, like now other member states have justification to wade in?
America marking a big deal about supplying HIMARS rocket system, then giving 4 ? WTF!
Here we go again
Will wait for verrification
The key is to recognise the 2 breakaway states..and then declare war on them.
Any russian troops killed will be called mercenaries fighting for a foreign power.
Or we declare war on Ukraine to oust the nazi threat on the EU border. They capitulate immediately and our troops progress rapidly through ukranian held territory.
The Nazi threat eliminated , we can call it a victory and the Russians can **** off back home.
A temporary puppet regime is installed ,elections called and zelensky gets voted back in.
If Russia wanted to continue it's expansion they would have to think very carefully.
Really good Economist article about tank warfare in Ukraine. Not behind a paywall for me
A most thoughtful piece on the future of the tank in today's Economist (was not behind a paywall for me)
— Dr Peter Caddick-Adams #StandwithUkraine (@militaryhistori) June 17, 2022
If this is accurate, it suggests Russia is really struggling to replace losses.
That bloke has been predicting the imminent demise of the Russian offensive for weeks - happening real soon now. Not.
The Russians don't have as many shiny high tech toys as the west, but an old aphorism attributed to Stalin is relevant - "quantity has a quality all of its own".
That bloke has been predicting the imminent demise of the Russian offensive for weeks – happening real soon now. Not.
It'll be months or years before we have a clear picture, but Russia seems to be making extremely slow progress and taking heavy losses. Digging out old tanks that have been in storage for decades and crewing them with 50 year-old conscripts is something you would only do if your were utterly desperate
Digging out old tanks that have been in storage for decades and crewing them with 50 year-old conscripts is something you would only do if your were utterly desperate
Is that actually happening though (genuine question - I just haven't read anything about this).
“quantity has a quality all of its own”.
It does, but It's not really applicable in the sort of attritional war that this has ended up being. The quantity over quality things works if you're engaged in a very fast very mobile aggressive war that's looking to roll over the enemy as fast and as comprehensively as it can. It doesn't stack up so well otherwise. Look at just the tank losses that Russia has suffered now; 750 or so from a total force of about 3000, That's nearly a third of the total of the entire Russian army (which probably includes stuff that exists only really on paper) in less than 120 days of war fighting. Or again airplanes: 5 confirmed Su-25 either shot down or RTB so badly damaged that they won't ever fly again. Now compared to A10 (a comparable aircraft) losses in Dessert Storm, also 5...But out of 8000 sorties. The whole of the Rus AF hasn't flown that many missions in Ukraine
The quantity over quality things works if you’re engaged in a very fast very mobile aggressive war that’s looking to roll over the enemy as fast and as comprehensively as it can. It doesn’t stack up so well otherwise
So from my point of view that's the opposite of what we are seeing - the initial tank attacks on Kyiv failed spectacularly due to the quality of the Ukrainian anti-tank weapons and tactics, whereas now they are being pulverised by the sheer volume of Russian artillery. We've no very good idea of the losses each side is taking, but the red stain on the maps keeps getting bigger.
Yes, I think the Russian are still "just" able to advance and the Ukrainians are "mostly" able to halt them. From a Russian perspective this just means they've lost. they don't control the airspace, their breakouts don't really work, and they daren't retreat.
The Economist has reported an estimate on the daily cost of the war for Russia: $876
Any extra digits on that? 😉
Is that actually happening though (genuine question – I just haven’t read anything about this).
Yes, they seem to be digging out some pretty ancient gear from storage. There was a video of some T-62 tanks being sent to Ukraine on a train. Those are basically 1950s technology and they won't have been updated with modern sensors and other electronic gear. One theory is that they will be servicable because they are used by reserve units, so the engines will start. The more modern tanks is storage won't have had any maintenance in decades and will take a lot more work to get them mobile.
So yes, Russia has a lot of gear but they've already lost a lot of their best stuff and they seem to be shipping some very old stuff to the front. If they are desperate enough to conscript 50 year-olds armed with 60-year old equipment, they won't be making any blitzkrieg breakouts, they'll just have to dig in and stick to artillery bombardment.
Interesting and relevant "War On Truth" episode on Radio 4 just now.
Photos of Marianna Vyshemirsky - wrapped in a duvet and with her forehead bloodied - have become some of the iconic images of the Russian invasion.
Marianna, a beauty blogger who was about to give birth, was caught up in the bombing of a maternity hospital in Mariupol on 9 March.
And in the aftermath of the attack, Marianna soon faced another onslaught - this time of disinformation and hate aimed at her and her family.
As Russia attempted to deny it had struck the hospital, Marianna was falsely accused of “acting” for staged photos. Russian diplomats even claimed that she had “played” not one, but two different women. Their allegations were false - so what was the truth?
In her podcast War on Truth, Marianna Spring has investigated the stories of people caught up in the information war over Ukraine. And in this episode, she spoke to Marianna Vyshemirsky after the beauty blogger was evacuated to her hometown in a part of Donbas controlled by Russian-backed separatists.
Good for infantry support against lightly armed opposition.
Not so good against any form of current Western anti tank technology. Evan a new rpg would probably blow a hole in an older Russian tank.
Older tanks have thicker armour than some modern RF ones. No defensive suites though, or modern targeting/gun stabilisation .
Any extra digits on that? 😉
Haha! $876 million a day.
Yes, I think the Russian are still “just” able to advance and the Ukrainians are “mostly” able to halt them. From a Russian perspective this just means they’ve lost. they don’t control the airspace, their breakouts don’t really work, and they daren’t retreat.
I wish I agreed but it looks worse to me. It looks like they are able to continue their bombardment ad infinitum because they have the kit (albeit old) and they don't care about Ukrainian civilians or even losses of their own men (especially not ethnic minority Russians, Chechens, Syrinas etc)
Watching the BBC documentary about the Falklands, that was clearly devastating but it was just a few weeks of conflict. This has been going on for months. I can't imagine what it's like at the sharp end.
T-62 tanks are apparently used by reserve units, not front line units. That suggests that Russia has fully committed all their best units and equipment and are now having to send second tier stuff.
I don’t see how the Russians can win this. They are in a complete stalemate. The kit they are bringing out now is getting older and older (as are the troops). Their gun barrels will be wearing out and the ammunition getting older as they pull it out of stockpiles, meaning lots more duds. The Ukrainians need AT LEAST a 3:1 advantage to be assured of success in major counter offensives, so their best bet is probably to keep nibbling away. There may still be a few swings backwards and forwards for a while yet, and sadly a lot more death and destruction.
War of attrition that can only be influenced by one side giving up, which probably won't happen, or a meaningful supply of materiel to one side
Successful European overtures for peace are also unlikely because that'll involve Ukraine giving up parts of their country in an echo of the 1938 Munich Agreement and we all know how that one ended
I agree I'm struggling to see how this can end. Even though Russia might end up pushing the Ukraine forces out of the Donbas region, I can't see that being the end of it- there is every indication that Ukraine will carry on fighting
The only way out might be for Putin to go. How that ends up happening or if it ever would is anyone's guess. But if they can get rid of communism they should in theory be able to get rid of Putinism eventually.
I agree I’m struggling to see how this can end. Even though Russia might end up pushing the Ukraine forces out of the Donbas region, I can’t see that being the end of it- there is every indication that Ukraine will carry on fighting
Ukraine can only carry on fighting as long as other countries support it.
Ukraine can only carry on fighting as long as other countries support it.
The US supported the Afghans when they were fighting the old USSR for a decade, and the Chinese supported the Vietnamese against the US for double that. So, maybe that's what we have a here- a ten year conflict before Russia finally slinks out with it's tail between it's legs
shermer75
Free Member
Ukraine can only carry on fighting as long as other countries support it.The US supported the Afghans when they were fighting the old USSR for a decade, and the Chinese supported the Vietnamese against the US for double that. So, maybe that’s what we have a here- a ten year conflict before Russia finally slinks out with it’s tail between it’s legs
The drip drop nature of the funding will ensure it lasts, under a hundred billion isn't going to cut it. If they want to send a proper message to putin they really should announce funding of multiples of that. £300billion to kick it of with an overdraft up to a trillion should make a statement.
The US supported the Afghans when they were fighting the old USSR for a decade, and the Chinese supported the Vietnamese against the US for double that. So, maybe that’s what we have a here- a ten year conflict before Russia finally slinks out with it’s tail between it’s legs
Afghanistan and Vietnam were part of a cold war by proxy and without the risk of nukes. End of WW2 to the collapse of the Soviet Union, or roughly 45 years. 10 years or 45 years, please be wrong!
10 years or 45 years, please be wrong!
Fingers crossed!!!
