“Ukraine’s army is using a nimble ‘game-changing’ drone called The Punisher that has completed scores of successful missions against the Russians, say reports” – TTG


“The Ukrainian military is using “game-changing” drones that can carry 3kg of explosives and hit targets up to 30 miles behind enemy lines, The Times of London reported. Eugene Bulatsev, an engineer with the Ukrainian designer UA-Dynamics, told the outlet that the “game-changing” Punisher drones had completed up to 60 “successful” missions since the Russian invasion began. “This is the cheapest and easiest way to deliver a punch from a long distance, without risking civilian lives,” Bulatsev told the newspaper.”

“The electric drones have a 7.5-foot wingspan and can fly for hours at 1,300ft and need only the coordinates of their target so they can carry out their mission automatically, Bulatsev said. He told the outlet that the drone is relatively small and light and is undetectable to radars. “What’s more, it can drop three bombs at a time or hit three separate targets then return to base to be reloaded and sent back into battle within minutes,” Bulatsev told The Sun. A smaller reconnaissance drone called Spectre flies alongside to identify targets before the Punisher strikes.”


These punisher drones are just another tool in the toolbox to help implement the strategy of national resistance. I wouldn’t call it a game changer. But these are elegant in their simplicity. Western factories, even small ones, should be able to churn out a steady supply of them in a few weeks. What if their targeting could be improved with offset targeting beacons or laser designators in the hands of SOF and Territorial Defense Forces? They could operate from a small piece of secondary road. Since they’re electric there would have to be generators to recharge the batteries. Perhaps they could even be operated from a hastily established FARRP.

Beyond these little drones, the Bayraktars are still hitting targets. I’m also glad to see good old fashioned artillery strikes called in by forward observers. Theres a video out there showing what is claimed to be Ukrainian Army 2S1 Gvozdika 122mm SPG in use against a Russian convoy. It appears that a MT-LB based vehicle (and likely others) are destroyed. A Russian convoy with fuel trucks was totally annihilated near Kyiv as a result of Ukrainian artillery shelling. The drone video shows six trucks in a line on a divided highway, all burnt out. In another incident in Mykolaiv, an entire artillery position was taken out. “Includes 7x transport trucks (approx), MT-LB, BTR-80, 10x D-30 122mm howitzer, BTR-D and more. Presumably the ammo was hit.” Don’t know what hit this artillery position. We have provided Ukraine with AN/TPQ-30 counter-battery radars. They also have their own 1L220UK radar systems.

Or maybe it was an SOF hit. A few days ago I mentioned a statement by the Ukrainian Special Operations Force Command in which they vow to identify and assassinate all Russian artillery servicemen responsible for their indiscriminate attacks on civilian targets. “Each and every gun crew… will be slaughtered like pigs.” Typical Slavic emotionalism, I said, and potential war crimes in that assassinate and slaughter phrasing, but hitting the artillery and missile units is an ideal SOF mission in this time and place. The Territorial Defense Forces will concentrate on the fuel and supply trucks.

And those Ukrainian farmers like the ones in the video above. I doubt Putin, Shoigu nor Gerasimov ever envisioned that.

BTW, looks like Biden is finally closing on a deal to backfill the Polish Air Force with F-16s in exchange for handing over its MiG-29s to Ukraine. Get the lead out, Joe! This should have happened days ago. Yes it’s a provocative action sure to further annoy Putin, but I have a thought on that. Putin, Иди на хуй.


Addendum: This map gives a more realistic view of recent Russian advances and areas of control than those maps showing vast swaths of Red. These maps aren’t exclusive to this war. Maps of the Syrian war did the same thing. Cartography is a subjective art as illustrated on the second set of maps.

This entry was posted in The Military Art, TTG. Bookmark the permalink.

112 Responses to “Ukraine’s army is using a nimble ‘game-changing’ drone called The Punisher that has completed scores of successful missions against the Russians, say reports” – TTG

  1. rduke11 says:

    You are clearly biased, i didn’t expect it from you. And problem is that you believe Ukrainians. Amount of psyops they unleashed is unbelievable, and it seems that you believe every one of them. Basically, you see all Russian forces as some untermensch meat, while ukrainian forces are superior, because they do nothing. In the reality, if monday parlay fails, Russia will end Ukrainian regulars. But maybe “ghost of kiev” will appear.

    • TTG says:


      Of course I’m biased. You should have expected that, especially since I’ve been very open about my Lithuanian roots and my rooting for the underdog in most every situation for years. Russia attacked Ukraine after swearing on their sainted mothers’ graves for weeks that Russia would not invade Ukraine. I support Russia’s actions in Syria and admire their competency there. This invasion of Ukraine has been a cock up, an unprovoked and unnecessary cock up.

      • AngusinCanada says:

        “unprovoked”? We can have rational arguments about many things, including if Russia’s invasion is justified, but to claim that Russia hasn’t been provoked to react, when the public pronouncements alone, of US officials and politicians for years shows US policy to use Ukraine to attack, undermine, threaten, weaken, ultimately destroy the Russian state, only makes you look foolish. Russia warned the US for many years about going too far, they wouldn’t listen. US wanted war, is the reality, and they did everything possible to provoke it.

      • Harry says:

        Why shouldnt he be biased? He is an american patriot. These people are American allies.

        • Fred says:

          They are allies? Which president signed that treaty of alliance and when did that senate ratify it?

          • TTG says:


            Ukraine joined the North Atlantic Cooperation Council in 1991 and the Partnership for Peace programm in 1994. Relations were strengthened with the signing of the 1997 Charter on a Distinctive Partnership, which established the NATO-Ukraine Commission. That’s the formal extent of our relationship with Ukraine. Not a formal military alliance, but close. Like being almost pregnant.

          • Fred says:


            So NATO obligated the US to defend a nation on the border of the Russian Federation. Where in the Constitution is that delegation of authority? When did the Senate ratify that obligation?

          • TTG says:


            “The Senate ratified the treaty on 21 July 1949 by a vote of 83-13. On 25 July 1949, President Truman and Secretary Acheson signed the Instrument of Accession, making the United States a founding member of NATO.”

          • Fred says:


            My history isn’t that hazy. 1949 is a few decades prior to the collapse of the USSR, of which Ukraine was a member. If you mean that by that treaty ratification NATO’s unelected leadership can force the US to defend other nations by ‘cooperation councils’ and ‘partnerships for peace’ then I disagree, we have no obligation to them at all. We aren’t “almost pregnat” but we are certainly screwed, especially with $130 a barrel oil and a corrupt administration that let it all happen.

        • TimmyB says:

          That begs the question “Should they be our allies?” And the answer to that question is “No.” The US has no vital interests in Ukraine. We didn’t need them as allies. Being allies with Ukraine doesn’t help us at all.

          And, given that we knew Russia repeatedly said that Ukraine in NATO was a redline, being allies with us only hurt Ukraine. We should have left that country alone. We didn’t, and now the people there are being slaughtered.

          It’s great to cheer for the underdog. But we shouldn’t lure the underdog to its own destruction. And that’s what we did.

      • Ghost_Ship says:

        Things change – the disorganised approach of the Russians suggest that this “special operation” might have been a last minute decision.
        I’ve seen mention that the Russians received last minute intelligence that Ukraine was about to launch a full-scale invasion of Donetsk. Last week, during the “special operation”, UN reported that 227 civilians had died in Ukraine of which 65 were residents of Donetsk. Does it make sense for an army supposedly fighting for the survival of its country to attack its own civilians rather than the supposed invader?
        Also, at a meeting in Munich, Zelensky suggested the possibility of Ukraine rearming itself with nuclear weapons. Would US or NATO do anything to stop this from happening? Nah, there are even US politicians who have suggested that they would support this idea. Washington is really stupid if it thinks that having Nazis in Europe with nuclear weapons is a good idea. Yet
        BTW, hasn’t Washington learnt by now “that my enemy’s enemy is my friend” is one of the stupidest concepts in foreign policy and forgotten about it.

        • TTG says:


          When the invasion started the DNR and LNR militias begun offensives against Ukrainian positions. Those Ukrainian defenses, which are in Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts, were improved over the last eight years. The DNR/LNR militias killed a number of civilians in their increased shelling and offensive operations especially in Volnovhaka and Schastye. Once the fighting started, the Ukrainian Army did fight back and even undertook some successful offensive operations themselves. There was no planned full scale operation to attack Donetsk prior to the Russian invasion. On the contrary, they were very restrained in responding to DNR militia shellings and shootings to avoid giving Russia a pretext for their invasion.

          In Munich Zelenskiy said Ukraine gave up nuclear arms in exchange for guaranteed security and respect for her territorial integrity. He never talked about acquiring or desiring nuclear weapons.

          • Harry says:

            OSCE reports suggest a massive increase in violations in the 3 days run up to the invasion, and also that a large proportion (80%) of the violations were on the Ukrainian side. This seems at least superficially at odds with your comment here.


          • southpoint says:


            “I am initiating consultations in the framework of the Budapest Memorandum. The Minister of Foreign Affairs was commissioned to convene them. If they do not happen again or their results do not guarantee security for our country, Ukraine will have every right to believe that the Budapest Memorandum is not working and all the package decisions of 1994 are in doubt.”

          • Leith says:

            Harry –

            OSCE observers do not attribute ceasefire violations to either side. But if you look at OSCE’s casualty lists you will see that the great majority of killed and wounded civilians and mil were on the Ukrainian side.

          • Harry says:

            With respect to Leith’s point.


            “OSCE observers do not attribute ceasefire violations to either side. But if you look at OSCE’s casualty lists you will see that the great majority of killed and wounded civilians and mil were on the Ukrainian side.”

            I took the location of the cease fire violation to be the location where the ordinance landed. This might be a mistake. The map details these locations. There is also a list. Its possible that I misunderstood what I read. I have attached the report above.

      • whoknows says:

        Did not root for the Donbas rebels for the last 8 years? They were underdogs. Thousands of people perished.

      • rduke11 says:

        I understand you, but i disagree with you. It was provoked for years, it was talked and talked in every UA media, it was endless psyops campaigns in russian socnet, it was a ukrainian officials talking openly about nukes and dirty bombs. What acceptable time Russia should wait to disable a threat? In Syria, RF waited for four years – and it was too late, now it is a stalemate.

      • LeaNder says:

        and my rooting for the underdog in most every situation for years.
        Yes, indeed. Put that way, it makes somewhat sense. 😉 Underdog in Libya vs underdogs in Syria???

        February 23, 2022, Paul Robinson:
        Regular readers will know that I have been decidedly sceptical of the idea that the Russian Federation is about to launch a full-fledged assault on the Ukraine. To be quite frank, I don’t want to believe it, as it would be an act of criminal folly – both criminal and folly, to be precise.

        The only mental way out for hardcore pro Russian’s would be pretty irrelevant variations on ‘Putin was lured into a trap’. ,,, Looks more like he was impatient with diplomacy …

        But we’ll see …

  2. Barbara Ann says:


    Mykolaiv looks to have been the scene of quite a few actions over recent days. That collapsed bridge with the tank on it was supposedly geolocated someplace NE of there. Looking at the map Mykolaiv seems strategically important if Russia is to advance on Odessa (without an amphibious landing).

    Even accounting for propaganda/faked videos etc I’m getting the impression Russia is losing a large amount of hardware, including top end aircraft like an SU-34 – or is it 2? Pro Russia analysts are saying a large tolerance for loss of men & materiel is part of the Russian military doctrine. Well I guess. Anyhow it is clear what the game changing weapon is; Ukrainian farmers and their John Deere’s.

    • Leith says:

      Barbara Ann –

      My father-in-law, may he rest in peace, used to sneer at John Deere tractors and always used International Harvester. He claimed JD would have gone bankrupt except for the multi-million dollar deal selling tractors to the Soviets during the great depression.

      I think now the Ukrainian farmers are using locally produced farm machinery from the Kharkiv Tractor Factory. Unfortunately the Russians reportedly destroyed that factory last week with shelling during last weeks stalled offensive:


    • TTG says:

      Barbara Ann,

      Reported air losses over a 26 hour period a day ago:
      – 1x Su-30SM multirole aircraft
      – 2 Su-34 strike aircraft
      – 2 Su-25 close air support aircraft
      – 2 Mi-24/35 attack helicopters
      – 2 Mi-8 transport helicopter
      – 1 Orlan-10 UAV
      Videos of helos going down show no anti-missile flares employed making them vulnerable to MANPADS. A video of the attempted landing on the Antonov airfield north of Kyiv on the first night showed copious use of those flares. Given the demonstrated logistics problems the ground forces are experiencing, it’s likely the Russian Aerospace Forces are also experiencing problems. Being out of flares is not a good position to be in with all the MANPADS flooding into Ukraine. Even worse when you have to fly under the Ukrainian Buk radars and drop unguided bombs.

    • Philip Owen says:

      Thjey tried an amhibious landing with paratroop support. The paratroops were dropped in the sea so the naval infantry mutinied and refused to attack.

  3. Cerena says:

    In addition to the previous post: “We have received documentation from employees of Ukrainian biological laboratories on the emergency destruction of especially dangerous pathogens of plague, anthrax, tularemia, cholera and other deadly diseases on February 24: https://function.mil.ru/files/morf/dokumentsmukr.pdf
    …with the beginning of a special military operation, the Pentagon had serious concerns about the disclosure of conducting secret biological experiments on the territory of Ukraine. The received documents confirm that the development of biological weapons components was carried out in Ukrainian biological laboratories, in the immediate vicinity of the territory of Russia.”
    Gues this should help to prevent the usual bashing of China for Covid.

  4. Leith says:

    That ‘Punisher’ uav bomb drops would need to have more precision to be considered ‘game-changing’. They will fsurely focus them on large stationary fuel and ammo dumps. Plus the three kg ordnance load doesn’t sound like it is going to overwhelm the Russians. That term ‘game-changing’ sounds like a marketing spiel by Mr Bulatsev.

    It does seems similar in size to early versions of ScanEagle, also catapult launched off of a rail. But ScanEagle had a pusher propeller in the rear. And it used skyhooks on its wingtips for recovery. I wonder what the landing recovery rate is for the Punisher?

    • TTG says:

      True, this drone is not game changing by any stretch of the imagination. That’s a vastly overused term. But every bit helps, just like all those molotov cocktails.

      • Harry says:

        Im not sure the molotov cocktail thing is a good idea. Im not sure its to the benefit of the civilian population to turn them into “enemy combatants”. The degree of restraint the Russians demonstrate is not a constant.

        • Barbara Ann says:


          If the civilian population consider it is to their benefit to become enemy combatants by hurling Molotov cocktails at the invader good on ’em. Hopefully if enough civilians do this it might eventually register that the Ukrainians do not wish to be de-Nazified and demilitarized by the Russian army.

          As a side note, I see that Wikipedia editor “Sandstein” added to the Molotov cocktail entry 2 days ago – by including a recipe from “Pravda Brewery, Lviv, 2022”. It would seem sensible to add instruction on how to best use the things whilst minimizing the risk of torching oneself. The video of the young woman throwing one from a moving car at a Russian Tigr is hair raising.


        • Leith says:

          Barbara Ann –

          The young woman tossing that Molotov Cocktail from a moving car was symbolic. But to be truly effective a barrage of cocktails need to be used. Like what happened to the Berkut armored vehicle that tried to drive thru the Maidan protesters in 2014. It looked like it had been hit by at least half a dozen, and then a dozen more after it was engulfed in flame.

          • Barbara Ann says:


            It sure was symbolic. When the targeted vehicle didn’t open up on the car, the pro-Russia crowd held it up as an example of the almost saintly restraint demonstrated by the Russian army. Maybe, but they missed the rather more important point that a young Ukrainian woman (who didn’t look like a Nazi to me) was willing to risk it all to resist the forces supposedly send to liberate herself and her countrymen.

            The premise for this war is fundamentally flawed and although we are only a few days in, I expect the Russian troops on the ground are becoming all too well aware of this already.

    • fredw says:

      “Stationary” seems to be a primary characteristic of the Russian invasion force. Even hitting small targets, unimportant in themselves, can help keep it that way. These sound pretty good for that. Satellite images should be able to provide some useful coordinates for effective targets.

  5. Fred says:

    Is a 7.5 foot wingspan affected by the wind? 1,300 feet does what to spotting from the ground? What type of counter dronecould be launched as local defense to take these out? I would assume if your position is already identified noise and heat would be no deterrent to launching AAA drones. Or you could just follow them back to base to target the launch crews. Didn’t the world see drones like this in action already? One would think the Russians would have planned accordingly.

    • TTG says:


      There’s nothing really new in these drones. The Russian military should have planned accordingly. But their planning and execution has been piss poor to date.

  6. Eric Newhill says:

    “annoy” Putin? IMO, he will see US involvement in aircraft transfers as an act of war – and he’d be correct.

    Your cheerleading for WW3 is disturbing and, frankly, utterly unhinged. First TDS, then covid hysteria and now anti-Russian hysteria. Is there any Borg sourced mob madness (that will damage or destroy the US) that you won’t fully buy into and propagate?

    • FWH says:

      Yes, understood. The fever of the moment threatens all of us. We are to confront another nuclear power over Ukraine. This is based more upon a propaganda bubble than a balanced view of things. I do not find a black and white in the event. Ethnic alignment, ancient prejudice and special interests are telling here.

      The special interests that have driven the confrontation from the background care not one whit for the lives of Ukrainians either in the East or the West of the country, nor for the lives of Russians in the conflict, now for the lives of any Western volunteers that might enter the conflict.

  7. Pat Lang says:

    Are they recoverable or is this a one-way trip depending on range to target?

  8. zmajcek says:

    All this talk about sending fighter planes and foreign volunteers is not conducive to resolving the issue. Innocent people are dying in ever increasing numbers.

    If Chechen war is any indication, Putin is willing to go far if he think he must.
    Why not put martial enthusiasm aside and work toward finding a peaceful resolution.
    Otherwise, this is bound to escalate and civilians will be the biggest losers, as always.

    • Pat Lang says:

      Ah, you want the Ukrainians to surrender. That identifies you.

      • JohninMK says:

        Do you see any other option Colonel?

        • Leith says:

          The Free French never surrendered to the Nazis. Neither did the Maquis. Neither the Poles nor the Czechs surrendered. Nor many others.

          Whoever Putin puts in as a puppet (if he takes Kiev) will be another Quisling, hopefully he will meet the same fate.

          • Cerena says:

            Are you in favor of someone like Nuland’s choice Mr. Yatsenyuk?

          • Barbara Ann says:


            This is why I think full annexation must be a real possibility. The alternative is a ‘neutral’ Novorossiya where the life expectancy of Russia-friendly politicians, regional governors etc will be very short indeed.

      • zmajcek says:


        With all due respect, that is not what I said at all.

        Ukrainians can do what they want. Some will fight for Russia, some against it and I suspect most will try to avoid the fighting all together.
        As a European I wish to see a stable and prosperous Europe. We’ve had enough of wars. And all this talk of sending fighters through a NATO country is pouring fuel on fire.

        • Harry says:

          Well thats not one of the current available choices. Europeans have failed the test. Sad Im sure. But no sadder than whats happening in Ukraine and Russia.

          The losses of business interests from whats happened in RF are under appreciated.

          Proof I think that Col Lang was right all along about economic determinism. Turns out that Galician hatred of Russia trumps the German Mittelstand’s business interests. Who knew?

    • TTG says:


      Putin could end the killing of innocent people by pulling his army out of Ukraine. At some point he should realize that, even if he occupies the entire country, he cannot defeat the already substantial Ukrainian resistance. The resistance will certainly go as far as they must to eventually defeat the invader.

      • zmajcek says:


        It is possible the Ukrainians will manage to push Russia back. Maybe Putin even loses power as a result of this action. However, without a political resolution of the issues that led to this conflict, I fear we are just kicking the can down the road. And what might await us in 10-15 years would be a much bigger war.

        • TTG says:


          One outcome of Putin’s invasion is the realization among NATO countries that defense is necessary. Real defense instead of military adventurism. The national resistance strategy is gaining ground among NATO countries, especially those facing Russia and Belarus. It is a strategy of real defense unsuitable for offensive operations which should meet Russia’s security concerns. That means no offensive long and medium range missile forces in Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltics and Kaliningrad. What will happen with the DNR and LNR is a mystery to me. Crimea could go on indefinitely just like the captive nations of the Baltic did for 50 years. I don’t see a war over the Crimea.

      • Harry says:

        I think everything the RF (under Putin) is trying to do is very difficult. However none of it is impossible. One should also consider the Strategic position if they fail. An implacable enemy on a long border who can install intermediate range missile batteries which can strike deep into your country. Their strategic situation will have deteriorated dramatically.

        Thats why Putin (IMHO) took this catastrophic step, and thats why they will spend a lot of Russian lives (and Ukr) in stopping that scenario. Its pretty much whatever it takes.

        How many US lives would the US expend in dealing with a hostile Mexico bent on militarizing against it and armed by your enemies? More importantly, how many Mexican lives?

  9. Rob Waddell says:

    TTG .. all
    Many committee members will remember the drone attack on oil processing facilities at Abqaiq and Khurais in eastern KSA on 14 September 2019. To recap (from Wikipedia entry):
    The Houthi movement in Yemen claimed responsibility, tying it to events surrounding the Saudi Arabian–led intervention in the Yemeni Civil War and stating they used ten drones in the attack launched from Yemen, south of the facilities. Saudi Arabian officials said that many more drones and cruise missiles were used for the attack and originated from the north and east, and that they were of Iranian manufacture. The United States and Saudi Arabia have stated that Iran was behind the attack while France, Germany, and the United Kingdom jointly stated Iran bears responsibility for it. Iran has denied any involvement.

    PL and many others described how these homemade and accurate drones could easily be designed, constructed and launched by ‘tribal armies”. With the ‘Punisher’ article, it now seems that the US, EU etc. mystically agree with this assessment.


    • TTG says:

      Rob Waddell,

      I remember the RC model airplanes back in the 1960s. I couldn’t afford them with my paper route money. I stuck with control line and free flight, but drooled over those 3 channel RC set ups in the magazines. I’ve looked at a few RC hobbyist sites online recently. What those hobbyists are creating now is amazing. All these war drones are just an extension of those RC models.

      • TTG says:


        I’m still following the Everglades Challenge even though I didn’t write an article this year. Been busy installing floors at one of my son’s place. Seems the headwinds are slowing a lot of people down. Deadlines for CP1 and CP2 have been extended. I guess I’ll make sure I get a sail that will point as close into the wind as possible.

    • JohninMK says:

      Hi Rob, another Waddell here.

      The drones used to attack Saudi Arabia are still being used, with the UAE added to the target list, but are a very different kettle of fish to the Ukrainian drones described above. Perhaps on the scale of a mosquito to a hawk.

      Rather than drones, the main ways that the Ukrainians seem to be negating parts of the, likely to be overwhelming in the end, Russian military advantage are its MANPADs and Buk/Tor mobile air defences. Both are very difficult to find and neuter whilst starting to make CAS aircraft and helicopters losses mount uncomfortably.

  10. tedrichard says:

    bias is ok we all have them for this or that.

    wishful thinking however is usually a waste of time and can lead to very bad outcomes.

    because if you listen to the msm spew out hyperbole and downright nonsense do not forget……….”It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”

    • Datil D says:


      Very well said, I think too many comments here underestimate Putin. Judging by the warmongers response in congress Putin must be doing well militarily and I suspect there are some political and financial cards up his sleeve still to be played.

      • tedrichard says:

        i can not speak on military strategy or tactics because it is not my area of extensive knowledge and sounding like an armchair general is to me foolish

        i can say with a real degree of certitude the economic policies the west is implementing towards russia are to going slit the throat of all too many western nation now so eager to pounce on russia and in time are going to disintegrate NATO because of the economic blowback that has ””barely”” begun.

        and that blowback includes the usa which imo is now run by utter ”’economically speaking”’ fools who should be allowed anywhere near a lemonade stand let alone a nations treasury.

        stagflation that the fed is powerless to overcomes with rate setting is going to be the order of the day and in time again imo the futility of sanctions will compel the western morons to up the ante as russia simply becomes more autarkic thumbing its nose which will produce ww3 as the west becomes desperate.

        quite simply the globalist great reset is IMPOSSIBLE unless russia AND china are on board which means they must be forced to capitulate to western plans. hence the western hysteria towards moscow and all things russian. the globalists are going to need all the luck they can get since the west has never been able to subjugate russia and history demonstrates much tougher armies have tried than what nato and usa can field today.

        • Datil D says:


          “quite simply the globalist great reset is IMPOSSIBLE unless russia AND china are on board which means they must be forced to capitulate to western plans”

          Yes the 3 in the way of the Great Reset were Trump, Putin and Xi, they handled Trump now working on Putin. My guess is Putin watched closely as Trump went out fully aware of what was happening and has a counter plan, interesting times.

    • Angel says:

      OR: Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is already made up!

  11. Fred says:

    How does the Ukrainian government plan on resupplying the 3 million or so people living in and around Kiev? It looks like a whole lot of usable road and rail lines have been cut. Is the bulk of the Ukrainian army still East of Dnipro, doing something, apparently?

  12. Jimmy_w says:

    A more equitable map, if using those squiggly red lines instead of splotches, should also have corresponding blue lines and dots showing the estimated UAF + militia + police positions. Reducing Ruskies to skinny red lines is fine and all, but let’s not pretend the UAF directly controls every square inch devoid of Russians, either.

  13. Sam says:

    Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill unsurprisingly endorsing Putin’s narrative on Ukraine in a sermon today. According to him the West essentially organises genocide campaigns against countries that refuse to stage gay parades


    I think this is significant. The head of the Russian Orthodox Church endorsing Putin’s actions. It appears the Vatican and the Russian Orthodox Church have a different perspective. Religion and faith have been enjoined in this conflict.

  14. Aidan says:

    The most critical obstacle for the Russians seems to be their transport. I read a January estimate that they had about 4,000 trucks in their entire army, and they’ve already lost in the region of 250 – probably at least 10% of what they could reasonably make available. Their only chance of forcing a Ukrainian collapse seems to be either the capture of Kyiv or a rapid advance from the south to cut off the eastern UKR army – both of which would require far more logistical support than they are currently supplying (and they seem to be failing to fully supply the front line they already have). Doesn’t that give them no realistic prospect of a quick victory, and in the ongoing stalemate, UKR appears to be doing proportionally more damage and retaining higher morale.

    • Jimmy_W says:

      Some people think that BTRs and BMPs (and MT-LBs) had a secondary function of last-mile logistic resupply. That after the BTG / Reg gets on the objective, the vehicles are supposed to run back to the railhead or logistic base to pick up the resupply themselves. Self-escorting, as it is. Certainly the Soviets were always short of trucks.

      In Afghanistan, they had to rely on trucks linehauling supplies from FOB to FOB. But when they deploy on multi-day operations, the BTRs and BMPs did shuttle resuplies from the nearest FOB.

  15. John Merryman. says:

    America seems to be the dumb heavy in thousand year old European tribal feuds.
    I suspect after a summer of 6 dollar gas, it will start to get really old when the election comes around.
    2022 is certainly going to be one for the history books and not in a good way.

  16. John Merryman. says:

    When we blow up civilians, it’s unfortunate collateral damage. When the Russians do it,it’s war crimes. Why am I having a serious case of cognitive dissonance here?

    • John Merryman. says:

      Oh, that’s right! It’s tribal!

    • Pat Lang says:

      I lived in Germany as a child just after WW2. What we and the Brits did to German cities from the air makes anything in Ukraine look minor up until now.

      • John Merryman. says:

        I understand the reality. I’ve long been a student of history. I’m just trying to present as impartial to a rapidly shrinking Overton window. The crowd immune response kicks in like a ton of bricks.
        After decades of meaningless wars and the four years of Russiagate, I realize logic is like shaking a stick at a fire.

  17. English Outsider says:

    TTG – I don’t think you’re biased and never have. Just realistic. The Baltic countries – the whole of Europe if it comes down to it – are pretty well defenceless should American military support be removed. And who knows what’s going to happen in US politics over the next few years.

    And none know either what’s going to happen in Russian politics after Putin. They have their hawks too. Not only is European defence weak right now given that the massive American cold war presence in Europe has been reduced, it could well be weaker, and in more dangerous circumstances, should American or Russian policy and intentions change.

    Against that background anxiety over European defence can scarcely derive from bias. Merely from a knowledge of how things are now and a fear of how they might be in the future. Going off topic for a brief moment, I don’t think our UK defence is at all soundly based either. I rather like Babak’s old suggestion of an English/American bilateral defence alliance. But for defence rather than attack.

    I do not, however, see the war in the Ukraine in that larger context of the current unsatisfactory state of European defence. We have used the Ukraine, in the words of that Rand Corporation study, to “overextend and unbalance” Russia and the Russians have finally come in to put a stop to it. Whether one considers that justified or not, and however one judges the steps the Russians are taking to put a stop to it, it’s happening. I’m finding the question of exactly how it’s happening unclear.

    On the one hand there’s the sharp and conclusive picture drawn by such as Colonel Mcgregor or Scott Ritter recently. That it’s all over bar the shouting. Am I wrong in drawing that conclusion from such interviews as this?


    On the other hand I’m getting the picture that the Russians are in deep trouble. They’ve bitten off more than they can chew.

    If the first then we should not be egging the Ukrainians on. We should not be sending them arms and feeding them intelligence, the only purpose of which is to keep them fighting longer and make the war more damaging.

    If it’s the second then we’re still not doing that much of a job helping the Ukrainians. The only effective support we can give is heavy sanctions and I don’t believe the Europeans are going to accept too many of those. I also believe that both the Europeans and the US are vulnerable to counter-sanctions.

    But irrespective of which scenario is adopted this looks like a lost cause. Unless we are hoping to keep the country in the same state of murderous chaos that was seen in the Ukraine in the late ’40’s and ’50’s. For the sake of the Ukrainians, and irrespective of whether the Russian invasion can be regarded as justifiable or not, the West should call it a day on this one.

    • Pat Lang says:

      Perhaps you Brits should have surrendered to the Germans in 1940? You had just been driven off the continent. The Germans were pounding your cities into rubble. If the US had not fed you, you would have starved. A realist would have surrendered.

      • Barbara Ann says:

        Well said Colonel. Thank God Churchill was a hopeless romantic.

      • English Outsider says:

        I don’t know whether or how fully it would have been implemented, Colonel, but the plan was that if we were defeated in 1940 there’d be stay-behinds conducting a guerilla war.

        If I’m wrong I’m wrong but I believe that for the West now to be pouring more arms into the Ukraine, and attempting now to deter Russia with sanctions, will not stave of Ukrainian defeat.

        If it does then move into guerilla war we’ll be back in the Ukraine of the ’50’s, with the West supporting the insurgency as before.

        But I was attempting to be neutral and realistic in the comment I submitted above. To take in both scenarios and attempt to argue that whichever scenario one holds to, encouraging the Ukrainians further is pointless.

        Maybe I was being dishonest in that I did not attempt to put my own point of view. That we in the West, both the EU and NATO, are responsible for the condition the Ukraine has found itself in since 2014 and before. That we have used the Ukraine for our own purposes.

        That we have proved ourselves to be incapable of resolving the problems in the Ukraine thus caused; or rather, have sought to intensify, not resolve, those problems.

        That we have ourselves as good as invited this Russian response and are satisfied with it because it forces Germany and thus the EU unreservedly into our camp.

        And that if we encourage further resistance it will not be because of fellow feeling for the Ukrainians or concern for their welfare. It will be because we wish to continue using the Ukraine as a battering ram against Russia with, as ever, no thought for the people living in the country we are using for that purpose.

        Perhaps it would have been more honest to have said that at the start. But I do believe, Colonel Lang, that whether I’m wrong or not our current policy of fighting to the last Ukrainian is worse than a crime. Considered neutrally, and however one regards this war and the causes of this war, it’s a mistake.

        But I must confess my sympathy for the underdog, as always, pulls me the other way right now, whatever the rights and wrongs of it.

      • Bill Roche says:

        Not to gang up on E.O. but he does makes a good case for Washington’s surrender after White Plains. There really wasn’t much hope beyond a ferry cross the Hudson run by Mr. Dobbs. Cornwallis chased him right down the Palisades but Washington d/n quit. The Brits were glad of it in ’17 and ’41. Back to Ukraine. it d/n take an international affairs grad to see the invasion coming and the line of the Dnieper loomed large. A “common joe” looked at the map of Ukraine last year and determined three obvious things. First, the “breakaway” provinces and Crimea were gone. Second, the Ukrainians could only get them back by force and who wants to own territory occupied by people who hate you. Coal not withstanding you’ve got to let go. Third, the natural line of separation was the Dnieper flowing south into Crimea. It conveniently demarked Russian and Ukrainian populations, solved the water problem into Crimea, and if Russia left Odessa and the remaining Black Sea coastline to Moldova in Kiev’s hands a “real politic” solution c/b had. But as I’ve said (ad nauseum) that would not serve as Russia’s first step to return to 1914.

        • Eric Newhill says:

          Bill Roche,
          This is another example of the limited usefulness of analogies to illustrate the reality of a current situation.

          UKR is not the colonies circa 1778; nor England circa 1940. Putin is not Hitler anymore than Saddam Hussein was. Putin is not Stalin either.

          • Bill Roche says:

            Thanks for explaining all that. Seems I cant keep up w/t times. You say Putin is neither Stalin, Hitler, nor Hussein. They’re interesting references to dead people but I’d like to know who you think he is. Like it or not Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 will be a Valley Forge for Ukrainians; it is a 1777-78 moment for them. This is probably not what Putin, who ever he is, had in mind.

      • Philip Owen says:

        At that point it was more the Canadians feeding us. Such support as came from the US was at war profiteering prices.

        • Pat Lang says:

          Philip Owen

          Do you like Spam? I do. They were making Spam in Canada throughout the war and through the starving years for the UK?

          • Pat Lang says:

            Philip Owen

            You chose to interpret my statement about US food for Britian as applying to 1940. That was petty and spiteful.

          • English Outsider says:

            Spam kept going for long after, Colonel. When I was a boy working on the local farms I was quite often lucky enough to be invited into the farmhouse for breakfast.

            Among the sausages and bacon and such like there’d often be some fried spam tucked in with the baked beans. I regarded it as the perfect breakfast.

            Still do, but I don’t attempt to revisit those old times in that respect. If one can even get spam these days. As a friend in Germany said to me – he’d made much the same journey from much the same background – “Die Zeiten sind vorbei.” I don’t want to find the reality doesn’t live up to the memory.

          • Bill Roche says:

            SOS wasn’t just a cry for help.

      • Xi says:

        If those Brits had cut a deal with Germany, how would we see the wonders and beauty of a destroyed Empire, grinding poverty and rule by Third World Despots such as the EINO mayor of New Pakistan, formerly known as London.

        Keep those Rainbow flags waving. Diversity is our only strength. Just ask the Chinese

  18. Christian J. Chuba says:

    1. Contrary to the Ukrainians say, I doubt the Bayraktars are still a factor. They are relatively large, high altitude drones that require direct line of radio communication to control. If the vaunted Russian air defenses can’t handle that then we could walk into Kamchatka.

    2. The Punisher drone is impressive. It’s very small and carries an explosive just large enough to take out any vehicle or ground bases aircraft. Can the Russians jam them, target and shoot them down, don’t know but it looks impractical to detect them w/RADAR but perhaps there is a radar person who can tell us about that.

    I always thought that an optical system would be best to use against these type of drones. You have cameras watching the sky that control either machine gun or lasers and blast anything it sees in the air. I pity the larger birds that would also get taken out but it is a war.
    Getting back to the Bayraktars. Videos showing this type of drone are the easiest to fake. We have been developing video games of this type of combat for decades so we are filled to the gills w/graphics libraries. I am not saying they are fake, just that they are the easiest to fake if you are trying to fabricate a video.

    • Leith says:

      Christian –

      A bayraktar just took out another Russian Buk SAM launch vehicle today. Apparently the Russian radars are either being spoofed or jammed, or the operators are asleep. Or perhaps you are right about fabricated video. But I have found this ‘UAWeapons’ site to be usually reliable.


  19. morongobill says:

    To quote a famous rock song, “and if the boys wanna fight, you better let ’em.”

  20. Shako says:

    Once again we are all reminded by the unique inability of Muscovy to live in peace with its neighbors. Time for “no fly zone” over sovereign Ukrainian territory, requested by the legitimate leadership of Ukraine. Buying into Muscovite agitation propaganda that somehow it is an “act of war”, is well buying into their propaganda.

    • Bill Roche says:

      I fear the wrath of the blog will be upon me but your post gives me courage to say it … Russians are bullies. They believe they are the master race of all slavs and have felt so since Peter. Simple.

  21. Kilo 4/11 says:

    Harry, here’s what you left out. De-Nazification, eh.

    VIENNA 3 March 2022
    News archive
    Media advisories
    Media contacts
    Media accreditation to OSCE events
    OSCE Live
    Frequently asked questions
    The Russian invasion on Ukraine has already resulted in thousands of dead and wounded soldiers and civilians. The unprovoked, aggressive war in Ukraine threatens to bring carnage on a vastly larger scale, not seen in Europe since World War II.

    Yet another reason for international condemnation is the missile attack on Babyn Yar, a neighborhood several miles from the center of Kyiv. It was in Babyn Yar, where in September 1941 Nazi Germany murdered 34,000 Jews, whose bodies remain buried in a ravine adjacent to an old Jewish cemetery. This attack damaged the memorial erected to these Nazi victims. The purpose of this war, we are told, is to “denazify” the Ukrainian leadership, so it is truly tragic and ironic that this site and this monument are among those sites affected by Russian actions.

    • Leith says:

      Kilo –

      Reports are coming out of Kherson that Ukrainian Naval Infantry shelled Chornobaivka airfield destroying 30 Russian helicopters.


      Don’t know whether it is true or not. But the Ukrainian Marines in that region have (or had) at least two howitzer battalions with 2S1 Gvozdika SP 122mms, one BM-27 Uragan MLRS battalion, and several Bm-21 Grad MLRS battalions. Even a small portion of that would make one heck of a TOT strike. Or maybe they used the D30 towed 122mms that were reportedly captured nearby at Mikolayev recently.

      • Kilo 4/11 says:

        Artillery: The king of battle.

        One of the hills I was on in Nam, can’t remember if it was Hill 65 or Hill 52, had, in addition to my sp 155 mm battery, a battery of towed 105 mm, and an 8 inch gun. I don’t recall us ever getting together to do a TOT, but it sounds exciting. Another exciting thing was that those oh-fives were dug in on a terrace below the crest of the hill, and thus they fired right over our heads.

  22. John Thurloe says:

    Typically, not one speck of forensic evidence about these drones and such. Claims not sustained by evidence.

  23. blue peacock says:

    What is the current status of the invasion? Bogged down? Stalemate? Or Putin achieving military objectives?

    • JohninMK says:

      I think it could be summed up as steady progress.

      Given the size of the Ukrainian Army, its large amount of equipment, the years of NATO training, the recent supplies of MANPADs and ATGM as well as its understanding of likely Russian strategy and tactics given that they were both the Red Army, it was never going to be an easy nut to crack.

      For the first few days their plan seems to have been to try to minimise both military and civilian casualties by almost not using artillery. Whilst that worked in the countryside it has not worked in the towns which have turned into fortresses. As a consequence tactics changed and towns/cities are now under the kind of attack that would normally have been expected on Day 1.

      The Russians seem to have successfully kept the main Ukrainian Army units, perhaps 60k+ men, in the Donbas long enough to be able to perform a pincer movement forming, in their speak, a cauldron. If they can neutralise that group of forces Ukraine has a huge problem as it has almost no other large mobile units, just towns with garrisons.

      I think we now have to wait to see where the Russians stop.

      • Bill Roche says:

        My guess is the Russian military will stop at the Dnieper and hold the east side of the river to Crimea. Will Ukranians accept a “rump state” from Kiev to Moldova, Galicia to Poland? How does Putin save face and say “see; we really gave it to you nazi/ukies and you’d better not forget it”. If the Finns and the Swedes say to NATO “let us in”, does Putin resort to wholesale destruction to frighten them away from NATO? Does Xi now consider Russia, given its performance in Ukraine, to be the “junior partner in their alliance? Russian mobilization was clear to me by early February but I never anticipated this would be such a world game changer.

        • English Outsider says:

          Bill – on that particular NATO expansion you mention I don’t think it’s central, not just now.

          1. On NATO expansion to Sweden and Finland, would it be that much of a threat? Both are well run countries and likely to remain so. Neither have populations of settled Russians in them so the Russians would not be prickly about Russians in the near abroad being oppressed.

          Nor would Finland be inclined to attempt to recover lost territory under Article 5 protection.

          I don’t know how the Russians would feel having missile bases so close to St Petersburg. But they’ve got missile bases close anyway.

          So however that gets sorted out, is it high on the list of Russian anxieties? But:-

          2. On all such questions the Russian security demands have not been met. There’s been no give on that from our side at all. Macron’s old idea of a new “security architecture” that could accommodate the fears of both sides seems to have well and truly fallen by the wayside.

          Even were there to be peace in Ukraine tomorrow those security demands would still be outstanding.

          Intensified, even – as I write this I see from an old friend in Germany an invitation to subscribe to a petition addressed to the meeting of European leaders Macron’s now called. The petition calls for a cessation of all fuel supplies with Russia. Oil and gas, the lot.

          That’s from a left wing and hitherto pacific friend. And the recent German poll showing support for Scholz’s hard line policy shows that friend of mine is one of the more moderate. Those Russian security demands are now even less likely to be met or discussed.

          So if the Russians are prepared to go the distance what else have they got to get those security demands addressed? Counter-sanctions. And counter sanctions they can justify by saying the Germans broke contracts first.

          However determined the Germans and the Europeans generally are to move over to alternative or green they can’t do it in a day. Von der Leyen was talking of it taking until 2030 and that’s hopeful. But they’re all assuming the Russians will dutifully continue supplying them with fuel for that period.

          They are living in fantasy land, which is where most of our politicians live anyway. If immediate counter-sanctions covering gas and oil are on Putin’s to do list they’ll be jerked back to reality with a vengeance.

          If so, there’ll be more for us in Europe to worry about than whether the Swedes or the Finns get nukes.

  24. Harry says:

    The map is by far the most important question. If your map is correct the Russians are in a very tough place. If the Russian maps I have seen are correct, the Ukrainians are in a terrible place.

    I suppose we will know for sure in a week or so.

    • Pat Lang says:

      The Soviets were very good at faking maps. They actually made their commercially available mapping inaccurate. This was quite deliberate.

      • Harry says:

        I always found them very sensible people, with a remarkably cynical take on most institutions. Very wise to make up your own facts. It can be invaluable for propaganda purposes.

        I am hopelessly confused about the situation. My interim conclusion is that the Russians make progress but their losses are massively higher than they expected. They must reasonably fear a domestic revolt. They must also be highly motivated to get this done. I doubt we understand quite how motivated the Russian leadership must be. It is existential for both the leadership and the RF as a political entity. My suspicion is that the best that can be done is to bleed them.

        As you know, I know nothing about military matters, and completely rely on the many experts here.

  25. Leith says:

    I remember hearing those 8-inchers roaring over our heads like a freight train running on damaged rails. Or maybe it was your 155s?

Comments are closed.