Looks like another Bakhmut.
The counter offensive is stalled while Ukraine sends reinforcements.
47th has a score of the modern leopards, surely that will help
Well I've linked articles that show that Saab, Rheinmetall, Expal (a subsidiary of the former, admittedly) and Thales have all increased production. Saab had doubled their production and are hoping to double it again next year. You aren't going to get the EU committing to making an extra million shells a year on top of that becacuse that's just poor future planning.
I'm aware that Excalibur are significantly more expensive (though I'm not sure they would be 100k a unit if production at scale is achieved:
My point is made even more clearly however because if, say a basic artillery shell costs €8,000 and an excalibur costs €80,000, it makes the choice simple - would you rather one excalibur or 10 unguided shells. The choice for NATO is obvious. The opposite choice for Russia is even more obvious because they struggle to manufacture guided munitions at scale but are able to build cheap and basic shells. Hitting 10 shells in an ammo dump with an excalibur to break even is just an example. They can also hit command posts, radars, artillery pieces etc.
As for hitting troops with basic unguided shells, there are two important points to make. First, as another poster pointed out, these are best serviced by the US cluster munitions, for which there is no shortage in the short to medium term and which the EU will not produce itself. Second, NATO has to plan for a potential war with Russia and Russian propaganda are trying to suggest that NATO should prepare for the WW1 style trench and artillery duel warfare that we are seeing in Ukraine but on a grander scale. NATO is saying "No thanks, we'd rather just destroy your logistics from afar before you can make any real inroads into our countries. So NATO will design their forces around that policy rather than preparing for a massive artillery slug fest.
Looking at the map above if the Russians bypassed the city and got behind it and linked both sides together you could have a sizeable group of Ukrainians encircled and pound them from the air. Ukraine would have to commit more troops to break the siege and probably take momentum from other areas that they are advancing. Weather Russia would do that or could do that and I am not sure what way Ukraine are set up to the west of the city under there control that Russia could even do that.
If they don't push back fairly soon there is a Risk of cutting off Ukrainians in that pocket in the middle, we know Russia is losing hand over fist but at the same time ukraine is losing numbers too , I've seen more and more foreign volunteers deaths being posted on social media than in other periods
Situation around Avdiivka. It's still deteriorating and needs a major pushback from Ukraine to stop the Russians consolidating their positions and pushing further.
We're at a key moment here in this battle. Hopefully Ukraine can plug any holes.
As predicted with the the Slovak elections they have decided to cut aid to Ukraine and will oppose future sanctions against Russia
Good post. Unfortunately I can say from experience that your effort is wasted on this poster.
You mention that "it doesn't matter how many shells you produce, it is how effective you are in making those shells hit their targets".
But I think a bigger factor at play is the range of the logistics trail for said shells.
The days where Russia could simply pound a position with overwhelming artillery barrages and then storm a position to take ground km by km are gone. I expect a certain uptick in shell usage by the Russians soon due to the NK shells. But probably not by much. Their entire strategy for moving forward after their initial failed assault relied on a 10:1 artillery advantage. Anything short of this and the regular Russian military have shown a complete lack of ability to take ground. And that's down to HIMARS. The amount of shells that they can fire is limited not just by how many shells they have overall but by how close they can stockpile them to the firing positions.
So it doesn't really matter if they get 2 million shells more if they can't get them to the front in time. Any significant stockpile of shells within 60km of the frontline are gonna get a visit from GMLRS. And soon that number will probably rise to 120km when GLSDB arrives.
In short Russia could have 100 billion shells up their arse if they like. But it won't help them at all if they have to ship them 1 by 1 via horseback across 120km.
We had videos of last week of Ukrainians destroying a whole armoured tank and personnel carriers column with a handful of shells
money well spent
we also in same week had 3 million of ATACMs rockets destroying 230 million (6%) of russian helicopters
For Russia quantity is important because the place is a basketcase
For modern militaries intelligence, precision and quality accomplishes more as was so clearly illustrated in videos posted here
I think there are several issues here and some like Rheinmetal and French companies are very publicly increasing capacity
If EU can somehow tackle those two issues or maybe even individual eu states
Here's an article here and another more detailed article detailing the whole situation are artillery and artillery production. Your Excalibur shells are 100,000 per shell
Boards maintenance again.
None of anything above is new information it's been documented for since last year there was no massive increase comes from the EU or west despite claims the whole military industry was operating on a War footing which absolutely isn't true,
It seems the majority of shells has come from other countries stocks ,it's going to take years to Produce the numbers for Ukraine,and yes you can look at Excalibur shells for hitting targets such as ammo dumps,but the biggest issue artillery is being used as infantry and armour and not ammunition dumps which are being hit with Himars depending on what's needed
The EU plan was to deliver 1m shells by March, 2024. March, 2024 hasn't happened yet. So far they have delivered, according to your article, 300,000. I find this figure strange as other sources report that 220,000 shells were delivered by May, 2023:
However, most of those probably came from stockpiles or purchases. The next stage is joint orders from arms manufacturers, in both the EU and outside the EU. They have another 5 months or so to come up with the goods from that, and given that it requires orders to be placed, shells to be manufactured and delivered to the EU before being shipped to Ukraine, it is reasonable to expect that these deliveries will be more concentrated towards the end of the year rather than the start. This phase could include purchasing shells from outside the EU which might free up existing stockpiles, much as the Americans are doing:
Finally, the third phase is for the EU to help increase to produce domestic output of shells. There are a number of positive stories in this regard:
That's just four countries' arms manufacturers who are increasing their supply in 2023, and again in 2024.
Bear in mind that shell production is covered in secrecy and so it is hard to say exactly what is going on. A lot of countries are seeking to minimise their involvement:
Also worth considering that since Ukraine can also use 152mm shells in ex soviet artillery pieces. Countries in the former Soviet sphere and who previously bought soviet stocks might sell their shells to the EU to give to Ukraine, but will want to do so very quietly so as not to antagonise Russia.
And of course every time you point to the EU problems with producing unguided artillery shells with the clear insinuation that NATO are falling behind in production capacity in this one over emphasised area, I feel it is my duty to point out, for balance, what NATO is really interested in increasing production of:
These are of course hugely expensive compared to unguided rounds. However, if a €50k guided artillery round can successfully blow up an ammunition dump of 100+ unguided shells, then it is easily wiping its face. When you then add in that 1 round is much easier to transport and store than 100, that it uses up less charge and barrell and that it does not require the same level of training to be accurate, it really is a no brainer.
Meanwhile Russia claims it is manufacturing up to 2 million shells a year (though I suspect most of this is taking old shells, giving them a lick of paint and calling them new/refurbished) and yet they aren't keeping up the intensity of fires that they had at the start of the war.
This was a longer post than I had anticipated, so the TLDR version is that it is too early to say if the EU has failed to deliver on its promise. If it promises a million and only provides 700k, that is less than ideal but it is far from bad. And if they make up for it by providing an amount of guided munitions that can service an equivalent number of targets to the shortfall, then that isn't a bad day's work at all. While there are undoubtedly problems in producing more shells, these problems are not due to a lack of money or resources by the EU so much as the significant question mark over whether the production of large volumes of unguided shells is a sustainable future business model. The overemphasis of the EU's failure, and claims of Russia's success in this area is just Russian propaganda that you are unwittingly contributing to. And as a final point, it doesn't matter how many shells you produce, it is how effective you are in making those shells hit their targets.
The EU though need to put a serious lean on European armaments manufacturers - what's the point in manufacturing basic armaments & munitions if you then prescribe when they can be used and by who.
The EU should be on top of German manufactures and I sincerely hope that states like Switzerland are and will be severely punished economically if they refuse to co-operate. In times of emergency you find out who your real friends are and cut ties with wasters.
It's not a flip per se. I've always maintained (though not always to much agreement) that the MAGA Republican opposition to sending money to Ukraine was a purely opportunistic political move against the Democrats, and that with the exception of e.g. Margorie Taylor Green, they are not ideologically opposed to it. Indeed, even Trump's comments are that if Putin didn't enter a peace agreement he would give Ukraine even more weapons:
Long story short, it is Russian propaganda to suggest that the Republicans will come into power and stop funding Ukraine. Only a small number are ideologically or politically opposed to it. Republicans main issue is that they don't like that the Democrats are currently funding Ukraine. Most Republicans are in favour of US support for Ukraine, they just want to be in charge when it is done and are willing to use it as a stick to beat the Democrats with.
Oh I agree, but the language doesn't match the facts. It's unnecessarily dramatic and makes implications that may not exist.
"You won't BELIEVE what the EU did next!!!"
Twitter is such a cess pit.
Can I ask where the figure of 8,000 plus comes from? Does it include the costs of charge, barrell replacement and training? I thought the figure was closer to 500-1000 per shell:
If ordinary unguided shells are becoming so expensive now due to shortages etc, then GMLRS, Excalibur etc are become relatively even better value and will likely drop in price due to economies of scale.
Remind us now, when was the official announcement that Ukraine were to receive ATACMS?
Notice how he subtly changed EU in his post to the “west”
EU is obviously not the “west” and is a subset of the “west”, not helping as much as it wants mainly thanks to Orban dragging feet and EU industrial capacity being gutted by decades of complacency (and ESG policies which make it impossible get funding for weapons production) arising from belief that US will rescue us from any military problems, just look at the Ireland in NATO thread
And a population that only in last year woke up to the fact that the world is a dangerous place with people (from Africa through Middle East to Russia) who hate us (yet trip over to get here) for being successful and rich and … free
True but the in the real world they failed to deliver on the promise of 1 million shells by March when they didn't have the production facilities or the contacts to get the shells as promised,
I really hate Twitter journalism.
"EU scraps plans!" Except they haven't scrapped any plans.
Surely "EU misses targets" would be a more accurate headline, and ripe for puns.
The stress of being his double must place a lot of pressure on the heart. It's a job for life I'd imagine.
The promised 1 million artillery shells by March 2024 has more or less failed the west has so far only managed 30% of the shells needed to date talking about a slap in the face for Ukraine, they were promised 1 million rounds this year and 3 million shells the following year .
Which version of him? Original or one of the xerox copies?
And Russia becoming a vassal of China and puppet of North Korea!
It did take months to deliver atacms because we've been talking about for months on here after it was initially announced
New accounts for ya not seeming to know a lot about what's going on
And the minor matter of expanding its NATO border !
It's never made a trendy hashtag
I wonder why they aren't training Ukrainians on modern American helicopters.
Also known as the Irish position on supporting them so we shouldn't criticise.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/23af546224513cf852af4d456d68d01c.svg)