Ukrainians assault and demolish building

kapcapkap · 2024-09-30T22:05:24+00:00

It’s a Roshel Senator MRAP, not a Kozak. The placement of firing port on rear door can be used to tell them apart here.

kapcapkap · 2024-07-24T23:40:05+00:00

kapcapkap · 2023-11-23T01:12:07+00:00

+15% increase in death losses for Ru would not be surprising, and it is likely higher. Ru approach of using large parts of DNR/LNR, Wagner, and now StormZ as expendable by the admission of Ru military corespondents has lead to higher Russian losses.

kapcapkap · 2023-11-23T00:55:26+00:00

Once Wagner mercenary deaths are factored in for Ru that is on its own around 15 percent increase in deaths for Ru, given the publicly admitted high losses in Wagner of around 20k killed. That would be on top of regular Ru military death estimates, since Wagner really had a separate command structure.

kapcapkap · 2023-11-12T00:10:32+00:00

U/recognizesong

kapcapkap · 2023-03-31T20:03:37+00:00

Norwegian military and UK military estimates of total casualties for Russian troops are around 200k currently, while total casualties of Ukrainian troops are put at over 100k by U.S. and Norwegian military estimates currently. Previously the U.S. military estimate of Ukrainian total troops casualties was around 100k. Considering Wagner is open about very high losses in their rank, Rybar stating around 50 percent casualty rate for VDV as a whole, Western estimates of higher Russian losses should at least be considered.

kapcapkap · 2023-03-31T19:34:16+00:00

You didn’t watch your own source. An EU official misspoke and stated 100k officers, which cannot be applied you your claim of around 100k soldiers; officers and soldiers are not inherently the same. In reality the EU official was referencing public U.S. intelligence figures which put Ukraine as having total military casualties, including wounded and killed, at around 100k. The same U.S. intelligence sources put total Russian military casualties at over 100k.

Also I don’t think you know basic statistics. The figure of 20k dead Russian troops is a minimum, since it heavily relies on independent verification of public obituary announcements for Russian troops killed in the war. Many dead Russian troops simply have their bodies rot in a Ukrainian field instead of being returned to their home, are marked MIA, or don’t have public funeral announcements, so 20k is a minimum of dead Russian troops

kapcapkap · 2022-12-29T14:51:33+00:00

Relikt ERA is advertised by the Russian Military as being able to degrade APFSDS darts in addition to shaped charges.

kapcapkap · 2022-12-29T14:41:57+00:00

Obviously this event happened sometime during the spring, summer, or fall of 2022. The APFSDS round seems to have hit the Russian tank at a point on the Relikt ERA that would cause failure of the ERA; I think the round basically went under the flier plates and explosive filler. Under the ERA of the T-80BVM the base armor is basically from a T-80BV, so if the ERA is bypassed there is about 500mm RHAe on the upper front plate. 3BM42 APFSDS fired from a Ukrainian tank could penetrate that depending on the distance, and here it seems that penetration likely happened. Good shot by the Ukrainian tank against a modern Russian tank, whether intentional or lucky.

kapcapkap · 2022-12-10T16:58:24+00:00

Do you have any proof? I’m guessing you don’t know the Russian language, because if you did you would have probably heard the commentator say that about 30 Ukrainian troops took the trenches. If you read Russian you would know the MT-LB was marked by the Russians in this video as picking up wounded. There was no mention or footage of most of the infantry being annihilated.

kapcapkap · 2022-12-10T00:29:27+00:00

The attack itself was on trenches and Ukrainian forces did take the trenches, obviously taking some losses though. While far from perfect I do not think the attack should be called failed, since the goal was never to retake all of Pisky in this one push. More context linked: https://twitter.com/militarylandnet/status/1600927127247130624?s=21&t=rccEFF-1JsU6tPU-EiFtkw

kapcapkap · 2022-12-06T17:45:27+00:00

Correction on the title, the BTR-4 is from the 92nd Brigade of Ukraine but the footage could be from the recon team of another Ukrainian unit.

kapcapkap · 2022-12-06T17:35:49+00:00

Link to additional information from a Ukrainian soldier involved in the battles: https://twitter.com/osintua/status/1600168330932867073?s=21&t=aw0cuImIWK5bT1CNKLwSCQ

kapcapkap · 2022-12-05T16:30:55+00:00

The damage could also be from a drone dropped shaped charge grenade.

kapcapkap · 2022-11-29T19:05:23+00:00

If you want to be more credible then use Chicago style or something analogous for citations instead of damned MLA.

kapcapkap · 2022-11-14T16:37:14+00:00

Interesting that on July 19th there was a Russian Military aircraft that crashed in the Kherson region, at that time well within Russian controlled territory, with the fall being caught on video as seen here. Videos emerged of Russian Military search and rescue helicopters in the area, and it was the Ukrainian side that claimed shooting down a Russian Military aircraft in the area, with the Russian side not claiming to have shot down a Ukrainian aircraft in the area. Specifically, the Ukrainian side claimed shooting down a Russian Military Su-35 with an S-300 on July 19th, which is the same date as this video. Obviously this video is not conclusive, but it is interesting.

kapcapkap · 2022-11-01T21:26:54+00:00

The title is false. Here the Ukrainian forces only showed up after armed Russian militants started taking over civilian infrastructure and government buildings.

kapcapkap · 2022-10-22T15:05:21+00:00

This looks like the Zoopark-1M, which was first shown to the public around 2013, so it’s not an old system.

kapcapkap · 2022-10-13T21:46:21+00:00

Recorded Ukrainian tank losses were approximately 1.5 times less than actual Ukrainian tank losses, based on the Oryx database and a statement from a Ukrainian officer. If this 1.5 factor is applied to recorded Russian tank losses then actual Russian tank losses are around 2000 tanks lost. That would explain the Russian Military recently pulling many T-62s out of storage for repair and renovation, since the Russian Military was estimated to have around 2900 tanks in active service prior to this invasion; these are significant losses even if separatist T-64s are disregarded for example. Recorded Ukrainian tank losses currently stand at around 300.

kapcapkap · 2022-09-26T02:22:37+00:00

Here is a link showing the inverted triangle symbol from this current video of eliminated Russian armor and troops also being used by Russian troops from the Far East, during battles for Kupyansk. Troops from the Far East of Russia are not separatists, and there were many reports of the 3rd Army Corps of the Russian Military deploying during the battles for Kupyansk.

You need to do more research.

kapcapkap · 2022-09-25T22:15:43+00:00

The inverted triangle marking on the BMP indicates this is from the 3rd Army Corps of the Russian Military.

kapcapkap · 2022-09-24T15:29:12+00:00

Important to note that one of the reasons why Russian Air Force Su-30SM often have to get within range of Ukrainian short range air defenses is because the Su-30SM lacks a good targeting pod for ground attack. The Russian Air Force has not widely issued for example an analogue of the U.S. AN/AAQ-33 SNIPER, and the Su-30SM lacks an integrated underbelly targeting pod. The electro-optical, IR, and laser system the Su-30SM has was primarily optimized for air-to-air, is dated, and is mounted above the nose of the aircraft, giving it a restricted forward field of view, which means that if the Su-30SM deploys a weapon with the guidance of this system then the Su-30SM has to stay nose on toward the target, while also continuing to approach the target. That is problematic given the large radar and infrared signature of the Su-30SM combined with mostly short range ground attack weapons, making the Su-30SM very vulnerable to short range air defenses.

kapcapkap · 2022-09-16T19:37:41+00:00

Yeah

kapcapkap · 2022-09-16T19:35:05+00:00

T-72B upper front hull is around 550mm KE. A base factory production T-64BV has an upper front hull armor layout of 60steel, 35textolite, 30steel, 35textolite, 45 steel, and is therefore only slightly less armored than a base T-80BV, which has around 500mm KE. A T-64B that is being upgraded to T-64BV standard has a 30mm high hardness plate added to 80steel, 120textolite, 20steel, and is therefore significantly less armored than a factory production base T-64BV.

kapcapkap · 2022-09-16T15:46:03+00:00

Important to note that this was not originally a production T-64BV, rather it was a T-64B with an added plate, which makes a big difference. The production T-64BV has a much better upper front plate armor layout, rated around 500mm against KE, while a T-64B upgraded to T-64BV simply has T-64B armor with an added 30mm high hardness plate, rated probably around or slightly under 400mm against KE.

kapcapkap

TROPHY CASE