Russia invades Ukraine - 2 - from 4 May 2022

Russia is effectively supplying Ballarat from Melbourne, instead of Ballan, using only backroads.

With comms and command dysfunctional due to HIMARS strikes, the supply hub will be guessing at what each unit needs, rather than fulfilling requests. Units will get too much ammo, which becomes a vulnerable target. Others will get too little and become starved of ammo.

Trucks will be doing 3x the work. Maintenance and fuel needs are tripled. Driver fatigue higher. Partisan and SF ambushes become far easier.

Russia didn’t have a great truck fleet at the start of the war. That fleet will be rather tired right now, reliability declining. A significant number of trucks were lost in Kyiv and other ambushes, along with HIMARS strikes and general accidents.

8 Likes

Absolutely. It takes the industrial might of a WW2 USA to sustain a Red Ball Express. Replenishment of trucks, drivers and fuel takes an extraordinary effort that most nations could never sustain for more than a couple of weeks.

4 Likes

Ukraine hitting all the bridges to Kherson.

2 Likes

Surreal

5 Likes

Russia his reporter has been pretty front and center throughout the conflict. Cool bit of recognition.

image

5 Likes
6 Likes

Of the two other agreed ports, Chornomorsk is 20km east of Odesa and Yuzhnny 32km east of Odesa… I suppose the towns are also within range

1 Like

Video of the results of the strike on the east west bridge I posted earlier. Notice the precise spacing between the shell impact craters. They’ve clearly been targeted in a line with 10m spacing. Impressive. 6 craters, 6 rockets in an MLRS launch box, pretty obvious culprit.

7 Likes

I fully expected Russia to renege on the grain deal but I thought they might wait more than 24 hours.

6 Likes

Gorbachev is still alive! I’d presumed he was long dead

3 Likes

The devil will be in the detail. As yet, I have not been able to find a copy of the text of the agreement. Nothing up on official sites ( including UN) of the Ukraine or Russian Black Sea shipments deals .
According to a BBC report ( sourced from relevant diplomats) , the agreement includes an undertaking by Russia that it will not target ports while shipments are in transit.
Erdogan has stated that shipments could commence within a matter of days, others are stating commencement within a few weeks.
ADD
Agreements could also have official starting date for the 120 days, or some other formality before they come into effect

He’s hanging in there. They just released a documentary about him.

Thread.

1 Like

Can you (or anyone) shed light on a related rough guess for me?

Battery powered drones exhibit a similar problem. To increase the endurance/range you have to increase the battery capacity, which increases the weight which requires further increase in battery capacity. Energy density of batteries is of course much less than for fuel powered engines so at some point drones with longer endurance and/or larger payload need to use engines instead of battery powered motors.

There can be fixed wing or rotary wing on both sides of that point, including VTOL fixed wing that take off nose up and VTOL fixed wing that have rotors facing up on the wings. But generally it seems there isn’t much that simply adds significantly heavier batteries to get more endurance and just puts up with the fact of disproportionate weight increase.

I am guessing this has something to do with the fact that a lot of the energy is spent on just keeping the weight airborne but I don’t know understand enough to calculate, let alone guesstimate.

DJI Mavic 3 is the popular camera drone that Ukraine’s “Drone Army” is seeking donations of. Manufacturer claims following specs (perhaps “on a good day with a fair wind behind”):

Takeoff Weight Mavic 3: 895 g
Mavic 3 Cine: 899 g (only 4 g extra for 1 TB faster SSD drive)

Presumably both include battery. Cine version more useful to have faster SSD storage.

Battery Type LiPo 4S
Energy 77 Wh
Weight 335.5 g

So battery is already 335.5/899 of takeoff weight ie 37.3% and doubling that would be 671/(899 + 335.5) ie 54.4%.

Four batteries would be 1342/(899 + 3 * 335.5) ie 70.4%

I get that increased inertia with same motor power would be more “sluggish” to accelerate to maximum speed in any direction but why should that make the range and endurance unviably less than 4 times?

I would really like to be able to just stick on a second battery for total 154 Wh, weight 671 g even if the increased endurance was nowhere near double, or preferably three more batteries for total 308 Wh, weight 1342 g.

A small increase in range from 30 km to 40 km and endurance from 45’ to 1 hour could make a big difference in usefulness at the front line. Four times the range at 120 km and 3 hours would be DRAMATICALLY more useful (because of the overhead taking off and landing and getting to target location). But it seems the drones with that sort of range and endurance are in a different category, usually with fixed wings and engines and much more expensive. Is that just because consumer sweet spot for mass production of camera drones requires less sluggishness or am I missing something?

There seems to be some threshold phenomena that makes overloading with batteries unviable but I don’t have any “feel” for what sort of formula/calculation to use or where to look it up.

Is it just obvious that having 70% the weight doing nothing but carrying the batteries is dramatically less viable than having 37%? If so why? I just don’t have any “feel” for that.

click for Majic 3 specs and attempts to calculate

https://dl.djicdn.com/downloads/DJI_Mavic_3/20220531/DJI_Mavic_3_User_Manual_v1.6_en.pdf

C mode is slowed down for “Cinema” video stability
N mode is “Normal” with collision avoidance cameras operating
S mode is faster for less safe “Sports” not slowed down to avoid collisions

I assume the maximum flight speed in S mode is relevant for catching up to a fast moving target and staying with it despite using up energy per minute and per km.

But cruising (not “maximum” flight speed in N mode is relevant for endurance and range. Say 9 m/s since that is the speed used for quoting maximum flight time of 46’.

Distance travelled in 46’ would be 9 * 46 * 60 m = 24.8 km - significantly less than the quoted maximum flight distance, 30 km, which presumably implies even less speed to get to maximum distance?

Video Max Transmission Distance
(unobstructed, free of interference) 15 km (FCC), 8 km (CE/SRRC/MIC)
Max Download Speed 15 MB/s (with DJI RC Pro)

For height above sea level h in m and no obstructions, visual horizon in km is about 3.57 * sqrt(h).

For cruising at 100 m that would be 35.7 km. Add another 3.6 km for distance from horizon to controller at 1 m (and subtract lots because planet is not just a sphere covered in sea).

Radar Horizon and Target Visibility Calculator • Electrical, RF and Electronics Calculators • Online Unit Converters

Both Majic 3 versions presumably include connector for up to 2 TB capacity SDXC, UHS-I Speed Grade 3 rating microSD card.

Cine version has SSD capable of storing RAW format video.
Capacity: 1TB
Max Read Speed: 700MB/s*
Max Write Speed: 471MB/s*

  • Max read or write speed of the aircraft. The speed may vary when
    connected to a computer or other device.

Potential sensor data storage rate 30 times wireless transmission rate. So copying and transfering stored data after landing and ingesting it to Processing Exploitation and Dissemination (PED) is a major aspect of system design. Less than 4% of the potential intelligence data acquired could be transmitted during the flight. Shorter flight times mainly negative but earlier access to delayed data is partial compensation.

Max Ascent Speed 1 m/s (C mode)
6 m/s (N mode)
8 m/s (S mode)
Max Descent Speed1 m/s (C mode)
6 m/s (N mode)
6 m/s (S mode)
Max Flight Speed (at sea level, no wind) 5 m/s (C mode)
15 m/s (N mode)
19 m/s (S mode)

Max Service Ceiling Above Sea Level 6000 m

Max Flight Time 46 minutes (measured while flying at 32.4 kph = 9 m/s in windless conditions)
Max Hovering Time (no wind) 40 minutes
Max Flight Distance 30 km
Max Wind Speed Resistance 12 m/s
Max Tilt Angle 25° (C mode)
30° (N mode)
35° (S mode)

Only 6’ longer flight time when actually flying (perhaps slowly) so if hovering power consumption is H Watts and flying F Watts, and overhead for takeoff and landing is T Wh, equivalent total energy in Wh for either just staying airborne and only hovering between Takeoff and landing or actually flying uses energy :

77 = T + H * 46/60 = T + F * 40/60 = 77

So F/H = 46/40 = 1.15 or only 15% more for flying.

I guess just keeping the weight airborne must use power increasing with the weight, not just flying time or distance?

But I don’t know the formula or what it depends on.

Potential energy to lift to a cruising height c would be mgc Joules or Watt seconds.
Say g = 9.8 m sec^-2.

Lifting to cruise at 100m that is .8999.8100/3600 = 0.245 Wh. So cruising at 1 km would only require 2.45 Wh or 2.45/77 ie 3.2% of the capacity of a single battery. The rotors won’t recharge the battery by running in reverse on the way down but energy required directly by gravity is small.

Sluggishness of extra weight for more batteries might make maximum Ascent speed much less in a given time to get to the desired height but does that have a big impact?

Perhaps there is a threshold because descent becomes more like “plummeting” with rotors not braking effectively?

Hybrid drones with a couple of kg extra weight for generator plus fuel seem to be viable - but they would be more vulnerable due to noise.

What am I missing?

@elfm I have still only explained who my drafts will be intended for and not clarified what I am proposing. But here’s some calculations for the Majic 3 drones being acquired by the Ukrainian “Drone Army” based on the specs you can see by clicking on the triangle above.

Effective flight range of only about 25 km means that Majic 3 can only barely get to 12 km away and back without any time to loiter doing artillery adjustment. Actually less given launch is not directly opposite target destination even if return can go to closer landing spot.

eg 10 km spacing between launch positions would give maximum of 5 km distance along the front line to be opposite to target. Flight along hypotenuse of right angled triangle could be 13 km to target then 12 km for return to land behind front line 5 km from launch zone, total 25km. 5^2 + 12^2 = 169 = 13^2 (pythagoras)

Needs just 250 cheap drones available for instant launch along 2500 km front. Several times that number for continuous availability and ability to track and laser designate mobile targets.

Handoffs from 200 “Tactical Drones” doing longer endurance surveillance at 5 km altitude plus counter artillery radar and direction finding of enemy radar and other emissions. Tactical Drones have other things to do after handing off the targets that are close enough for the cheap drones.

But it would take 13000/9 seconds = 24 minutes to get to a target 12 km from the front, so anything moving would need a lot more than 1 cheap drone per mission and if the target was moving away from the front it would need more attention from a Tactical Drone.

No more restrictive limit from either horizon or transmitter power. There are a lot of targets less than 6 km from the front but any increase in range would make a big difference.

The distance that Launch and Recovery Zones would have to be from the front also makes a big difference as does the distance between FLOT and FLET, depth of Artillery Manouver Area and proportion of range that enemy artillery stays away from front.

Preparing a proposal for JDICS should at least include some sample mission vignettes showing what some examples of a mission sequence would look like with and without development of the proposed enhancements.

The Artillery Range and Numbers poster from Ukrainian edition of Forbes columnist via @barry_day is labelled “System Kropyva”:

That is the name of a Ukrainian C2 system:

It seems reasonable to take the figures shown as plausible Ukrainian estimates of enemy artillery as well as their own used in their C2 system. They might just be from Project Oryx data used in similar graphics from same source. But either way, good enough to be used here.

Top right of diagram looks to me like lots of enemy artillery that would do a lot less damage if it had to move back away from drones that could reach a depth of 12 km. Plus 6,600 reserves. Far more if that range could be extended. Far less if they need to be launched and/or return from some distance behind the lines or if the FLET and FLOT are some distance apart. I cannot guesstimate how much. Need to put plausible example numbers in plausible mission sequence vignettes.

With little time to loiter for artillery adjustment it may make sense for the cheap drones to be able to do precision Target Mensuration. As soon as the drone acquires the target, first round gets close and if necessary single subsequent salvo finishes the job while drone is already on the way back (and perhaps another one on the way to do Battle Damage Assessment).

The same hardware that enables precise targeting also enables operation despite GNSS jamming and will be needed anyway to overcome enhanced EW C2 jamming when it arrives.

But even if the cheapest drones are just used as forward observers to adjust mortar fire that pounds the actual line of contact at short range more accurately, it still makes a difference to move away from drones being attached to the same units as fire teams.

In a more fluid situation you are stuck with short range drones being controlled by individual fire teams with controller next to a shoulder mounted missile within 1 km of target. Very low operations tempo. But adjusting mortars and artillery fire across even a small gap could benefit from networked drones.

With separate uplink and downlink sites and separate launch and recovery sites and separate fire control you get a much better battle rhythm and economy of force. Along the front separate forward observers at the downlinks can watch the video and image feed without being exposed to enemy fire and send adjustments to the relevant fire teams.

2 Likes

Media reporting that the German Government has bailed out Uniper, including a 30% stake in the company and the right to raise prices in long term contracts, as well as financial measures, acceptable to Finland.
Also that Nord Stream up to 40% capacity ( normally runs at 67%).

You are on the money with:

  1. You are using an increasing fraction of your useful payload to carry “fuel” i.e. a bigger battery, reducing your available payload. However given you a planning a fixed mission payload then this is less an issue than if you are trying to carry freight or weapons.
  2. As mass increases, the engines need to work at a higher power setting to keep the aircraft aloft, therefore increasing the rate of energy consumption (i.e. battery or fuel)
  3. The performance margin will decrease, meaning not only more sluggish acceleration but potentially also less tolerance to turbulence and gusts (can’t accelerate fast enough to hold position, potentially reducing effectiveness for surveillance) and reduced ceiling.

The other factor would be the longer downtime between missions to recharge battery packs, although swap n go packs would mitigate that.

Thread on the predicament Putin is in.

2 Likes

And a related thread on US supply struggles under targeted attacks.

5 Likes

7.23.22 Update, day 150 of Russian invasion.

Belarus:

Belarus has again extended their military drills to July 31st, the 13th time it was extended/ It is unlikely they will physically participate in the war however.

Kyiv/ West Ukraine (1):

The situation remains unchanged in W Ukraine.

Additional strikes were launched on Kyiv, with damage to a university and apartment blocks.

In central Ukraine, 13 RU missiles were fired into Kirovohrad, targeting the military airfield and electrical/train infrastructure.

Sumy/Chernihiv (2):

RU forces continue to consolidate themselves along the border, and fired across the border with mortars. There appears to be no formation of RU assault groups as of yet, or preparations for a renewed ground assault. The increased usage of automatic grenade launchers is observed.

Kharkiv (3):

RU forces continue to skirmish along the front lines N of kharkiv, with an RU attempt towards Udy being repelled in the area UA controls closest to the border. Airstrikes continue on UA positions in Verkhnii Saltiv, who are the closest to menacing Vovchansk and the RU supply lines therein.

Izyum/Lyman (4):

RU forces N of Slovyansk continue to skirmish into the area of Borodychne, and have been generally prevented from advancing by way of UA artillery sighted into the rubble of the town. RU forces continue to shell along the front lines, and have reportedly been repelled from around the town on the leading edge of the advance to Slovyansk, Krasnopillya. which lies just along the main highway south.

UA forces continue to shell into the RU backlines, both immediatly inside Izyum, and also along the far riverbank in Svyatohirsk, which lies right across from the rubble formerly known as Borodychne, and has been an RU command post since at least May.

Siversk/Lysychansk (5):

An RU meeting between 50 commanders and staff in Lysychansk courthourse was interrupted by accurate UA artillery fire to devastating effect.

RU forces again attacked towards Siversk, both along the central and southern fronts towards Verhkhnokamyanske and Ivano-Darivka, both attacks were repelled.

There is evidence of UA MLRS strikes on RU bases in Verkhnokamnyanka, the site just E along the main road from Siversk to Lysychansk, and the industrial area that UA covered the withdrawl from Lysychansk in.

Increased RU shelling NW of Siversk appears to originate from across the river, and is designed to limit supplies and troops redeploying. Additionally, while the volume of fire along the eastern front line appears steady, there has been increased RU strikes on the southern route into Siversk, along the T05-13 highway, which runs dune north from Bakhmut.

Popasna/Bakhmut:

RU forces attempted attacks along the NE highway from Bakhmut towards Berestove, Bilohorivka, and Yakovilvka, and appear to have dislodged UA defenders from Berestove itself, with UA strikes targeting into the town and RU strikes now targeting increasingly west of the town into the hills. The UA strongpoint further west of Vesele continues to be supplied, and a corresponding attack to the south in Bilohorivka was repelled, with UA forces continuing to shell RU supply routes sustaining this assault.

Around Bakhmut, RU forces attempted an attack on the UA defensive strongpoint of Soledar, but were repelled and had their supply lines struck. Due E of Bakhmut however, per the UA MoD, Wagner group mercs succesfully assaulted into the southern half of the town of Pokrovske. Pokrovske luies along the main highway towards Bakhmut, and is the final main residential area before entering Bakhmut proper. The increased usage of CAS in this assault is reminiscint of the final portion of the battle of Popasna, where Wagner PMC aircraft managed to dislodge UA defenders. It remains to be seen if this is a concerted attempt a la popasna, or a smaller force, as UA continues to shell the Russian backlines here, and the Wagner PMC operating base located just a few KM further east along the river from Illovaisk.

RU forces continue to attempted to close the UA pocket to the SE of Bakhmut around the Vulehirska coal power plant, which lies along the the Luhan river reservoir and effectively allows UA troops to control movement through the area from this industrialized strongpoint. The intensity of RU attacks in this region has diminished slightly after they attempted attacks from multiple directions simultaneously earlier on in the week. There are increased UA strikes into Luhanske and Svitlodarsk, RU command/supply hubs for this push.

Donetsk (6):

The video evidence purportedly showing a HIMARS being destroyed several days ago, is reported by both the US government and RU military celebrity Igor Girkin as false. The DOD stated that no US MLRS systems have been destoyed as of yet, and Igor Girkin continues to bemoan the fact that RU lacks effective countermeasures to stop them from striking.

RU volunteer battalions from Chechnya are walking back their rhetoric of rapid deploying into Ukraine, following some domestic pushback against Kadyrov. The increased reporting on the dramatically unfit and undertrained “volunteer” battalions forming around russia as part of Putins “shadow mobilization” has generated a surprising amount of angst and aggravation among the citizenry, who can plainly see that this is more of a desperation move then groups of highly motivated soldiers signing up. Allegedly, the RU government has limited its goals to now 24 battalions being formed (8 formed, 16 more reqeusted) in the next few weeks, as opposed to the orginal stated plan of at least 1 battalion per region in Russia, of which there are 84. The ethnic minority regions are seeing more of this behavior then the ethnic Russian metropolises in the W, such as Moscow, St Petersburg, and the like.

RU ammo depots near Donetsk city such as Horlivka continue to be hit.

RU continues to shell into Avdiivka, and has attempted no further ground assaults. Overall, there continues to be a reduction in the volume of RU artillery fire, attributed to the destruction of RU logistics and command bases in the backline.

Mariupol (7):

The situation remains grim in Mariupol. RU is accelerating it’s plans to block the flow of any information in and out of the region, as well as staging sham referendums for the occupied areas in the south by autumm.

Zaporizhia/Southern Axis (8):

RU forces continue to leverage artillery and rocket fire across the southern front, but launched no major offensives.

UA released video footage of the effects of precision strikes carried out by loitering munitions on RU positions near the Zaporhizia NPP, which were able to effectively target RU MLRS and troops within 350m of the nearest nuclear infrastructure. The RU battle strategy of using nuclear and other sensitive infrastructure as a “shield” against enemy attacks appears to be less effective in the presence of highly-accurate and controllable suicide drones.

RU forces have taken significant losses in the South, and reportedly the remains of 3 battalions are constituted together in order to form a new one. In that specific unit, 2000 reinforcements arrived since the war began, and only 500 are still alive, and that even the increased deployment of psychologists is not helping convice RU soldiers to redeploy back to Ukraine or go on assault. The RU soldier also stated that the Ukrainians artillery capabilities have improved so much that they no long have warning time before the explosions, which has created a sense of general dread.

Kherson (9):

RU and UA forces continue to fire artillery at each other along the front line, and RU MI-8 gunships (a transport helicopter which can also fire missiles, but not a dedicated gunship) continue attempts to strike UA positions with minimal effect. RU forces fired another batch of S-300 missiles in Mykolaiv, and attempted an assault with antiquated T-62 tanks along the front line which was repelled. UA forces destroyed 3 of these old tanks, and two ammo dumps/logistics hubs in Kherson.

Per Zelensky, the offensive to retake Kherson oblast continues in a slow grinding pace, with rocket strikes and shelling to be expected. Per RU military reports, UA still maintains a bridgehead across the Inhulets river near Lozove, which has drawn significant RU attention in the form of mines and artillery in order to prevent another UA assault forming there.

The reports of an RU grand encirclement in Vyskopillya by UA troops remain unconfirmed at best, with the city having been reduced to rubble some time ago and unlikely to have been held onto unneccesarily by increasingly menaced RU troops.

RU forces in Kherson have stepped up their anti-partisan measures, and are going house to house to check for weapons caches and other signs of resistance. Snipers have been deployed to watch for “suspicious activity” of Ukrainians standing in high rise windows, with incredibly loose ROE for what constitues a Ukrainian spotter, and subsequently an RU team being sent in. Due to the increased UA strikes in the region, RU forces are increasinly prohibited from moving military equipment or manpower during daylight hours.

A Ukrainian government minister fighting in the south was reportedly saved from an RU bombardment by a simple mattress he threw up on the window.

Odessa/Black Sea/Crimea(10):

This morning, the RU black sea fleet fired 4 missiles into the Odesa port, targeting infrastructure faacilities thereof. 2 were intercepted, and the other 2 hit near loading centers which are to be used for offloading grain onto ships following the previously announced “grain deal” Russia had agreed to. It is believed that the strikes were focused on on the grain storage itself, but the infrastructure for moving them, in a way to slow the pace of any transloading.

Reportedly in the black sea, there are 2 missile ships and 2 submarines, as well as 1 transport ship equipped with up to 12 Kaliber cruise missiles.

The UA military stated that the UA ports of Odesa, Chornomorsk, and Pivdenny will be ready for grain export by the end of the week following mine clearing operations. They also stated that there is functionally no chance of an RU Naval invasion attempt, due to the increased posture of UA anti-ship forces, and the increasingly eastern deployments of the black sea fleet around crimea.

Moldova has confirmed that it is not allowing any RU military personnel in Transnistria to enter or transit through Moldova.

A cat, which was rescued from Snake Island, got the name Snake as it has become something of a mascot for the defenders in the south.

RU forces targeted the landmark Adzhigol lighthouse with 3 missiles, the tallest lighthouse in ukraine.

General:

Yesterday, Ukrainian forces eliminated:

240 x soldiers (Total 39,240)
4x tanks
9x APC
3x Artillery (2x MLRS)
17x vehicles
1x UAV

The greatest losses were in the Kramatorsk and Bakhmut regions.

UN Secretary General António Guterres “unequivocally” condemned the shelling of the Odesa seaport, from where the export of Ukrainian grain was supposed to resume. Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar said that the Russian side claims that it has nothing to do with the missile attack on the Odesa port and is “studying this issue in detail.”

UK PM Boris Johnson said that last week he visited the training camp of Ukrainian servicemen in North Yorkshire and even trained with them, releasing a video.

The US announced another 270 million USD packaged, comprised of

4 HIMARS and support vehicles, 36k 105mm Artillery rounds for light NATO artillery, anti tank weaponry, and up to 580 Phoenix Ghost drones. The Phoenix Ghost is believed to be a modern long range loitering munition, developed in part by DARPA following the usage of Switchblade drones on the battlefield. It has a larger warhead and range.

Looking forward:

RU artillery strikes have continued to diminish in effectiveness, as a result of UA strikes on ammo depots.

RU forces near Kherson are increasingly on edge for potential UA strikes, and the movement of ammo depots further behind the lines indicate the concern applied.

4 Likes