The UK Ministry of Defence has provided an update on the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, focusing on the situation in the eastern Kharkiv Oblast.
The update highlights continued Russian pressure in the region, particularly near the town of Kupiansk.
According to the intelligence, “Russia has maintained pressure in the east of Ukraine’s Kharkiv oblast,” with Russian forces now positioned “within several hundred metres of the Oskil river in a narrow salient approximately 20km south of the town of Kupiansk.”
The report further notes the challenges faced by Ukrainian forces, stating, “It is likely that continued Russian attacks are complicating Ukrainian operations on the east bank of the Oskil.” In response to the intensifying situation, on 15 October 2024, “regional Ukrainian authorities ordered the civilian evacuation of several population centres in the area.”
Looking ahead, the Ministry of Defence indicates that Russia “will likely continue to make gains in the area in coming weeks.”
The report also points to Russia’s strategic interest in Kupiansk, mentioning that “Russian forces have been making sporadic attempts to regain control of Kupiansk since losing the town in a Ukrainian counter-offensive in September 2022.”
The town is particularly important due to its location on the Oskil River and its role as a “rail hub supporting Ukrainian operations in the area.”
The attack into Russia certainly showed chutzpah, however, was it at the cost of stalling Russia in other areas?
Well said and yes you are correct with it taking away drone groups, battalions and brigades who were better off being used to defend \ break through elsewhere
One of my colleagues thinks that Ukrainian unit equipment losses in the Kursk amount to 100% whenever the Russians advance. I’m wary of disagreeing with him. It’s exactly what happened towards the end of Germany’s invasion of Russia before they were kicked out into Eastern Europe. The Russians have alot of experience breaking fortified lines.
He’s being saying the Russians will win ever since the invasion started, and he’s predicted every offensive correctly (barring Khrakiv). The Russians are winning, and once winter lifts, they’ll just keep going and going. 3 to 1 fires advantage according to Michael Koffman. The North Koreans will contribute to their existing manpower advantage. I just don’t see how the Ukrainians can stop this.
NATO has to step up with weapons when General Winter sets in.
Ukraine manpower is another problem.
However, if NATO political leadership can convince Western leaderships to unleash the dogs, the UAF could mallet Russian positions, HQs, and logistics.
For me, hitting Russian stockpiles and logistics would balance some of the Russian capabilities / capacity. That could hold them back
Are the Russians making major advances against the Ukrainians in Kursk? I had not heard that the Russians were doing much. Did the Ukrainians put down fortified lines in Kursk ie are they static and in defence?
I certainly am not an expert I’m these matters but other than an opportunity to practice “all arms” whilst not under to much (initial) counter pressure, with some tactical success, I can only see strategic failure. This unfortunately seems to be the Ukraine experience as it strives to escape from its own soviet style mindset.
Looks like it is the Russians who have an old school Soviet mindset. The Ukrainians are being highly innovative and showing much initiative, in contrast.
For those ‘experts’ who say Russia is finished militarily and incapable of confronting NATO and that our hollowed out forces are capable of engaging Russia I say you are either ignorant or living in a rose tinted vacuum! Russia has shown it’s capable of suffering multiple reversals, setback and tactical defeats. However it has the time and resources. We on the other hand have the resources for tactical success but so few troops, ammunition and capabilities to last more than 6 months. With North Korea now providing troops this is no time for rose tinted glasses.
Spot on RMJ. There are certainly a couple on here who constantly deride Russia as any threat to NATO. The Russian effort in Ukraine has frequently been inept, their tactics poor., their kit underperforming, their losses very high.
But they learn, they keep the pressure on the front line, they adjust their tactics and switch to a war production economy and are still dictating the battle.
We make a big mistake if we underestimate the Russian threat to NATO Europe. With a population twice ours and conscription, they can field a large army that dwarfsallied forces, particularly if Turkey sits it out, which is an even bet.
Too right Cripes and with Trump the US could also walk away.
I think it’s nearly time for Ukraine to get round the table, the trouble is now Russia has its tails up there’re not interested and I can see them making a move on Odessa and cutting Ukraine off from the Black Sea and creating a land corridor to their enclave in Moldova. Then we’ll see Putins next land grab.
I suggest you start smoking something a little less potent,
If Ukraine negotiates it will simply give Putin time to refit , rearm and finish the job.
Further the Russian have no assets capable of an amphibious attack, they are now mostly artificial reefs dotted around the Black Sea courtesy of the ukraine non navy, further Crimea is now effectively cut off and any assault across the Dnipro is a recipe for a lot of dead soldiers and lost assaults,
With the Ukraine now building their own improved long range firepower. Russia has alot to be concerned about.
I think if you look at the war as a whole Russia has shown its quite willing to throw men and lives at any objective. Time will tell and I certainly do hope things work out for Ukraine but I feel they need more help quicker than they are getting it now and I’m getting the impression there’s a bit of war fatigue from some of its backers.
The introduction of NK military cannot go unanswered. Further it is time NATO started drawing some red lines of its own.
Further Russia meat grinder tactics must eventually start to undermine their ability to continue this conflict, their manpower is considerable but not infinite.
I cannot disagree there is a certain amount of fatigue but this is exactly what Putin wants and why this conflict needs to be ended,
Hope Ukraine and West can make sure this doesn’t happen and can offer further weaponry and resources to help Ukraine push Russian forces out of its territory rather than more land adventures into Russia. If all the “intelligence” knows where Russian forces are then hopefully this is being taken advantage of and acted on. Hope the new US leadership doesn’t walk away from supporting Ukraine.
Yes, the US support is vital. If the Democrats win then a fresh declaration of support from the US and more equipment would be a massive boost. My personal biggest fear is rotation of Ukrainian troops out of the front line and getting much needed down time.
Sadly Kamala Harris might be lukewarm to supporting Ukraine as President, compared to Biden.
The response from NATO to Trump should be a united front and one voice say “ don’t let the door hit you on the way out” .
Or are we really saying that without the US the total spending of 31 countries NATO is nothing?
It is time the NATO members realised that the USA is now a very unreliable partner, even if Harris wins and until the voice of sanity returns to the Republican Party , at any one time the US is a max of 4 years away from another Trump and all that entails .
Couldn’t agree more. Clear signs of Russian meddling in foreign political affairs is a worry. I see by the results in Moldova this morning in their elections the current pro European president who was expected to gain enough votes in the 1st round to win is now likely to have to go to a 2nd round run off vote plus they were also voting on changing their constitution to move away from Moscows orbit and look for EU candidacy and that vote now looks to have fallen short of the required amount.
The Russians have also achieved huge destruction to Ukraine – housing, infrastructure. Ukrainians will experience a terrible winter without much power and heat. The russians have killed many civilians and are terrorising the population. Despicable, but success in their book.
Its taking everything Russia has got for a stalemate with Eastern Ukraine. National mobilisation. Thousands of young Russians dead. Thousands of devastated families. For what. Some WW2 style shelling. Numerous Warships lost. Zero air superiority. So-called 5th gen fighters proven to be useless. Having to go cap in hand to North Korea for some more 70s tech and troops that don’t want to be there. Its not rose tinted glasses. It’s tactical reality. A conventional conflict with NATO and US forces would not look like this. Which is why Russia won’t step foot in a NATO nation. Because they know they would be finished.
Its a question of who runs out of troops, ammo, and equipment first, as much as Russia has taken a hammering, they keep firing and they keep attacking, they still have sizeable reserves to continue. There is a clear danger now that UKR forces will totally wear down on one or two fronts, and Russia will breakthrough to undefended territories.
In all long wars it is often the size and quality of the defence industrial base that is the determining factor. Nazi Germany could not hope to win against the resources available to US, UK and USSR.
NATO may only be a few Squadron losses from disintegrating in favour of national self preservation. NATO is untested and with each country having so little in the way of defensive depth a modest amount of attrition could see NATO disintegrate. Especially more so with Trump. How long does it take to train a FJ pilot, how long to build a FJ? I think you vastly over estimate NATO
I think you vasty underestimate NATO. How long do you think the Russians take to train a fast jet pilot? 2 weeks?? Which is probably about right, as so many have been shot down. We have overwhelming capabilities.
Numbers of young Russian dead and devastated families are not on any chart in the Kremlin. The only KPI of interest to Putin is ‘how much ground was taken yesterday?’
I think you will find Russia has air supremacy, and while rightly wary of GBAD (hello UK gov, looking at you) they are bombing at will. NATO would never stand against Russia precisely for the reasons you listed. Russia has built a narrative of a country over its nations. The UK has for political expedience been divided into an electoral calculation and its cohesion destroyed by mass immigration. We wouldn’t even have time to run out of our “two weeks” of ammo. The thousand dead in two days with no change on the ground and only escalation to come would see us capitulate in short order.
If a direct threat to the UK existed from Russia. Then underestimate the publics resolve at your peril. A NATO conflict with Russia would look nothing like the Ukraine conflict. The US on its own has overwhelming capabilities. And we wouldn’t run our of ammo in two weeks. That is just utter rubbish.
Russia isn’t stupid enough to directly threaten any of the “large” NATO powers. It will be some poxy little Baltic or Balkan former Soviet state (think Latvia or Moldova). I would dispute that any average British citizen is going to either get riled up into a Lord Kitchener-esque bloodlust or indeed have any idea where those places are. And you are right about the ammo, it won’t last half as long as the MoD imagine, barring the fact we lack the physical barrels or delivery systems to expend it anymore.
,I was referring to a direct threat to the UK rather than Latvia ect but I know what you mean.
Agreed 👍
Get real. NATO has over 500 typhoons. If Ukraine had 500 typhoons (not even counting Rafale, Gripen or anything US made) there wouldn’t be a Russian soldier on Ukrainian territory. Russia doesn’t have a MIG or SU within 200 miles of Ukraine. And Ukraine doesn’t even have a proper airforce. Russias GDP is 2 thirds of the UK. And dropping. Things cost money. You don’t have to be an expert to put 2 and 2 together. It’s plain common sense. Other possibly than its subs, Russia has been exposed and is not equipped for modern conventional warfare.
Those ‘500’ are meant to protect the sovereignty of Spain, Germany, UK and Italy. How many would each commit before national interest and preservation kicks in! Don’t forget Churchill pulled back the RAF from France to protect our shores. NATO in my view is no more than a few setbacks from national interest kicking in! More so if the US pull back under Trump. PS: how long do you reckon it takes to train a new FJ pilot?
You obsesse over some very strange things. Yes, it takes a long time to train a new fast pilot. Guess what. It takes Russia a long time to train a fast jet pilot. They don’t magically do it in a couple of months. And they are not trained to the standard RAF/US/NATO pilots are, otherwise they wouldn’t have lost some many aircraft over Ukraine. And during times of war, the training pipeline can be sped up without a loss of quality. We have been doing this for rather a long time.
There’s a tenet – control the air you control the battlefield. Out of our 9 Squadrons how many will be devoted to a NATO theatre v’s protecting our own airspace v training v maintenance v rotation? the answer – no more than 1 Squadron. Factor in attrition and before you know it we have neither the airframes nor pilots for operations. The ability to regenerate force is not a luxury we/ the Belgians/ Dutch/ Norwegians/ Danes/ Canadians/ Portuguese have. So in a Trump led US scenario which other NATO member will provide the air assets to control the air? Answer = our 9 Squadrons aren’t enough and we need at least 5 more.
Russia doesn’t control anything. The reality of Russian forces is staring you in the face, and yet you argue they can take out the UK. I don’t know where you are from. But you assumptions about UK/NATO/US forces capabilitys are way off the mark. How many fast jets do you think Russia can commit and deploy? the ones that haven’t already been shot down that is.
I’ve not commented on the US other than in a scenario where Trump pulls the US back. Any strategist can see the glaring hole that is UK’s lack of depth – that’s why those who know more than you and who’ve serve call it hollowed out. We all know 9 Squadrons is too few but you don’t.
I have served. You haven’t. I understand the big picture. You don’t. You haven’t taken any notice of our operational fast jet output on deployments overseas and what we can achieve. The capability we have today with Typhoon FGR4 and a growing F35 fleet far outstrips anything the RAF could achieve in the past. You won’t understand the reasons why.
I have served thanks and yes 9 FJ is too small
Instead of arguing who’s done what, let’s be realistic. The Gucci aircraft are great, but we’ve spoilt F35 by being dumb enough to cheapskate the carriers out of being truly able to launch. So we’re carrying a spare engine everywhere in case we find a carrier. The carriers can’t deploy cos there’s not enough Frigates etc..and the RFA might be on strike. We’ve become an arthritic Boxer, as long as our opponents slow, we might not lose
You mean the lift fan that makes it a supersonic VSTOL fighter.
Sorry, V part is only needed to suck up to Navy. Let’s nit pretend we’ll have enough to play with, by the time they CAP the carriers, there’s few enough to go mud moving, or Air support over the targets. They do have lots of capability, and the price tag shows it, but the reason behind giving one a bath, and the jockey a brown flying suit..was inexperience and short handedness..at least that’s what the report said
Absolutely right
We certainly need more strike and air defence aircraft. And a dedicated RAF F35 rather than lugging a spare engine everywhere instead of weapons.
The F35B carries exactly the same number of weapons as the F35A. The internal bay on the A is slightly longer, allowing it to carry 2000lb class weapons internally. We don’t operate the 2000lb Paveway 3 anymore, so it doesn’t make any difference to the RAF/RN.
So there’s no difference in payload even when hopping off a carrier as opposed to a normal takeoff from an airfield? The lift engine etc, must be really light, and not take up any room I guess
It can take off from a carrier with a full weapon load. The lift fan alone generates 29:000lb of thurst.
2 years?
11+
They were faster in my day…although being a Rupert first adds quite a bit of time.
So, that’s for Fast Jets after ab initio?
These Ukrainian ones look to be cutting it down to 1 year for F16
I think we underestimate their ability to regenerate and resupply their front line forces and this is the strength they play to by using attrition tactics.
I agree and our now boutique armed forces will not last 6 months
Against who exactly? The UK against the rest of the world? You might have noticed that every campaign since the end of the Cold War has been part of a coalition. Remember the Gulf wars? Kosavo, Bosnia, 2003 Gulf War, Afghanistan. Op Shader over Syria/Iraq. All with allies, all working together. That’s why we exercise so much with allies, that’s why we have huge exercises like Red Flags and Joint Warriors. Exercises I have taken part in. Nations offer different capabilities and share resources and tactics. Interoperability is key, and we are very, very good at it. Russia knows it cannot match the west in conventional warefare, and that is why Putin won’t step foot on NATO soil, despite the crap the Kremlin comes out with.
7 FGR4 Sqns is not sufficient to sustain operations against any peer. If you don’t understand that with maintenance, training, rotation and other commitments we’d be lucky to provide more than 1 Sqn then you’re in cloud cuckoo land. As for Putin – if Trump gets to power and pulls the US back there’s nothing much to stop him walking into the Baltic states. 4 Typhoons and a mothballed Bulwark aren’t going to stop him!
You just don’t get it, do you. Our Typhoon sqns could sustain operations far longer than any Russian fast jets units could, and with world beating capability. And as a collective (NATO) We have far more mass, and vastly more capability than Russia could dream of. And US forces aren’t going anywhere.
Don’t get what? That 7 FGR4 Sqns (plus loss of tranche 1) not sufficient for much beyond existing commitments. If you think it is then you’re clueless on the intensity of ops and the 72hour planning cycle
We can achieve more with those Typhoons than we could with 142 Tornado GR4s and the Harrier GR7 fleet combined. Tranche 1 has just created a fleet within a fleet, which is an engineering planners nightmare. Individual aircraft availability is far higher due to the maintenance contract which guarantees X number of aircraft available on any given day, plus surge capacity. Along with being massively more capable aircraft. Working with allies is what gives the west ita edge. And again. The Russian air force cannot match a single thing the RAF can achieve. Not op Shader, not the Falklands islands det, or deploy to Japan or Red Flags, or to Iceland or escort RC135s. None of it. They don’t have useful mass, poor availability, and still dropping dumb bombs.
I disagree. You vastly underestimate VKS and overestimate what our small contingent of 100 FGR4s can achieve operationally in both CAS and OCA, alongside DCA. At least GR4 was operationally cleared for SS, something that neither F35 nor FGR4 are. Yes FGR4 and F35s are outstanding but with so few we’re no longer a tier 1 airpower.
The RAF will go for capability over airframe numbers every day of the week. We are spending £2.5bn on upgrading the Typhoon T2/3 fleet.
both are required – not boutique. Everyone recognises we’re short of frames. Control the air control the battlefield. For CAS numbers count.
And we have years of experience over Afghanistan. Typhoon is a superb CAS platform.
Yes those Taliban were a terribly efficient Air Superiority force.
Ony the ground forces had real battles there, the RAF were mudmoving, an important job, but no enemy air meant no practice, no AAA meant actually..almost artillery, but with a slower reload time
But at least Typhoon didn’t have to lug a lift engine everywhere in case!
You don’t understand 5th gen capability for you.
Definitely, superjet carrying extra engine equals slightly less load carrying capability than superjet without additional weight, the fact that half the users don’t need Vtol, nor really Svtol for their missions Due to being operated from land masses.
I’m sure the Kippercatchers will adore the 35B… just questioning the fleet size V Carriers and Crabair needs
And, according to a BAES director on the project the carrier originally was specced for cat and trap, then bean counted down, requiring spending more on designing out the kit.
If VTOL us so cheap and light, why do we build long concrete stripes, when we could just bolt in the lift fan, and hang a swivelling pipe on the back. Save millions with no impact on capability…apparently
The lift fan and P&W F135 makes a supersonic capable VSTOL all aspect 5th gen stealth fighter that can operate from carriers, asture airfields and normal runways. It gives you massive amounts of operational flexibility. People would have had a hard on over the thought of a supersonic Harrier, but doubt the F35B. The carrier’s with CATOBAR layout would be massively more expensive. Longer more complex refits . Requires larger deck crews, more training, stricter weather limits. The QE class with F35B is the best bang for our buck. And a true first night of war capability.
That maintenance contract..is that like the one at Shawbury, which has yet to actually deliver a single year without shortfalls due to lack of engineers? Who obviously would rush back to the same RAF that didn’t keep them happy? Or the poorer paying civvy snake oil salesmen who got the contract
Or the Babcockup contract with Army that was two year adrift on spares for Chally and Warrior?
Or maybe the Typhoon maintenance contract at Coningsby (TyTAN) which is delivering outstanding availability and operational flexibility.
And under duress I’m sure it will be the strongest support that money can buy
Trump will make US Putins puppy
Maybe you don’t agree with this? https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/royal-air-force-too-small-warns-report/
All talk of numbers. And none of capability and availability. No talk of NATO capability and any political will or capability of our enemies. The RAF of 2024 would dominate the RAF of 1994, even with far fewer aircraft.
Hold on..Red Flag was a tour USA job in my day..now Giant Voice..that was an exercise
It is an exercise. I spent 4 weeks at Nellis back in 2003.
Yes, but for the little aircraft
There are about 20 Ukrainian Battalions \ Brigades in that Kupiansk area!
Im more concerned about the Pokrovsk sector, which is very fragile