Russia invasion of Ukraine

[Ithekro]

Enforcement is based on the 120 or so countries that did sign on. How much of Europe is in on the ICC?

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by ramlaen

Really? A 20 year old article about how the US will rescue any Americans that are abducted under the guise of an ICC ruling is supposed to show the ICC has authority or the ability to enforce their decrees?

A twenty year article was not the reason, but a showcase of how the usa government enacted a law to curtail the perceived overreach of the ICC powers. Not that the USA was a pristine track record in recovering citizens held by foreign powers *coff* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis *coff* but this law will make the ICC think twice before arresting any usa citizen.
--------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Enforcement is based on the 120 or so countries that did sign on. How much of Europe is in on the ICC?

I am too lazy to count the green ones


--------------------------------------------------
Spring has come, any bets of when and where the Ukranian counteroffensive will strike? I am surprised surprised no one in vegas has set up one, didn't they bet on basically everything?

[Ithekro]

So basically, if Putin goes to any of the countries in green, there is a higher chance someone will arrest him. Or at least make and effort or show of it. Since it is likely still an act of war to take a Head of State into custody. Though I wonder of the Russian Government would use that as an excuse to get out of Ukraine.

[ramlaen]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Since it is likely still an act of war to take a Head of State into custody.

Ding ding ding, barring a complete collapse of Russia in the future Europe is not going to be able to enforce the ruling.

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

So basically, if Putin goes to any of the countries in green, there is a higher chance someone will arrest him. Or at least make and effort or show of it. Since it is likely still an act of war to take a Head of State into custody. Though I wonder of the Russian Government would use that as an excuse to get out of Ukraine.

That is why I said from the start that putrid no longer has the option to leave the presidency so one of his lackeys fixes this mess (while he enjoys the millions he has accumulated over the years thanks to his modest salary); this mess and all its consequences will haunt him every night till he reaches his (early?) grave.

[TheForsaken]

Oh please, former President still has protection.
You think how the US will react if a foreign government nabs Obama?

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by TheForsaken

Oh please, former President still has protection.
You think how the US will react if a foreign government nabs Obama?

False equivalency detected! The USA and Russia are not on the same level. Also, I can't think of any crimes the ICC would charge Obama, now if had said dubya that would have made some sense. If Boris Yeltsin had received a warrant like putina chances are russia would have protected him just like he does Snowden nowadays. But one of the tasks of whoever succeeds putin will be precisely getting rid of the influence of his predecessor and what better way than having other governments do the dirty job for him? Remember autocratic governments are not like democracies where new elected officials do not have to battle with the remnants of the prior government, which is similar what putler did when invading Kazakhstan, thinking the new ruler would be lukashenko 2.0 and lick his boots right away.

[GDB]

There's also the obvious difference of just "nabbing" someone and making a clear, concise, and very public announcement that if said person steps foot in the country, they'll be arrested.

[Key Board]

Originally Posted by TheForsaken

Oh please, former President still has protection.
You think how the US will react if a foreign government nabs Obama?

I still think George W Bush should be put on trial for Iraq.
I still remember "WMDs"
I'm not alone.

//

[Roger Rambo]

Sooo, uhhhh. This is a thing.

Russia deploys ancient T-54 tanks to Ukraine

“The train [with T-55s] has recently departed from the town of Arsenyev, Primorsky region, where the 1295th Central Tank Repair and Storage Base is located,” OSINT team said.

They also noted that the deployment and use of T-62 tanks by the Russian Armed Forces during the current invasion has been documented since the summer of 2022, but it is the first recorded instance of T-54/55 tanks withdrawal from storage.

The first T-54 prototype was completed at Nizhny Tagil by the end of 1945. From the late 1950s, the T-54 eventually became the main tank for armoured units of the Soviet Army, armies of the Warsaw Pact countries, and many others.

I feel it really needs to be emphasized again that the bottomlessness of the Russian tank reserves was possibly somewhat exaggerated. Even if this isn't likely a sign that Russia is totally out of more modern tanks, there's really no discernible reason for Russia to be refurbishing T-62 unless huge numbers of the stored T-72 and T-80 tanks were in essentially non-repairable condition. Shifting down to the T-55 shifts that question to how functional even the T-62s in storage are.

[Renegade334]

Not surprised at all by them scraping the bottom of the barrel. Russia may have a crapton of long-term tank storage areas, but at the end of the day, these T-55s, T-62s, T-64s, T-72s, T-80s and on are just sitting outdoors, hardly shrink-wrapped and prepared for a long cryogenic sleep. All those MBTs and IFVs are left at the mercy of the elements and, if there is one thing that kicks everyone's butt in Russia regardless of your nationality, it's the weather. Hell, it's already a miracle if even half of the published reserve numbers are found in working order, given that such crucial things as preventative maintenance (just moving the vehicles and their turrets around to keep them serviceable and keep the moving parts from getting too crusty) is AFAIK not really a thing there. Financial issues with maintenance are also one of the reasons why many of Ukraine's Soviet era tanks (especially those from KMDB in Kharkiv) were unavailable when hostilities broke out. With no money to spruce them up from time to time, they had simply rotted away and are now only good as organ donors for other tanks in better shape.

Now compare that to the Sierra Army Depot (SIAD) in Herlong, California, where an absolute boatload of vehicles of all types (M113s, M1s) are stored in a (nearly yearlong) dry environment, and you're looking at better refurbishment and reactivation rates. Many of those old M1s are either upgraded to the latest SEP variant and sent back to active units, once they rotate out their attritted materiel, or they get refurbished in preparation for a FMS (Foreign Military Sale), like the USMC's deactivated M1A1FEPs now destined for Poland and Ukraine.

Another possible (but not necessarily major) reason why they're jumping off to the T-54/55 is lack of equipment (thermal imagers, FCS) and spare parts (engine, transmission components) that can be used to quickly revitalize/upgrade T-62s and others. At the end of the day, the guys in charge of planning and supply fall back on the old military arithmetic: an old tank on the frontlines is still better than no tank on the frontlines.


That said, T-54/55s are hardly the oldest armored grandaddies to fight their last fight in Ukraine. I know of at least two instances in Donbas where separatists tinkered with IS-3s converted as monuments and museum pieces and against all odds managed to jumpstart them (one of the two, IIRC, was recaptured and sent back to a museum). There is also at least one picture of a T-34 that was towed onto a hastily barricaded street (with wooden Czech hedgehogs - hardly an obstacle) by locals to serve as decoy and trick the approaching Russians into wasting precious ammunition (hopefully, ATGMs) on it.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Renegade334

Not surprised at all by them scraping the bottom of the barrel. Russia may have a crapton of long-term tank storage areas, but at the end of the day these T-55s, T-62s, T-64s, T-72s, T-80s and on are hardly shrink-wrapped and prepared for a long cryogenic sleep. All those MBTs and IFVs are left at the mercy of the elements and, if there is one thing that kicks everyone's butt in Russia regardless of your nationality, it's the weather. Hell, it's already a miracle if even half of the published reserve numbers are in working order, given that such things as preventative maintenance (just moving the vehicles and their turrets around to prevent them from getting too...crusty) is AFAIK not really a thing there. Hell, financial issues with maintenance is also one of the reasons why many of Ukraine's Soviet era tanks (especially those from KMDB in Kharkiv) were unavailable when hostilities broke out. With no money to spruce them up from time to time, they had simply rotted off and are only good as organ donors for other tanks in better shape.

Now compare that the Sierra Army Depot (SIAD) in Herlong, California, where an absolute boatload of vehicles of all types (M113s, M1s) are stored in a (nearly yearlong) dry environment, and you're looking at better refurbishment and reactivation rates.

Yeah. There's some old articles that talked about that. It seems that was something that got more attention since Ukraine had a free press and was geographically closer to Europe, and didn't really have the Russia stronk reputation that seems to have made people not really pay attention to the fact that much of Russia's tank reserves weren't really in any better shape than Ukraines. Neither country has a year long desert you can dump your tanks off into like the US does.

Of course heard some stories about how despite the favorable weather, in the run up to Gulf War 2, the Army was unpleasantly surprised to discover that a decade of post Cold War spending cuts had left a lot of the vehicles in the Sierra Army depot in not that great shape. The US response was to allocate manpower and resources to refurbishments, but that ends up costing money.

Originally Posted by Renegade334

Another possible (but not necessarily major) reason why they're jumping off to the T-54/55 is lack of equipment (thermal imagers, FCS) and spare parts (engine, transmission components) that can be used to quickly revitalize/upgrade T-62s and others. At the end of the day, they fall back on the old military arithmetic: an old tank on the frontlines is still better than no tank on the frontlines.

I think finding the spare parts for the T-62 is probably the bigger issue, though that goes kinda hand in hand with finding working T-62s in the reserves. Even if Russia had trouble finding enough electronics to outfit all their older T-62s with budget thermal sights and fire control systems, they could still at least send them with basic Soviet Specs. Downgrading to the T-55 from the already downgraded T-62 suggests more fundamental problems than not being able to refurbish vehicles to more modern standards.

Granted one theory I've heard is that Russia is using the older T-62's less in an armored assault more, and more as an improvised artillery field gun. That's a less suicidal use for them given that improv Kamikaze drones are a thing, but it maybe suggests that some of the rumblings about Russia having to ration their shell usage because of shortages are accurate.

[Ithekro]

The only other thing I can think of is that maybe the Russians are refitting older T-72s and T-62s, but it will take more time than they think they have to counter a Ukrainian offensive, and decided to just throw out the functional T-55s just to have enough tanks on the front lines.

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

The only other thing I can think of is that maybe the Russians are refitting older T-72s and T-62s, but it will take more time than they think they have to counter a Ukrainian offensive, and decided to just throw out the functional T-55s just to have enough tanks on the front lines.

If we go down that rabbit hole why stop midway? maybe this is all an strategy from vlad "master strategist" putin to make the ukranians feel overconfident and then annihilate them with their super secret stash of t-14 armata tanks they have managed to send to the frontlines without anybody noticing!

... or going by Occam's razor, the next ukranian offensive is going to be an spectacle that will make the invasion of iraq look difficult. I expect the "stop, he is already dead" simpson meme to surge in social networks in the near future.

[MeoTwister5]

So like are these the relatively outfitted versions of the 54s and 55s or are they fielding ye ol' grandfather tanks? The 54 has been in service for 70 years already, and IIRC they were already being having problems during the Six Day War in the 60s and were already outclassed by the 70s...

[Yu Ominae]

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles...0m/0na/004000c

Maebashi-based school operator Nippon Academy was warned after NA chairman Masumi Shimizu' called Ukrainians in Japan as "refugee aristocrats".

This started after Ukrainian students objected to the fees required when they were told that it was free for them to go to NA and study Japanese.

[Renegade334]

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

their super secret stash of t-14 armata tanks they have managed to send to the frontlines without anybody noticing!

There are only fourteen -or thereabouts- T-14s in existence, all of them being preproduction vehicles, with their only known battlefield being parade grounds. The manufacturer, Uralvagonzavod, is not only experiencing huge problems gathering the necessary electronics to build new units, but it is also stuck in dire financial straits. It was practically bankrupt when it was acquired by Rostec and even now it's still facing huge hurdles such as repaying loans and preexisting debts and maintaining production lines (their main one in Nizhny Tagil had to stop, IIRC - but I could be wrong on this one). There are also rumors that UVZ couldn't build a dedicated Armata manufacturing line because of 1°) lack of funds 2°) repercussions from the 2014 invasion and 3°) embezzling of said funds -- but I'm taking those with a grain of salt.

...And even then, the T-14 is apparently still bedeviled by reliability issues with its Chelyabinsk A-85 engine. Since the UVZ engineers designed the T-14 around the A-85, which is a very compact Diesel thanks to its X-shaped cylinder scheme (the A-85 is basically Russia aping the German Simmering-Graz-Pauker Sla.16...which was supposed to be an alternative to the WW2 Tiger II's Maybach engine), the engine compartment cannot fit a ready replacement like the (bigger and V-shaped) V-92 found in the T-90A. The developers did say they wanted a different engine a couple years ago (2020, IIRC?) after "fix-requiring shortcomings" were found in the A-85, but...no dice.

As for the recent Armata sightings, those are just pre-series tanks doing gunnery exercises at the Kazan training range and used by milbloggers in dire need of pageviews.


As for the T-55, it's probably going to be used as a WW2-type assault gun.


EDIT: well, what do you know - LazerPig's just released a video on the T14's misadventures in Vatnikgrad.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by MeoTwister5

So like are these the relatively outfitted versions of the 54s and 55s or are they fielding ye ol' grandfather tanks? The 54 has been in service for 70 years already, and IIRC they were already being having problems during the Six Day War in the 60s and were already outclassed by the 70s...

It looks like the grandfather versions of the tanks.

Russia had some upgraded versions of them with additional turret armor and a laser range finder/targeting computer (similar to the upgraded T-62's we've been seeing), but that version looks pretty distinct from the older T55.

Originally Posted by Renegade334

There are only fourteen -or thereabouts- T-14s in existence, all of them being preproduction vehicles, with their only known battlefield being parade grounds. The manufacturer, Uralvagonzavod, is not only experiencing huge problems gathering the necessary electronics to build new units, but it is also stuck in dire financial straits. It was practically bankrupt when it was acquired by Rostec and even now it's still facing huge hurdles such as repaying loans and preexisting debts and maintaining production lines (their main one in Nizhny Tagil had to stop, IIRC - but I could be wrong on this one). There are also rumors that UVZ couldn't build a dedicated Armata manufacturing line because of 1°) lack of funds 2°) repercussions from the 2014 invasion and 3°) embezzling of said funds -- but I'm taking those with a grain of salt.

...And even then, the T-14 is apparently still bedeviled by reliability issues with its Chelyabinsk A-85 engine. Since the UVZ engineers designed the T-14 around the A-85, which is a very compact Diesel thanks to its X-shaped cylinder scheme (the A-85 is basically Russia aping the German Simmering-Graz-Pauker Sla.16...which was supposed to be an alternative to the WW2 Tiger II's Maybach engine), the engine compartment cannot fit a ready replacement like the (bigger and V-shaped) V-92 found in the T-90A. The developers did say they wanted a different engine a couple years ago (2020, IIRC?) after "fix-requiring shortcomings" were found in the A-85, but...no dice.

As for the recent Armata sightings, those are just pre-series tanks doing gunnery exercises at the Kazan training range and used by milbloggers in dire need of pageviews.

My understanding that some of the problems with the T-14's engine stem from a lot of its components originally being traced to the Ukrainian tank industry in Kharkiv. Which ended up cutting ties after the Crimean annexation and the War in the Donbas. It seems that has contributed to them having trouble working out sourcing parts or making the needed engine modifications for the tank.

[Renegade334]

Some of the faults found with the A-85 were "fuel efficiency, resource, oil consumption, specific heat transfer and other indicators", all found to be lackluster compared to "their Western counterparts". It's possible it's the X-shaped scheme that is at fault - one recurrent problem found in such designs is hydraulic lock induced by excess oil pooling in the bottom cylinders. Who knows.

Either way, the Armata family of vehicles is practically not in production anymore, despite what Zvezda and co. would like everyone to believe. Too cost prohibitive.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

My understanding that some of the problems with the T-14's engine stem from a lot of its components originally being traced to the Ukrainian tank industry in Kharkiv. Which ended up cutting ties after the Crimean annexation and the War in the Donbas. It seems that has contributed to them having trouble working out sourcing parts or making the needed engine modifications for the tank.

Did the new russian frigates have also engine issue because they were supposed to use some from Ukraine?