Sponsored by Private Internet Access, Use the following link to access their promotional offer: www.piavpn.com/Perun As noted in the description, this video is intended as the companion piece to the video on Russian equipment losses and reserves released two weeks ago and they should probably be considered together. I think the broad observation here is that the Ukrainian military has been sustained and is being steadily transitioned to NATO equipment by foreign assistance over time, but still finds itself facing shortages, uncertainty over its pipeline and various other challenges that mean it still remains in a period of relative vulnerability even if it's proven capable of maintaining a pattern of hard defensive fighting through much of this year. How the pipeline develops may help determine the trajectory of Ukrainian combat power over time. I'll also note that certain system categories (including artillery and air defences) really do merit their own detailed look as part of a more focused study, so you may see a closer look at them in the coming weeks and months.
Dang it Perun. You made me have to spell check 'Materiel'. I even had to fight Auto-correct who wanted to change it to 'Material'. I'll let people figure out why on their own. Well played Sir.
44:40 - When you look at the normal Costs of having a vehicle like the M113 “decommissioned”(scrapped), donation to Ukraine makes OH-so-much-sense. Just a quick servicing, ensure it’s functional, and load it onto a transport to Europe. After learning about the situation for regular transport vehicles in Ukraine, those medical version 113s are especially valuable to the Ukrainians. I’ve worked for a contractor to the US Government that worked on decommissioning projects. There’s a SUBSTANTIAL cost to it on the part of the government, due to things like environment regs, customs/export rules, etc., donation as an alternative might even be saving us money, on balance.
if any of that was true you'd not decommission anything ever..you'd just give it all away to some friendly state looking for a second hand system it couldn't ordinarily afford.. and yet they don't...weird right?
TL;DR: Ukraine is different because of what they would do with the equipment. Getting it destroyed fighting Russia has none of the downsides that normally prevent export as a method of decommissioning. Two reasons it didn't always happen: Your allies don't usually want your leftovers. They'd like decent newer equipment, thanks. And your lesser 'allies' who are less secure, less of allies, you don't necessarily want to send them a bunch of equipment that might find its way to fight your other allies. Third reason: This could mean undermining your weapons export industry. Fourth: Unless you're the original manufacturing nation you often lack permission to send the tech to anyone else.
@@johntowers1213except for the warehousing costs, maintenance costs, and costs of protecting said equipment. While waiting to find someone to give the equipment to. You either find someone to give the equipment to immediately or you decommission it immediately. Unless you want to build an equipment reserve with all the associated costs, what you are suggesting is simply not economical.
It only doesn’t make sense if you assume that the process is fully intelligent & well managed. We are talking about an Administration that left billions of dollars worth of military equipment to the Taliban that Ukraine could have used. 😵💫
As a German Ex M113 Driver: We used them for everything which needed to be transported or to be hidden but not fast. It was darn cheap, around 25.000 USD in the 80's or about two midsized Cars. It's literally an Aluminium Box, a truck Diesel Engine, some Steelbars which are the Springs and a Ramp, together with an okeish differential and steering is in the simple Version with simple Breaks. Later variants got a Wheel instead of the tillers for the breaks, i am allowed to drive both types, as they didn't upgraded the ones in the unit but in driving school those had been upgraded... and then replaced with some without as the hydraulic system had problems. But extremely simple and Cheap. And according to our Feldwebel the best Shopping Vehicle in the World, you can pull up at the market, drive in 4 Shopping card, thanks to the Ramp, with 4 Soldiers (Driver, commander, 2 grunts)
There do so many talking heads on this subject that I have grown to loathe. Perun is one of the few I can watch with his data driven analysis that is actually sourced. Keep going man.
@@mitchyoung93Exactly he obviously has a Ukrainian bias, which isn't inherently bad, all sources have biases, you just need to compare sources. I personally look at both sides to get a better picture
"Without sufficient mine clearing equipment or ATACMS to suppress enemy attack helicopters" was said so matter of factly that I had to back up and make sure I'd heard that right. God dammit Perun, I love your humour!
Some surplus 1980s-90s Israeli Border Guards patrol armor might still be welcome, most of the year. Head-to-toe Threat Level 3+ protection, with Threat Level 4 trauma plates over the torso, groin, and throat. Think, that fellow's wolverine, in full plate mail rated for rifle rounds!
While PTSD is a issue for any military in a war, Ukrainian mechanics and the logistics departments (having to maintain all the various nations' _"donations")_ might be more stressed than some combat troops.....
It's worse, after talking to people on the ground and watching some of the content by them I came to a realisation that a lot of the frontline ground pounders also double as maintenance crews when rotated out or during more peaceful moments. Especially the second line troops claim to be constantly working on something or trying to source parts from private donors and the market.
@@jeffparry2754 Have you ever thought you just deleted an entire production database? Yeah, fighting and dying in a trench seems less stressful, at least you'll hear the end of it.
This really makes me appreciate OSINT. We as the public would know almost nothing about the details of this conflict if it weren’t for the hard work of people on Oryx, people who buy satellite images, and communicators like Perun. It’s amazing that we can cut through the fog of war as well as we do.
He is a spin doctor. Ukraine could never have won this conflict, and now its army is degraded and collapsing. There was never any doubt this would be the case. Yet he tows the party line.
@@raz_hz Multiple double and triple entries for the same object (one 'famous' t-64 from Mariupol comes to mind, it had 3 entries as a Russian tank and actually was Ukrainian). Many completely unrecognizable piles, etc...
I hope you know Perun, and never doubt, just how awesome your work here is. Just excellent reporting and analysis. Deeply valueable information and generalizable analysis techniques. You make your audience smarter and better equipped to be media literate. Thanks to you, your patrons, and your sponsors for keeping this free for the masses!
Complaining about lack of logistics support for military defense economics made me chuckle..that was a geeky joke but hey we all are watching a powerpoint on Sunday dudes and dudettes
We cannot support him YET. ^^ 🏆❤️ If anyone can appreciate the importance of long-term planning for the funding of "military defence economics analysists"; it's likely Perun. ❤️
The Swedish Gripen's were put on hold when the western allies asked Sweden to wait until Ukraine had implemented the F16's. This to simplify implementation and logistics. Kind of a shame imo but there is logic there.
It's all about money grabbing. Those NATO countries who are buying F-35s are dumping their 40 years old F-16s. Sweden will not buy F-35 because of domestic money interests, so they keep their Saab-39 Griffin. The corrupt globalists are incapable of managing a concept such as actually winning a war. None of them think that way.
@@Damien_N it probably wouldnt lead to a faster implimentation, same ammount of resources now spread across more jets, and more types of jets. adds unneeded stress to the logisitcal system. theres not enough spare gripens in existence to have the impact that 70-100 f-16s could, though gripen are theoretically a better fit for ukraines needs.
The M113 is a terrible front line armored vehicle. However, it is perfectly capable as a armored supply vehicle, ammo carrier, ambulance, command vehicle (if outfitted with commo gear), armored personnel carrier to staging areas (not into combat), recovery vehicle of light armored vehicles, towing artillery, etc.
It's especially good for Ukraine considering the higher-than-average need for tracked platforms over wheeled ones. This is likely also why the wheeled Polish Wolverines haven't been showing up much in the loss sheets, being relegated to areas/tasks that involve less risk.
@@B.D.E. - Nah. I think I'd take an MRAP over an M113 if terrain allows. A bit more armor against small arms/shrapnel and better lower hull against mines. Probably won't help you against a triple stack monstrosity, but it'll likely save you from a stray. M113s just aren't that thicc.
There's one more category of countries that offered aid - those that sent agricultural vehicles of a highly unusual configuration and uncertain use, except perhaps for VERY long range plowing of fields. Romania and Bulgaria are in this category, I believe.
I've been hearing "Ukraine is going to be getting F16s as soon as the end of the month" for more than a year. It's starting to sound like "everything in the store is up to 90 percent off."
@@carlosandleon yeah, but in the end of the day a new units is infantry one, not mechanized. If Ukraine army can't reliably get their hands on some old and numerous staff like Bradley Fighting Vehicle, F16 delivery is completely unbelievable
Is it just me or do anyone else think that F16s won't really change much? They'd be difficult to really make good use of without air superiority and Russian AA being severely depleted, which i know Ukraine has recently been trying to do, but will it be enough?
Quick Addition: Ukraine is finally flying F-16s, defending their sovereign airspace. Videos were posted just a few hours ago. Combat operations will probably begin in a few weeks, if not sooner. Make sure you take your pictures of Putin's "Friendship Bridge" while you can.
Beyond the Poland brigade training, there was an idea I saw floated a while back but haven't seen anything done with it since: let people considering signing up choose their MOS. Guarantee them: 1) If you qualify for your MOS, you serve in your MOS for your entire service period. 2) You cannot be transferred to any other MOS. 3) Serving in your MOS makes you immune from conscription. 4) If you do not qualify for your MOS, you're free to leave at any time (potentially even letting overseas Ukrainians of draft age return overseas if they fail to qualify). I'd think that'd lead to a *huge* surge in recruitment. Tons of people want to help but don't want to serve in trenches. Many have specific skillsets but think those skills would be wasted as a general grunt in a trench. Pilots, drone hobbyists, programmers, engineers, truck drivers, your name it. One example that really drives this home for me was watching Denys Davydov - commercial pilot and self professed coward who would never serve in the Ukrainian military, as much as he wants to see Ukraine win, out fear of just being sent to a trench and getting killed - in a video where he was covering how Ukrainian pilots in WWII-era planes were shooting down drones with shotguns. He was practically giddy describing it and sounded like he wished so much that he could be doing that. So you know... why *not* create an environment where people with varying skillsets can offer to serve *in just that skillset* ? It should be a *massive* boost in service rates.
Unfortunately this highlights an issue with militaries the world over: they regard the individual as utterly untrustworthy in all metrics, even in assessing their own talent. This culture is derived from the Napoleonic era when nations moved away from employing mercenary companies and into national militaries. The national militaries could do something the mercenaries couldn't: They could conscript. Doing so would trigger political backlash if the conscripts were people who society valued, so they conscripted people who society didn't value, lower classes and convicts. These would be people who society didn't work well for, and in the convicts' cases people who actively disobeyed society's rules. This meant that they had to be closely monitored, regarded with suspicion, and assumed to be somehow up to no good at all times. This culture has unfortunately persisted into the 21st century. Recruiters will put people into whatever they're under pressure to recruit today regardless of the aptitude of the applicant, and will even go so far as to lie to applicants saying that the profession they want is full, and only the professions they are under pressure to recruit today have openings.
There are those here in Ukraine that are good soldiers, those who can be good soldiers and the rest are chaff before the wind that is created by their ego's......
@@Markfr0mCanada Conscription was always a thing. Move to national armies was due to far greater reliability. Mercenaries are inherently untrustworthy and Russia learn that hard way. You clearly repeat Russian delusional interpretation of the military as bunch of slave trash. What in fact was not a thing during Napoleonic Era or in any successful military ever, which Russia is not (they fight mostly inferior enemies). The problem with Ukraine is specifically that some generals there still think in Soviet categories (look Krynki) and I hardly can blame people who don't want be send to pointless death.
He is good on Terra Invicta, but terrible on geopolitics because he believes Western state media, which mostly repeats what the Ukrainians say, and totally disregards the other side. To have an accurate picture, you need to watch what both sides say.
@@ctrlaltdebug But he does account for Russian claim too - exposing that Russians lie about destroyed Ukrainian equipment by up to 17:1 while Ukrainians lie about destroyed Russian equipment by approximately 3:1.
@@Raivo_K I don't believe that 17:1 over count for a minute. On the balance it seems that the Ukrainians lie more. Take the new Kursk offensive for example. Ukraine is making it out to be a huge thing, but what will it accomplish realistically? It's just a waste of their best well-equipped brigades at this point.
@@ctrlaltdebug Ukrainians have barely said a word about Kursk. You cant lie if you dont say anything. As for Russians - i dont believe half of what they're saying. They've lied and been caught lying so many times that i have zero trust in their claims. I have at least some trust in Ukrainian claims. Especially if accompanied by photo or video evidence.
These reports are without a doubt the best out there. Very well researched and the data is easily absorbed and understood. And wondrous sprinkle of the pointed sense of humour makes me smile every time!
I found your channel less than 2 weeks ago, and have probably listened to 20 hours. I love the content. It's informative, thorough, and the pacing is excellent. I don't know what videos you're planning, but I think a video breaks down The United States strategy in the Asian Pacific, and possible escalation scenarios with Taiwan. Keep it up, cheers!
Small correction: at 44:22 you have a graph with both "Benelux" and "Netherlands". "Benelux" however stands for "Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg", so you're including the Netherlands twice. Greetings, a concerned Belgian who thinks one Netherlands is already plenty.
Yet another fine PowerPoint presentation with lots of information to digest. Big shout out to Perun for his dedication to the task at hand. Also, the X4 content was boss mate 👍
The most frustrating part of this is that the USA would save themselves billions of dollars by shipping out equipment and armaments to Ukraine as it approaches end-of-life. That stuff costs lots of dollars to store so sending it to Ukraine is the best choice.
What are you complaining about? Practically everything is exactly as you describe, ammunition at end of shelf life and equipment either already EIL or to be replaced within a couple years. The weapons given Ukraine that aren't surplus and soon to be destroyed or given away to somebody anyway is a very short list . HIMARS and something else I can't remember at the moment. But absolutely everything you hear sent to Ukraine is 99% not costing US taxpayers anything new in the budget and in some cases cheap disposal.
@@stephaniewilson3955 a great example is the Brad. We're already testing its replacement and thousands are in storage. Same thing with MRAPs. Both have proven useful and survivable in Ukraine & probably a better choice than the Abrams (although we have plenty of those sitting around too). A concerted, coordinated effort amongst the Allies to get the Ukrainians as close to EVERYTHING needed hasn't been done. It's been dribs and dregs. Yet how much did we spend arming Iraqis and Afghans who don't even want to fight? Much more could be done-- Ukrainians have lost their lives in our failure to stand behind them fully. Even the Germans are onboard and those guys are run by a coalition that includes the GREENs.
The goal is never to cut spending or save taxpayer money. The billions of dollars for scrapping equipment in the US create a domestic market itself. It creates jobs and wealth for americans
DAMN! I’ve been waiting for this content for a while. A real barnstormer of a production that puts all these articles I read in perspective. Thank you so very much.
treading water in a war of attrition isn't a terrible position, but i'd really wish we'd just sent enough *stuff* that the balance finally tilts somewhere favorable :c
Totally agree. One silver lining to all of this is if you look at the number of Command and Control centers that Ukraine has lost, it's the lowest number in the data, compared to Russia who has lost hundreds.
@@williamyoung9401 Any sites or videos that you know of with that data, or even just a search term, I've never thought about that angle of C&C loss impacting the course of frontline combat before. Would be interested in looking at that aspect of the war.
Few comments for the internet: 1. I was concerned that the ratio of Russian equipment lost to Ukrainian equipment lost was only 3:1 because, as far as I can tell, it really needs to be 4:1 or else Ukraine is falling behind. Hearing that most of the losses are light equipment was really great to hear! This means that Ukraine is slowly evening out the overall numbers of heavy equipment. The light equipment is easy enough for other countries to replace for Ukraine. 2. Also very pleasantly surprised that heavy equipment is maintaining its overall numbers for Ukraine. Again, Ukraine needs to wait a bit longer, but next spring might be a good time to do another offensive since Russian equipment will be getting quite low at that point. 3. The decrease in the air force is concerning but hopefully can be managed. 4. Overall, Ukraine needs more troops and the West needs to send more equipment. This is quite doable. PS. War is horrible. Putin is such an a**hole.
Re1: The one thing you're not factoring in is how much stored equipment Russian forces have that they can replenish with minimal costs. We've seen all countries over the world send their decaying/stored equipment to Ukraine to just simply get rid of it. So everyone kind of profited from the SMO in Ukraine. Getting rid of old military equipment to free up space for newer, better equipment at minimal cost. Decommissioning a military vehicle costs way more than putting it on a train to deliver to Ukraine, especially if it's sent in its current state as practical spare parts. Re2: I don't think Ukraine will actually last until next spring for that counter-offensive to be effectively executed. Russia doesn't look like it's in a hurry. Which can't be said the same for the Ukrainian military or its residents. We're already seeing that the manpower in Ukraine is declining, which means certain jobs will be ineffectively maintained by elderly, women or children. Also, Russia is starting to grind down the energy production capabilities, which will impact the quality of life when winter starts. Also, don't forget that there's other geopolitical events that will impact the Ukrainian position in a negative way (the brewing honey pot in the Middle East specfically). Re3: I agree that it's concerning. What's even more concerning is the projection on how much experienced pilots Ukraine still has and can replenish to fly the new coming aircraft effectively. Re4: I disagree. We (the West) are making clutch decisions for events we have put in motion. We've engineered this encounter by progressively adapting more and more nations into NATO and giving Russia a clearly blatant excuse for doing whatever it needs to protect its borders & spheres of influence. NATO was created to counter Soviet-Union. In more simple terms, the cold-war that supposedly ended in 1991 never did - at least NATO and its leading USA didn't. NATO kept pushing the cold-war agenda to stretch its claws over all the borders around Russia. Just look at this from your own perspective. Would you sit quietly and calmly in whichever country you live in if Russian or Chinese or Iranian Alliance nations were approaching your country of residence one by one until you were effectively surrounded. You wouldn't. Nobody would. Re-PS: War is horrible. No doubt about it. But Putin is just doing what he thinks is best for the continued future of his people. Just like every other world leader. You might not agree with their agenda, but you can't deny there's no justification for it.
I cant believe people still believe “Russia is protecting itself from NATO excuse”. Yeah, Putin started the whole SMO with one hour speech of how Ukraine is not a real country and had zero issues with Finland and Sweden joining NATO, but he definitely is afraid of NATO. Sure buddy.
"The takeaway being that after two hard fought years of attritional warfare, the Ukrainian tank force is right about where it began." This speaks volumes about US and EU support. Ukraine can win, but we must arm them. "Send them equipment else you'll send them your sons!"
I think it's appropriate to mention that, while we all love making fun of Russia for very good reasons, they are (primarily) the attacker. So, even if Russia was doing things well, we'd still expect them to receive proportionally more casualties unless they can quickly overwhelm Ukrainian positions. Seeing as Russia can't do this and Ukraine has some very well dug-in troops I wouldn't expect a change any time soon. So, while Russian incompetence plays a factor, it's also inevitable that Russia will suffer more casualties on the offensive than Ukraine will on the defensive. This is important to note as we should expect proportionally elevated Ukranian casualties when they perform their offensives.
True. I don't expect this to end by Ukraine gradually taking back sqm by sqm in the same grinding way Russians do now, or Ukraine did in the south last year. Rather, something inside Russia changes (Economy collapse, oligarchs getting fed up with Putin, money (wealth fonds) running out, out of fuel due to refineries going offline, ...), so Russian lines won't get the supplies to hold and will collapse, leading to similar situation like liberation of Kharkiv. Until then, best for Ukraine IMO is to preserve their forces and trade minor pieces of land for high enemy losses.
looks like a big lesson from this tragedy is . Keep everything . everything . store every armoured vehicle you ever built . sombody will use it sometime
@@etienne8110 The Ukrainians were major tank producers and upgraders after the fall of the Soviet Union. The problem is most of that capability either has been destroyed or exists on territory occupied by the Russians. There's a big advantage to fighting the war in your enemy's territory.
Even if your end use is as the base for a new coral reef. (The fate of surplus US M60A3 tanks.) And one of the biggest reasons to send our surplus tanks and other armored fighting vehicles to Ukraine is to save the taxpayer a lot of money. The reason they are all sitting Sierria Army Depot is not in case of future need - but because removing the hazmat to EPA/OSHA standards is over double the value of the vehicles as scrap metal. Getting rid of them would be enormously expensive.
The Danish f-16 are fully upgraded with the newest technology, the frame is old but should be able to handle several years of operation, and they are both capable attacking ground and air targets, they where the most effective aircraft in the Libyan war, but that was danish pilots, who have enormous numbers of flight hours experience, you don’t become an experienced fighter-16 pilot in a short training session.
Our efficiency in Libya was also a result of shorter command chains. In Libya every bomb dropped needed authorization from a magistrate. And we deployed ours to Malta on constant standby, while other countries had to phone home to drop bombs. I think we dropped so many that we ran out of bombs and had to get resupply from the American NATO stockpile to continue.
On the other hand: There is no better training than fighting to survive. I have no doubt that after this war, many countries will be looking to Ukraine for valuable war-fighting experience of all kinds, including their F-16 pilots.
The MLU upgrade packet these F16s are equipped with is NOT the 'newest technology'. In particular it hasn't upgraded the range-limited AN/APG-66 radar to the latest 83 version which would allow for engaging enemies at the maximum range of the AIM-120 AMRAAM by itself. What the MLU did however was add the Link16 capabiliy which enables for networked targeting so through the aid of AWACS and ground radars, the F16 can engage enemy aircraft beyond it's own detection range. This was the most likely use scenario going to be anyway, keeping the F16 jets as safe as possible while still pushing back the range from which Russia can release glidebombs with impunity. It's also highly likely that these F16s are ONLY going to be used for mid range engagement of air and ground targets, be it through the AIM-120, HARM, JDAM or long-range through Stormshadow/Scalp. This very limited scope severy reduces the training load and experience requirements for Ukranian pilots.
Yes, both... Both planes we got. Allegedly more than one. This is ridiculous the alliance that has 90% of world's GDP is unable to provide PARITY with 1% of GDP that is russia. If Ukraine stops fighting russians are taking a brisk walk to Lisbon. Germany expects to last 2 days, Poland slightly more. Nobody in the West is doing anything to even attempt to survive for a week. They just expect Ukraine to compensate lack of shells by throwing meat at the problem. Insane.
You didn't mention the one Challenger 2 which was lost was mobility killed (tracked), likely by an Anti-Tank mine, the crew survived and ran away, and it was subsequently destroyed by follow up attacks like Artillery.
According to a comment in an interview from someone far up in the German military earlier this year, no Ukrainian soldier serving in a Leopard2A6 or STRV122 had died at that point.
@@kortanioslastofhisname none is stretching it a bit. But i have seen most lost leopards and 2/3s of them were mobility kills with the crew completely fine. 1/3 was hit by drones, mostly at the back of the turret or roof. None of them got a cook off but some burned and smoked heavily out of the turret. They might had some casualties from the turret crew.
@@queenlives4ever after all Leopard 2 did very well in ukraine so far. The drone issue will be addressed in future versions like the 2A8. They will get a autonomous 30mm roof mk with air burst ammo to shoot them down and thickened roof and side armor like on the hungarian 2A7Vs. They also get trophy APS which is already being tested against drones. Leopard 2A8 will be highly competitive
I’ve been doing some reading on US Tank production and storage numbers - it feels shameful that we’ve sent only 15 Abram’s to Ukraine - I KNOW that it’s due to some very solid reasons for that fact, and I know we’re planning on sending more…but we have around 4000 in storage. Imagine if we could donate just 10% of that to Ukraine, and they could use them. I get GIDDY with the idea of 400 Abrams fighting the Russians. Even HALF that, with the others for spares.
@@dawgwiddaglasses what could we be saving these tanks for? These are tanks in storage and don't include the 5,000 Abrams in active service. We could send 1000 of them and still have 8,000 Abrams.
@@Biologist19681 There's also laws on the books that stipulate the minimum stocks the US military has to maintain. I don't know where we are relevant to that, but it's something we have to be aware of.
I'd imagine the problem has less to do with the hulls themselves and more to do with all the perishable components that would be needed to reactivate them. Furthermore, I doubt there is any slack capacity in the workforce and facilities that would be needed to conduct those restorations.
Swedish unionized worker-built equipment prevails again. Crew survival is so ridiculously important in so many ways, not only to preserve (skilled, experienced) manpower and morale. Crew survival has been a top priority in Swedish military & arms production due to Soviet historicaly being the only likely threat, with it's vast reserves of manpower, tanks & other equipment - which have forces Sweden to make up for some of the difference by quality. It also help having a society that values human lives, the individual, has a comparably low corruption and high openness & transparency when it comes to the military and politicaly debating the subject, which also makes sure the expensive military equipment produced and brought are what they are claimed to be.
It is the unions that make them good, it is the idea that ordinary people and workers actually matters that make the idea o survavability matter THE NONUNION VEHICLES ARE THE ONE RUSSIA MAKES YOU KNOW WHERE PEOPLE DONT MATTER LIKE NONUNIONISED PLACES workplaces outside unions have massive amounts of death AND MASSIVE LOWER WAGES^* THIS IS NOT USA we ahve not a century of cooperation and right wing propaganda lying about unions UNIONS AHVE ALWAYS BEEN GOOD FOR WORKERS WHICHS I WHY THE OWNERS WANT THEN DESTROYED AND OFTEN HAVE THE LEADERS KILLED!
Finally this is something I really wanted to hear about from others, what does the Ukraine status look like we hear SO much about the losses on Russia's side but I think this is the first time I finally get to hear about what's going on the Ukrainian front. At least for what I've been able to follow casually.
I know you hear this enough man, but you do good work. Thank you for the solid Open source information. More than possibly any other or in conjunction with others to have a roughly good idea of what’s happening in the world and thank you. Your work is really appreciated.
So on the Gripen side of things. It was a headline here in Sweden a week or so ago that Ukraine had declined the Gripen due to logistical reasons. This was said by a SAAB spokesman and he kept repeating that we on the Swedish side were not the ones who canceled but that it was an Ukrainian decision.
I added you to my video queue because perun is back🎉 And then went back to listening. And the video that I was watching before you was an in-depth analysis of the flood from Halo. And it kind of ended abruptly. And your video starts immediately. And your video starts immediately it was so smooth and surprisingly not jarring that I was jarred and had to comment on it.
Proud to see the badge of the 53rd Mechanized Brigade (the unit I support) included in the vid, though afraid to ask my contacts if that soldier is still alive.
@@etienne8110 1. "Western Media" is not a monolith. Fox News is overwhelmingly pro-Russian. 2. Nobody has ever claimed that Ukraine has had absolutely 0 losses.
A Swedish perspective: In terms of the Gripen(39C), it looks as if Sweden is prepared to send some, likely in the 20 range. However they were asked to hold off on this so Ukraine could focus on the F-16. That by itself makes sense but the "conspiracy" theory here is that the US want Ukraine to use the F-16, so that they can then sell new aircraft. So the ask of Sweden wasnt a military ask but an industrial preference to keep Gripen out. I would also like to point out that if Sweden sends Gripen it will be from their own inventory and those planes are fairly recently upgraded to be used into the 2035-2040ish timeline, while the F-16s that have been pledged by Nato members are of the F-16AM variant, updated in the early 2000s, and being phased out anyway within the next 2-3 years. So while new F-16s like the ones bought by Turkey are new and updated, the pledged ones arent. I would also like to comment on the video regarding ordnance and Im taking Meteor as an example. Gripen with Meteors are a multiplier that will give Russia a world of hurt, while Gripens/F-16s with old AMRAAMs, while good, is a totally different story(F-16 cant carry Meteor).
Concerning Meteor: do the Europeans even want to donate Meteor? The risk of capture and analysis of such a weapon has been brought up in this context. IMHO, it makes no sense to not send Meteor for available platforms because well, they were designed to defend a free and democratic Europe, aka right now. I think the F-16s being delivered were, in the 6+ months it took to actually train the crews, upgraded. We'll see.
In Ukraine we kind of buy into this "conspiracy", can't speak for everyone but the general feeling recently is absolute HATE for Biden and his administration in how they're protecting russian pilots at the cost of our children. At BEST, we see him as lesser evil, if it wasn't for Trump being absolute worst case, we'd be burning Biden effigies in the street. Americans selling russians missile components so they can hit us anywhere AND banning Ukraine from striking russian airfields are not conspiracies but facts of US collusion with russia... There are very few people in Ukraine still trusting the West at this point, we know we need out own nukes and long range conventional ammunition as the Westerners will always fail and betray, as it happens every single time, no exceptions so far.
Regarding Rosomak APC’s - initial numbers planned for the delivery were cut down. Ukraine still got about 100 of them (including Rak mobile mortar variant), but delivery of the rest were delayed. Payment problems mostly. Still, they have pretty good survivability record indeed.
@@alexwhinnie274 Yup bmp front armour 33mm welded rolled steel side around 20mm back top 6mm, m113 front 44mm going to 28 on side rear alliminium alloyt, humvee depending on type around 50mm front . bmp was the first type and pretty much only had armour for taking on light machineguns
@@tuehojbjerg969 Bmp1 is rated to take 50cal from the front , 762 from the side, while remaining combat effective. It was put to test in Vietnam and it works as intended. Actually the side offer slightly more protection over 762 point blank. It is effective against 50 cal at some angle at certain range. It is about the same with m113. Production humvee is only rated against 762.
@@jintsuubest9331 From my experience on the frontline - 7.62 PKM punches through BMP-1 from about 500m no problem. BMP-2 could be penetrated from sides if you have good AP ammo. BMP-3 cannot be hurt by a PKM. Hummvee tanks any rounds from PKM from every side except side glass and rear hatch. Also Hummvee has decent visibility while from the inside of BMP-1 you can't see sh*t.
@@Thaidory Interesting! I wonder if that means the bmp1 armor has become less effective due to years of rust and storage. You think the age of those vehicles has made them softer?
7:21 What differentiates Russia from Ukraine is. 155 mm m777 Replace a destroyed Ukrainian 122mm d30 . Meanwhile, the Russian 115mm T62 adds to the number of existing Russian artillery pieces . This help is invaluable as it improves quality and the troops always have artillery to use while 2s19 is under maintenance.
It's nice to see the Bradley show how survivable it is. The design program was so terrible, it's nothing short of a miracle that the vehicle we got turned out to be this good.
Well, when you sink the kind of money into a weapon program like the US does, it's rare to end up with something that's completely shite. It's also a matter that high-end IVFs have proven to be one of the most efficient combat platforms while drones are flying everywhere with little impunity. I will be interesting to see how it will change again once more effective drone countermeasures become commonplace (drone-specific ECM, improved APS, modernized turret-based SHORAD,etc).
Bundeswehr procurement department leaders have been purposefully staffed with people who don't believe Germany should have a useful military since the early 2000's. Some were nearly Russian puppets because they believed Russia had turned a new leaf and wanted to be an EU external partner.
It costs a lot... Money is harsh to come by, especially when you then have to explain to voters why you bought 10 new jet fighters rather than funding schools, hospitals etc...
Yes, though it’s not surprising. The “Peace Dividend” was taken more seriously there than in the US. Decision makers in the US looked at it and said: “Some extra room in the budget, cool. We’ll shut down a lot of the “extras”, and let these corporations consolidate a bit, but we’ll “keep the lights on” and our most important factories.” Europe, on the other hand, looked at those same savings and thought: “And never again shall we need ______. Away with all of it.” And now they’re paying for it, quite literally.
@@chinchilla415 in my country migrants are bringing and earning money to the country. (Most are working, even illegals) Social welfare does as said, it brings benefits to our citizens. Why should we cut out on anything making lives of our citizens better?
This video came out at almost perfect day as a person couple of days ago tried to argue to me that Russia has soon destroyed all equipment from all European nations because they have sent it to Ukraine. I'll just link this video to that direction now.
Sponsored by Private Internet Access, Use the following link to access their promotional offer: www.piavpn.com/Perun
As noted in the description, this video is intended as the companion piece to the video on Russian equipment losses and reserves released two weeks ago and they should probably be considered together. I think the broad observation here is that the Ukrainian military has been sustained and is being steadily transitioned to NATO equipment by foreign assistance over time, but still finds itself facing shortages, uncertainty over its pipeline and various other challenges that mean it still remains in a period of relative vulnerability even if it's proven capable of maintaining a pattern of hard defensive fighting through much of this year. How the pipeline develops may help determine the trajectory of Ukrainian combat power over time.
I'll also note that certain system categories (including artillery and air defences) really do merit their own detailed look as part of a more focused study, so you may see a closer look at them in the coming weeks and months.
Puuuuuke on your attention reselling. Never pay to anyone sponsoring youtube vids
Dang it Perun. You made me have to spell check 'Materiel'. I even had to fight Auto-correct who wanted to change it to 'Material'. I'll let people figure out why on their own. Well played Sir.
🇺🇦
Badass Based Perun hope you are doing well! ❤
Will there potentially be a video on Russian and Chinese actions in Africa?
"Here is a picture of a vehicle whose turret is presumably trying out a new career as an anti satellite weapon" Haha, Love it.
I haven't gotten to this part of the video yet, but knowing Perun, I know that it will be in there, and am looking forward to it!😂
The Germans were probably laughing when their guns made a Soviet tank look like a crappier V2 rocket.
The turret-tossing mechanism is the most Russian part of the vehicle... It nearly always works and the crew never survives.
@@captainmaimNearly always working as not very Russian, almost never is more like it.
44:40 - When you look at the normal Costs of having a vehicle like the M113 “decommissioned”(scrapped), donation to Ukraine makes OH-so-much-sense. Just a quick servicing, ensure it’s functional, and load it onto a transport to Europe. After learning about the situation for regular transport vehicles in Ukraine, those medical version 113s are especially valuable to the Ukrainians.
I’ve worked for a contractor to the US Government that worked on decommissioning projects. There’s a SUBSTANTIAL cost to it on the part of the government, due to things like environment regs, customs/export rules, etc., donation as an alternative might even be saving us money, on balance.
if any of that was true you'd not decommission anything ever..you'd just give it all away to some friendly state looking for a second hand system it couldn't ordinarily afford.. and yet they don't...weird right?
@@johntowers1213we Want Them to buy new stuff from the US military industrial complex
TL;DR: Ukraine is different because of what they would do with the equipment. Getting it destroyed fighting Russia has none of the downsides that normally prevent export as a method of decommissioning.
Two reasons it didn't always happen:
Your allies don't usually want your leftovers. They'd like decent newer equipment, thanks.
And your lesser 'allies' who are less secure, less of allies, you don't necessarily want to send them a bunch of equipment that might find its way to fight your other allies.
Third reason: This could mean undermining your weapons export industry.
Fourth: Unless you're the original manufacturing nation you often lack permission to send the tech to anyone else.
@@johntowers1213except for the warehousing costs, maintenance costs, and costs of protecting said equipment. While waiting to find someone to give the equipment to.
You either find someone to give the equipment to immediately or you decommission it immediately. Unless you want to build an equipment reserve with all the associated costs, what you are suggesting is simply not economical.
It only doesn’t make sense if you assume that the process is fully intelligent & well managed. We are talking about an Administration that left billions of dollars worth of military equipment to the Taliban that Ukraine could have used. 😵💫
As a German Ex M113 Driver: We used them for everything which needed to be transported or to be hidden but not fast. It was darn cheap, around 25.000 USD in the 80's or about two midsized Cars. It's literally an Aluminium Box, a truck Diesel Engine, some Steelbars which are the Springs and a Ramp, together with an okeish differential and steering is in the simple Version with simple Breaks. Later variants got a Wheel instead of the tillers for the breaks, i am allowed to drive both types, as they didn't upgraded the ones in the unit but in driving school those had been upgraded... and then replaced with some without as the hydraulic system had problems. But extremely simple and Cheap.
And according to our Feldwebel the best Shopping Vehicle in the World, you can pull up at the market, drive in 4 Shopping card, thanks to the Ramp, with 4 Soldiers (Driver, commander, 2 grunts)
can also double as shopping cart inside the store ^^
@@thingamabob3902 The reboot of supermarket sweep is wild
A real grocery getter
The German shopping experience must be wild! ^^ 😁❤
Which one did you prefer, steering wheel or tillers?
The one we don't like to hear, but need to hear. Thanks for the straight shootin' as always Mr. Australian PowerPoint man.
@jaredpilbeam6988 might as well do both sides
I wonder how many people say the same about his videos on russia
Ukraine didnt lose any vehicles this video is kremlin propaganda
@@marceloantunes998 A minority, most people just declare it as Ukrainian propaganda and say that Perun should trust the Russian MoD.
Awwww don't like to hear? 😢
Great timing. Was about to start cleaning the flat and now i am perfectly informed and entertained while doing it.
I'm definitely not doing the same thing 🙄🙄
Informed?😂😂ua-cam.com/video/6AgxsjAnYYE/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
If only it where true 😂😂ua-cam.com/video/6AgxsjAnYYE/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
Yep, peruns weekly release is my signal to get my house in order.
Dude, I'm moving out of the apartment at the same time lol
There do so many talking heads on this subject that I have grown to loathe. Perun is one of the few I can watch with his data driven analysis that is actually sourced. Keep going man.
He is propaganda...likely Australian MIC
@@mitchyoung93Exactly he obviously has a Ukrainian bias, which isn't inherently bad, all sources have biases, you just need to compare sources. I personally look at both sides to get a better picture
He might have biases but he isn't exactly propaganda, like some other channels
@@PunishedMushu Especially reading opposite of what Russians say, tend to be useful.
@@mitchyoung93 But is he WRONG?
Power point is back on the menu boys!
I dont think the orcs have heard about powerpoint.
@@aramintywhitesell4566😂😂😂
Then we shall feast in the shade(d and air conditioned auditorium)!
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
POWERPOINT! POWERPOINT! POWERPOINT!🎉🎉🎉
"Without sufficient mine clearing equipment or ATACMS to suppress enemy attack helicopters" was said so matter of factly that I had to back up and make sure I'd heard that right. God dammit Perun, I love your humour!
The Polish Rosomaks clearly just have an aura of anger so strong it burns any approaching projectiles, acting as an impromptu hard kill system.
No one wants to be the one to annoy a wolverine
Some surplus 1980s-90s Israeli Border Guards patrol armor might still be welcome, most of the year. Head-to-toe Threat Level 3+ protection, with Threat Level 4 trauma plates over the torso, groin, and throat.
Think, that fellow's wolverine, in full plate mail rated for rifle rounds!
Now that iv caught up on all the episodes from the last 3 years, it takes so long for Sunday to come around. Always worth the wait 🎉
When I'm starting a long drive, I open a Perun playlist and hit "play".
While PTSD is a issue for any military in a war, Ukrainian mechanics and the logistics departments (having to maintain all the various nations' _"donations")_ might be more stressed than some combat troops.....
It's worse, after talking to people on the ground and watching some of the content by them I came to a realisation that a lot of the frontline ground pounders also double as maintenance crews when rotated out or during more peaceful moments. Especially the second line troops claim to be constantly working on something or trying to source parts from private donors and the market.
More stressful than fighting and dying in a trench? Do you hear yourself?
@@jeffparry2754it’s a joke man. Whoooosh
@@jeffparry2754 Have you ever thought you just deleted an entire production database?
Yeah, fighting and dying in a trench seems less stressful, at least you'll hear the end of it.
@@iQKyyR3K Ah yes, the OhNoSecond
This really makes me appreciate OSINT. We as the public would know almost nothing about the details of this conflict if it weren’t for the hard work of people on Oryx, people who buy satellite images, and communicators like Perun. It’s amazing that we can cut through the fog of war as well as we do.
Oryx is crap.
Using a crap source >>> ....
@@histrion5390How do you know oryx is crap? Where's your proof? Genuine question btw
@@raz_hz Source: I made it the fuck up😄
He is a spin doctor. Ukraine could never have won this conflict, and now its army is degraded and collapsing. There was never any doubt this would be the case. Yet he tows the party line.
@@raz_hz Multiple double and triple entries for the same object (one 'famous' t-64 from Mariupol comes to mind, it had 3 entries as a Russian tank and actually was Ukrainian). Many completely unrecognizable piles, etc...
I hope you know Perun, and never doubt, just how awesome your work here is. Just excellent reporting and analysis. Deeply valueable information and generalizable analysis techniques. You make your audience smarter and better equipped to be media literate.
Thanks to you, your patrons, and your sponsors for keeping this free for the masses!
Russia will be watching this as well, for some truth.
Thank you Perun.
Sorry I cannot economically support you but I am very thankful of your work.
Complaining about lack of logistics support for military defense economics made me chuckle..that was a geeky joke but hey we all are watching a powerpoint on Sunday dudes and dudettes
We cannot support him YET. ^^ 🏆❤️
If anyone can appreciate the importance of long-term planning for the funding of "military defence economics analysists"; it's likely Perun. ❤️
The Swedish Gripen's were put on hold when the western allies asked Sweden to wait until Ukraine had implemented the F16's.
This to simplify implementation and logistics.
Kind of a shame imo but there is logic there.
I wonder will the Gripens be readied to go while the F16’s are getting implemented. Leading to a faster implementation there
Or more delay built in by the US...Still afraid of escalation.....
@@Damien_N The past experience with the F-16s doesn't lead one to hope.
It's all about money grabbing. Those NATO countries who are buying F-35s are dumping their 40 years old F-16s. Sweden will not buy F-35 because of domestic money interests, so they keep their Saab-39 Griffin. The corrupt globalists are incapable of managing a concept such as actually winning a war. None of them think that way.
@@Damien_N it probably wouldnt lead to a faster implimentation, same ammount of resources now spread across more jets, and more types of jets. adds unneeded stress to the logisitcal system. theres not enough spare gripens in existence to have the impact that 70-100 f-16s could, though gripen are theoretically a better fit for ukraines needs.
The M113 is a terrible front line armored vehicle. However, it is perfectly capable as a armored supply vehicle, ammo carrier, ambulance, command vehicle (if outfitted with commo gear), armored personnel carrier to staging areas (not into combat), recovery vehicle of light armored vehicles, towing artillery, etc.
It's especially good for Ukraine considering the higher-than-average need for tracked platforms over wheeled ones. This is likely also why the wheeled Polish Wolverines haven't been showing up much in the loss sheets, being relegated to areas/tasks that involve less risk.
Maybe at least a bit better than an MRAP though? We have seen both being used to assault positions directly.
@@B.D.E. - Nah. I think I'd take an MRAP over an M113 if terrain allows. A bit more armor against small arms/shrapnel and better lower hull against mines. Probably won't help you against a triple stack monstrosity, but it'll likely save you from a stray. M113s just aren't that thicc.
Apparently motorcycles are better personnel carriers, if we are to judge upon seeing the Russian advances.
There's one more category of countries that offered aid - those that sent agricultural vehicles of a highly unusual configuration and uncertain use, except perhaps for VERY long range plowing of fields. Romania and Bulgaria are in this category, I believe.
?
@ChrisTian-yw7jc that keeps their agricultural production up, and those could be used for trench digging, and for captured minefields mine clearing.
Tractor donations?
1.) Source?
2.) The f*ck? 😂🏆❤️
@@timothystamm3200or towing captured vehicles lol
One of very few channels that I don't skip past the ads for. Get that money.
Click on it if you really want him to make money on ads
I've been hearing "Ukraine is going to be getting F16s as soon as the end of the month" for more than a year. It's starting to sound like "everything in the store is up to 90 percent off."
they said August for months now
@@carlosandleon yeah, but in the end of the day a new units is infantry one, not mechanized. If Ukraine army can't reliably get their hands on some old and numerous staff like Bradley Fighting Vehicle, F16 delivery is completely unbelievable
@@carlosandleonActually , they said june for months now , after june passed , it became july and is now become august.
Is it just me or do anyone else think that F16s won't really change much? They'd be difficult to really make good use of without air superiority and Russian AA being severely depleted, which i know Ukraine has recently been trying to do, but will it be enough?
The jets are the easy part.
Getting trained pilotes for those hypothetic planes is the real bottleneck. It takes years to train one.
9:48 Perfect Perun dry humor 😊
Bring on the Sunday Powerpoint!
Quick Addition: Ukraine is finally flying F-16s, defending their sovereign airspace. Videos were posted just a few hours ago. Combat operations will probably begin in a few weeks, if not sooner. Make sure you take your pictures of Putin's "Friendship Bridge" while you can.
Beyond the Poland brigade training, there was an idea I saw floated a while back but haven't seen anything done with it since: let people considering signing up choose their MOS. Guarantee them: 1) If you qualify for your MOS, you serve in your MOS for your entire service period. 2) You cannot be transferred to any other MOS. 3) Serving in your MOS makes you immune from conscription. 4) If you do not qualify for your MOS, you're free to leave at any time (potentially even letting overseas Ukrainians of draft age return overseas if they fail to qualify).
I'd think that'd lead to a *huge* surge in recruitment. Tons of people want to help but don't want to serve in trenches. Many have specific skillsets but think those skills would be wasted as a general grunt in a trench. Pilots, drone hobbyists, programmers, engineers, truck drivers, your name it.
One example that really drives this home for me was watching Denys Davydov - commercial pilot and self professed coward who would never serve in the Ukrainian military, as much as he wants to see Ukraine win, out fear of just being sent to a trench and getting killed - in a video where he was covering how Ukrainian pilots in WWII-era planes were shooting down drones with shotguns. He was practically giddy describing it and sounded like he wished so much that he could be doing that. So you know... why *not* create an environment where people with varying skillsets can offer to serve *in just that skillset* ? It should be a *massive* boost in service rates.
Unfortunately this highlights an issue with militaries the world over: they regard the individual as utterly untrustworthy in all metrics, even in assessing their own talent.
This culture is derived from the Napoleonic era when nations moved away from employing mercenary companies and into national militaries. The national militaries could do something the mercenaries couldn't: They could conscript. Doing so would trigger political backlash if the conscripts were people who society valued, so they conscripted people who society didn't value, lower classes and convicts. These would be people who society didn't work well for, and in the convicts' cases people who actively disobeyed society's rules. This meant that they had to be closely monitored, regarded with suspicion, and assumed to be somehow up to no good at all times.
This culture has unfortunately persisted into the 21st century. Recruiters will put people into whatever they're under pressure to recruit today regardless of the aptitude of the applicant, and will even go so far as to lie to applicants saying that the profession they want is full, and only the professions they are under pressure to recruit today have openings.
@@Markfr0mCanadaNot necessarily accurate.
@@GrahamCStrouse Care to elaborate?
There are those here in Ukraine that are good soldiers, those who can be good soldiers and the rest are chaff before the wind that is created by their ego's......
@@Markfr0mCanada Conscription was always a thing. Move to national armies was due to far greater reliability. Mercenaries are inherently untrustworthy and Russia learn that hard way. You clearly repeat Russian delusional interpretation of the military as bunch of slave trash. What in fact was not a thing during Napoleonic Era or in any successful military ever, which Russia is not (they fight mostly inferior enemies). The problem with Ukraine is specifically that some generals there still think in Soviet categories (look Krynki) and I hardly can blame people who don't want be send to pointless death.
came for the Terra Invicta gameplay, stayed for the geopolitics and economics, don't regret a thing, keep it up Perun.
He is good on Terra Invicta, but terrible on geopolitics because he believes Western state media, which mostly repeats what the Ukrainians say, and totally disregards the other side. To have an accurate picture, you need to watch what both sides say.
@@ctrlaltdebug But he does account for Russian claim too - exposing that Russians lie about destroyed Ukrainian equipment by up to 17:1 while Ukrainians lie about destroyed Russian equipment by approximately 3:1.
@@Raivo_K I don't believe that 17:1 over count for a minute. On the balance it seems that the Ukrainians lie more. Take the new Kursk offensive for example. Ukraine is making it out to be a huge thing, but what will it accomplish realistically? It's just a waste of their best well-equipped brigades at this point.
@@ctrlaltdebug Ukrainians have barely said a word about Kursk. You cant lie if you dont say anything. As for Russians - i dont believe half of what they're saying. They've lied and been caught lying so many times that i have zero trust in their claims. I have at least some trust in Ukrainian claims. Especially if accompanied by photo or video evidence.
0:00 “Mission Accomplished” banner hanging on the Admiral Kuznetsov
At least it taught navies from all around the world what to expect from modern drones. 😅
These reports are without a doubt the best out there.
Very well researched and the data is easily absorbed and understood.
And wondrous sprinkle of the pointed sense of humour makes me smile every time!
The quality of the content from this account is outstanding
I found your channel less than 2 weeks ago, and have probably listened to 20 hours. I love the content. It's informative, thorough, and the pacing is excellent.
I don't know what videos you're planning, but I think a video breaks down The United States strategy in the Asian Pacific, and possible escalation scenarios with Taiwan.
Keep it up, cheers!
While it's not my favorite channel and they get some things wrong, Infographics goes over some of that info.
Small correction: at 44:22 you have a graph with both "Benelux" and "Netherlands". "Benelux" however stands for "Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg", so you're including the Netherlands twice. Greetings, a concerned Belgian who thinks one Netherlands is already plenty.
They're two different bundles for two different vehicles In the 113 family. The Netherlands does indeed get to be included twice.
I love this exchange
Its all double dutch to me :-)
Gekoloniseerd
@@PerunAU is there a similar reason for the inclusion of two strv 122 columns at 1420? or was it so impressive that you needed to include it twice.
Yet another fine PowerPoint presentation with lots of information to digest. Big shout out to Perun for his dedication to the task at hand. Also, the X4 content was boss mate 👍
the only channel where 1 hour seems too short, amazing work always
The most frustrating part of this is that the USA would save themselves billions of dollars by shipping out equipment and armaments to Ukraine as it approaches end-of-life. That stuff costs lots of dollars to store so sending it to Ukraine is the best choice.
What are you complaining about? Practically everything is exactly as you describe, ammunition at end of shelf life and equipment either already EIL or to be replaced within a couple years.
The weapons given Ukraine that aren't surplus and soon to be destroyed or given away to somebody anyway is a very short list . HIMARS and something else I can't remember at the moment.
But absolutely everything you hear sent to Ukraine is 99% not costing US taxpayers anything new in the budget and in some cases cheap disposal.
@@tonysu8860 I know. But that is not ALL the end of life stuff. They could be sending a lot more.
@@stephaniewilson3955 a great example is the Brad. We're already testing its replacement and thousands are in storage. Same thing with MRAPs. Both have proven useful and survivable in Ukraine & probably a better choice than the Abrams (although we have plenty of those sitting around too). A concerted, coordinated effort amongst the Allies to get the Ukrainians as close to EVERYTHING needed hasn't been done. It's been dribs and dregs. Yet how much did we spend arming Iraqis and Afghans who don't even want to fight? Much more could be done-- Ukrainians have lost their lives in our failure to stand behind them fully. Even the Germans are onboard and those guys are run by a coalition that includes the GREENs.
Were testing its replacement. Meaning we have to keep that stockpile for a decade while we actually build the replacement @chrisstrawn4108
The goal is never to cut spending or save taxpayer money.
The billions of dollars for scrapping equipment in the US create a domestic market itself. It creates jobs and wealth for americans
I still don't understand how you make these presentations do damn interesting to me. Here Perun.......have another hour of my life!
Ready for brief! Great topic this week.
DAMN! I’ve been waiting for this content for a while. A real barnstormer of a production that puts all these articles I read in perspective.
Thank you so very much.
Babe, get up. New PowerPoint just dropped.
I wish you'd stop calling me that. But keep notifying me, because, PowerPoint
@@latso10 Ssssstt, I am watching the powerpoint babe.
It's always better getting your truth from real sources PowerPoint man 😂😂ua-cam.com/video/6AgxsjAnYYE/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
😂😂 more Sunday lies ua-cam.com/video/6AgxsjAnYYE/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
You guys are adorable.
Now then, back to powerpoint.
treading water in a war of attrition isn't a terrible position, but i'd really wish we'd just sent enough *stuff* that the balance finally tilts somewhere favorable :c
Totally agree. One silver lining to all of this is if you look at the number of Command and Control centers that Ukraine has lost, it's the lowest number in the data, compared to Russia who has lost hundreds.
@@williamyoung9401 Any sites or videos that you know of with that data, or even just a search term, I've never thought about that angle of C&C loss impacting the course of frontline combat before. Would be interested in looking at that aspect of the war.
YWNBAW, loony troon. ukraine lost, kamala lost, you will 41%
Few comments for the internet:
1. I was concerned that the ratio of Russian equipment lost to Ukrainian equipment lost was only 3:1 because, as far as I can tell, it really needs to be 4:1 or else Ukraine is falling behind. Hearing that most of the losses are light equipment was really great to hear! This means that Ukraine is slowly evening out the overall numbers of heavy equipment. The light equipment is easy enough for other countries to replace for Ukraine.
2. Also very pleasantly surprised that heavy equipment is maintaining its overall numbers for Ukraine. Again, Ukraine needs to wait a bit longer, but next spring might be a good time to do another offensive since Russian equipment will be getting quite low at that point.
3. The decrease in the air force is concerning but hopefully can be managed.
4. Overall, Ukraine needs more troops and the West needs to send more equipment. This is quite doable.
PS. War is horrible. Putin is such an a**hole.
3:1 is simply untrue. Unreal how anyone can believe those numbers.
@@joelfiskyou wouldn’t believe the visually confirmed losses than or even the estimated losses. Visual losses don’t lie.
Re1: The one thing you're not factoring in is how much stored equipment Russian forces have that they can replenish with minimal costs. We've seen all countries over the world send their decaying/stored equipment to Ukraine to just simply get rid of it. So everyone kind of profited from the SMO in Ukraine. Getting rid of old military equipment to free up space for newer, better equipment at minimal cost. Decommissioning a military vehicle costs way more than putting it on a train to deliver to Ukraine, especially if it's sent in its current state as practical spare parts.
Re2: I don't think Ukraine will actually last until next spring for that counter-offensive to be effectively executed. Russia doesn't look like it's in a hurry. Which can't be said the same for the Ukrainian military or its residents. We're already seeing that the manpower in Ukraine is declining, which means certain jobs will be ineffectively maintained by elderly, women or children. Also, Russia is starting to grind down the energy production capabilities, which will impact the quality of life when winter starts.
Also, don't forget that there's other geopolitical events that will impact the Ukrainian position in a negative way (the brewing honey pot in the Middle East specfically).
Re3: I agree that it's concerning. What's even more concerning is the projection on how much experienced pilots Ukraine still has and can replenish to fly the new coming aircraft effectively.
Re4: I disagree. We (the West) are making clutch decisions for events we have put in motion. We've engineered this encounter by progressively adapting more and more nations into NATO and giving Russia a clearly blatant excuse for doing whatever it needs to protect its borders & spheres of influence.
NATO was created to counter Soviet-Union. In more simple terms, the cold-war that supposedly ended in 1991 never did - at least NATO and its leading USA didn't. NATO kept pushing the cold-war agenda to stretch its claws over all the borders around Russia.
Just look at this from your own perspective. Would you sit quietly and calmly in whichever country you live in if Russian or Chinese or Iranian Alliance nations were approaching your country of residence one by one until you were effectively surrounded. You wouldn't. Nobody would.
Re-PS: War is horrible. No doubt about it. But Putin is just doing what he thinks is best for the continued future of his people. Just like every other world leader. You might not agree with their agenda, but you can't deny there's no justification for it.
I cant believe people still believe “Russia is protecting itself from NATO excuse”. Yeah, Putin started the whole SMO with one hour speech of how Ukraine is not a real country and had zero issues with Finland and Sweden joining NATO, but he definitely is afraid of NATO. Sure buddy.
@@AlessandraKovac
You claim that NATO expansion encouraged Russia to invade? Opinion dismissed.
Perun makes the World more reasonable
😂😂ua-cam.com/video/6AgxsjAnYYE/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
Cope helps
Yip hearing someone give a depth of sources for data, talk of caveats not dogmatic certainty . is refreshing.
"Mister president, another Perun video has been published"
Shouldn't that be madam president?
@Steve Biden is president until Jan 2025
@@stevewhite3424 No, it shouldn't.
@@stevewhite3424 the meme show Bush jr. so no
@@stevewhite3424and who would madam be?
Thanks for the comprehensive video Perun, as always very informative.
Warm greetings from the Netherlands🇳🇱.
You're the only channel I have notifications on for
PowerPoint man has blessed us with our weekly updates on defense economics.
Better getting real updates 😂😂ua-cam.com/video/6AgxsjAnYYE/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
blessed be the powerpoint savior of military analytics
Yeah 😂😂ua-cam.com/video/6AgxsjAnYYE/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
😂😂ua-cam.com/video/6AgxsjAnYYE/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
"The takeaway being that after two hard fought years of attritional warfare, the Ukrainian tank force is right about where it began."
This speaks volumes about US and EU support. Ukraine can win, but we must arm them.
"Send them equipment else you'll send them your sons!"
we should do neither
@@GeldUndKokaine-kc1hp Stick to the white powder, comrade
@@qZbGmYjS4QusYqv5yes we will
@@qZbGmYjS4QusYqv5Nothing like paying for wars in other countries, just hope you don't need medical care
You think the americans were getting free healthcare if they stop ukraine aid? 😂 @@PunishedMushu
Ok that anti-satellite weapon joke got me ...thank you Perun... I am now cleaning coffee off my screen.
I think it's appropriate to mention that, while we all love making fun of Russia for very good reasons, they are (primarily) the attacker. So, even if Russia was doing things well, we'd still expect them to receive proportionally more casualties unless they can quickly overwhelm Ukrainian positions. Seeing as Russia can't do this and Ukraine has some very well dug-in troops I wouldn't expect a change any time soon. So, while Russian incompetence plays a factor, it's also inevitable that Russia will suffer more casualties on the offensive than Ukraine will on the defensive. This is important to note as we should expect proportionally elevated Ukranian casualties when they perform their offensives.
True. I don't expect this to end by Ukraine gradually taking back sqm by sqm in the same grinding way Russians do now, or Ukraine did in the south last year. Rather, something inside Russia changes (Economy collapse, oligarchs getting fed up with Putin, money (wealth fonds) running out, out of fuel due to refineries going offline, ...), so Russian lines won't get the supplies to hold and will collapse, leading to similar situation like liberation of Kharkiv. Until then, best for Ukraine IMO is to preserve their forces and trade minor pieces of land for high enemy losses.
@@ClemensKatzer It's hard to win against an attacker who only uses shovels
G’day all 👍🏻🍷
looks like a big lesson from this tragedy is . Keep everything . everything . store every armoured vehicle you ever built . sombody will use it sometime
And have your own factories and logistics lines.
@@etienne8110 The Ukrainians were major tank producers and upgraders after the fall of the Soviet Union. The problem is most of that capability either has been destroyed or exists on territory occupied by the Russians. There's a big advantage to fighting the war in your enemy's territory.
Good news for Ireland's fully operational 1920s Rolls Royce armoured car. See The Chieftain's recent video.
Even if your end use is as the base for a new coral reef. (The fate of surplus US M60A3 tanks.)
And one of the biggest reasons to send our surplus tanks and other armored fighting vehicles to Ukraine is to save the taxpayer a lot of money. The reason they are all sitting Sierria Army Depot is not in case of future need - but because removing the hazmat to EPA/OSHA standards is over double the value of the vehicles as scrap metal. Getting rid of them would be enormously expensive.
Every Perun video feels like christmas. :D
The war of attrition grinds on and Perun is here to help us understand it.
The Danish f-16 are fully upgraded with the newest technology, the frame is old but should be able to handle several years of operation, and they are both capable attacking ground and air targets, they where the most effective aircraft in the Libyan war, but that was danish pilots, who have enormous numbers of flight hours experience, you don’t become an experienced fighter-16 pilot in a short training session.
Our efficiency in Libya was also a result of shorter command chains. In Libya every bomb dropped needed authorization from a magistrate. And we deployed ours to Malta on constant standby, while other countries had to phone home to drop bombs. I think we dropped so many that we ran out of bombs and had to get resupply from the American NATO stockpile to continue.
On the other hand: There is no better training than fighting to survive. I have no doubt that after this war, many countries will be looking to Ukraine for valuable war-fighting experience of all kinds, including their F-16 pilots.
The MLU upgrade packet these F16s are equipped with is NOT the 'newest technology'. In particular it hasn't upgraded the range-limited AN/APG-66 radar to the latest 83 version which would allow for engaging enemies at the maximum range of the AIM-120 AMRAAM by itself. What the MLU did however was add the Link16 capabiliy which enables for networked targeting so through the aid of AWACS and ground radars, the F16 can engage enemy aircraft beyond it's own detection range.
This was the most likely use scenario going to be anyway, keeping the F16 jets as safe as possible while still pushing back the range from which Russia can release glidebombs with impunity. It's also highly likely that these F16s are ONLY going to be used for mid range engagement of air and ground targets, be it through the AIM-120, HARM, JDAM or long-range through Stormshadow/Scalp. This very limited scope severy reduces the training load and experience requirements for Ukranian pilots.
Yes, both... Both planes we got. Allegedly more than one.
This is ridiculous the alliance that has 90% of world's GDP is unable to provide PARITY with 1% of GDP that is russia.
If Ukraine stops fighting russians are taking a brisk walk to Lisbon. Germany expects to last 2 days, Poland slightly more.
Nobody in the West is doing anything to even attempt to survive for a week. They just expect Ukraine to compensate lack of shells by throwing meat at the problem.
Insane.
F-16s are flying in Ukraine. Videos dropped a few hours ago. Should be flying combat operations within a few weeks, if not sooner.
WE EATIN GOOD BOYS, PERUN COOKED ANOTHER POWERPOINT FOR US🔥🔥🔥🗣🗣🗣🗣
You didn't mention the one Challenger 2 which was lost was mobility killed (tracked), likely by an Anti-Tank mine, the crew survived and ran away, and it was subsequently destroyed by follow up attacks like Artillery.
That is also true for many of the leopard 2 kills.
According to a comment in an interview from someone far up in the German military earlier this year, no Ukrainian soldier serving in a Leopard2A6 or STRV122 had died at that point.
@@kortanioslastofhisname none is stretching it a bit. But i have seen most lost leopards and 2/3s of them were mobility kills with the crew completely fine. 1/3 was hit by drones, mostly at the back of the turret or roof. None of them got a cook off but some burned and smoked heavily out of the turret. They might had some casualties from the turret crew.
@@queenlives4ever after all Leopard 2 did very well in ukraine so far. The drone issue will be addressed in future versions like the 2A8. They will get a autonomous 30mm roof mk with air burst ammo to shoot them down and thickened roof and side armor like on the hungarian 2A7Vs. They also get trophy APS which is already being tested against drones.
Leopard 2A8 will be highly competitive
@@ratlingzombie8705 That was the statement in the interview. Also, the statement was not "no casualties" but none of them were fatalities.
The Aussie King of Numbers & Graphs has thrown down a good one for us to consume.
Great PowerPoint Mr Perun. 👍
I’ve been doing some reading on US Tank production and storage numbers - it feels shameful that we’ve sent only 15 Abram’s to Ukraine - I KNOW that it’s due to some very solid reasons for that fact, and I know we’re planning on sending more…but we have around 4000 in storage. Imagine if we could donate just 10% of that to Ukraine, and they could use them. I get GIDDY with the idea of 400 Abrams fighting the Russians. Even HALF that, with the others for spares.
1. Leopards make more sense.
2. We might be saving those Abrams for something else.
@@dawgwiddaglasses what could we be saving these tanks for? These are tanks in storage and don't include the 5,000 Abrams in active service. We could send 1000 of them and still have 8,000 Abrams.
The reason is the same reason as always: appeasement of Putin.
@@Biologist19681 There's also laws on the books that stipulate the minimum stocks the US military has to maintain. I don't know where we are relevant to that, but it's something we have to be aware of.
I'd imagine the problem has less to do with the hulls themselves and more to do with all the perishable components that would be needed to reactivate them. Furthermore, I doubt there is any slack capacity in the workforce and facilities that would be needed to conduct those restorations.
Keep it up young man. With much appreciation - Radek.
Swedish unionized worker-built equipment prevails again.
Crew survival is so ridiculously important in so many ways, not only to preserve (skilled, experienced) manpower and morale.
Crew survival has been a top priority in Swedish military & arms production due to Soviet historicaly being the only likely threat, with it's vast reserves of manpower, tanks & other equipment - which have forces Sweden to make up for some of the difference by quality.
It also help having a society that values human lives, the individual, has a comparably low corruption and high openness & transparency when it comes to the military and politicaly debating the subject, which also makes sure the expensive military equipment produced and brought are what they are claimed to be.
Yes, im Swedish, and yes, i'm braging.
Yes you being replaced
@@einfachignorieren6156 only in nazi fantasies
Imagine how many could be built without union extortion.
It is the unions that make them good, it is the idea that ordinary people and workers actually matters that make the idea o survavability matter
THE NONUNION VEHICLES ARE THE ONE RUSSIA MAKES
YOU KNOW WHERE PEOPLE DONT MATTER LIKE NONUNIONISED PLACES
workplaces outside unions have massive amounts of death
AND MASSIVE LOWER WAGES^*
THIS IS NOT USA we ahve not a century of cooperation and right wing propaganda lying about unions
UNIONS AHVE ALWAYS BEEN GOOD FOR WORKERS
WHICHS I WHY THE OWNERS WANT THEN DESTROYED AND OFTEN HAVE THE LEADERS KILLED!
Finally this is something I really wanted to hear about from others, what does the Ukraine status look like we hear SO much about the losses on Russia's side but I think this is the first time I finally get to hear about what's going on the Ukrainian front. At least for what I've been able to follow casually.
Great Video, love your PPPPP!
(perfectly presented powerpoint presentations)
I miss the BTR- 4's, the footage they provided early in the war was absolutely KINO!
Hes not talking about bmps he talking about the ukrainian btr-4s@@Aercadian
@@Aercadian ahh my bad than
I know you hear this enough man, but you do good work. Thank you for the solid Open source information. More than possibly any other or in conjunction with others to have a roughly good idea of what’s happening in the world and thank you. Your work is really appreciated.
So on the Gripen side of things. It was a headline here in Sweden a week or so ago that Ukraine had declined the Gripen due to logistical reasons. This was said by a SAAB spokesman and he kept repeating that we on the Swedish side were not the ones who canceled but that it was an Ukrainian decision.
I added you to my video queue because perun is back🎉 And then went back to listening. And the video that I was watching before you was an in-depth analysis of the flood from Halo. And it kind of ended abruptly. And your video starts immediately. And your video starts immediately it was so smooth and surprisingly not jarring that I was jarred and had to comment on it.
Proud to see the badge of the 53rd Mechanized Brigade (the unit I support) included in the vid, though afraid to ask my contacts if that soldier is still alive.
Fear not, Ukraine has no losses. At least according to western medias 😅
@@etienne8110
1. "Western Media" is not a monolith. Fox News is overwhelmingly pro-Russian.
2. Nobody has ever claimed that Ukraine has had absolutely 0 losses.
@@etienne8110 Go away RN/Russia's troll
@@Kapito13 just spreading the good words of the mass medias... Don t rage over it, revel in it. 😅
@@etienne8110 Woah youre so anti-establishmentarian!! Crazy how you showed the "nu wRlod oDrer" 😂 pathetic
Thank you for another excellent video!
Hell of a hangover, i needed this
😂
Voldka,gin or whiskey?
Stand out analysis as always 👏👍
A Swedish perspective:
In terms of the Gripen(39C), it looks as if Sweden is prepared to send some, likely in the 20 range. However they were asked to hold off on this so Ukraine could focus on the F-16. That by itself makes sense but the "conspiracy" theory here is that the US want Ukraine to use the F-16, so that they can then sell new aircraft. So the ask of Sweden wasnt a military ask but an industrial preference to keep Gripen out.
I would also like to point out that if Sweden sends Gripen it will be from their own inventory and those planes are fairly recently upgraded to be used into the 2035-2040ish timeline, while the F-16s that have been pledged by Nato members are of the F-16AM variant, updated in the early 2000s, and being phased out anyway within the next 2-3 years. So while new F-16s like the ones bought by Turkey are new and updated, the pledged ones arent.
I would also like to comment on the video regarding ordnance and Im taking Meteor as an example. Gripen with Meteors are a multiplier that will give Russia a world of hurt, while Gripens/F-16s with old AMRAAMs, while good, is a totally different story(F-16 cant carry Meteor).
Concerning Meteor: do the Europeans even want to donate Meteor? The risk of capture and analysis of such a weapon has been brought up in this context. IMHO, it makes no sense to not send Meteor for available platforms because well, they were designed to defend a free and democratic Europe, aka right now.
I think the F-16s being delivered were, in the 6+ months it took to actually train the crews, upgraded. We'll see.
In Ukraine we kind of buy into this "conspiracy", can't speak for everyone but the general feeling recently is absolute HATE for Biden and his administration in how they're protecting russian pilots at the cost of our children. At BEST, we see him as lesser evil, if it wasn't for Trump being absolute worst case, we'd be burning Biden effigies in the street.
Americans selling russians missile components so they can hit us anywhere AND banning Ukraine from striking russian airfields are not conspiracies but facts of US collusion with russia... There are very few people in Ukraine still trusting the West at this point, we know we need out own nukes and long range conventional ammunition as the Westerners will always fail and betray, as it happens every single time, no exceptions so far.
Excellent video! Thank you Sir!
Sweden has started production of the Cv9035 mk3C for Ukraine.
At least 30 have been ordered and paid for.
Thanks, Perun. Heavy subject, but a necessary one to talk about.
Regarding Rosomak APC’s - initial numbers planned for the delivery were cut down. Ukraine still got about 100 of them (including Rak mobile mortar variant), but delivery of the rest were delayed. Payment problems mostly. Still, they have pretty good survivability record indeed.
Best from Poland dear Perun. Great work! ;-)
Im always so impressed with your videos. Can you speak to what your research process is/what resources do you frequently use?
I don't know about his research process but the sources for each video are listed in the video descriptions.
Feeding the algorithm like the allies have been feeding in M113's. Thanks Perun!
Just for the record - an average Hummvee or M113 have way better armor protection than BMP-1.
Wow is that really true ?
@@alexwhinnie274 Yup bmp front armour 33mm welded rolled steel side around 20mm back top 6mm, m113 front 44mm going to 28 on side rear alliminium alloyt, humvee depending on type around 50mm front .
bmp was the first type and pretty much only had armour for taking on light machineguns
@@tuehojbjerg969
Bmp1 is rated to take 50cal from the front , 762 from the side, while remaining combat effective.
It was put to test in Vietnam and it works as intended. Actually the side offer slightly more protection over 762 point blank. It is effective against 50 cal at some angle at certain range.
It is about the same with m113.
Production humvee is only rated against 762.
@@jintsuubest9331 From my experience on the frontline - 7.62 PKM punches through BMP-1 from about 500m no problem.
BMP-2 could be penetrated from sides if you have good AP ammo.
BMP-3 cannot be hurt by a PKM.
Hummvee tanks any rounds from PKM from every side except side glass and rear hatch.
Also Hummvee has decent visibility while from the inside of BMP-1 you can't see sh*t.
@@Thaidory Interesting! I wonder if that means the bmp1 armor has become less effective due to years of rust and storage. You think the age of those vehicles has made them softer?
This was your best episode yet. In my opinion.
Love my weekly Australian PowerPoint. Cheers from kansas
fellow Kansan here; your username brings me joy.
Always enjoy the power-points with facts, and that's what you get with the Aussie Gentleman, Perun. Thank you 💛
Already watched it, good video
Many thanks Peru. Very informative!
Wow, is this what having Sunday off is like?
The Great analysys!
Last time I was this early to a Perun video I was happy.
Great vid, thanks
"service that target". Military euphemisms will never cease to horrify.
Which isn't how real military people talk. When you hear phrases like that - you are listening to a 'politician in uniform' instead of a warfighter.
Perun you almost killed me. That joke about live ammunition and airshows made me choke on my ice cream.
7:21 What differentiates Russia from Ukraine is.
155 mm m777 Replace a destroyed Ukrainian 122mm d30 .
Meanwhile, the Russian 115mm T62 adds to the number of existing Russian artillery pieces . This help is invaluable as it improves quality and the troops always have artillery to use while 2s19 is under maintenance.
Incredible quantity and quality of research!
It's nice to see the Bradley show how survivable it is. The design program was so terrible, it's nothing short of a miracle that the vehicle we got turned out to be this good.
Well, when you sink the kind of money into a weapon program like the US does, it's rare to end up with something that's completely shite. It's also a matter that high-end IVFs have proven to be one of the most efficient combat platforms while drones are flying everywhere with little impunity. I will be interesting to see how it will change again once more effective drone countermeasures become commonplace (drone-specific ECM, improved APS, modernized turret-based SHORAD,etc).
30:38 "...unless the lines become much more dynamic."
That's what we call "Foreshadowing."
Hi Perun
Excellent, and thank you again for making it topical and Ukraine-relevant !
cheers mate, have a great week ahead
Thank you for your coverage and insights
🇪🇺🇺🇦🏴🇺🇦🏴🇺🇦🇬🇧
Europe is chockingly slow with building up military equipment since 2014
Bundeswehr procurement department leaders have been purposefully staffed with people who don't believe Germany should have a useful military since the early 2000's. Some were nearly Russian puppets because they believed Russia had turned a new leaf and wanted to be an EU external partner.
It costs a lot...
Money is harsh to come by, especially when you then have to explain to voters why you bought 10 new jet fighters rather than funding schools, hospitals etc...
Yes, though it’s not surprising. The “Peace Dividend” was taken more seriously there than in the US. Decision makers in the US looked at it and said: “Some extra room in the budget, cool. We’ll shut down a lot of the “extras”, and let these corporations consolidate a bit, but we’ll “keep the lights on” and our most important factories.”
Europe, on the other hand, looked at those same savings and thought: “And never again shall we need ______. Away with all of it.”
And now they’re paying for it, quite literally.
@@etienne8110 Or why you're not accommodating immigrants and social welfare programs as before.
@@chinchilla415 in my country migrants are bringing and earning money to the country. (Most are working, even illegals)
Social welfare does as said, it brings benefits to our citizens. Why should we cut out on anything making lives of our citizens better?
As all ways thank you so much for all your time and efforts
This video came out at almost perfect day as a person couple of days ago tried to argue to me that Russia has soon destroyed all equipment from all European nations because they have sent it to Ukraine.
I'll just link this video to that direction now.
I’ve spent more time on collective sundays watching Perun than I have in a church. Just the way it should be.
Church of PowerPoint.