Russia and Ukraine Current Events

[Mendel]

Article:

Ukrainian forces successfully sank another Russian Black Sea Fleet (BSF) landing ship in the Black Sea off the southern coast of occupied Crimea on the night of February 13 to 14. The Ukrainian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) published footage on February 14 showing Ukrainian maritime drones striking the Caesar Kunikov Ropucha-class landing ship off the coast of occupied Alupka, Crimea.[1] The GUR reported that maritime drone strikes caused the ship to sink and stated that Russian search and rescue operations were not successful. The GUR stated that the Caesar Kunikov was the largest amphibious landing ship of its project 775 type. Ukrainian forces have destroyed or damaged at least five BSF landing ships since the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.[2] Ukrainian Navy Spokesperson Captain Third Rank Dmytro Pletenchuk stated that only five of 13 BSF landing ships that Russia had at the start of the full-scale invasion remain “in service” and that “four ships are under repair, four are destroyed, and five are still in the ranks.”[3]

Source: https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-february-14-2024

Article:

Ukrainian forces have begun to withdraw from Avdiivka, and Russian forces appear to be focused on complicating or preventing a complete Ukrainian withdrawal. Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Colonel General Oleksandr Syrskyi stated early in the morning Ukrainian time on February 17 that he ordered Ukrainian forces within Avdiivka to withdraw to more favorable defensive positions in order to avoid encirclement and save the lives of Ukrainian personnel.[1] Syrskyi’s announcement comes after several confirmed Russian advances on the outskirts of Avdiivka in the past 24 hours.

Russian sources claimed that Ukrainian forces are withdrawing en masse and that Ukrainian withdrawals are becoming increasingly chaotic and costly.[5] ISW has not observed any visual evidence of large or chaotic Ukrainian withdrawals, however, and the continued marginal rate of Russian advance in and around Avdiivka suggests that Ukrainian forces are currently conducting a relatively controlled withdrawal from Avdiivka.

Germany and France both signed bilateral security agreements with Ukraine on February 16. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a long-term bilateral security agreement with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on February 16 providing for bilateral cooperation in the military, political, financial, and humanitarian spheres until 2034.[13] The agreement also states that Germany will provide over €7 billion ($7.5 billion) in military aid to Ukraine in 2024, including a €1.1 billion ($1 billion) aid package that is currently being prepared and will include 36 howitzers, 120 thousand artillery shells (including 50,000 155mm artillery rounds), two Skynex air defense systems, missiles for the IRIS-T air-to-air missile system, 66 armored personnel carriers (APCs), several mine-clearing vehicles, and various reconnaissance drone models.[14] Zelensky also met with German Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier to discuss the launch of joint weapons production.[15] Zelensky later met with French President Emmanuel Macron to sign a bilateral security agreement and reported that France will provide Ukraine €3 billion ($3.2 billion) in military assistance over the course of 2024.[16]

Source: https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-february-16-2024

The Avdiivka withdrawal is the most significant change of the frontline since Bakhmut.

 

[Duke]

"According to Austrian aviation war expert Tom Cooper, a probable but as-yet unproven and unconfirmed explanation for the recent string of Sukhoi shoot-downs is the compromise of confidential defensive electronic systems aboard the Russian jets to Ukrainian and US technicians, and tweaks made to Ukrainian-operated anti-aircraft systems taking advantage of the knowledge."

Content from External Source

Source: https://twitter.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1764625599539089603


Tom Cooper is a well respected military aviation writer and analyst. If he is correct, appears the Ukrainians (and friends) have found a way to render Russian threat warning receivers ineffective, and/or defeat Russian anti-missile countermeasures like jamming, flares, and chaff.

 

[Mendel]

Tom Cooper is a well respected military aviation writer and analyst. If he is correct, appears the Ukrainians (and friends) have found a way to render Russian threat warning receivers ineffective, and/or defeat Russian anti-missile countermeasures like jamming, flares, and chaff.

It's very much speculation, though. The tweet references a Kyiv Post article, which references a February 29th blog post by Tom Cooper; this:

Article:

Then mind that sometimes the last year, there was a report about Ukrainians finding a near-intact Su-34 that crashed somewhere in the eastern Kharkiv Oblast, already sometimes back in 2022 (was a ‘typical Ukrainian claim’ for which ‘there was no confirmation’, and then for months).

That (‘famous’) itch in my small toe is telling me that before soon, there was a group of ‘men in black’ (MiB) inspecting that wreckage, carefully recovering every bit and piece of avionics, tidily packing and then taking that away… very, very, far away: all the way across the Atlantic Ocean.

….and over there, across the ‘Big Pond’, there is an agency named National Air and Space Intelligence Center (PDF): it came into being through re-organisation of the Foreign Technology Division of the US Air Force – the branch famous for sending its ‘MiBs’ all over the world. For example to collect MiG- and Yak-fighters, Mil-helicopters, SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and different Soviet air-to-air missiles, and other Soviet made weaponry, whenever these were captured – whether in Korea or Yugoslavia of the 1950s, then in Vietnam, in the Middle East, in Chad, or wherever else… and then study them closely, back during the (I) Cold War.

That would explain the rest of the story: essentially, Su-34’s avionics has been compromised – to the Americans, and thus to Ukrainians.

Unless the Russians find a way to upgrade it, significantly, the type is near-defenceless to such SAMs like PAC-2 and PAC-3.

Source: https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/ukraine-war-29-february-2024-roaming

So, the speculation is that NASIC exploited Russian tech to come up with a countermeasure. It's a nice thing to publish, because whether true or not, it scares Russian pilots.

That said, a technique like avoiding chaff misdirection by attacking from above, as described by Tom Cooper in the same blog post, doesn't require NASIC to be involved.

 

[Mendel]

From Tom Cooper's following blog post:

Article:

Bottom line: there are lots of ‘arguments speaking in favour of many of Ukrainian ‘claims’.

However, fact is that there is no visual evidence for more than 4 kills over the last two weeks. Fact is also that, for example: a ‘jet that disappeared from radar while targeted by a SAM’ is absolutely no ‘confirmation’ for a kill: it’s at least ‘likely’ the targeted jet actually recognised the threat (i.e. the RHAW-gear ‘worked’), and dove to evade – as that the jet was shot down.

Thus, we have to wait and see what information might eventually emerge out of Russia. In the case of shoot-downs with fatalities, that’s usually ‘easy’, because – whether hours, days, weeks, or months later – there are related reports in the social media. Where the crew survived: not at all.

Source: https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/know-thy-enemy

 

[Mendel]

One more:

Article:

Integrated Air Defense Systems

Given the multiple air defense systems Ukraine received, it made sense to integrate the various western systems with each other and with Ukraine’s existing systems. Part of that integration involved the ability of different missiles being used in different launchers. The Norwegian NASAMS systems was designed with that capability in mind but other systems have also been modified. The other part of the integration is the software that links various radar data with different command centers to different launchers. The integration has been called the FrankenSAM system after Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein monster that was created from various body parts.

[...]

An integrated network of system components is significantly more effective than isolated air defense systems. This is the probable reason why Ukrainian air defenses are claiming more aerial shootdowns, many of which have been verified. It is also likely to impact future air defense development and production where advanced components can be created and plugged into an integrated network of existing components rather than needing to create new advanced isolated air defense systems.

Source: https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/ukraine-war-2-march-2024-112-or-8

Details there. This (but not the NASIC theory) was repeated in Cooper's March 4 weekly report.
It has the advantage of some facts supporting it, unlike the "secret countermeasures" idea.

 

[Duke]

It's very much speculation, though. The tweet references a Kyiv Post article, which references a February 29th blog post by Tom Cooper; this:

Article:

Then mind that sometimes the last year, there was a report about Ukrainians finding a near-intact Su-34 that crashed somewhere in the eastern Kharkiv Oblast, already sometimes back in 2022 (was a ‘typical Ukrainian claim’ for which ‘there was no confirmation’, and then for months).

That (‘famous’) itch in my small toe is telling me that before soon, there was a group of ‘men in black’ (MiB) inspecting that wreckage, carefully recovering every bit and piece of avionics, tidily packing and then taking that away… very, very, far away: all the way across the Atlantic Ocean.

….and over there, across the ‘Big Pond’, there is an agency named National Air and Space Intelligence Center (PDF): it came into being through re-organisation of the Foreign Technology Division of the US Air Force – the branch famous for sending its ‘MiBs’ all over the world. For example to collect MiG- and Yak-fighters, Mil-helicopters, SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and different Soviet air-to-air missiles, and other Soviet made weaponry, whenever these were captured – whether in Korea or Yugoslavia of the 1950s, then in Vietnam, in the Middle East, in Chad, or wherever else… and then study them closely, back during the (I) Cold War.

That would explain the rest of the story: essentially, Su-34’s avionics has been compromised – to the Americans, and thus to Ukrainians.

Unless the Russians find a way to upgrade it, significantly, the type is near-defenceless to such SAMs like PAC-2 and PAC-3.

Source: https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/ukraine-war-29-february-2024-roaming

So, the speculation is that NASIC exploited Russian tech to come up with a countermeasure. It's a nice thing to publish, because whether true or not, it scares Russian pilots.

You'd not expect the Ukrainians (and friends) to tell the world if/how they have found a way to defeat Russian systems. Similarly, you'd not expect the Russians to acknowledge recent higher loss rates and systems' ineffectiveness. Since none of the parties involved are likely keen on verifying their part of this situation, a lack of hard evidence is not surprising. Operational security is taken very seriously in all militaries, but doesn't quell informed speculation.

Cooper's narrative of exploiting found/captured Russia equipment by Ukraine (and friends) does make sense and has happened many times in the history of warfare. One of the best known examples was the capture of a German radar station in occupied France in early 1942 by British commandos. The Brits not only examined the radar in situ, but hauled away key components of the radar system and captured a German radar technician. The exploration of information obtained allowed the British to fine tune their development and use of chaff (code name "Window.")

Examination of the radar array also allowed British scientists to conclude that they would have to deploy a countermeasure that had recently been developed, code-named Window. Examination of the Würzburg array showed that it was impervious to being jammed by conventional means used by the British during the early years of the conflict; thus Window would have to be deployed against German radars. The effectiveness of Window against Würzburg radar arrays was confirmed by a raid conducted by RAF Bomber Command on 24 July 1943 against Hamburg (Operation Gomorrah); the bombers used Window, all of the radar arrays in Hamburg were blinded and their operators confused, unable to distinguish between the radar signature of a real bomber and several pieces of Window giving off a similar signature.

Content from External Source

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Biting

Of course advantages as a result of such exploration are usually relatively short lived as both sides in a conflict continually work to gain/regain the upper hand. Think real world, hi-tech version of MAD Magazine's "Spy vs. Spy." Sometimes these solutions are technological, other times resulting from change of tactics or missions.

 

[NorCal Dave]

So, the speculation is that NASIC exploited Russian tech to come up with a countermeasure.

It also sounds like a "magic bullet" type argument for a complex situation. The story could be completely true, but still just a part of the reason for higher Russian AC loses. In addition to the FrankinSAMs, there is also the shooting down/destroying of the A50s and the resulting possible grounding of them:

Russia has likely grounded its fleet of A-50 early warning and control aircraft after Ukraine shot down a second one in two months, the UK Ministry of Defense said in an intelligence update on Saturday.

The A-50 is an airborne radar system that detects enemy aircraft, missiles, and air defense systems. They also provide daily command and control to Russian air operations and identify ground targets.

Before these two losses, Russia was believed to have only eight of the high-value aircraft, which cost hundreds of millions of dollars to build.

Justin Bronk, an air war specialist from the think tank the Royal United Services Institute, previously told the BBC that losing an A-50 with its 15-strong specialist crew would be a "highly operationally significant and embarrassing loss" for Russia's air force.

Losing these planes from the skies likely "significantly degrades the situational awareness" provided to Russian aircrews, according to the UK department.

Russia has lost three of these high-value planes in total. Kyiv's forces first hit an A-50 in February 2023, when an exploding drone flew to an air base in Belarus and destroyed an A-50 parked on the runway.

Content from External Source

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/othe...nsustainable-losses-says-uk-intel/ar-BB1jdX16

Even before the 2nd shoot down, it seems the A50 were operating further out than before.

I'm speculating a bit based on previous readings, but it seems the Russian Air Force, like much of the military, has fairly top-down command structure with less autonomy for its pilots than maybe NATO crews have. They may be much more dependent on not just warnings and situational information, but what to actually do from the coordinators on the A50s.

On a side note, as we've speculated before, this sure sounds like an Alien/UFO retrieval program if someone only heard bits and pieces of it:

...there is an agency named National Air and Space Intelligence Center (PDF): it came into being through re-organisation of the Foreign Technology Division of the US Air Force – the branch famous for sending its ‘MiBs’ all over the world. For example to collect MiG- and Yak-fighters, Mil-helicopters, SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and different Soviet air-to-air missiles, and other Soviet made weaponry, whenever these were captured – whether in Korea or Yugoslavia of the 1950s, then in Vietnam, in the Middle East, in Chad, or wherever else… and then study them closely, back during the (I) Cold War.

Content from External Source

 

[Mendel]

You'd not expect the Ukrainians (and friends) to tell the world if/how they have found a way to defeat Russian systems.

That argument smells too much of CT for me to accept it, it's unfalsifiable.

I have no doubt the US is exploiting any interesting Russian hardware that the Ukranians come across. But there's zero evidence that there's a huge tactical advantage to be had from that. And I don't agree that the existence of such an advantage would need to kept secret, it'd have a good propaganda value.

 

[Duke]

That argument smells too much of CT for me to accept it, it's unfalsifiable.

I have no doubt the US is exploiting any interesting Russian hardware that the Ukranians come across. But there's zero evidence that there's a huge tactical advantage to be had from that. And I don't agree that the existence of such an advantage would need to kept secret, it'd have a good propaganda value.

There's a difference between exploiting tactical success for propaganda purposes and revealing how the success was achieved. For example, the US made sure the world knew about the attack on Japan by Doolittle's Raiders, but the US didn't announce it had been achieved by launching Army twin-engine medium bombers from an aircraft carrier. When asked where the bombers had launched from, FDR claimed they flew from a secret US based in Shangri-la.

 

[JMartJr]

For example, the US made sure the world knew about the attack on Japan by Doolittle's Raiders, but the US didn't announce it had been achieved by launching Army twin-engine medium bombers from an aircraft carrier. When asked where the bombers had launched from, FDR claimed they flew from a secret US based in Shangri-la.

Which, I was surprised to read on the Wikipedia page about the ship, is why we had an aircraft carrier named "Shangri La." In commemoration of that quip, and raid.

 

[Duke]

It also sounds like a "magic bullet" type argument for a complex situation. The story could be completely true, but still just a part of the reason for higher Russian AC loses. In addition to the FrankinSAMs, there is also the shooting down/destroying of the A50s and the resulting possible grounding of them:

Russia has likely grounded its fleet of A-50 early warning and control aircraft after Ukraine shot down a second one in two months, the UK Ministry of Defense said in an intelligence update on Saturday.

The A-50 is an airborne radar system that detects enemy aircraft, missiles, and air defense systems. They also provide daily command and control to Russian air operations and identify ground targets.

Before these two losses, Russia was believed to have only eight of the high-value aircraft, which cost hundreds of millions of dollars to build.

Justin Bronk, an air war specialist from the think tank the Royal United Services Institute, previously told the BBC that losing an A-50 with its 15-strong specialist crew would be a "highly operationally significant and embarrassing loss" for Russia's air force.

Losing these planes from the skies likely "significantly degrades the situational awareness" provided to Russian aircrews, according to the UK department.

Russia has lost three of these high-value planes in total. Kyiv's forces first hit an A-50 in February 2023, when an exploding drone flew to an air base in Belarus and destroyed an A-50 parked on the runway.

Content from External Source

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/othe...nsustainable-losses-says-uk-intel/ar-BB1jdX16

Even before the 2nd shoot down, it seems the A50 were operating further out than before.

I'm speculating a bit based on previous readings, but it seems the Russian Air Force, like much of the military, has fairly top-down command structure with less autonomy for its pilots than maybe NATO crews have. They may be much more dependent on not just warnings and situational information, but what to actually do from the coordinators on the A50s.

If the stories of A50 traps and concerted efforts to bring down them are legit, I'm surprised the Ukrainians (and friends) waited so long in making the decision(s) to go after them. The US/West knows how important our ability to protect combat support force multipliers like AWACS/C3I aircraft and aerial tankers in wartime has been in SEA, Granada, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. We also know how much the Brits' lack of airborne early warning aircraft cost them in terms of naval losses during the Falklands War. I'd have thought blinding the Russian Air Force early on would have been a high priority.

The PRC has figured out the value of such asserts for their adversaries. Their long range PL-17 air-to-air missile was designed to destroy AWACS and tanker type aircraft.

The People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) appears to be on the brink of fielding an AAM that could pose a challenge to potential adversaries. The PL-17 (CH-AA-X-12) likely has a range of around 400 kilometres, using a dual-pulse solid rocket motor combined with a lofted trajectory to achieve the distance. The weapon is intended to engage what are sometimes referred to as high-value airborne assets, such as airborne early warning or tanker aircraft.

Content from External Source

https://www.iiss.org/online-analysi...ssiles-push-the-performance-payload-envelope/

On a side note, as we've speculated before, this sure sounds like an Alien/UFO retrieval program if someone only heard bits and pieces of it:

...there is an agency named National Air and Space Intelligence Center (PDF): it came into being through re-organisation of the Foreign Technology Division of the US Air Force – the branch famous for sending its ‘MiBs’ all over the world. For example to collect MiG- and Yak-fighters, Mil-helicopters, SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and different Soviet air-to-air missiles, and other Soviet made weaponry, whenever these were captured – whether in Korea or Yugoslavia of the 1950s, then in Vietnam, in the Middle East, in Chad, or wherever else… and then study them closely, back during the (I) Cold War.

Content from External Source

As I've noted somewhere here on MB, these NASIC recovery/exploitation teams do exist. I was seconded to one such (then FTD) team as a subject matter expert (SME) for the MiG-29 crash at the Paris Air Show in 1989. How the spooks got hold of the stuff we got to see I don't know, and I knew better than to ask. Whatever FTD learned in total was OBE soon afterwards, however. Within a couple years after the Paris crash, the German Air Force took over the MiG-29s the Soviets had supplied to the East Germans. "Air Force Magazine" did an article not long after the MiGs were absorbed into the Luftwaffe on the USAF pilots and technicians who went to Germany for real "hands on" experience with the Soviet built fighters.

 

[Mendel]

I don't think this was posted here back in December.

Article:

Former Wagner head Yevgeny Prigozhin was killed under the oversight of former FSB Director and current Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev, according to The Wall Street Journal (WSJ).

Patrushev reportedly warned Russian President Vladimir Putin that relying on Prigozhin and his mercenaries in the war with Ukraine posed a threat to the Kremlin, ultimately leading to a bomb being planted under the wing of Prigozhin’s plane.

On Aug. 23, Wagner's leader was waiting at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport for his private plane to be checked and prepared for departure. According to Western intelligence services, it was during this delay that a small bomb was placed under the wing of the aircraft.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Dec. 22 that the current investigation is just "tabloid reading" and described the WSJ as being "very fond of producing pulp fiction."

Source: https://www.kyivpost.com/post/25829