Ukraine Watch...

[Ralphw2]

Ukraine has blown the main railway bridge between Crimea heading north towards Melitapol. The damage looks moderate, probably taking days rather than weeks to repair, but significant as it is the primary resupply route out of Crimea, in the middle of the offensive.

It seems that the recent crackdown on critical ultranationalist bloggers in Russia is having an impact, in that very few are mentioning this setback, in spite of clear photo evidence.

Quiet day on the front lines, but Ukraine has made solid advances in recent days.

More reports of blockade running ships, possibly with US. military support.

[UndercoverElephant]

Ukraine has blown the main railway bridge between Crimea heading north towards Melitapol. The damage looks moderate, probably taking days rather than weeks to repair, but significant as it is the primary resupply route out of Crimea, in the middle of the offensive.

It can also be hit again, as soon as it is repaired. This is a logistical nightmare for the Russians.

[invalid]

https://www.ecosophia.net/notes-on-stor ... -syndrome/

Greer on the ongoing NATO debacle...

[Ralphw2]

Ukraine appears to have damaged a Russian troop ship with a maritime drone, ship seen listing badly and towed to port.

Russia is now repeatedly bombing the Ukrainian grain export port on the Danube, just 200m from the Romanian (nato) border.

The front lines have become almost static the last few days.

[adam2]

News report re above. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66402046

[UndercoverElephant]

Reports coming in of multiple explosions near Kerch bridge.

https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/sta ... 3420071936?

[BritDownUnder]

Ukraine has blown the main railway bridge between Crimea heading north towards Melitapol. The damage looks moderate, probably taking days rather than weeks to repair, but significant as it is the primary resupply route out of Crimea, in the middle of the offensive.

It can also be hit again, as soon as it is repaired. This is a logistical nightmare for the Russians.

It might make 'sense' to attack the bridge while it is being repaired as it may eliminate a few skilled repairers and specialised equipment needed to carry out such repairs.

Those boat drones seem to be very good if a little expensive assuming the price tag of $1m is correct. The range also seems quite impressive. I would suggest that they also carry some torpedoes for extra effect.

Greer's take on the war is quite interesting. He argues that the Russian move to WW1 fortifications seems to make sense. I agree that some of the Russian measures do make sense, like having artillery shells that are not based on expensive copper, but cheaper steel which have the side effect of wearing out gun barrels more quickly, also they have very impressive trenching equipment. The downside of being in fixed fortifications is that the enemy with slightly improved technology than WW1 knows where you are, can target your fixed positions at will and attrite your forces. This war is going to its logical conclusion as a classic war of attrition with economics at the forefront.

[Ralphw2]

Ukraine has hit a Russian oil tanker (presumed empty) with a sea drone. This is a significant escalation because it was not a military asset to Russia in this conflict, unlike the bridges and oil terminals, although it was used to break sanctions and supply the Syrian military with jet fuel.

I expect Russia to call it a war crime, unlike the systematic Russian bombing of Ukrainian civilian infrastructure.

[invalid]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66383377

The BBC trying as hard as they can (and failing) to put a positive spin on the counteroffensive.

[clv101]

Yeah, this article is the mainstream admitting what's been obvious for weeks, even months. The 'spring', no summer, offensive was a non-event. If Russia can maintain its current defensive posture, Ukraine has little chance of regaining any significant territory.

Only way things change is
a) for Russia to retreat, give up, go home - and that only happens with regime change in Moscow or some significant degree of state collapse.
b) NATO to commit boots to the fight - could just be airstrikes. ~1000 sorties in a week could decimate Russian defences but would likely result in a dozen+ NATO aircraft losses (even such low losses would be politically unacceptable to many in the West) and runs a non-zero risk of Russian nuclear retaliation.

Option 'c', which I think the most likely, is a mostly frozen conflict and Russia, slowly making gains over a decade as the West gradually withdraws support and Ukraine collapses.

[UndercoverElephant]

Yeah, this article is the mainstream admitting what's been obvious for weeks, even months. The 'spring', no summer, offensive was a non-event. If Russia can maintain its current defensive posture, Ukraine has little chance of regaining any significant territory.

That isn't necessarily true. Russia has weak points, especially the Kerch bridge.

Only way things change is
a) for Russia to retreat, give up, go home - and that only happens with regime change in Moscow or some significant degree of state collapse.
b) NATO to commit boots to the fight - could just be airstrikes. ~1000 sorties in a week could decimate Russian defences but would likely result in a dozen+ NATO aircraft losses (even such low losses would be politically unacceptable to many in the West) and runs a non-zero risk of Russian nuclear retaliation.

Option 'c', which I think the most likely, is a mostly frozen conflict and Russia, slowly making gains over a decade as the West gradually withdraws support and Ukraine collapses.

But why should Russia slowly make gains? It is Ukraine that is currently making slow gains. And I don't believe the West is going to withdraw support. I think the most likely outcome is Ukraine continuing to make slow gains until such time as they manage to take out the Kerch bridge completely, which is entirely possible. At that point Russia will face a logistical nightmare, and logistical nightmares have often been pivotal in the outcome of wars.

[Ralphw2]

This war will definitely be won or lost on logistics. YouTube has a daily diet of Russian hardware being taken out by a combination of drones and artillery. We get weekly reports of large ammo dumps or train lines being taken out, and now Ukraine has opened shipping up to be targets, in retaliation for Russia bombing grain silos. The bottom line is, will this be enough to weaken the defensive lines that they spent a year building? The poor bloody infantry need ammo supplies and don’t like being hit with cluster bombs, but as yet, they still have the Russian helicopters coming in to give air cover when the Ukrainians approach the front lines. The fields are now so heavily mined, and summer undergrowth so vibrant, that neither side can cross no man’s land without heavy casualties, so even underfed and shellshocked conscripts can hold the lines.

There are reports that more of the Ukrainian reserve battalions are being committed to the front lines, so fewer are left to exploit any breakthrough, if it were to happen. Both sides are in an electronic arms race to jam each others drones and air defences. Russia still has thousands of Cold War hulks that it can send as target practice, and a few cruise missiles and Iranian drones to terrorise the civilians.

A frozen war would not be a bad outcome for the western military industrial complex, as they would be billions richer supplying cheap(ish) munitions for the Ukrainians to use destroying ever more of the Russian war machine. Not such a great result for the European economies, and a disaster for Ukraine, the environment, and the world grain supply.

There is no way that Russia can advance far from the current front lines without another mobilisation, and I don’t think the Russian middle classes will stomach that. The people realise that the war is going badly, and the total clampdown on dissent and protest is a clear sign of Putin feeling threatened. If Ukraine can build enough maritime drones and sink a few more tankers or other ships exporting Russian goods, then the Black Sea export route will be blocked, which will further weaken the Russian economy and isolate it from its few remaining client states.

It is too soon to say how this war will end, but Russia will be a spent force militarily or economically. They will be far more reliant on their mercenary/terrorist forces to project power, as they seem to be trying in Niger.

[Ralphw2]

As I expected. Wagner have been 'invited' into Niger. Expect civil war with several neighbours joining in.

[BritDownUnder]

I think Option C could very well be an outcome but with a few changes to your assumptions. Maybe it is in the West's interest to keep a low level conflict alive with Russia and keep Russia busy in Ukraine. A weakened, aging, increasingly paranoid, dictatorial and incompetent Putin is kept in office whose bluff has been called by NATO on numerous occasions. With Europe becoming less reliant on Russian fossil fuels, and hopefully all fossil fuels, this war will be a boon for renewable energy and EVs.

The UK's defence budget is 55 billion pounds and the main focuses of this are Russia, International Piracy and Shipping, and Argentina, with China coming up in the future. The UK gave about 3 billion pounds of aid to Ukraine to do exactly what most of the rest of the defence budget is aimed at, i.e. containing Russia. So why not keep helping Ukraine? It might even be cheaper to actually have someone fight Russia than spend money on defending against what Russian might hypothetically do.

Going forward I look forward to more little black speedboat drones sinking most of the Russian Black Sea fleet. I hear these may have even been developed by the UK. As I have said before I think NATO should be deployed inside of Ukraine on Ukraine's non-Russian borders, i.e. the Belarus border and the Moldova border. On the nuclear issue I think there needs to be some public clarification on NATO's position on Russian use of tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Mine would be to publicly say that Ukraine will be immediately issued with NATO tactical nuclear weapons on Russia's use of them.

For future defence developments I would like to see some efficient anti-drone weapons developed whether these be guns, directed energy weapons, interception anti-drone drones and better drone detection systems that might be acoustic, infra-red, visual or radar based.

[adam2]

The maritime drones used by Ukraine are a challenge to detect because they are semi-submersible. They run with the bulk of the hull below water and only the engine exhaust, air intake, camera, and antennae above the waterline. A very small target for manual observation or radar detection.

Possibly similar to the "narco-subs" used by south american drug cartels to import cocaine into the USA.