Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Crazy_Ivan80]

I still half suspecting that Russia is trying to bait Ukraine turning Kherson into a Stalingrad. Have them bogged down there whole winter and do a new Russian offensive in the spring

I think that's my read too on Kherson - it feels like a trap.

Though I think Ukrainians will be too smart to fall into it if it is.

That seems to be the conclusion of the channels reporting on the conflict too: it's a trap and we're not intending to fall for it.

The withdrawal of Russian troops from northern Kherson but the strengthening of Kherson itself seems a dead giveaway...

[Admiral Yi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeqszwkqhSo

Sevastopol attack footage.

[Legbiter]

Judging by the military twitter accounts I observe what the Russians are doing to their own vatnik conscripts (throwing them into frontline positions without food, clothing, weapons and leadership) is a little too much even for me. Subsequently the Ukrainians are reporting Russian casualty numbers that are reminiscent of WW II Eastern front daily totals.

[Josquius]

To be fair Ukrainian estimates do tend to be over the top.
Is there any up to date neutral calculation? - these usually underestimate but usually show a shit tonne of definitive deaths that really highlight the Russian lies.

[Threviel]

What I've read indicates that the Ukrainian estimates are very good for live wartime updates, what makes you think they are over the top?

[Tamas]

What I've read indicates that the Ukrainian estimates are very good for live wartime updates, what makes you think they are over the top?

Let's be fair, they are almost certainly over the top, even without propaganda reasons it's very standard to end up with overestimations of enemy losses when you rely on combat reports from your troops.

[The Brain]

What I've read indicates that the Ukrainian estimates are very good for live wartime updates, what makes you think they are over the top?

Let's be fair, they are almost certainly over the top, even without propaganda reasons it's very standard to end up with overestimations of enemy losses when you rely on combat reports from your troops.

My impression is that the Ukrainian numbers are much better than the "drag marks" numbers of yore.

[Admiral Yi]

I frankly haven't encountered any Ukrainian official estimates of Russian casualties, but I don't have any reason to doubt their reporting, except for that unfortunate bit about about the Blue Ace or whatever he was called that shot down six planes in one day. 

Their reporting on ground gained certainly appears reliable.

[Josquius]

The general way it works  I find is-

Russia says they suffered 10 casualties in an operation.

Ukraine says the Russians lost 100.

Clear and irefutable photo evidence shows 30 dead Russians. A bit of further investigation turns up 50 funerals from soldiers strongly believed to have been in that operation. At least 20 more are unaccounted for.

Basically ukraines numbers are from the upper range of possible.

[Iormlund]

Ukraine has been pretty reliable when reporting Russian casualties. It is also clear they are hiding their own for the sake of morale.

[grumbler]

Basically ukraines numbers are from the upper range of possible.

Almost certainly true, and this is a good response to theearlier claim by someone that their estimates "tend to be over the top."  Maybe that poster doesn't know what "over the top" means?

[Legbiter]

I frankly haven't encountered any Ukrainian official estimates of Russian casualties, but I don't have any reason to doubt their reporting, except for that unfortunate bit about about the Blue Ace or whatever he was called that shot down six planes in one day. 

Their reporting on ground gained certainly appears reliable.

Yeah the only totals that look obviously juiced up by the Ukrainians are Russian aircraft losses. In the opening days of the war they reported ridiculous numbers of downed Russian fixed-wing aircraft in order I guess to boost morale. But otherwise using open source intelligence like Oryx for example you get a pretty good low-end benchmark for equipment losses. Russian military blogs on social media in the last 10 days or so are full of stories about entire battalions of Ivan Conscriptovich being thrown untrained and unequipped into WW I frontal assaults and all but wiped out.

[The Brain]

Unequipped? Many Russian soldiers are equipped for WW1 combat.

[Legbiter]

The Mosin-Nagant rifle in use today was great in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-05.

[Threviel]

What I've read indicates that the Ukrainian estimates are very good for live wartime updates, what makes you think they are over the top?

Let's be fair, they are almost certainly over the top, even without propaganda reasons it's very standard to end up with overestimations of enemy losses when you rely on combat reports from your troops.

Over the top is Japanese pilots reports in the pacific war or US reporting in Vietnam, 10-20% error in wartime  as the Ukrainians seem to do is more or less as spot on as it's reasonable to get.

And we do not know how the Ukrainian numbers are calculated. I would guess they are primarily based on sigint, probably with the assistance of western nations. Wouldn't surprise me if they have as exact numbers as the Russians and just report something credible to not make it too obvious.