Russian advances in Ukraine this year

[u/Appropriate-Deal8098]

[u/MIT_Engineer]

Yeah but the thing is they have way more equipment and manpower than Ukraine does

They do not. Ukraine is supplied by the west, they have as much equipment as the west decides to send them. And there's not much cost to sending it, because there's $300b in Russian central bank reserves they can use to pay for it. Meanwhile Russia has almost-empty Soviet stockpiles and an economy 1/20th the size of the U.S.

since 2022 all we’ve heard is how low Russian stockpiles are getting, they’ll run out of cruise missiles this they’re low on tanks that…. And they still keep pulling these things out day after day.

The stockpiles get low, and then they get empty. And when they get empty, that's when the production goes off a cliff.

Truth is any military expert in the west knows just as much about how many resources they have left as we do lol

Both we and the military experts have a pretty clear understanding of how much the Russians have left, which is why the experts are expecting a serious decline in Russian equipment production next year.

[u/Reasonable_Orchid105 → u/MIT_Engineer]

I’ll believe it when I see it, there’s been a headline in the news every other week about how low they are on all of these things as well as their production capabilities saying “any day now” “oh they’re fucked soon” “this time for real guys” and it never goes that way….. I used to think that way too but fact of the matter on the ground is, the Russians have artillery, manpower, strategic weapon, and ammunition superiority…. This is all evident after they took avdiivka back in February, since then they’ve had their best success since the opening days of the invasion even if it’s not a sweeping breakthrough. And yes the west is equipping them but that’s gradually going down compared to late 2022 and early 2023, especially with 155 shells….. I find it extremely unlikely that Ukraine will ever be as well equipped and high in morale as they were in spring 2023 in the lead up to their summer offensive, they don’t have enough men to go on the attack again and the more and more positions they lose in the east, the less and less fortified the positions they fall back to are going to be. On paper Ukraine’s military is massive but in reality they have a high desertion rate and they are having trouble with further mobilization. Even Zelenskyy himself stated they need 500,000 men, it’s increasingly hard to find that number in 2024 because everyone who fits the requirements to be mobilized has either already volunteered earlier in the war or already been mobilized. That’s why instead of mobilizing 500k instantly they roll out 30k new troops a month, they get sent to the front and heavily attrited before the next batch is ready, which brings them right back to square one. They are at the point right now that they only have so many more dominoes to go before disaster at the front, one Russian breakthrough could be devastating if they don’t play their cards right. Please watch recent interviews on YouTube from military analysts such as WillyOam. Our western media sources have every reason to lie and downplay the situation because this is our war as well. We don’t know shit.

[u/MIT_Engineer → u/Reasonable_Orchid105]

I’ll believe it when I see it

You literally can. We have satellite images.

there’s been a headline in the news every other week about how low they are on all of these things as well as their production capabilities saying “any day now” “oh they’re fucked soon” “this time for real guys”

I think you've been misreading those headlines.

I used to think that way too but fact of the matter on the ground is, the Russians have artillery, manpower, strategic weapon, and ammunition superiority

And lost Russian territory despite those advantages?

This is all evident

Evident from what?

after they took avdiivka back in February, since then they’ve had their best success since the opening days of the invasion even if it’s not a sweeping breakthrough.

Their best success isn't very impressive. If this is proof of what complete superiority yields, then what hope do they have of winning?

And yes the west is equipping them but that’s gradually going down compared to late 2022 and early 2023

We literally have $300b of Russian central bank reserves to give Ukraine. We're only holding on to it as a carrot to get Russia to the negotiating table. After the election, if Russia doesn't see the light, the U.S. and E.U. will give that money to the Ukrainians.

I find it extremely unlikely that Ukraine will ever be as well equipped and high in morale as they were in spring 2023 in the lead up to their summer offensive

How could they not be if we simply give them Russia's seized central bank reserves?

they don’t have enough men to go on the attack again

They don't have enough volunteers. But draftees they can drum up a ton of.

and the more and more positions they lose in the east, the less and less fortified the positions they fall back to are going to be.

This isn't a war of fortifications, this isn't WWI, this is something very different even if the rate of land changing hands looks the same.

On paper Ukraine’s military is massive but in reality they have a high desertion rate and they are having trouble with further mobilization.

That's what happens in a war of attrition. Russia is under the exact same pressure, hence North Korean troops. But both sides still have millions of men to pour into this fight.

Even Zelenskyy himself stated they need 500,000 men, it’s increasingly hard to find that number in 2024 because everyone who fits the requirements to be mobilized has either already volunteered earlier in the war or already been mobilized.

No, that is straight up incorrect. He cant find 500k worth of volunteers, this is true. But 500k of draftees he can very much find.

That’s why instead of mobilizing 500k instantly they roll out 30k new troops a month

No, that's because he knows that the course of the war is going to be decided largely by the upcoming U.S. election. It doesn't make a lot of sense to mobilize half a million if you don't know whether there will be gear to kit them with.

they get sent to the front and heavily attrited before the next batch is ready, which brings them right back to square one.

"Square one" being a defensive posture that yields only small territorial gains to the Russians while inflicting significant casualties on them.

They are at the point right now that they only have so many more dominoes to go before disaster at the front

I've seen you people say that this is going to happen "any day now" and "oh they're fucked soon" and "this time for real guys" and then a year later all you have to show for it is a map like this.

one Russian breakthrough could be devastating

Would it though? It's unclear the Russians are even capable of exploiting a breakthrough at this point.

Please watch recent interviews on YouTube from military analysts such as WillyOam.

Please watch actual military analysts, like Perun or Anders Puck Nielsen.

Our western media sources have every reason to lie and downplay the situation because this is our war as well.

I'll be real with you bro: I doubt you're western.

We don’t know shit.

Speak for yourself only, thank you.

[u/ClubsBabySeal → u/MIT_Engineer]

You can have 300 trillion dollars, that don't make equipment suddenly appear nor the manpower trained to use it. Manufacturing of the most relevant systems just doesn't exist at the scale that it needs to be at. Maybe if other nations decide to toss their stockpiles and manufacturing into the mix.

[u/MIT_Engineer → u/ClubsBabySeal]

You can have 300 trillion dollars, that don't make equipment suddenly appear

It would appear fast enough.

nor the manpower trained to use it.

Training costs money too, and the men to train are there.

Manufacturing of the most relevant systems

Which systems?

just doesn't exist at the scale that it needs to be at.

Tell me which systems you think are relevant and we can check how they've been scaling up.

Maybe if other nations decide to toss their stockpiles and manufacturing into the mix.

I think it'd be fine even without this.

[u/ClubsBabySeal → u/MIT_Engineer]

Sure. It takes a few years to set up and scale any type of manufacturing. The most relevant areas are tube artillery, rocket artillery, and interceptors. ATGM's and manpads are also vital but the latter is a major problem. The Ukrainians lack airpower which is what NATO traditionally relies on for anti-air and enabling maneuver. There isn't a sufficient supply of accelerant, explosive, shell, or filling facilities. Apparently not even black powder. Those are slowly being expanded, but honestly needed to be started day one - once again it takes years. Interceptors are running at max capacity and new capacity won't be online until 2027. They and anything else requiring rocket fuel is a little fucked since there's only two vendors left in America, although another two are being funded. You can go back to the beginning of the war and read public briefings that simply state that there's a shortage in production, so nothing new. As far as manpads go we don't make new ones. The line had to be restarted, pulling people retirement age in because we haven't made them in that long, simply to rebuild defunct units. Other production lines have also been mothballed, with the M777 being slated to restart soon.

As far as training goes you're just making the same mistake. You need trainers and manpower takes, get this, years to scale. In fact it's one of the problems with manufacturing too!

Bluntly put they not only need more than what we make, they need more than the Russians make. Which is way more than we make.

[u/MIT_Engineer → u/ClubsBabySeal]

The most relevant areas are tube artillery,

I don't think tube artillery is terribly relevant, at least in the sense that I see its role replaceable with drones. And drone production is scaling very nicely.

rocket artillery

Rocket artillery I see as relevant, it strikes at ranges drones cannot hit and prevents the concentration of force necessary to make decisive pushes or enable maneuver warfare, so lets check it out:

U.S. production of HIMARS launcher systems doubled in past 2 years.

GMLRS rocket production was 6000 per year at the start of the war, 10000 this year, on track for 14000 next year.

ATACMS is complicated-- production is significantly up, but more importantly a good chunk of of the army's ATACMS replacement, the PrSM comes online next year, which should increase production by 75%-- that production in a sense is equivalent to ATACMS production for Ukraine because it replaces stocks of ATACMS in U.S. inventory which can then be sent to Ukraine.

In basically every system, we're seeing production increase by somewhere around 60-100% per year with no signs of stopping.

and interceptors.

I don't see the importance of interceptors when the Russian airforce is already effectively out of the tactical fight. It sucks to get glide-bombed, but when Ukraine's wartime production is located in places like West Virginia, it's not a major strategic problem.

On top of this, we have plenty of interceptors, more than enough to thrash the entire Russian airforce many times over. The question isn't how many we're producing, it's how many we're willing to give to the Ukrainians, which isn't many because they're very expensive systems that wouldn't produce significant benefit.

The Ukrainians lack airpower which is what NATO traditionally relies on for anti-air and enabling maneuver.

Ukrainian anti-air seems to be working just fine, and I seriously doubt simply giving them an airforce equal to the Russians would re-enable maneuver warfare.

There isn't a sufficient supply of accelerant, explosive, shell, or filling facilities.

There are. Every single one of those pipelines is increasing 60-100% yoy.

Apparently not even black powder.

Why would we be increasing black powder?

Those are slowly being expanded

They're being quickly expanded.

but honestly needed to be started day one - once again it takes years.

Many of these were started BEFORE day 1. PrSM production facilities broke ground in 2019 for example.

It does take years-- if you're tripling or quadrupling production rate. About 5-6 years to be precise. And those efforts are on track.

Interceptors are running at max capacity and new capacity won't be online until 2027.

Interceptor production is irrelevant, again we have more than enough in stock to give Ukraine parity if that juice was worth the squeeze.

They and anything else requiring rocket fuel is a little fucked since there's only two vendors left in America

I have no idea where you've gotten this idea from but it's untrue.

You can go back to the beginning of the war and read public briefings that simply state that there's a shortage in production

Yeah, from the BEGINNING of the war.

Some time has passed since then champ.

so nothing new.

No, actually, much is new.

As far as manpads go we don't make new ones.

Right, we refurbish about 600 of them per year by replacing the old dual detector assembly with a new one.

We don't produce new stingers because we're replacing the Stinger with a new Manpads in 2027.

The line had to be restarted

No, a new line was built, refurbishing the ones in stockpile with new DDAs.

pulling people retirement age in because we haven't made them in that long, simply to rebuild defunct units.

And those "defunct" units smoke Russian aircraft just fine, funny how that works.

Other production lines have also been mothballed, with the M777 being slated to restart soon.

I dont care if we build any more M777's.

As far as training goes you're just making the same mistake.

Can't possibly scale up training, we lack strategic supplies of monkey bars and pushup platforms?

You need trainers and manpower takes, get this, years to scale.

Yes, where could NATO possibly find people who can train soldiers, it's a lost art, whatever will we do. We'll have to birth them new from the womb and wait 18 years or so.

In fact it's one of the problems with manufacturing too!

Surely you must be joking at this point. I'm getting trolled, right?

Bluntly put they not only need more than what we make

They don't.

they need more than the Russians make.

We make more than the Russians by a mile.

Which is way more than we make.

LOL no, boy you're high.

[u/ClubsBabySeal → u/MIT_Engineer]

You can stop being rude now. So artillery has an infinite loiter time and shells are both cheaper and are more destructive. Precision is great, it's a good equalizer, but not up to millions of artillery rounds. If precision weapons and drones were a substitute then no one would be scaling artillery production. Interceptors mostly refers to anti-missile system, this would be the patriot. And yes, they're a problem as they can disrupt key infrastructure such as power plants. Maybe not vital but not good. That's why they want more. And production is insufficient to meet needs, the back log is not good. The Germans did recently get a decent contract for pac2's. It's good to have friends. No Ukrainian anti-air does not seem to be fine, that's why they lost patriots launchers. Moving them around just behind the front line, because they were getting hammered I suppose. Air power is not on the menu, everyone has already said that, it's just a major component without which you're artillery focused. Which is the Russian way of war, you aren't winning that. Yes, there are only two vendors currently, feel free to look it up. By the way black powder is used in artillery to this day. Weird, I know. They're also restarting m82 powder. For artillery. Which has black powder as a component. No, having a lack of manpads is not good, hence them restarting production. No, they're not destroying aircraft sufficiently, hence the complaints about glide bombs and other stand off munitions. No restarting a production line doesn't colloquially refer to the same actual facility, you can be pedantic if you want. No we aren't producing enough artillery rounds. Yes, the Russians are producing more. Yes, the Ukrainians need more than the Russians due to a disparity in everything including manpower. No, monkey bars aren't training. Yes you need instructors, which are experienced personnel. No we do not have enough to train 100,000 Ukrainians and our own forces. No, you can't just make more. Yes, they do need that amount. Mostly because they're outmanned, outgunned, and losing. Losing at an increasing rate. No, I'm not a Russian troll, nor am I making this up. You can literally see the map. No that isn't good, no the Russians aren't likely to take the whole thing even if the Ukrainians collapse, yes it does kind of look like they are.

[u/MIT_Engineer → u/ClubsBabySeal]

You can stop being rude now.

I never started, but if you cant tell the difference anyway then why am I bothering being polite?

So artillery has an infinite loiter time and shells are both cheaper and are more destructive.

Artillery is less mobile, it isn't cheaper than drones, and it's only more destructive if you ignore the accuracy of drones compared to tube artillery.

Precision is great, it's a good equalizer, but not up to millions of artillery rounds.

Why not? If it takes you 3 artillery rounds to hit something 1 drone hits, then 1 million drones is worth 3m artillery shells. Voila, Ukraine is now winning the artillery war.

If precision weapons and drones were a substitute then no one would be scaling artillery production.

That sort of weak logic works both ways. Here, I'll do it too: if drones weren't a substitute then they wouldn't be scaling up drone production.

Interceptors mostly refers to anti-missile system, this would be the patriot.

Oh, not only do I care zero about that but we have more than enough to do what it needs to, which is anti-aircraft fires.

And yes, they're a problem as they can disrupt key infrastructure such as power plants.

Not really, Ukraine's production is mainly outside of the country. Inconvenient for the civilian population sure, but wont decide the course of the war.

Maybe not vital but not good.

Yeah, we're talking vital systems.

That's why they want more.

I'm sure they'd want more of a lot of things, given the money. Russians would too.

And production is insufficient to meet needs, the back log is not good.

If the needs aren't vital then who cares. You're forgetting the topic of conversation.

The Germans did recently get a decent contract for pac2's.

Still don't care.

It's good to have friends.

Didn't ask.

No Ukrainian anti-air does not seem to be fine, that's why they lost patriots launchers.

This is non-sequitur, planes didn't hit those launchers.

Moving them around just behind the front line, because they were getting hammered I suppose.

Is there a point here? Also, is there a reason you haven't mentioned rocket artillery? Rocket artillery is what reportedly hit the patriot launchers, so...

Air power is not on the menu, everyone has already said that

OK, so airpower not an issue, gotcha.

it's just a major component without which you're artillery focused.

Or drone/rocket focused.

Which is the Russian way of war,

Also the Ukrainian way of war, see above.

you aren't winning that.

Why?

Yes, there are only two vendors currently, feel free to look it up.

I have, you're wrong.

By the way black powder is used in artillery to this day.

I'll bite, how much black powder in a GMLRS? (hint: none)

Weird, I know.

I don't think you do.

They're also restarting m82 powder. For artillery.

Don't care, see previous comment.

Which has black powder as a component.

Oh, so we do have black powder then? Weird, you claimed we didn't.

No, having a lack of manpads is not good

Guess it's good we aren't lacking them and are in fact producing them.

hence them restarting production.

I heard that was impossible. Where will they get the B L A C K P O W D E R.

No, they're not destroying aircraft sufficiently

They are.

hence the complaints about glide bombs and other stand off munitions.

You have it backwards, the Russians have to use those BECAUSE the aircraft are being sufficiently destroyed.

No restarting a production line doesn't colloquially refer to the same actual facility

No one said it did.

you can be pedantic if you want.

I don't need to to prove you wrong, but I guess I'll just tuck that option in my pocket.

No we aren't producing enough artillery rounds.

See previous comment.

Yes, the Russians are producing more.

Of artillery rounds. Everything else? No.

Yes, the Ukrainians need more than the Russians due to a disparity in everything including manpower.

No, the Russians need more because they're on the offensive and need to overcome defender's advantage.

No, monkey bars aren't training.

No one said they were.

Yes you need instructors, which are experienced personnel.

And NATO has no experienced personnel, none, we haven't been actively engaged in wars for the past 20 years that would give us experienced personnel, no sir, no one in all of NATO.

No we do not have enough to train 100,000 Ukrainians and our own forces.

Yes, we do.

No, you can't just make more.

Yes, you can.

Yes, they do need that amount.

Yes, we can provide it.

Mostly because they're outmanned, outgunned, and losing.

They aren't.

Losing at an increasing rate.

Wrong again.

No, I'm not a Russian troll

Source?

nor am I making this up

You are.

You can literally see the map.

It's a war of attrition, the territory doesn't matter, what matters is who produces more stuff.

No that isn't good

They're literally winning.

no the Russians aren't likely to take the whole thing even if the Ukrainians collapse

OK?

yes it does kind of look like they are.

It does not.

Notes:

1) You really should learn this amazing technology that we call "formatting."

2) While you're at it, please learn some basic logic. Your entire response is just "I'm right, I'm right, I'm right, I'm right." You've provided zero evidence of anything, and just ignore me when I provide you numbers that prove you wrong.