Well this is a nice, level-headed debate isn’t it? How long until someone brings Corbyn into the mix?

In the meantime it seems to me that it is extremely likely that it was the Russians wot done it, as follows:

1) They’ve denied it. And we all know that them what denied it, supplied it. Plus the Russians lie for fun

2) Prior to denying it they admitted it ( or at least their henchmen, apparatchiks and various social media apologists did before swiftly changing their narrative when the implications became clearer

3) Given that most expert commentators are of the view that a breach on this scale couldn’t be made through artillery or missiles and would need to be done through careful placement of high explosives by sappers, we’d need to accept the idea that the UA carefully mined the dam under the noses of the Russians who controlled it. I mean we all know the RA are incompetent and frequently drunken eejits, but that a supposition too far

4) The Ukrainians have been warning that the dam had been mined since October

As for all the other stuff. Whether or not tue expansion of NATO is to blame. Any Eastern European country who has had to live through Russian (Soviet) occupation was/is desperate to join NATO as a result. Which says a lot. The US are no saints but I’d rather be occupied by them than a bunch of bullying, drunken, psychopathic Russians any day of the week

singletrackmind
Full Member

Why would Ukraine blow the dam? To make a realy wide body of water narrower. So you can cross it more easily.

That doesn’t seem to (and I really am sorry for this but) hold much water. Crossing a long established lake/reservoir that has roads at the side is definitely going to be easier than crossing a half-drained one that’s still a big body of water but is also now surrounded by mudlands and swamp. Meanwhile everything downstream is now way harder to move through.

It’s clear that the Ukrainian counter attack is underway. Lots of news, images of western resources in action and a lot of frothing.

Fingers crossed that Ukraine will prevail, and that loss of life and damage is as little as can be in such a violent conflict.

Unconfirmed reports Russia are shelling the refuge centers set up to home people who where washed out.
Not going to link news outlets until a bigger one picks it up

And it’s not like western hardware is some sort of gold standard.

Ever used it? If so, please give examples rather than incomplete or inaccurate third-hand ones.

It’s not that long ago that our tanks ground to a halt in Oman because the engines clogged with sand,

They clogged simply because the logistics chain and the CR2 project team wouldn’t authorise the purchase of upgraded air filters that matched the environmental strain placed on the engines. See also the track issues, conflating the effectiveness of the equipment with issues arising from penny-pinching bureaucracy is a lazy argument.

rifles jammed

Fair, but again another cost saving exercise by MOD Plc in designing a weapon with mid to late 80’s for the NW Europe theatre in mind. This was GW1, Operation Granby, rushing a military from temperate European operations with very little mind to the impact on equipment of an alien theatre to the military of the time. The ‘forward assist’ drill and the shield around the magazine release catch whre the first iterations of improvements as a result. The A2 and A3 variants took those lessons further, all delivered by H&K after much more robust testing.

soldiers boots melted

See above. The Combat Assault and Combat High boots were never design for desert operations, they had a soft rubber sole for operating in temperate conditions. Combat High was an late 80’s / early 90’s, post DMS boot, Combat Assault was the first UK produced gore-tex boot used in NI and the Balkans.

First contact with very hot tarmac and hard standing in those environments had them melting, also degraded the glue holding them together. Took the MOD some time to react as is the way. Over the years i’ve had some pretty damn good desert patrol boots from Meindl, Lowa, Altberg and Aku. Hiax are shit.

helicopters had their blades service life cut to 27 hours.

A known issue, the cut was an engineering decision design to prolong the life of a fairly important component. if you make them or the leading edge out of a more robust material you then impact on the lift capability, which can be a factor already in hot and high environments. The 27 hours was an inspection, repaint or replacement. We deploy with surplus cabs and crews to maintain a minimum effect.

We were so badly organised in Iraq we couldn’t supply body armour to troops.

Again, see GW1 and Op Telic 1. Didn’t learn the lesson there, caught napping. even if we had enough CBA/ECBA, it’s about as much use as tits on a fish. Subsequent iterations of Osprey and VIRTUS have been significant improvements, but body armour and the protection vs mobility conflict will never be resolved.

We figured out in Afghanistan that Land rovers were rubbish for anything outside the base, with fatal consequences.

We figured that out in Iraq when IED’s were hitting snatch land rovers as at the time our fleet of protected mobility vehicles was incredibly limited. Warrior/Saxon/WMIK with armour upgrade. This was addressed by the Mastiff and the Bulldog (FV432 upgrade). along with improved Warrior and CR2.

The issue in Afghanistan was the WMIK variant used by reconnaissance/fire support and other dismounted units requiring rapid mobility and significant firepower. But that was addressed by the Coyote/Jackal mobility vehicles as well as a whole host of other protected mobility.

The issue is less the kit isn’t good, the issue as always is the civil servants involved in the procurement process, the lack of engagement with operators and effective testing and trialling in ALL environments.

But you have to accept that sometimes you will come across what seems to be a similar environment but there can be subtle or not so subtle changes that take a big steamy shit all over your kit.

That’s why we train and when these failings are passed up, those in their ivory towers should act to provide resources or rectifying actions to mitigate said failings. That’s what’s happened in every example you’ve put forward. the MOD and Abbey Wood aren’t great at it though. Through the UOR (urgent operational requirement) purchase scheme it allows q quicker response time.

Propaganda isn’t something only the enemy does.

If somebody thinks that it’s only the enemy that does it, I’ll show you a **** fool.

Proper knowledge.  I like

Looks like a column of Ukraine armour including at least one Leo2 were ambushed 🙁

that looks bad. handed russia a great bit of footage for their propaganda efforts. I did wonder how soon we would see western tanks destroyed.

honestly not sure tanks are particularly useful in this campaign. without air support they just seem to be sitting ducks

Did anyone think that none of the “modern” tanks supplied to Ukraine would be destroyed? It’s inevitable.

modern artillery munitions at long range and modern atms at short range has made a tankers life very precarious !

Did anyone think that none of the “modern” tanks supplied to Ukraine would be destroyed?

Nope, looking back to the liberation of Kuwait the coalition aircrew were told to expect 25-30% losses in the initial sorties. John Nichol said that one of the things that surprised him most when he was freed was the low level of loses.

This is not a video game, lots of people will die until one side breaks. The only way to minimise casualties is for one side to have a large advantage otherwise it’s attrition. Hopefully the Ukrainians will force a breakthrough and rout the Russians but until that happens both sides will have large numbers of casualties.

Even successful offenses are costly.

https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1666933089954586625

Ukraine made successful attacks on two other fronts. It’s devastating, but Ukraine has to probe to work out where to launch their offensive.
Mines seem to have caused the destruction https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-june-8-2023

Im in no way an expert on videos but that looks faked to me. Tanks go ftom tucked underneath trees to open ground. Plus no separation whatsoever in an armour column makes it easier to hit rather than miss with artillery.
Very blurry for drone footage too, when most drones appear to film in HD now.
Not saying it didn’t happen, just not exactly in the way the Russian milblog say it did.

Looks like all my banging on about Tokmak a few months back wasn’t just idle gibbering, all indications suggest this is exactly where the big Ukrainian push is going.

It’s also probably one of the most heavily defended bits of the Russian line. The fighting is going to be horrendous, my thoughts are with those brave souls making the assaults and their families back home waiting for news.

Slava Ukraine

Not saying it didn’t happen, just not exactly in the way the Russian milblog say it did.

Tbh, theres so much disinformation out there you can only really start believing stuff once the event is some time past and a consensus reached. And that’s for all involved parties.

E.g. when Julian Roeckpe claimed the Kherson offensive was a failed disaster on the first day or two. Which was clearly garbage. Or Russians using footage of destroyed Leopards ftom Turkey/Syria, and claims of massive gains by Ukraine thats simply just words from a pro Ukrainian account.

that was an interesting read timba.

suggests the counter attack was telegraphed and the Russians were expecting them.

armchair general mode, surely the entire front can’t be heavily defended with troops dug in all along it. its such a long line of defence. can’t they go around heavily defended positions and cause serious issues in the supply lines?

blowing the dam has effectively reduced the front line by many hundreds of miles at least short term, so that makes it harder for ukr

can’t they go around heavily defended positions and cause serious issues in the supply lines?

They’ll certainly try to but you need to remember Ukraine aren’t nearly as capable logistically as a NATO army, it’s very difficult for them to reposition their forces quicker than the RA can reinforce areas with reserves (although HIMARS attacks for the last few months have been focused on degrading that RA capability as well as the strength of their reserves). The RA isn’t totally inept either, they’ll punish any overly stretched UA pushes and they still have a decent intelligence gathering capability (by contrast the Iraqi army didn’t have much more knowledge than what their binoculars told them or Western media reported).

The UA dilemma is they can’t afford a grinding war to slowly push back the RA but rapid attacks come with a lot more risk.

Im in no way an expert on videos but that looks faked to me.

Is that the fake Russian propaganda video where they try to pretend that farm tractors are destroyed Ukrainian tanks?

Anyway, enough armchair general stuff. Have a fish.

Fish jumped into the hatch of a BMP vehicle of Ukraine's 60th brigade as it was crossing a river

📹https://t.co/ekFLbJHDnM pic.twitter.com/6kb5IZJUwO

— Euromaidan Press (@EuromaidanPress) June 8, 2023

About that Leopard. From the BBC:

“The Russian military was forced to delete a video which had claimed to show the destruction of a western-made Leopard tank earlier this week, after it turned out to be a training video targeting a combine harvester”.

I saw one of those destroyed Leapord claims and it genuinely looked like a C&C Nod Stealth Tank.

So no blown up Leopard?

Confused…..

Haven’t got the data to sit and watch all the reddit/twitter feeds.

So no blown up Leopard?

Not a Leopard, a (John) Deere.

I beleive the first Leopard has been taken out, and that’s from a pro Ukrainian account

Edit, if anyone is on Instagram they might find this

Edit, i think this might be bllx

Allegedly some polling on Ukrainian public opinion on the defence of Ukraine.

https://kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1242&page=1

Kyiv International Institute of Sociology surveyed 1029 respondents.

During the year – from May 2022 to May 2023 – there were practically no significant changes in public sentiment. Each time, the absolute majority of respondents (82-87%) spoke against territorial concessions and the absolute minority (8-10%) were ready for them.

Popped up on what is a very pro Ukrainian source if you want to factor that in.

Yup, it was inevitable that this could happen once the offensive started.

Tanks are, at heart, assault vehicles that end up in the thick of things, if you’re using them properly against halfway competent foe with artillery, ATGMS or other tanks you’re going to take losses.

It’s not like HIMARS which can operate well behind the lines and kept out of harms way so long as they keep on the move.

Think people are confusing two videos. There was one a few days ago of a combine harvester, which the Russians claimed was a Leopard, then another from yesterday posted up thread which was an actual Leopard being hit/run over a mine, along with some MRAP personel carriers. The Twitter OSINT guys seem to think its true, and the military experts are saying that its to be expected and the good thing with the western kit is the crew normally survive. The crew being much more valuable than the kit.

They also say its also why Ukraine are using the western kit in all the probes that are happening now because they expect loses and crew survival is more important to them. I wonder how long before we see them really show progress. I guess that depends on success of the probes and following attrition of the Russians?

A wee lunch glance across Tw*tter and it seems Ukraine are making progress, albeit a a cost of lives and machinery.

Photo showing damaged/abadoned Ukrainian Leopard 2A6 tank and Bradley IFVs reportedly in the Orikhiv part of the front. Possible mine strikes. Also indicates the Ukraine's 47th Mechanized Brigade is taking part in the fighting.https://t.co/cBqMQcLrIw pic.twitter.com/ZbShWLPakW

— Rob Lee (@RALee85) June 9, 2023

It’s impossible to tell just from the photo above, but that Leopard probably just needs a new track and it’ll be back in service. It certainly hasn’t suffered a cookoff and blown its turret off like the videos of Russian tanks. A tank losing a track to a landmine is like a mountain bike puncturing a tyre on a rocky descent, just run of the mill stuff.

Good points – the difference seems to be that the vehicles are broadly intact – did people get out?
Compared to the existing Russian/Ukrainian tanks which mainly seem to disintegrate along with the people inside 🙁

A tank losing a track to a landmine is like a mountain bike puncturing a tyre on a rocky descent, just run of the mill stuff.

I’d have thought that then makes the tank a sitting target for artillery.

it’s a sitting duck, probably worth waiting until an attempted recovery and then hit it.  assuming artillery is still in range.

I’m surprised they don’t have equipment that is designed to demine and provide a clear path

I’m surprised they don’t have equipment that is designed to demine and provide a clear path

They do, you can see it in the top of that picture.

It’s impossible to tell just from the photo above, but that Leopard probably just needs a new track and it’ll be back in service. It certainly hasn’t suffered a cookoff and blown its turret off like the videos of Russian tanks.

I thought Nato tanks dont “cook off” like the Russian tanks because the ammunition is in a separate compartment that vents externally, unlike the Russian tanks where the crew are literally sitting on top of the autoloader magazine. Nato tanks are designed so the crew survive.

I thought Nato tanks dont “cook off” like the Russian tanks because the ammunition is in a separate compartment that vents externally, unlike the Russian tanks where the crew are literally sitting on top of the autoloader magazine. Nato tanks are designed so the crew survive.

Every gun ammunition will cook off given a set amount of heat soaking, that’s why they do slow and fast cook off trials to work out the timings, all you can do is delay it to allow time to evacuate safely, Russian storage means it happens pretty quick, UK, US, etc tend to have better stowage solutions for OME, and better quality explosives, but an armoured vehicle is like a pipe bomb if the propellant or worse ignite or detonate, lots of heat and pressure released at once.

Did anyone think that none of the “modern” tanks supplied to Ukraine would be destroyed? It’s inevitable.

Hence why in defence we talk about probability of survivability in certain scenarios. It’s mostly internet weirdos that talk in binary and absolutes. They’re like the sith, but shitter.

if they have de mining kit why are they losing tanks to mines?  not using it right or some sort of special mines?  ones with remote detonation?