r/CredibleDefense • u/AutoModerator • 15d ago
Active Conflicts & News MegaThread March 23, 2025
The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.
Comment guidelines:
Please do:
* Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,
* Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,
* Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,
* Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,
* Post only credible information
* Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules.
Please do not:
* Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,
* Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,
* Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'
* Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.
42
u/Kantei 14d ago edited 14d ago
Trying to be objective about a potential inflection point that's based on a lot of uncertainties: Russian artillery losses.
There's high-effort handle that makes regular projections about when the battlefield situation will substantially likely turn in Ukraine's favor based on reported losses of RU arty.
Their latest projection has this inflection point on April 19, based on the reported losses by the General Staff of Ukraine getting much closer to reaching 26,100. This number is derived from approximated OSINT estimates of Russian artillery stockpiles + NK deliveries + new production. The theory is that once these stockpiles are depleted, the AFRF will be on the back foot due to artillery being such a core component of the Russian way of war.
However, some comments have expressed caveats or doubts on this. Not just because the GSUA is technically a biased source with minimal video evidence of their claims, but because they might also be counting smaller systems such as mortars as 'artillery'. This isn't a definitive accusation, because previous reports of these losses earlier in the war would also be too minimal if it were inclusive of mortar systems.
There's also the fact that the reported amount of artillery losses are accelerating, with GSUA reporting a few days ago that they reached a record of 101 destroyed arty systems in a single day. Conventional logic would assume that the fewer valuable systems you have, the more protective and selective you are about using them, so reported losses should be going down over time if Russia were truly down to their last pieces.
On the flip side, these are the theories in favor of this inflection point truly being this close:
Russian command is more desperate than let on, and have been further concentrating their assets to push the AFU out of Kursk and break through AFU defenses in the Pokrovsk direction.
We're already beginning to see AFU counterattacks in areas where there should also be high concentrations of Russian forces. The AFRF is still very capable of offensive operations across the front, but they no longer have the overwhelming superiority in firepower and are instead relying on fundamental manpower advantages.
My own conclusion (based all of the above while considering caveats upon caveats): Even if the inflection point isn't as close as projected, Russian artillery losses are indeed having a noticeable effect on operational conditions.
11
u/okrutnik3127 14d ago edited 14d ago
These artillery loses are likely irrelevant for the battlefield situation. Drones are now primary method of indirect strikes for both sides, having much more impact than artillery. Their really turn doing anything near the frontline into hell, including resupply and rotations.
AFU had to retreat from Kurschyna since it was impossible to resupply with the logistic routes saturated with Russian drones, for example.
Anyway, since Russian Federation depleted their and their allies stocks of 152mm ammunition they are not able to leverage the huge number of artillery pieces they have/had, since they do not have the shells to repeat these heavy barrages from 2022 with, if I recall correctly, 60k shells fired per day.
I don’t think projection based on UA gov reported artillery loses has any connection to reality in 2025, frankly speaking.
Potentially UA newly advertised ability to jam KABs can be very impactful, if some analysis of a trend in KAB strikes appears, it would be interesting to see.
26
u/MeesNLA 14d ago
a lot of commanders on the ground and analyst say that drones are more of a substitute then a replacement of artillery
3
u/okrutnik3127 14d ago edited 14d ago
For some tasks like long rage strikes they may be a substitute, but reality on the ground changed dramatically on the ground compared to 2022, these drones wreak havoc which was never seen before to the tactical rear zone, making any activity there very risky.
17
u/poincares_cook 14d ago
I don't think it's correct to discount artillery, artillery and drones fullfil different purposes at different conditions.
While it's accurate that artillery is not as impactful as it was in 2022 and 2023, it's not worthless either.
On the other hand, even if we assume the numbers are correct, the deterioration of artillery will continue on slowly with no meaningful inflection point, while the Russians develop other means and tactics to mitigate the situation.
4
u/okrutnik3127 14d ago edited 14d ago
Obviously artillery is still relevant and cannot be replaced fully by drones, my main point was that as drones took over parts of artillery tasks, it should be much easier to compensate for the lost guns.
That is on the strategical level, on tactical level taking out big number of artillery pieces can be leveraged of course.
14
u/Velixis 14d ago
but because they might also be counting smaller systems such as mortars as 'artillery'.
There‘s no might. They do. That‘s been clear since 2022.
It‘s probably going up because they‘re hitting more mortars lately but I‘d wait for a bit longer before making assumptions about what? One or two weeks of claimed Russian arty losses by the GSUA?
16
u/plasticlove 14d ago
I think the numbers are completely off. They are very different from open source data, and I believe we would have heard more about it if they were running critically low.
But let's say it's actually correct. Would it even end the war? Ukraine recently announced that 85% of the destruction of personnel and equipment is the work of Ukrainian UAVs.
2
u/Alexandros6 13d ago
I mean it would negate one of the main Russian advantages so far, the number of shells and good artillery crews. But it really does seem a far off possibility
18
u/Electrical-Lab-9593 14d ago
the number of hits going up could be because they are using shorter ranged or more worn out units that they have to bring closer to the zero line, and might be in range of drones now.
15
u/shash1 14d ago
Its a combination of all of the above. AFU had/has a lot more FPV and Baba yaga drones and these simply devastate russian mortars, D20s, D30s, Gvozdikas and so on. Andrew Perpetua consistently lists a few guns struck by FPVs every day, but they are not added to Oryx/Warspotting because there is no aftermath video.
4
u/okrutnik3127 14d ago
Russians upped their drone game as well, making loss of these old artillery pieces less relevant unfortunately. While Ukrainians are much more innovative with the drones, Ukrainian state is extremely inept and fails to capitalise on it. The Russians move slow, but are able to scale up solutions like the FPV and wire guided drones, they now have advantage in quantity.
7
u/WeekendClear5624 14d ago
The Russians move slow, but are able to scale up solutions like the FPV and wire guided drones, they now have advantage in quantity.
Based on what?
6
u/LepezaVolB 14d ago edited 14d ago
While Ukrainians are much more innovative with the drones, Ukrainian state is extremely inept and fails to capitalise on it. The Russians move slow, but are able to scale up solutions like the FPV and wire guided drones, they now have advantage in quantity.
That's.... not how it happened over the course of the War, far from it, I'd go as far as to say it's almost the exact opposite of your impression on several counts.
Ukrainians develop a lot of solutions through their grassroots, sure, but they were late to introducing both regular FPVs and oFPVs, which we can use as two benchmarks (ie. unlike drone interceptors, which likely won't be a Russian priority for a while longer, so it's a separate topic) - not just at scale, but figuring out functioning prototypes that can even be scaled up. Russians were the first ones to figure out both, and then scale them up. They weren't slow relative to AFU in terms of developing initial solutions, at all.
However, it's usually the next steps that differentiated them in the medium-to-long term. Take Sudoplatov VT-40 as an example, it was developed in the early 2023 (state-sponsored, but apparently with a decent degree of autonomy), and was used to great effect in the Spring and Summer during the Southern Counter Offensive, and during that period the Russian state recognized it as a good solution and got involved much more deeply, managed to set up something resembling a serial production and scaled it up introducing a lot of inefficiencies and grift and the whole project was extremely unresponsive to rather quick developments on the battlefield. So much so it wasn't unusual still reading testimonies about how base models were still being unsuccessfully used in April/May of 2024 in Krynky (it was the case really across a lot of the front, but Krynky was a hot sector where Russian situation was so dire at times that it allowed for a bit more free circulation of information to the outside world), to both sides' bemusement. That is over a year since the prototype was first developed, and just under a year since AFU dealt with it at scale. It also wasn't unusual to find testimonies at around the same time how it's impossible to get anything else through official Russian channels if the sector was low priority (think more the number of Luhansk/Kharkiv axes), likely because the whole project was still a cash cow for a lot of those involved, possibly even down to the commanders on the ground. Hell, there was some reporting that they were still falling back on them in the initial stages of Kursk (formerly the lowest of the priorities amongst Russian sectors) and it might've played a pretty significant role in AFU's initial success. However, that doesn't mean they were slow in developing other solutions - they weren't, they were keeping pace with AFU, but getting the State to back those to a level they did with VT-40 was likely challenging since it would require dismantling a well-entrenched system of pervasive incentives they managed to set up.
Ukrainian State was slow at scaling up production through official channels, yes, but that shielded them (inadvertently) from exactly these blunders we saw Russians commit, and it allowed for an accumulation of relatively decentralized expertise they were then able to exploit, and a fair portion of them had by then independently developed an understanding of pace of development required by the War - and are likely disseminating that throughout the official system, as well.
We could observe something similar with Vandals, but oFPVs appear by their technical nature to offer a lot fewer options for countering, so tracking developments (or lack of them that really affect them enough so as to cause public posts) might be a lot harder.
34
u/wormfan14 14d ago
Sudan update the SAF have more of the capital, war in South Sudan continues to escalate.
''The armed forces take full control of central Khartoum after defeating the rebellion.'' https://x.com/VistaMaps/status/1903506798033920288
A new miltia joins the SAF another Eritrean based one.
''Mansour Arbab, the leader of the New Justice and Equality Movement (New-JEM), announces he will join Sudan's army in the fight against the RSF. An agreement was reached in negotiations with the Sudanese government in Eritrea. https://x.com/PatrickHeinisc1/status/1903744281703055558
''Sources in South_Sudan report that soldiers from Uganda's army are approaching the border with Sudan to launch attacks on the White Army in Upper Nile State. https://x.com/PatrickHeinisc1/status/1903777819810812051
''Germany has decided to temporarily close operations of its embassy in Juba, capital of South Sudan, due to the deteriorating security situation. The USA has already withdrawn diplomats from its embassy.'' https://x.com/sudanwarmonitor/status/1903669013344866390
''Several sources reported on Sunday that members of the Rapid Support Forces participating in the Arab coalition's Operation Decisive Storm had arrived from Saudi_Arabia in Nyala, the capital of Sudan's South Darfur state.''
https://x.com/PatrickHeinisc1/status/1903818494010855903
These RSF fighters have spent years fighting the Houthis and various other groups in Yemen so should not be underestimated.
''The RSF, having abandoned its ambitions for the capital Khartoum, is now taking on the remaining pockets of resistance in Darfur.The agenda of the genocidal gunmen might now be one of separatism instead of rebellion.''
https://x.com/ThomasVLinge/status/1903796976983904304
Sudan's petroleum minister says damage and losses in the oil sector total $20 billion. He hopes that the refinery in #Khartoum can be rebuilt. Regardless of this, another refinery will be built in Port_Sudan. https://x.com/PatrickHeinisc1/status/1903941410996256805
I think this news will be bitter for a lot of Sudanese, by that Khartoum's importance will be lowered, it's a smart idea for security from land invasions but regionally will effect politics in Sudan.
''- Sudan Doctors Network: at least 48 ppl killed & 63 others injured in what the org called ethnically-motivated attacks by RSF in Almalha, North Darfur. RSF attack on Um Gineibila village, North Kordofan; homes reportedly looted & burned, residents abducted.'' https://x.com/BSonblast/status/1903642048873566466
44
u/Well-Sourced 14d ago edited 14d ago
Updating down the front line from North to South. In Kursk, the North Koreans are applying pressure on any remaining UAF presence. In Kharkiv, Lukhansk, & Dontesk both sides trade small positional gains/losses while taking losses in men and equipment. In the south the Russians might starting a bigger push but at the least are keeping up the pressure on every part of the line.
The Russians have more to trade in almost all areas of the front. The pressure is constant to keep UAF units on the back foot.
Ukrainian paratrooper discusses current situation in Russia's Kursk Oblast | New Voice of Ukraine
North Korean soldiers remain actively involved in the fighting in Russia’s Kursk Oblast, according to a post on the 95th Separate Airborne Assault Brigade of Polissya's Telegram channel, shared by brigade soldier Bohdan on March 23.
A Ukrainian soldier named Bohdan shared his experiences from the front lines in Kursk, noting that while he hasn't encountered many Russians recently, there are numerous North Koreans. "They swarm like cockroaches," he said, adding that while some try to draw attention to themselves, others attempt to flank from different directions.
Once a driving instructor, Bohdan is now stationed in Kursk, where he described enemy assaults lasting from dawn until night for several days.
"Now, it's mostly North Koreans retreating, with Russians sending them in as cannon fodder," Bohdan said. "You can take out a dozen in a day, but more show up the next." He also reported that Russian forces are abandoning their wounded on the battlefield, making no attempt to evacuate them.
Russian forces are trying to use underground communications to amass forces for assaults on Ukraine’s Vovchansk, Kharkiv Oblast. However, their attempts have not been successful, says Oleksandr Danilenko, the head of communications for the Hart brigade of the State Border Guard Service, according to UNIAN. Russian forces are trying to use underground communications to amass forces for assaults on Ukraine’s Vovchansk, Kharkiv Oblast. However, their attempts have not been successful, says Oleksandr Danilenko, the head of communications for the Hart brigade of the State Border Guard Service, according to UNIAN.
He emphasized that Vovchansk is in ruins—the city is completely destroyed. Concrete and brick debris lie on the ground, and there are no undamaged buildings left. The defensive line in Vovchansk runs along the Vovcha River, which divides it into southern and northern parts. “There has been no Russian advancement in this direction. Although they try every day to cross the Vovcha River and advance in other areas to enter Ukrainian territory,” Danilenko emphasized.
According to the Hart brigade representative, Russian forces mainly conduct assaults in the city and nearby settlements with small infantry groups of up to 10 people. The Russians work under the cover of drones, artillery, and mortars. On other sections of the front, within the brigade’s area of responsibility – the Ukrainian border with Russia – the occupation forces attempt to conduct mainly reconnaissance and sabotage operations. These are also successfully detected by Ukrainian aerial and ground reconnaissance and neutralized.
He noted that the Vovchansk front, where the Hart brigade operates, remains consistently challenging and tense. The Russians have a significant amount of equipment and personnel, but Ukrainian defenders are preventing Russian troops from advancing and effectively taking out their forces.
The Phoenix Border Unit of Unmanned Aerial Systems celebrated a significant combat achievement in Kharkiv region. On March 21, a video posted on the Unit’s official channel captured the dramatic events unfolding in real-time. Russian forces were were prevented from deploying two PPS-84 pontoon systems, one of key assets in their arsenal. The precision of the strike didn’t stop there, the drone operators also successfully destroyed the Tiger armored vehicle, further crippling the adversary’s capabilities. Moreover, the operation resulted in the elimination of approximately a dozen enemy combatants, highlighting the Unit’s effectiveness in neutralizing threats. The day was capped off with an impressive fireworks display at the enemy’s supply depots, symbolizing the broader impact of the operation on enemy logistics and morale.
Nadiia in Luhansk now under Ukrainian control after 30-hour assault | New Voice of Ukraine
Ukrainian defenders have liberated the settlement of Nadiia in the Svatove district of Luhansk Oblast, the Third Army Corps announced on March 23.
The report states, "The brigade’s forces, primarily the 1st Assault Battalion, have regained control of the settlement of Nadiia, with a total area of three square kilometers liberated from the enemy." Andriy Biletsky, commander of the Third Army Corps, said the capture of the village cost Russian forces “two months of effort and two mechanized regiments, the 752nd and 254th of the 20th Russian Army, which were wiped out.”
Russia has launched an unexpected offensive in the region between Kamianske and Orikhiv to execute this strategy. This area has been relatively stagnant for months, with no clear strategic reason to prioritize attacks there—until now. If we look at the topographic map, we can see that the assault is centered on seizing control of a key hill ridge with key Ukrainian defense lines situated on and around it. The Russian assumption was that Ukraine had moved most of its best equipment and personnel to hotspots like the Kursk and Pokrovsk fronts, leaving this sector vulnerable.
The Russian attack initially surprised Ukraine. Russian forces, spearheaded by the 108th Air Assault Regiment, made quick advances, exploiting a weak spot between the area of responsibility of two Ukrainian units. They launched assaults on positions near Mali Shcherbaky and Piatykhatky, pressing forward aggressively in an attempt to consolidate control over these villages. Map
In Stepove, Russian units pushed toward the main highway to secure a logistical corridor for further movement. However, Ukrainians quickly recognized the seriousness of the situation and responded in force. The battles escalated into intense engagements across multiple settlements, with Ukrainian troops determined to hold the line.
The 128th Mountain Assault Brigade, one of Ukraine’s most experienced units, has been deployed to counter the Russian advance with some of its best drone units. While the situation remains serious, Ukrainian troops are now stabilizing the front and limiting Russian gains. Already posted geolocated footage from the area shows how Ukrainian drone operators are hunting down Russian soldiers and equipment.
If Russian forces were to push significantly further, they could bring Zaporizhzhia city—home to 700,000 people—into artillery range. Such a development makes it imperative that Ukrainian troops hold back the offensive before it becomes too dangerous. Despite the initial Russian success, significant limitations await, as their advance is currently restricted to the contested zone between Russian-controlled parts of the Surovikin Line and the parts Ukrainians took control of during their summer counteroffensive in 2023.
Even if they manage to push beyond this area, they will be met with a strong layer of defense in the form of the Ukrainian Zaporizhzhia defense lines. This far more formidable obstacle will completely prevent any further progress. Additionally, Russia does not have sufficient reserves stationed in this area to achieve a significant breakthrough or sustain a continued offensive effort. Unlike the more concentrated assaults in other regions, this offensive seems to be an opportunistic gamble rather than a well-prepared strategic push. While Russian troops might continue pressing forward in the short term, their long-term prospects for major territorial expansion in Zaporizhzhia remain low. Map
37
u/GTFErinyes 14d ago edited 14d ago
So a lot of people automatically think that Boeing getting the F-47 was some handout to Boeing, or that it WILL get screwed up (nevermind that Lockheed, the only other one on NGAD, has been in hot water over the F-35/TR-3), but I think the most important part of the F-47 NGAD announcement gets missed often
Despite what our adversaries claim, the F-47 is truly the world’s first crewed sixth-generation fighter, built to dominate the most capable peer adversary and operate in the most perilous threat environments imaginable. For the past five years, the X-planes for this aircraft have been quietly laying the foundation for the F-47 — flying hundreds of hours, testing cutting-edge concepts, and proving that we can push the envelope of technology with confidence. These experimental aircraft have demonstrated the innovations necessary to mature the F-47’s capabilities, ensuring that when we committed to building this fighter, we knew we were making the right investment for America.
Note the plural: planes.
I don't have anything particular to point out here other than that planes means there have been multiple demonstrators, and maybe one day we will know for sure, but it's entirely plausible that they picked Boeing based on demonstrated performance and not promises.
We know Boeing has made X-planes in the shadows before (like Bird of Prey). So if that's where they made the decision on, that's very different from a handout.
edit: as KommanderSnowCrab87 wrote below, DARPA announced that Boeing and Lockheed had indeed built demonstrators (no mention of NG, so did they not even compete?) and that they first flew in 2019 and 2022. Looks like Boeing might have beaten Lockheed to the punch by a not-insignificant timeframe, and unlike all the handout talks, I'd be shocked if performance of those demonstrators didn't give it to Boeing given the huge lead they had
edit 2: Keep in mind that Will Roper had talked about demonstrators flying back in 2020 'setting records', which means it is. referring to the first X-plane in 2019. So it must have been something eyewatering
9
u/0rewagundamda 14d ago edited 14d ago
Looks like Boeing might have beaten Lockheed to the punch by a not-insignificant timeframe
We don't even know if they were awarded the contracts at the same time, they may not have been the kind of parallel development the way ATF and JSF demonstrators were.
Actually I find it unlikely that they were awarded a similar amount at the same time to fulfill the same criteria, Lockheed wouldn't have the money to work for 3 years longer than Boeing.
Edit:
flying hundreds of hours
Would suggest they were test campaigns of similar nature to YF-22/23 X-32/35, with duration measured in months.
The question that really needs to be asked, IMHO is actually what they have been doing since the demonstration. At least based on public statements so far there has not been full scale development let alone preparation for mass production unlike at the conclusion of ATF/JSF flyoff.
6
u/Complex-Call2572 14d ago
Can you expand upon how Lockheed has been in hot water over the F-35? Not sure what that's referring to.
20
u/KommanderSnowCrab87 14d ago
DARPA put this out on Friday. Seems like Lockheed was far behind schedule.
10
u/sunstersun 14d ago
Surprising given Lockheed's perceived advantages making the only two stealth fighters for the US military.
12
u/GTFErinyes 14d ago
Surprising given Lockheed's perceived advantages making the only two stealth fighters for the US military.
They're the only two that made it to production - doesn't mean others haven't built it. There were clearly other tech demonstrators/prototypes (X-32, Bird of Prey, who knows what else that has never been declassified... and well now we know there was a Boeing and Lockheed one for NGAD).
5
u/sunstersun 14d ago
Ok yeah, but you'd think production and all that know-how is a huge advantage.
3
u/DefinitelyNotABot01 14d ago
Not really? Boeing is a major subcontractor for the F-35.
2
8
u/Old_Wallaby_7461 14d ago
Boeing is a subcontractor for F-22 as well. The days of one company building a new fighter have been over since F-15E came off the line.
27
u/Well-Sourced 14d ago
The Ukrainian Airforce has reported on strikes carried out on March 21-22.
Ukraine’s Air Force Strikes Russian Positions in Donetsk, Belgorod in One Day | Kyiv Post
The Ukrainian Air Force carried out two successful strikes on Russian military targets on Friday, March 21—one on an enemy base in occupied Toretsk, the Donetsk region, and another on a command post in Russia’s Belgorod region.
According to the General Staff of Ukraine, which reported the strike on March 23 via Telegram, the Air Force targeted a concentration of Russian troops in Toretsk. A released video captured the moment of impact—an explosion followed by thick smoke. However, Kyiv Post was unable to independently verify the time and location of the footage.
“The Air Force successfully struck the gathering point of the Russian 1st Separate Guards Motorized Rifle Brigade of the 103rd Motorized Rifle Regiment, located in a shelter and basement in Toretsk,” the General Staff reported.
The strike reportedly destroyed the site completely, eliminating Russian airborne assault troops and drone operators stationed there. “While final casualty figures are being clarified, the destruction of enemy personnel and fortifications significantly weakens Russian forces in the Toretsk sector,” the report added.
Meanwhile, in a separate strike on March 22, Ukrainian pilots successfully targeted the command post of a Russian border unit in Glotovo, Belgorod Oblast. “Despite Russia’s extensive camouflage efforts, Ukrainian pilots successfully eliminated the enemy facility,” the report said.
The attack reportedly destroyed communication systems and other key equipment. “The elimination of this command post significantly disrupts enemy operations against Ukrainian forces in the Sumy and Kharkiv regions,” the General Staff stated.
Ukrainian Air Force strikes Russian supply unit in Kherson | New Voice of Ukraine
On March 21, 2025, Ukraine’s Air Force carried out a strike on a Russian military supply unit stationed in the occupied town of Dnipriany, in Kherson Oblast. According to a statement by Ukraine’s General Staff on Telegram, the target was a consolidated ferry support company belonging to Russia’s 205th Separate Guards Motor Rifle Brigade. The post included video footage of the attack.
“As a result of the strike, enemy watercraft, military equipment, and an auxiliary facility filled with technical supplies were destroyed,” the General Staff reported. “This destruction prevents the enemy from continuing combat operations against Ukrainian forces in the area.”
Earlier this month, on March 5, Ukraine’s Air Force launched a precision strike on the command post of Russia’s 17th Tank Regiment, part of the 70th Motor Rifle Division, in the occupied town of Oleshky, also in Kherson Oblast.
16
u/blackcyborg009 14d ago
How do you weigh in the costs vs benefits of being closer or farther away from the frontline?
For instance, Ukraine has struck the Engels base AGAIN.
Ukraine has also struck some other Russian oil facilities AGAIN.
I mean I am sure that Putin is aware that Ukraine is capable of reaching Engels base.
So why not move equipment further away so that you won't be in range?
Yes I know easier said than done...........and the further they move away, the more that their aircraft is subject to added flight time + more fuel consumption + wear-and-tear etc.
But won't you rather take that decision.............instead of putting your assets within harm's reach?
Sure they can add more Air Defense................but whatever AD they are adding isn't enough if Ukraine is still able to hit them.
What do you think?
30
u/Orange-skittles 14d ago
The funny thing is I think Russia may have already moved aircraft from the base and are using primary as a layover. Based on the reports Ukraine isn’t even claiming to have damaged let alone destroyed any aircraft. Which is odd because any exposed planes at the bases would have been damaged by the blast.
But back to your question it might be a cost benefit deal. Russia seems to be betting that Ukraine can’t maintain these attacks regularly as they did the same thing a few months back to limited effect then stoped for six months. It might also be more effective to just add hardened shelters which they did to some munitions stores (the ones that didn’t blow up surprisingly) instead of moving the whole base. But yah kinda funny they didn’t use the break to reinforce the base
Edit: seems that one plane may have been damaged by shrapnel but this is unconfirmed (TU-95MS)
17
u/Sa-naqba-imuru 14d ago
We don't know how many unsuccesful attacks Ukraine tried on that location previously and what they changed to make it work this time. It may be something that won't work again until Ukraine figures out something new after a dozen(s) more attempts.
It just might simply be worth it for Russia to defend and suffer a hit every once in a while.
Every time you send soldiers to combat, you calculate if casualties suffered are worth the result. Same is for using assets that are vulnerable to strategic bombing.
56
u/Gecktron 14d ago
Yesterday, the President of Germany signed the debt brake reform into law. With that, all defence spending above 1% of the GDP is exemt from the debt brake. "Defence spending" also explicitly includes military aid for countries in situations like Ukraine is right now.
On Friday, the parliament also approved a new aid package for Ukraine
SPIEGEL: Ministry of Finance releases aid package for Ukraine
The Federal Ministry of Finance has given its approval for the disbursement of a three billion euro aid package for military support for Ukraine. In a letter to the budget committee of the Bundestag, which is available to the AFP news agency, the ministry justifies the above-plan expenditure with the difficult military situation in Ukraine, which requires support with new armaments.
With this, Germany approved an aid package that includes support worth 2,5bn EUR from Germany, plus 500 million EUR financed trough reimbursements from the European Peace Facility (so a total of 3bn EUR). Bringing the total of German support for 2025 to 7bn EUR.
It has been reported that between 50-60% of this new aid package will arrive this year.
In addition to that, the parliament has also approved commitment appropriations worth 8,25bn EUR for 2026 to 2029. These appropriations will allow the Government to sign new contracts now, for material that will arrive in the future.
For what will be included in these roughly 11bn EUR, the MoD stated the following:
There is a particular need in Ukraine in the areas of air defense, protective and special equipment, endurance, drones, protected vehicles, self-propelled howitzers, main battle tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, the ministry wrote. “Numerous further procurement contracts must be concluded immediately” in the first half of 2025.
Its reasonable to assume that these are the categories that will see new orders now.
Air-Defence likely includes more IRIS-T (both systems and missiles), maybe some Patriot missiles. For SPGs we are likely looking at PZH2000s and RCH155s.
IFVs are likely both more refurbished Marders, and orders for Rheinmetall's KF41 Lynx. Germany likely paid for the first 10 vehicles that have been sent to Ukraine. With money secured, its likely more Lynx will be ordered.
Seeing MBTs mentioned here is quite interesting. This could be paying for the refurbishment of older tanks, but I wouldnt rule out completely new produced vehicles either.
All in all, while more support NOW would be better, placing long-term contracts ensures continued support, and will help building up European production capacities.
7
u/LibrtarianDilettante 14d ago
It has been reported that between 50-60% of this new aid package will arrive this year.
Is this aid intended to keep Ukraine in the fight, or is it assumed that there will be a cease fire?
3
u/coyote13mc 14d ago
Maybe I'm incorrect, but is this German government more supportive of helping Ukraine, increasing Military spending and "anti-Russia than the previous government?
I was under the impression that one reason that the previous government lost, was because of their support of Ukraine.
19
u/Agitated-Airline6760 14d ago
Maybe I'm incorrect, but is this German government more supportive of helping Ukraine, increasing Military spending and "anti-Russia than the previous government?
You could maybe argue CDU/CSU is "marginally" more hostile toward Russia vs SPD but you are not gonna see much material difference in the German policy towards Ukraine - still no Taurus etc - in the short or the medium term. All these debt is gonna go to Bundeswehr and infrastructure in Germany.
19
u/Gecktron 14d ago
Maybe I'm incorrect, but is this German government more supportive of helping Ukraine, increasing Military spending and "anti-Russia than the previous government?
The difference isnt too big IMO.
The Social Democrats and Greens wanted to make changes to the debt brake the last years, but the Liberals (part of the old government) and the Conservatives (the leaders of the new Government) blocked it. The Conservatives explicitly campaigned on keeping the debt brake.
The Conservatives originally wanted only a new special budget for the military. It was the Greens pushing them that got the current deal with the debt brake reform trough. This reform was even passed with the votes from the old parliament. The new parliament is only coming together next week.
Yes, the old Government had "pro-negotiations" people. But so have the conservatives. But overall, Conservatives, Social Democrats, Greens and Liberals are all pro-Ukraine.
I was under the impression that one reason that the previous government lost, was because of their support of Ukraine.
Im sure different people will give different answers, but in my opinion it was the financial situation that killed the last government. In 2022, the Conservatives sued the government for moving parliamentary approved unused Corona emergency funds into a climate and transformation fund. The constitutional court slapped that move down, and also put even more budgetary restraints on the government. This tore a 60bn EUR hole into the governments plans. And from thereon out it was a constant bickering between the three parties to get stuff funded. And in addition to that, the Liberals were consciously and purposefully sabotaging the Government during all of last year to force new elections.
18
u/Impossible_Ad4789 14d ago edited 14d ago
Sry to be pedantic here but discourses might get mixed up here if you call it reform. You are technically correct that its a reform of the debt brake but art. 109 GG (debt brake) stays the same for the federal government and only gets changed for states to equalize federal and state dept brake. The most important reform is art. 87a para. 1a GG, which is the article for the special fund of the armed forces and art. 143h GG will be added to establish a seperate special fund for [infrastructure](https://dip.bundestag.de/vorgang/gesetz-zur-%C3%A4nderung-des-grundgesetzes-artikel-109-115-und-143h/320784?term=vp%3A100%2F258%20OR%20vp%3A100%2F440%20OR%20vp%3A100%2F470%20OR%20vp%3A100%2F475&f.wahlperiode=20&f.typ=Vorgang&rows=25&sort=datum_ab&pos=1&ctx=e)
Point 6 of the preliminary coalition agreement, states that they want to form a commission to explore the possibility of [„modernizing“](https://www.spd.de/fileadmin/Dokumente/Sonstiges/20250308_Sondierungspapier_CDU_CSU_SPD.pdf) the debt brake in general.
20
u/scatterlite 14d ago
Ive been reading up on western "procurement disasters" that have gathered public attention. The LCS is well known, so is Ajax and ive recently read a report that the german procurement for a new intelligence/recon plane to replace the breguet atlantic became a total shitshow
What are some other examples of this? It seems like western militaries are particularly vulnerable to botched procurement.
2
u/roche_tapine 14d ago
Just a few years ago, there was a Chinese promotional video showcasing rifles with bullets tumbling at 10m and keyholing the target. If western seems more vulnerable, it's probably because they're more public about them.
3
10
u/ThatOtherFrenchGuy 14d ago
The Boeing tanker KC-46 is an example. It lost the competition against Airbus, Boeing did enough lobbying to restart another bid this time with criterias tailor made so that they couldn't lose. Turns out the Boeing offer was indeed inferior and they are plagued by defects.
18
u/ChornWork2 14d ago
What are some other examples of this? It seems like western militaries are particularly vulnerable to botched procurement.
Look at Russia, its a gong show. Announcements for blue water surface combatants have been laughable. T14 appears to be vaporware. Su57 getting very limited playtime in ukraine. GBAD appears to have been significantly overrated. Etc, Etc.
For china, who knows. No transparency and untested. Good chance things don't function nearly as well as they seem/claim.
13
u/PancakeHer0 14d ago
The procurement process of Gawron class corvettes was a major shitshow in Polish procurement history. Close runner up would be the procurement, or rather the termination of procurement of Airbus Caracal in 2016.
21
u/theblitz6794 14d ago
The Constellation class frigate is a disaster currently in process made even more hilarious since it's supposed to be an off the shelf design
19
u/Skeptical0ptimist 14d ago
When the project kicked off, the design was to be 85% as is, and 15% new. Latest report is that the design stands 15% inherited and 85% new, all the while construction is ongoing. It’s mind boggling.
The Congress should just purchase FREMMs unmodified, and then hand over completed ships to navy with modest budget to localize.
8
u/reviverevival 14d ago
I've said it before, they should've bought a couple lead ships off-the-shelf, with only necessary changes for interoperability within the US fleet. Gained shipbuilding and operating experience with them for a bit, then use lessons learned to drive scope and requirements for the rest of the class. That's how it should've been done.
The US navy hasn't been able to manage a successful new surface combatant class for almost my entire lifetime. They literally have no in-house ability for successful program management anymore and keep trying to sprint before learning to crawl.
7
u/ppmi2 14d ago
They should have gone with the Navantia version wich already does make use of mostly US or US style equipment and elecronics, but noooo, they needed to punish spain for not playing ball with the whole Israel business and so there they are suffering from Karma.
7
u/Agitated-Airline6760 14d ago
They should have gone with the Navantia version wich already does make use of mostly US or US style equipment and elecronics, but noooo, they needed to punish spain for not playing ball with the whole Israel business and so there they are suffering from Karma.
It was mostly a jobs giveaway program for Marinette Marine which is the US subsidiary of Italian Fincantieri. They were building Freedom-class littoral combat ships and that was going away once USN found LCS were useless. Maybe if Navantia had a US subsidiary in Kentucky, they could had a fair shot.
3
u/theblitz6794 14d ago
I heard somewhere that the same admiral in charge of the LCS disaster is leading the Constellation project. Is that true?
3
u/Agitated-Airline6760 14d ago
heard somewhere that the same admiral in charge of the LCS disaster is leading the Constellation project. Is that true?
That is true. I think the rationale was/is well surely he must've learned his lessons from the LCS program. Not enough as it turns out. Or USN higher-ups don't care.
3
u/ppmi2 14d ago
>It was mostly a jobs giveaway program for Marinette Marine which is the US subsidiary of Italian Fincantieri. They were building Freedom-class littoral combat ships and that was going away once USN found LCS were useless.
In that case they missed the odvious solution for another dumb reason
4
u/Old_Wallaby_7461 14d ago
Jobs for the Boys is dumb militarily but good politically. Until 2022, a lot of Europe's defense industry existed in large part to provide good jobs.
4
u/OldBratpfanne 14d ago
The German F-125 frigates and to a lesser extent the Puma IVF, might fit the bill when it comes to big ticket items.
36
u/Gecktron 14d ago
Just a heads up, there is a lot that's wrong or without context in that PEGASUS article. For example, there is no indicator that the Pegasus doesn't have satellite communication.
The issues with the EuroHawk are also downplayed. Having basic safety features is absolutely necessary when flying above densly populated areas. Other countries have to deal with these issues as well, limiting how they can operate.
It seems like western militaries are particularly vulnerable to botched procurement.
In regards to this, it's more that western governments are uniquely open about their own shortcomings. Just because we don't hear about issues in other countries doesn't mean they don't exist.
Russia has a lot of failed military projects. They often just got dropped without much fanfare. It's reasonable to assume that these projects got dropped because of issues that couldn't be worked out.
8
u/scatterlite 14d ago
Just a heads up, there is a lot that's wrong or without context in that PEGASUS article.
Im referring to a Zeit article, not sure you mean the same. It mentions things like germany already putting payments forward to the American Triton, but never ordering it.
Russia has a lot of failed military projects. They Russia has a lot of failed military projects. They often just got dropped without much fanfare. It's reasonable to assume that these projects got dropped because of issues that couldn't be worked
Im aware Russia has its very own issues: Kuznetsov, armata, SU-57 etc. However the PLAN in particular seems to procure remarkably fast and efficient. Im also not aware of similar big procurement problems in the Turkish, Japanese, Indian or South Korean militaries. Are there any?
7
21
u/Gecktron 14d ago
Im referring to a Zeit article, not sure you mean the same. It mentions things like germany already putting payments forward to the American Triton, but never ordering it.
Thats the article im refereeing to. So take a lot of what is said there with some salt.
In regards to the EuroHawk project, yes, money had already been paid. But there was no end in sight. There was no way to know for sure if the drone could fulfil the requirements. Cutting funding for a project with no path to success is painful, but necessary. Holding onto it would have been a prime example of the sunk cost fallacy.
As far as I know, no considerable amount of money had been paid for Triton before the project was halted for similar reasons.
Im also not aware of similar big procurement problems in the Turkish, Japanese, Indian or South Korean militaries. Are there any?
India had considerable problems with past military projects.
Korea has been trying for years now to build an engine and transmission that can replace the German systems, including many failed timelines. Turkey struggling to put the Altay into service is another example.
Japan had an example just recently with the Type 96 replacement program. Putting considerable amount of time and money into the "Wheeled Armoured Vehicle (Improved)", only to chose the Patria AMV 8x8 in the end.
However the PLAN in particular seems to procure remarkably fast and efficient.
Like I said, how would we even be able to tell if there are issues? China doesnt talk about their projects at all.
If you only had public demonstrations of the Ajax, it would seem like an efficient process too. The vibration issues arent visible. Missing capabilities dont show themselves in prepared demonstration, etc..
11
u/tormeh89 14d ago
Agreed. India is borderline famous for bad procurement and military project management. As a result large parts of the Indian armed forces are fielding incredibly outdated kit. Which is very bad when your neighbor and biggest geopolitical rival is China. It's baffling when you consider how much bang they get for their buck when it comes to their space program.
5
u/scatterlite 14d ago
There was no way to know for sure if the drone could fulfil the requirements. Cutting funding for a project with no path to success is painful, but necessary.
Valid point but the alternative was that the Bundeswehr has lacked any kind of replacement for what will be almost 20 years. The article imo rightly points out that thats a serious risk.
Korea has been trying for years now to build an engine and transmission that can replace the German systems, including many failed timelines
Interesting, i wasn't aware.
Like I said, how would we even be able to tell if there are issues? China doesnt talk about their projects at all.
Here i would say, dont the results speak for themselves? The PLAN commissions modern ships on a tight schedule, similar to the US navy in its best times. Seems reckless to assume that there's some hidden problem.
5
u/Old_Wallaby_7461 14d ago
Here i would say, dont the results speak for themselves? The PLAN commissions modern ships on a tight schedule, similar to the US navy in its best times. Seems reckless to assume that there's some hidden problem.
PLAN didn't commission a single new SSN from 2018 until 2022. They're not dumb, they know how important SSNs are in the Pacific- I doubt that was the original plan.
8
u/Weird-Tooth6437 14d ago
"Here i would say, dont the results speak for themselves? The PLAN commissions modern ships on a tight schedule, similar to the US navy in its best times. "
On "a tight schedule"? What schedule?
The PLA is famous for being extraordinarily secretive; its entirely possible many of the current projects enteeing service are years delayed and you and I would never know just by looking at shipyard output (which could have been told to keep producing old designs while problems were ironed out of newer designs).
Further, how do you have any idea how well built a Chinese weapons system is? Its entirely possible some Chinese vehicle is in service which looks fine but has more issues than the Ajax - or a ship in the PLAN thats less functional than the LCS's.
We just dont know.
Its worth pointing out though that a lot of civilian Chinese construction has suffered from quality issues to meet aggressive time targets - like the "Tofu buildings" that collapsed in earthquakes they were suppoaedly able to wistand and got a huge number of people killed. Wether or not Chinese military equipment suffers the same issues is impossible to know.
If you want a concrete example of Chinese industry struggling though, they've taken decades to be able to build modern jet engines, which are only just entering service now - I've no idea what the target timeline was, but I'd bet it wasnt that.
(Also you gave India as example of a less flawed procurement system before which I'd just like to point out is a touch hillarious considering India has one of the least functional procurement systems on the planet, which is also famously corrupt. Not a great example).
•
u/AutoModerator 15d ago
Continuing the bare link and speculation repository, you can respond to this sticky with comments and links subject to lower moderation standards, but remember: A summary, description or analyses will lead to more people actually engaging with it!
I.e. most "Trump posting" belong here.
Sign up for the rally point or subscribe to this bluesky if a migration ever becomes necessary.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.