There has definitely been progress but not the kind you might see in a three minute news piece on the 9pm news.
It's hard to ever know what Russian strategy is currently, but drawing more US money in, as US continues to be drawn into Mid East, and just keep going until Trump gets back in, seems like a reasonable bet for what's currently happening.
The simplistic answer is the Russians are bigger have more resources. They had time to prepare vast defences and mostly control the air. Even with that they are having to pour vast resources to hold their positions and are losing ground slightly.
That their invasion with vastly superior forces was stopped and pushed back to where it is now is amazing.
Define 'so little' then. Because Ukraine has gained back enormous amounts and is making slow but steady progress. Driving the Russian navy out of Sevastopol with no navy of their own is one of the most notable naval victories in history.
Russia use a mix of brand new, older and very old equipment. As do Ukraine, although Ukraine do not have the stockpiles of WW2 and cold war era equipment that Russia have and are using. The backing of the West is not unlimited, so Ukraine doesnt have nearly as much modern weapons as they need. Older weapons can be just as deadly, in certain circumstances as more modern ones. Ukraine is gaining territory over Russia, at a slow pace.
Why is Ukraine not routing Russia? A combination of all of the above. Wars are challenging and they have inadequate supplies. Russia have utterly failed to be the modern military they claimed to be pre 2022 and its kinda amazing seeing them use 60+ year old equipment, but the vastness of their stockpiles and the large amounts of solidiers they have to throw into the war have led to them engaging in a war of attrition, which we are currently seeing.
I hope this clarifies all your questions
very informative but genuinely wondering where 'Ukraine is gaining territory over Russia'. Any online map, originated from both sides, I look at recently doesn't reflect that. Maybe, I am looking at the wrong maps!!!!!
ISW have in-depth daily maps and reports
I’d imagine the bullets from a world war 2 era rifle would do as much damage as a modern rifle. My cousins still use the shotguns that my grandfather used 60/70 years to shoot pheasants. The design has not changed that much. The cartridges are pretty much the same. A lot of weapons and ammunition were dumped after world war 2 by the allies. The Soviets obviously didn’t dump theirs. I know the Soviets kept a large standing army at all times so they could maintain these weapons where as the allies demobilised but it does seem baffling and wasteful that so much was dumped. I understand the mood was very much anti war and never again but to just dump all that stuff in the sea is insane.
Maybe there was an economic logic to it to keep the arms industry in business post war???
The issue is really how well they are stored and the cost of same. Yes it is wasteful, but sure everything about war is wasteful on a philosophical level.
I love how you leap to conspiracy and profiteering...
A piece of metal hitting you at decent velocity is always effective. But...
Old Russian Ammunition is corrosive. War time weapons are not built to high standards. So while they will not be reliable, occasionally dangerous, and likely not very accurate or consistent. If you have nothing else, you've no choice but firing old guns with old ammo is going to hard to hit anything, occasionally main or kill the shooter. Collectors of old weapons will cherry pick the best condition rifles and ammo. Even then the guns misfire and jam a lot.
A lot of weapons were not dumped after the war. They were stockpiled and reused if not by the host nation but by selling them to other nations. Ireland had Lee Enfield Rifles and Bren guns still on inventory until the 1980s. There were German WW2 guns used in the Vietnam War.
Lot of countries converted old Rifles into sporting or sniper rifles.
funnily enough, the Isaeli army got to defeat German made tanks of the Syrian army, Panzer IV and Stug111. They must have got a chuckle out of that
Russia are clearly all in until the next US election in 12 months. If Trump isn't elected it will suck the Oxygen out of them as Ukraine will get 4 more years of bipartisan support. The shackles will be off too for full support with no looming election to hamper support. If Trump wins Russia will continue fighting with confidence of a favourable long term outcome.
Ukraine is focusing on counter battery, striking logistic hubs and ammo dump, airfields and bases. The russians are losing hardware at an unsustainable rate and Ukraine will pounce once it feels russia's resistance is low enough. They have already gained artillery superiority over russia but not in the air.
The last bren's were retired in the mid 2000's,
It's not just Russia using older weapons Ukrainian were using Lewis guns from WW1 the Russians on donesk were using mosin nagants rifles which looked pretty much new out of the factory,guns maybe old but the can be rechambered in modem calibres and just built new from the factory, either way they are still lethal weapons definitely wouldn't be volunteering to charge someone down using one or emplacement.
Another one bites the dust
I think as well Russia I read has caught up with drone production and has thousands of drones for the battlefield and is hitting Ukrainian armour hard. So it's definitely slowing Ukraine down.
And the evidence for this theory is where?
We have videos and pictures of hundreds of russian tanks and apcs destroyed in Avdiivka alone
where are similar videos from these Russian drones?
Russians wasted a small country’s worth of armour on taking and then losing a slag heap ffs
There are pictures of western armour and vehicles destroyed in Ukraine. Just a lot fewer.
Contrasting the Normandy liberation and this war, to me, the biggest difference is the absence of clear air superiority, and the presence of a significant dug-in in-place defensive force.
People forget that Nazi Northern France didn't have the insane depth of trenches and artillery that the Russian invaders have in Ukraine, couple these two challenges and it should be clear the scale of the challenge the Ukrainians face in liberating their home.
F-16s, lots of then. A-10s, ditto. Modern Sherman firefly equivalents, too.
Not sure if this person is talking crap or not but read it there.
That's a lot of spam that doesn't really answer the question asked about drones killing Ukraine Armour.
A link would have been a better way to link to an article.
do you have a bit more context for the arty superiority? the western media have been reporting arty shells issues, it will be a couple of years before there are increases in production if ever or may not be significant, it doesnt seem possible that Ukraine will receive anything like they did in 22/23 in 24. Currently a western shell costs $8K which implies its just price gauging due to shortages, the Russian cost for a shell is about 1/10th of that
So no evidence whatsoever to support the thesis slash claims that Russian drones are leading to increased destruction of Ukrainian armour
at a time we have dozens of drone videos of Russian armoured attacks being shredded to pieces with remarkably accurate artillery
It's probably based on number of shells fired each day. The fact Russia is firing less than Ukraine and the fact Russia have had to beg Kim for 100' of thousands of shells may lead people to the conclusion that Russia cannot produce enough to out shell Ukraine.
The cluster shells have been a godsend for Ukraine. They would be fooled without them.
Even if Russia can produce shells for $800, they cannot seem to do it at scale. 63k a day down to 7k, that's a significant drop.
And when you consider that a lot of Russian artillery is dumb artillery depending on volume fired to create impact while Ukraine has a lot of very technical guided munitions. Where a shell can land within a couple meters if it target from 50+ miles away
but thats the past. the question is what will there supply be like in Q1 and Q2 of 24 , on the face of it, Ukraine wont receive anything like they did in 23 and Europe will only be supplying current production as the Europeans etc have given them their surplus and they wont be minded to run their stocks down to 0. Ukraine will have built up a stock for the summer offensive which they will have burned through now. If the Russians are going to do a serious offensive (if they are capable) it will be a Spring one, I see a risk for ukraine in the next 4-6 months. If the war rolls into 25 then I assume western production will have risen significantly.
here read these
Remember too that russian shells fired are very inaccurate compared to Ukrainian
I've serious doubts about that claim. Ukraine has shown to be very innovative in building drones to different needs in the war. Russia may claim to be building millions but they lie about everything.
The biggest difference is the Ukrainian are building basic quadcopters with limited range and payload capacitys yes they have done some pretty clever stuff, but the type's of drones being used by the Russians have better range and capabilities,
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
