Friday, September 16, 2022

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, September 15 by ISW

 Kateryna Stepanenko, Katherine Lawlor, Grace Mappes, George Barros, and Frederick W. Kagan

September 15, 9:30 pm ET


Click here to see ISW’s interactive map of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This map is updated daily alongside the static maps present in this report.

Ukrainian forces are continuing counteroffensive operations in eastern Ukraine, increasingly pressuring Russian positions and logistics lines in eastern Kharkiv, northern Luhansk, and eastern Donetsk oblasts. Russian sources reported that Ukrainian forces are continuing ground operations southwest of Izyum, near Lyman, and on the east bank of the Oskil River, reportedly compelling Russian forces to withdraw from some areas in eastern Ukraine and reinforce others.[1] Russian forces in eastern Ukraine will likely struggle to hold their defensive lines if Ukrainian forces continue to push farther east.

The Kremlin is responding to the defeat around Kharkiv Oblast by doubling down on crypto-mobilization rather than setting conditions for general mobilization. Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov called on all federal subjects to initiate “self-mobilization” and not wait on the Kremlin to declare martial law.[2] Kadyrov claimed that each federal subject must prove its readiness to help Russia by recruiting at least 1,000 servicemen instead of delivering speeches and conducting fruitless public events. Russian propagandist Margarita Simonyan echoed the need for Russians to volunteer to join the war effort, and several loyalist Russian governors publicly supported Kadyrov’s speech.[3] The Russian-appointed head of occupied Crimea, Sergey Aksyonov, announced the formation of two volunteer battalions on the peninsula in support of Kadyrov’s calls.[4]

The defeat around Kharkiv Oblast prompted the Kremlin to announce a Russia-wide recruitment campaign. Kremlin officials and state media had not previously made country-wide recruitment calls but had instead tasked local officials and outlets to generate forces ostensibly on their own initiative. Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov vaguely welcomed the creation of the battalions on July 12, while 47 loyalist federal subjects advertised and funded the regional volunteer battalion recruitment campaign.[5] A prominent Russian milblogger and a supporter of general mobilization praised officials such as Kadyrov for taking the recruitment campaign from the ineffective Russian Ministry of Defense; this recruitment revamp is likely to secure more support for the Kremlin among nationalist figures who are increasingly critical of the Russian MoD, even if the drive does not generate large numbers of combat-effective troops.[6]

The Kremlin has likely abandoned its efforts to shield select federal subjects from recruitment drives, which may increase social tensions. ISW has previously reported that the Kremlin attempted to shield Moscow City residents from reports of the formation of the Moscow-based “Sobyaninsky Polk” volunteer regiment.[7]  Russian opposition outlet The Insider noted that several groups in the republics of Buryatia, Kalmykia, Tyva, and Yakytia (Republic of Sakha) are publicly opposed to the Kremlin's emphasis on recruitment on an ethnic basis.[8] Simonyan’s statement about “self-mobilization” prompted numerous negative comments among Russians calling on Russian oligarchs to pay for and fight in the war.[9]

The Kremlin has almost certainly drained a large proportion of the forces originally stationed in Russian bases in former Soviet states since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in February, likely weakening Russian influence in those states. A Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) investigation reported on September 14 that the Russian military has already deployed approximately 1500 Russian personnel from Russia’s 201st Military Base in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, to Ukraine since the full-scale invasion began and plans to deploy 600 more personnel from facilities in Dushanbe and Bokhatar, a southern Tajik city, in the future.[10] RFE/RL additionally reported on September 13 that Russia has likely redeployed approximately 300 Tuvan troops from the Russian Kant Air Base in Kyrgyzstan to fight in Ukraine at varying points since late 2021.[11]

The withdrawals from the Central Asian states are noteworthy in the context of border clashes between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Tajik and Kyrgyz border guards exchanged fire in three separate incidents on September 14, killing at least two people.[12] The uptick in violence between Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, both of which are members of the Russian-controlled Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), comes alongside renewed aggression by Azerbaijan against CSTO member state Armenia. Russian forces also withdrew 800 personnel from Armenia early in the war to replenish losses in Ukraine, as ISW has previously reported.[13]

Key Takeaways

  • Ukrainian forces continued counteroffensive operations in eastern Ukraine.
  • The Kremlin is responding to the defeat around Kharkiv Oblast by doubling down on crypto-mobilization, rather than setting conditions for general mobilization.
  • The Kremlin has almost certainly drained a large proportion of the forces originally at Russian bases in former Soviet states since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in February, likely weakening Russian influence in those states.
  • Russian and Ukrainian sources reported Ukrainian ground attacks northwest of Kharkiv City, near the Ukrainian bridgehead over the Inhulets River, and south of the Kherson-Dnipropetrovsk Oblast border.
  • Russian-appointed occupation officials and milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian forces conducted a landing at the Kinsburn Spit (a narrow peninsula of the Crimean Peninsula).
  • Russian forces conducted limited ground assaults and are reinforcing positions on the Eastern Axis.
  • The Russian proxy Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) is likely attempting to stop its administrators from fleeing ahead of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, demonstrating the bureaucratic fragility of the DNR.

We do not report in detail on Russian war crimes because those activities are well-covered in Western media and do not directly affect the military operations we are assessing and forecasting. We will continue to evaluate and report on the effects of these criminal activities on the Ukrainian military and population and specifically on combat in Ukrainian urban areas. We utterly condemn these Russian violations of the laws of armed conflict, Geneva Conventions, and humanity even though we do not describe them in these reports.

  • Ukrainian Counteroffensives—Southern and Eastern Ukraine
  • Russian Main Effort—Eastern Ukraine (comprised of one subordinate and two supporting efforts);
  • Russian Subordinate Main Effort—Capture the entirety of Donetsk Oblast
  • Russian Supporting Effort—Southern Axis
  • Russian Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts
  • Activities in Russian-occupied Areas

Ukrainian Counteroffensives (Ukrainian efforts to liberate Russian-occupied territories)

Eastern Ukraine: (Vovchansk-Kupyansk-Izyum-Lyman Line)

Ukrainian forces continued counteroffensive operations in eastern Ukraine, setting conditions to drive deeper into the Russian rear in eastern Kharkiv and western Luhansk oblasts. A Russian source claimed that Ukrainian forces expelled Russian forces from Sosnove on the north bank of the Siverskyi Donets River and are fortifying positions at the settlement.[14] The source also reported that Russian forces may have pulled out from Studenok immediately west of Sosnove to avoid encirclement.[15] Official Russian and Ukrainian sources reported that Russian forces reinforced Russian positions in Lyman.[16] The Ukrainian General Staff reported that the heavily reduced remnants of the Luhansk People’s Republic (LNR) 2nd Army Corps 202nd and 204th Motorized Rifle Regiments were disbanded into reserves, possibly meaning that the remnants of these reduced elements reinforced the Russian Combat Army Reserve (BARS) elements fighting in Lyman.[17]

Ukrainian forces are reportedly advancing across the Oskil River in northern Kharkiv Oblast. A Russian source claimed that Ukrainian forces are establishing bases and artillery positions throughout Kharkiv Oblast, including emplacing artillery in Hryanykivka on the east bank of the Oskil River near the R79 highway.[18] A confirmed Ukrainian position in Hryanykivka would indicate that the Russian frontline east of the Oskil River is weak and/or that Russian forces’ lines in this area are farther east of the Oskil River than previously assessed.  ISW will continue collecting and reconciling data to refine our control of terrain assessment. A Russian source reported that Ukrainian sabotage and reconnaissance groups occasionally cross the Oskil River in unspecified areas.[19]

Ukrainian forces continued operations to disrupt Russian logistics in eastern Ukraine and pin Russian forces away from the frontlines. Ukrainian forces reportedly struck rear areas in occupied Luhansk Oblast, including Lysychansk, Svitlodarsk, Perevalsk, and Kadiivka, all situated along major Russian GLOCs.[20] Imagery shows the aftermath of a Ukrainian strike on a Russian base in Lysychansk.[21] Russian and Ukrainian sources engaged in artillery duels across the Kharkiv-Belgorod Oblast border.[22]

Southern Ukraine: (Kherson Oblast)

Ukrainian military officials are continuing their operational silence regarding the progress of the southern counteroffensive, noting that Ukrainian forces are continuing to improve their tactical positions and are engaged in positional battles.[23] Ukrainian local sources stated that there is no official confirmation that Ukrainian forces have liberated Kyselivka northwest of Kherson City but noted receiving local reports that Russian forces are mining all of the roads in the settlement.[24] Ukrainian officials did not report changes in Russian troop composition, but social media footage showed a Tuva Oblast flag in Beryslav, which likely indicates that Russian forces are continuing to reinforce northern Kherson Oblast with regionally formed volunteer units.[25] Conventional Russian military units typically do not fly republic or federal subject flags.

Ukrainian military officials stated that Ukrainian forces are continuing their interdiction campaign, targeting Russian ground lines of communication (GLOCs) across the Inhulets and Dnipro Rivers.[26] Ukrainian military officials noted that Russian forces are continuing to transfer equipment across the Dnipro River, however.[27] Ukrainian forces reportedly struck areas of Russian manpower and equipment concentrations in the Kherson City suburbs and in Krynychanka (about 21km southeast of the Ukrainian bridgehead over the Inhulets River).[28] The Ukrainian Southern Operational Command noted that Ukrainian forces damaged Russian ammunition depots in Sadove (about 15km southwest of Snihurivka) and Mykolaiv and Kherson raions, and struck the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) control center in Komyshany, northwest of Kherson City.[29] Ukraine’s Department of Strategic Communications (StratCom) reported that Ukrainian forces destroyed a Russian military base in Nova Kakhovka, and local footage and reports corroborated StratCom’s information.[30] Other social media reports noted Ukrainian strikes on Russian positions in Oleshky, on the left bank of the Dnipro River.[31]

Ukrainian and Russian sources indicated three areas of kinetic activity on September 15: northwest of Kherson City, near the Ukrainian bridgehead over the Inhulets River, and south of the Kherson-Dnipropetrovsk Oblast border west of Vysokopillya. A Russian milblogger claimed that one Ukrainian reconnaissance and sabotage group drove down 25km southeast of the bridgehead to Charivne in a car without encountering any obstacles.[32] The milblogger added that Russian shelling decreased in Sukhyi Stavok (about 12km southeast of the bridgehead) and that Ukrainians are operating helicopters in the area, which may indicate that Russian forces have pulled back further from the bridgehead area. The milblogger noted that Russian forces continue to repel Ukrainian counterattacks on Davydiv Brid on the T2207 highway. The Ukrainian Southern Operational Command reported that Ukrainian forces repelled Russian assaults from Arhanhelske on Ivanivka (west of Vysokopillya), while Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian airborne troops repelled Ukrainian counterattacks on Kostyrka and Novopetrivka.[33] Kherson Oblast Head Yaroslav Yanushevych stated that Ukrainian forces conducted evacuations from Myrolyubivka (southeast of Vysokopillya), which could indicate that Ukrainian forces have advanced to the settlement.[34] Both the Russian Defense Ministry and the Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces launched missile strikes at Ukrainian positions on the Kherson Oblast border.[35]

Russian-appointed occupation officials and milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian forces conducted a landing at the Kinsburn Spit (a narrow peninsula of the Crimean Peninsula southwest of Kherson City) on September 14, but offered differing accounts. Several milbloggers amplified the claims of a single source that suggested Ukrainian forces conducted an unsuccessful amphibious landing at the Kinsburn Spit with five boats. The source also claimed that there was an unconfirmed report of a heliborne landing at the Iron Port in Lazurne, about 60km southwest of Kherson City.[36] Deputy Head of the Russian occupation administration in Kherson Oblast Kirill Stremousov claimed that Russian forces repelled the attempted landing and killed over 120 Ukrainian airborne troops at the Kinsburn Spit.[37] Another milblogger criticized Stremousov and pointed out that his sources within Russian units in the area did not witness or repel any Ukrainian landing attempts and that Stremousov did not present any visual evidence supporting his claim.[38]


Russian Main Effort—Eastern Ukraine

Russian Subordinate Main Effort—Donetsk Oblast (Russian objective: Capture the entirety of Donetsk Oblast, the claimed territory of Russia’s proxies in Donbas)

Russian forces conducted limited ground assaults across the Eastern Axis and continued routine fire along the line of contact on September 15.[39] Both Ukrainian and Russian official sources confirmed fighting in Spirne (east of Siversk) and Mayorsk (south of Bakhmut).[40] Russian sources claimed that Russian forces captured Mayorsk, though ISW cannot verify this claim.[41] The Ukrainian General Staff also reported that Ukrainian forces repelled Russian ground assaults against Mayorsk, southeast of Bakhmut, and southwest of Donetsk City.[42]

Russian forces are reinforcing positions along the Eastern Axis, likely due to extensive combat losses. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces are moving reserves from 3rd Army Corps volunteer battalions and remnants of units previously operating in Kharkiv Oblast to reinforce the Donetsk and Zaporizhia Oblast frontlines.[43] The Ukrainian General Staff also reported that the Russian 137th Airborne Regiment (subordinate to the 106th Airborne Division) sustained significant combat losses in the Bakhmut area and cannot continue combat operations without additional unspecified measures (likely meaning reconstitution).[44]

Supporting EffortSouthern Axis (Russian objective: Maintain frontline positions and secure rear areas against Ukrainian strikes)

Russian forces continued to strike Ukrainian hydraulic structures in Kryvyi Rih and other infrastructure in Ukraine on September 15. Dnipropetrovsk Oblast officials reported that Russian forces again targeted unspecified hydraulic structures in Kryvyi Rih, and Russian sources published footage of smoke claiming that Russian strikes damaged an unspecified dam on the Inhulets River on September 15.[45] Russian forces are likely continuing to strike Ukrainian dams on the Inhulets River to raise flood levels in an effort to disrupt the Ukrainian bridgehead over the river in northern Kherson Oblast and threaten Ukrainian logistics lines in the same way that Ukrainian forces are targeting Russian crossings of the Dnipro River.[46] Russian milbloggers amplified footage of large-scale explosions in the cities of Uman, Zaporizhia, and Vinnytsia, as well as in Odesa Oblast.[47] Russian forces also launched an Onyx cruise missile from a Bastion coastal missile complex and a Kh-59 missile fired from an Su-35 aircraft at an open area in Mykolaiv Oblast.[48] Social media users reported witnessing the activation of Russian air defense systems in Yevpatoria, Crimea.[49]

Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts (Russian objective: Expand combat power without conducting general mobilization)

Russian military leadership continues to pull newly-mobilized forces from every possible source but is unlikely to be able to meaningfully increase Russian combat power with those forces. The Ukrainian General Staff reported on September 15 that the Russian government lifted restrictions on conscription for large families, suggesting that multiple sons from the same family could be forced to fight in Ukraine.[50] The Ukrainian mayor of Melitopol, Ivan Fedorov, reported on September 14 that Russian forces are promoting Russian military service in occupied territories such as Melitopol.[51] Forcibly or even willingly-mobilized Ukrainian civilians without military experience who are ordered to fight their better-trained countrymen are unlikely to significantly enhance Russian combat power in Ukraine.

The Russian Ministry of Defense announced on September 15 that the Russian Military Construction Complex is building a new, modern “military town” in Sernovodskoye in the Chechen Republic.[52] The town will reportedly contain over 50 facilities to accommodate Chechnya-based units.

Activity in Russian-occupied Areas (Russian objective: consolidate administrative control of occupied areas; set conditions for potential annexation into the Russian Federation or some other future political arrangement of Moscow’s choosing)

The Russian proxy Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) is likely attempting to stop its administrators from fleeing ahead of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, demonstrating the bureaucratic fragility of the DNR. The DNR’s State Defense Committee extended one-time injury payments of 3 million rubles and one-time death payments of 5 million rubles to the families of officers, civil servants, and employees of the DNR’s Ministry of Emergency Situations killed in the line of work, the first time ISW has observed DNR civil servants being promised payment in the event of their injury or death in the war.[53] The DNR is likely attempting to incentivize its employees to remain in place to prevent a collapse in local governance as Ukrainian forces advance. Russian occupation forces have struggled to staff local administrations in occupied Ukrainian territory since the invasion began due to a lack of willing Ukrainian collaborators and competent bureaucrats.

Note: ISW does not receive any classified material from any source, uses only publicly available information, and draws extensively on Russian, Ukrainian, and Western reporting and social media as well as commercially available satellite imagery and other geospatial data as the basis for these reports. References to all sources used are provided in the endnotes of each update. 


[1] https://t.me/rybar/38811; https://t.me/rybar/38790; https://t.me/rybar/38840; https://t.me/nm_dnr/9013; https://t.me/NeoficialniyBeZsonoV/17672; https://t.me/epoddubny/12301; https://t.me/sashakots/35673; https://t.me/sashakots/35659; https://t.me/sashakots/35666

[2] https://t.me/kommunist/9450; https://t.me/RKadyrov_95/2822

[3] https://t.me/margaritasimonyan/12050; https://ura dot news/news/1052587297

[4] https://t.me/Aksenov82/1469; https://t.me/kommunist/9459; https://t.me/NeoficialniyBeZsonoV/17678; https://eadaily dot com/ru/news/2022/09/15/v-krymu-tozhe-nachali-formirovat-dobrovolcheskie-batalony

[5] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-28; https://tass dot com/politics/1478839

[6] https://t.me/strelkovii/3249

[7] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-24

[8] https://theins dot ru/politika/254329

[9] https://24tv dot ua/ru/simonjan-sdelala-novoe-zajavlenie-zovet-rossijan-sobirat-dengi_n2157987

[10] https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-troops-tajik-base-redeployed-ukraine/32033791.html

[11] https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-kyrgyzstan-base-troops-redeployed/32031647.html

[12] https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/world/fresh-clash-erupts-between-kyrgyz-tajik-border-guards-2022-09-14/

[13] https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-september-13; https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-13

[14] https://t.me/rybar/38811

[15] https://t.me/rybar/38811

[16] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HbJHe0hDck; https://t.me/pavlokyrylenko_donoda/4882; https://t.me/nm_dnr/9013; https://t.me/NeoficialniyBeZsonoV/17672; https://t.me/epoddubny/12301; https://t.me/sashakots/35673

[17] https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hCejE9MTF5ywGLZs3SfD2y2aWbL4sZqWvnYgopdJWfk8nh3tGVyXRMrjkixw7WNol; https://lenta dot ru/news/2022/09/12/krasnyy_liman/

[18] https://t.me/rybar/38840

[19] https://t.me/rybar/38790

[20] https://t.me/luhanskaVTSA/5759; https://t.me/millnr/9441; https://t.me/kommunist/9443; https://t.me/kommunist/9440; https://t.me/miroshnik_r/8708; https://t.me/kommunist/9438; https://t.me/mod_russia/19863; https://t.me/millnr/9443; https://t.me/millnr/9441

[21] https://twitter.com/typicaldonetsk/status/1570345103025405952; https://twitter.com/Cosmonaut19/status/1570371173313310720

[22] https://t.me/kommunist/9458; https://t.me/boris_rozhin/64024; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/40407; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/40404; https://t.me/kommunist/9456;  https://t.me/rusich_army/5169; https://t.me/NeoficialniyBeZsonoV/17693; https://t.me/rusich_army/5172; https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1570444332947341313; https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1570342821634387968/photo/1; https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1570262736311046145; https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1570442667095375872; https://twitter.com/Minodoro/status/1570443494350622721; https://t.me/rybar/38835; https://twitter.com/Blue_Sauron/status/1570465387677884420?s=20&t=agnWKMZ7gbuTZTEv0vHUoA; https://twitter.com/TexAgg04/status/1570454700516061185?s=20&t=agnWKMZ7gbuTZTEv0vHUoA;

[23] https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hCejE9MTF5ywGLZs3SfD2y2aWbL4sZqWvnYgopdJWfk8nh3tGVyXRMrjkixw7WNol; https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=380532447618182; attacks. RUAF attacked the front and rear areas with aviation. https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=582024966937795

[24] https://www.facebook.com/sergey.khlan/posts/pfbid02VNV12o6Qi1m64GzXRm3GJ4f1Anhm8UBisfpLf3QXoHzJhT164Q44j5SPnVEMBhFPl\; https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1570397840551350275; https://t.me/hueviyherson/25949

[25] https://twitter.com/666_mancer/status/1570306379335827457

[26] https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=380532447618182; https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=582024966937795

[27] https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=380532447618182

[28] https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=582024966937795; https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=380532447618182

[29] https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=582024966937795

[30] https://t.me/hueviyherson/25953; https://t.me/hueviyherson/25945; https://t.me/AFUStratCom/6636

[31] https://t.me/hueviyherson/25912

[32] https://t.me/rybar/38817

[33] https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=582024966937795; https://t.me/rybar/38827

[34] https://t.me/khersonskaODA/991

[35] https://t.me/mod_russia/19863; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hCejE9MTF5ywGLZs3SfD2y2aWbL4sZqWvnYgopdJWfk8nh3tGVyXRMrjkixw7WNol; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hvNPTZfMszbNwzXyddGeMQZXZ8akAVKzgMUjewVmQ1EaWNZYeZs6oB5WVs3jzBNtl

[36] https://t.me/rsotmdivision/992; https://t.me/vysokygovorit/9411; https://t.me/vysokygovorit/9410; https://t.me/rsotmdivision/993 ; https://t.me/rsotmdivision/997; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/40379  

[37] https://t.me/rian_ru/177844; https://t.me/miroshnik_r/8710; https://tass dot ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/15755683; https://t.me/Stremousov_Kirill/320

[38] https://t.me/grey_zone/15032

[39] https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hCejE9MTF5ywGLZs3SfD2y2aWbL4sZqWvnYgopdJWfk8nh3tGVyXRMrjkixw7WNol; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hvNPTZfMszbNwzXyddGeMQZXZ8akAVKzgMUjewVmQ1EaWNZYeZs6oB5WVs3jzBNtl; https://t.me/luhanskaVTSA/5758; https://t.me/luhanskaVTSA/5758

[40] https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hCejE9MTF5ywGLZs3SfD2y2aWbL4sZqWvnYgopdJWfk8nh3tGVyXRMrjkixw7WNol; https://t.me/mod_russia/19863; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hvNPTZfMszbNwzXyddGeMQZXZ8akAVKzgMUjewVmQ1EaWNZYeZs6oB5WVs3jzBNtl; https://t.me/TRO_DPR/7549; https://t.me/TRO_DPR/7548; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/40384

[41] https://t.me/TRO_DPR/7549; https://t.me/TRO_DPR/7548; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/40384

[42] https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hvNPTZfMszbNwzXyddGeMQZXZ8akAVKzgMUjewVmQ1EaWNZYeZs6oB5WVs3jzBNtl; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hCejE9MTF5ywGLZs3SfD2y2aWbL4sZqWvnYgopdJWfk8nh3tGVyXRMrjkixw7WNol

[43] https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hvNPTZfMszbNwzXyddGeMQZXZ8akAVKzgMUjewVmQ1EaWNZYeZs6oB5WVs3jzBNtl

[44] https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hvNPTZfMszbNwzXyddGeMQZXZ8akAVKzgMUjewVmQ1EaWNZYeZs6oB5WVs3jzBNtl; https://t.me/luhanskaVTSA/5758

[45] https://t.me/rybar/38823; https://t.me/rybar/38832; https://t.me/rybar/38825; https://t.me/dnipropetrovskaODA/1854; https://t.me/dnipropetrovskaODA/1853; https://t.me/dnipropetrovskaODA/1848; https://t.me/mykola_lukashuk/1500 ; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hCejE9MTF5ywGLZs3SfD2y2aWbL4sZqWvnYgopdJWfk8nh3tGVyXRMrjkixw7WNol

[46] https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-september-14

[47] https://t.me/rybar/38803; https://t.me/rybar/38791; https://t.me/rybar/38792

[48] https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=380532447618182; https://t.me/senkevichonline/2498

[49] https://t.me/hueviyherson/25953; https://t.me/milinfolive/90549; https://t.me/rybar/38828

[50]https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0hCejE9MTF5ywGLZs3SfD2y2aWbL4sZqWvnYgopdJWfk8nh3tGVyXRMrjkixw7WNol

[51] https://t.me/ivan_fedorov_melitopol/562

[52] https://t.me/mod_russia/19867

[53] https://t.me/TRO_DPR/7553; https://t.me/dnronline/78609

You can read more here

 





Tuesday, November 12, 2019

First F-35 Sale To UAE Could Still Be Years Away

 Aviation Week & Space Technology

During the same week as the Dubai Airshow in November 2009, Lockheed Martin celebrated the first flight of the AF-1 test aircraft for the F-35 development program, and a top air force official in the United Arab Emirates (UAE)—Brig. Gen. Ibrahim Naser Alalawi—publicly declared his “hope” that his country would procure a fifth-generation fighter “within a couple years.” A decade later, Lockheed has delivered more than 435 F-35s to eight countries, but none so far to the UAE. 

With the 2019 edition of the biannual air show ready to run from Nov. 17-21, the UAE’s search for a new stealth fighter may be set to take nearly another decade. In the last two years, the UAE has commissioned a billion-dollar upgrade program for the air force’s F-16 Block 60s and launched a service-life extension program for its Mirage 2000s. The combination gives the UAE the flexibility to defer one of the world’s largest fleet replacement programs for fighters by several years. 
“It certainly looks like the UAE is trying to skip a generation and coast on their F-16 Block 60 and Mirage 2000 force until they can get F-35s, which will likely be around 2026 or 2027,” says Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis for the Teal Group consultancy. That timeline assumes orders by the UAE around 2024, followed by deliveries to a U.S. training base in 2026 and transfer to the UAE around a year later, Aboulafia says. 

It was only two years ago that the UAE’s potential F-35 order appeared more imminent. During the first year of U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration, officials succeeded in reopening stalled negotiations with the Gulf Cooperation Council on several arms sales. “The Obama administration would not talk about the F-35” to countries in the Middle East, says Derek Bisaccio, a regional market analyst for Forecast International. “That seemed to change when Trump took office.” U.S. defense officials openly discussed the “ongoing,” early talks with the UAE about a potential F-35 deal during the last Dubai Airshow in 2017. 
The timing of the new sales discussions also followed a pattern of U.S. policy. The first F-35I ordered by Israel arrived at Nevatim AB in December 2016. The U.S. government generally offers Israel at least a five-year head start on new fighter technology, then allows other governments in the regions to import the aircraft, Aboulafia says. 
The F-35 may not be the only fighter on the UAE’s long-term shopping list. Alalawi displayed a picture of the F-35 as he expressed hope in a fifth-generation fighter acquisition in 2009, but the UAE is not exclusively tied to the American fighter. In 2017, the UAE government signed a memorandum of understanding with the Russian Aircraft Corp. to collaborate on the design of a lightweight, next-generation fighter. Neither side has publicly moved the relationship forward over the last two years.
“There’s been precious few details on what the concept of the aircraft would be,” Bisaccio says. “This could well prove in time for the UAE a bargaining chip in negotiations with the United States.”
The UAE has been careful to avoid reliance on a single government for weapons. The current fighter fleet is split between the U.S.-made F-16s and French-built Mirage 2000s. That policy could continue even if the UAE signs a deal in the long term for F-35s.

“There’s still a chance the UAE Air Force is going to give a little bit to everybody,” says Michel Merluzeau, director of Aerospace Market Analysis for AirInsight. “If they acquire an F-35, I think they’d go with a micro-fleet. Maybe a wing: 30-40 aircraft. It would be a mistake to think they’d buy an equivalent number of fighters as they did with the F-16.”
The most logical alternative to the F-35 for the UAE could be the RafaleDassault’s successor to the UAE Mirage 2000 fleet. Block upgrades, such as the F4 and F5, will introduce teaming capabilities with unmanned combat air vehicles, along with new weapons and sensors. 
For the moment, the UAE has time to wait and consider its options. The service-life extension for the Mirage 2000 fleet provides the UAE with at least a decade to deliver a replacement. 
“When you look at the [Mirage 2000s], these are near [the] Rafale in terms of avionics and weapon systems,” Merluzeau says. “They have a good 10 years left.”

KAI Begins Building KF-X Prototype For 2022 Flight

 and  Aviation Week & Space Technology

Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) has begun building the first prototype for the KF-X fighter program, following completion of the critical design review in September. Development is running on schedule, a source close to the program says.

Meanwhile, South Korea’s defense technology organization and Hanwha have flight-tested a technology-demonstration fighter radar in cooperation with Elta Systems, while proceeding in parallel with full-scale development of the sensor for the KF-X.
Rollout of the first KF-X prototype is due in June 2021 and its first flight in May 2022, the source says, giving more precise timings than those that have been published. 
Production of the first aircraft, a single-seater, is beginning with the forward fuselage. There will be four single-seat and two twin-seat prototypes. These aircraft will be built to the Block 1 standard, cleared for air-to-air missions only. The Block 2 will introduce air-to-surface capability. Although the KF-X is designed for eventual development of a stealthy version, the government has given no indication of when that may happen.
The first flight-test aircraft is following the strength-test airframe into manufacturing. KAI began building that static test structure in March.
South Korea requires 120 KF-Xs to replace Lockheed Martin F-16s. Indonesia is a junior partner in the program, with a reported requirement for 50 aircraft. 

The twin-engine fighter is powered by the General Electric F414-GE-400K turbofan generating 22,000 lb. thrust. Maximum speed will be 2,200 kph (1,370 mph), according to KAI, revealing the figure for the first time since exploratory development. Payload will be 7.7 metric tons (17,000 lb.) and ferry range 2,900 km (1,800 mi.), it says.
The air force is due in 2024 to review test results and, if satisfied, advise the defense ministry to issue a production contract, says the source. Manufacturing of delivery aircraft will then go ahead while flight testing proceeds to a targeted completion in June 2026, winding up Block 1 development about 10.5 years after program launch. Then deliveries are supposed to begin in late 2026.
KAI displayed a full-scale mockup at the Seoul Aerospace and Defense Exhibition, held on Oct. 15-19. The mockup shows no changes from the preliminary design that the air force approved in July 2018.
The KF-X is initially being designed to use the MBDA Meteor long-range and Diehl IRIS-T short-range air-to-air missiles. Washington routinely withholds permission for integration of U.S. air-to-air missiles in the first few years of a foreign fighter program, so Seoul will seek approval for the work after the first flight, says a South Korean government source who is close to the program. The Raytheon AIM-120 medium-range and AIM-9 short-range weapons are presumably the desired weapons.
More than 1,000 engineers are working at KAI on the KF-X. One issue debated before program launch in late 2015 was whether KAI could find it had insufficient engineering resources to develop the aircraft, which has an empty weight of 12 metric tons. The first source says the problem has not arisen.
The radar demonstrator, mounted in Elta’s Boeing 737 testbed, was flown 10 times in Israel and six times in South Korea, says a researcher from the technology organization, the Agency for Defense Development (ADD).
The ADD is leading development of the radar. Officially, Hanwha is contracted for manufacturing, but officials close to this work say the company is also helping in development.
The radar program was committed to full-scale development before technology demonstration. The intended production radar passed its critical design review in May 2019. Development is due for completion in 2026, so it will be ready just as KF-X deliveries are due to begin.
The radar has an active, electronically scanned array (AESA). In 2014, before KF-X full-scale development began, the government’s Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute said it would use gallium-nitride semiconductors. It will have about 1,000 transmitter-receiver modules, local media say.
Building and testing the technology demonstrator is the first phase, which includes software for air targets. The second phase will produce software for ground and sea targets, Lee Bumseok, the head of the ADD division handling the project, said at a seminar ahead of the exhibition. This phase is due to be completed in October 2021. A prototype radar is due to be fitted in a KF-X prototype in 2023. 
South Korea has not previously developed a fighter radar. It has built indigenous naval and ground radars, including some with AESAs, but its experience looked so limited that foreign companies expected one of them would provide the technological foundation for the program.
Instead, the ADD was authorized to create a fully South Korean radar. Elta is supposed to play a relatively minor supporting role, but it is clearly positioned to step up its involvement should the program run into trouble.