There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

dragontamer , (edited )

They don’t need to

1st Guards Tank Army probably could face M1 Abrams in maneuver warfare. That was literally their training.

We’ve gone from a position where the Russians had a command of the frontlines, into a position where Russians are forced to use inferior equipment and ambush tactics. Its why the Russians are unable to effectively attack into Ukrainian defenses anymore.

Now you’re right in that Ukraine may not have the strength to attack into Russian defenses. But that’s what F16s are supposed to change. Is it enough? Who knows, but its better than nothing and better than what was available in 2023. What I can say for sure, is that Russia has also been unable to mount an effective attack.

In any case, I think the M2 Bradley is probably a match for T-55. M2 Bradley doesn’t have the same firepower, but it does have homing missiles. T-55 thin armor probably gets penetrated by enough M2 Bradley armor-piercing rounds (not that I’m an expert in that, but… M2 Bradley did take down more powerful tanks already). Its not what the M2 Bradley was designed for, but its showing the technological advantage Ukraine now commands on the front.

Remember: M2 Bradley is a troop-carrier. Not a tank. But it seems to match up favorably against many Russian tanks in practice, because Russians have had their forces degenerate so much.

at which point they are artillery and drone targets.

If you move, artillery can’t hit you. Artillery takes over a minute before it lands. That’s why tanks exist, tanks are close enough to bring the guns to the frontlines and instantly strike a target, because striking a target within 3km is just a few seconds at most… while striking a target 20km away with Artillery has all kinds of delays and downsides.

Drones are subject to electronic warfare and anti-air guns like the German Flakpanzer Gepard, or US’s MACE system (www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5e-KIu7t3M). Aimbot + RADAR == dead drones. Yes, Ukraine needs to advance under the cover of anti-air (and those anti-air can be targeted by guide bombs or other more powerful weapons). But there’s a plan in place for that too.

For now they are unfortunately still making gains everyday.

Russia has still lost territory since 2022 actually. Russia has been unable to secure Donbas or Luhansk. Russia then starts a new front in Kharkiv and immediately stalls out.

Russia, even with all their meatwave attacks, was unable to cause anything like the 2022 Kharkiv counteroffensive (en.wikipedia.org/…/2022_Kharkiv_counteroffensive). It is Kyiv / Ukrainians who have effectively counter-attacked and changed territory last. Everything else is just a rounding error.

It seems that currently glide bombs are a large problem but for f16 to be effective, they need to have permission to engage russian fighter/bombers that tend to fire from deep inside russia, out of “allowed” reach for western missiles. To me thats a massive issue.

That’s not how glide-bombs work. Glide bombs don’t have any rockets, they literally fall into their target with little wings to extend the range a bit. Glide Bombs only have like 100km range or something like that, and the Fighter/Bombers that launch these glide bombs have already been taken out by well placed Patriot systems (or … something??. But probably Patriot missiles given what has been publicly released. I think there were some discussions that the Ukrainians made a ground-launched tube that can shoot air-to-air missiles from the ground… so its not necessarily the “Patriot” system that killed those fighter-bombers. But whatever it was, the Ukrainians have the capability for that kind of ground-based ambush today).

The problem is that its very difficult to constantly move Patriot systems (or any other ground-based system), so the Russians can just attack elsewhere. The Ukrainians need an aircraft that can meet the speed of enemy aircraft so that anti-air can follow Russians as they fly around the frontlines. But Ukraine is actually already in a position where they can position Patriot missiles (or whatever ground-based system they’re using) to stop glide-bomb attacks in one area. Ukraine just can’t afford to defend the whole frontline, and Ukraine cannot move those Patriots / ground defenses faster than Russia can move Glide-bomb / Jets.

Finally, USA has given permission to use American equipment anywhere the Russians are attacking from. Your point is moot as of a month or two ago, the Ukrainians already have that permission. Its simply an issue of capabilities.

Neither apparent hurt for vehicles or manpower losses deters them. Do see Ukrainians making some gains recently from time to time, but overall, its still not going well enough.

No one expects Ukraine to make gains this year. Everyone expects Russians to attack and pin everything on the hopes of Donald Trump winning the 2024 election (wherein Donald Trump then cuts off funding, preventing Ukrainians from counter-attacking next year).

That’s Russia’s plan. Ukraine has placed their trust / counter-offensive in the hands of the election. I don’t think Ukraine will surrender if Donald Trump becomes President though, Europe should be strong enough to keep Ukraine going even without the USA in 2025.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines