You portrayed the physical restrictions that the Russians have in terms of artillery shells.
We all are constantly joking about "Russia is running out of missiles".
Yes, that is unlikely. But as you pointed out the bottleneck is located at the artillery shell production.
I absolutely believe that Russia is still using up its large stockpiles and that the consumption is higher than the production. But I also think that the production will be brought up to speed before the stockpiles will run out.
Especially, since the Russian armed forces will be expanded dramatically.
Several months ago I wrote down my thoughts about that here.
They have been running out of Ammo and everything else for a year and a half now, constantly on the verge of collapse and running away, just one more sci-fi smart weapon strike from the West away from losing. Russia is Schrödinger's Enemy, they are both weak and a threat to the whole world depending on the narrative you wish to push, sometimes in the very same sentence. NATO justifies its expansions and build-up with claiming Russia is going to conquer all of 'Garden' Europe if NATO doesn't surround them. And yet at the same time the Russians are so weak they are fighting with cartoonish inferior equipment, mindless horde tactics, they are dumb orks that are starving, lack even basic clothes and shoes, and so poor and unequipped they have to fight with shovels and sticks.
Thanks for the article, very interesting. I believe that Russia could be able to produce even one million 152mm rounds per month, which seems a lot, but actually requires relative small quantity of metals and chemicals (ca 50.000 tons, which is very little compared to russian industrial capacity). The most difficult part will be to manufacture one million fuzes (the fuze is by far the most complicated and expensive part of a artillery round), but even that can be achieved, eventually returning to the use of mechanical (non electronic) fuzes, a technology that worked well for most of XX century. Increasing the production while simplifying the tecnology could be (and perhaps is) a natural solution for Russia.
Another interesting topic is the size of the pre-war russian ammunition stock, which is perhaps the big mistery of this war.
However, there is some information about the size of the stock until 2013, specifically from this articles:
+Russia inherited 15 millions tons (!!!) of ordnance from SSSR
+SSSR produced ca 1+ million tons each year
+Russia had still 8 millions tons in 2010 (but 6.5M were considered "unsuitable")
+4.6 millions tons were disposed of in 2010-12
+Russia had 3.7 million tons by 1/1/2013, of which 1.1M were "unusable", so net is 2.6M
+year production was around 200.000 tons (according to a british source)
+likely stock in 2022 could be more than 4M tons (2.6M from 2013 plus production 10x200.000)
Even only 2M tons of ordnance will be an immense stock: ten millon rounds of 152mm calibre are just half a million tons.
In the end, Russia is unlikely to run out of ammo, but could have problems or limits in certain categories of ordnance because of industrial or techonological bottlenecks (I'm thinking about the most sophisticated weapons, like cruise or ballistic missiles).
I calculate the same quantity of rounds (projectile + explosive) as you: 20 rounds per ton. The propellant is separate, and I wonder how much was/is available from stocks at the beginning of the SMO. Probably not a huge amount, because proper storage (dry, cool) is critical, and shelf life is not unlimited. Increasing propellant production is a high priority, and that is not too difficult. The chemistry is almost stupid-easy (nitrocellulose was discovered accidentally by a lab worker spilling a chemical mixture on a cotton lab apron). It's the purification and handling that is critically dangerous.
Your last point, and Aleks's point about rockets/missiles versus artillery rounds, brings up an interesting question: which is more important in this SMO, artillery rounds; or rockets/missiles?
Provided the figures are correct, it correlates with my estimates and data that I roughly calculated a few months ago.
Nevertheless, the consumption is higher than the production.
Hence, Russia is still living from the stock.
I'm sure the Russians are working on this (as you pointed out).
Not only the operational stocks need to be replenished but also the strategic for the armies that are being built, and for potential large-scale conflict, which would make 20,000 shells/day look like a joke. Nevertheless, I still do not believe in such a scenario.
Thx Piquet, this makes to much sense, meaning the the West doesn't want to hear it.....and whats sad is, no offense, but what you did here, matching known and acknowledged production and resource levels, isnt rocket science ;) , but renders a clear example of how, even with the knowledge out there, the lack of and loss of curiosity, its debilitating and a sad reflection on the supposed 'Creation and Home of Reason', the West.
The Media is a venal, silent, serpentine killer, its almost parasitical in turning even smart people into supine dupes. ............ this whole Ukr Russian
That is a great point. The information is (mostly) available from public sources, but it must be cross-checked with multiple (independent) sources because of the chaff that is on the internet. That is time consuming, and the results can still be inaccurate. That is why I have to use words like "somewhat", "approximately", and "likely". Before I retired, I had access to proprietary databases, and it would have been easier to write authoritatively. But we can still reach the "likely" appropriate conclusion by thinking reasonably.
When pundits insist that Russia is running out of ammunition/men/washing machines/ships/aircraft/missiles/cat litter/something else, they are not particularly concerned with the truth of their statements, as these statements are not offered for truth.
Rather, they are offered as a form of cheerleading, a slightly less juvenile version of making fun of some Russian leader's name.
More importantly, they are offered to keep the populace on side, just one more push, just one more big offensive, just one more escalation, just one more sacrifice and we'll win, we can't stop now!
The US brings its strategic reserves of land war equipment and ammunition down. At least to a low but not critical level. But, the US doesn't need this land war equipment for itself. It is rather for their "allies" which are being striped of it.
The US rather needs air and naval assets because that's their power projection assets.
Hence, the US allies are suffering from this.
The US will certainly not fight any ground war in the next time, so it is not critical to them.
If the US wants to smash a little country against the wall (a famous quote from Michael Ledeen) it will do it with its air assets and stand-off weapons of the navy.
If the US wants to piss on the foot of a larger enemy it will use proxys.
You got my point?
Bottom line: US is doing well by dumping its not needed ground assets on its proxy Ukraine to piss on the foot of Russia. The US will certainly not be engaged in any ground war against any serious opponent anytime soon.
Fighting a Naval war against China or Russia? That would be over very quickly because ALL fleets (Russian, Chinese and American) would be sunk very quickly. And for this short standoff time the stocks are more than sufficient.
I don't think that such a scenario will materialize anytime soon.
The grim reaper is already behind the corner and is on its way to take the Dollar with him.
And that will hopefully (one can't know of course) be the end of the US hegemony and the end of the imminent threat of a world war.
I will write about that in Economics and Empires 5 and 6.
This is a common trope among Russia fans, that the United States cannot supply more missiles/uniforms/tanks/cat litter, etc. to Ukraine. It's the mirror image of Russia is collapsing because it is out of missiles/tanks/aircraft/ships/burrito coverings/etc..
The West has been saying Russia is going to run for at least the last 8 months. Also the economy was long ago supposed to collapse with Russia breaking apart
World famous expert for semiconductor technology, Ms Ursula von der Lyin, claimed that the Russian technicians, against all odds, managed to modify the plentiful electronic chips from washing machines to carry out the functions required for guidance systems in these sophisticated airborne munitions.
In that way, she, unintentionally, prised German technology of washing machines as capable of producing very dangerous weapons, much more dangerous than e.g. Leopard tanks .
To put it more clear, Russian guided amunnition, with electronic chips retaken from German washing maqchines easily destroy famous tanks on the real battlefield. It is not because of ingenuity of Russian technicians but because of effectiveness of chips from German washng machines.
It seems it would be better for Germany to supply UAF with washing machines instead Leopards.
As for Ursula herself, her name means little she-bear. All of us know quite well what is symbolic meaning of bear in Russia. Interesting, isn't it?
Cotton is not required, CELLULOSE (the major constituent of cotton) is.
Wood is generally more than 60% cellulose by weight and sawdust/wood flour are much cheaper & higher abundance raw materials for nitrocellulose production than even the waste "lint" from a cotton mill. Straw and other agricultural wastes are also mostly cellulose, cheap, widely available & have been used.
Also, if your example presented of a 7.62 cartridge is the Russian standard 7.62x39, typical propellant loads are about 2X your estimated "over 400 per pound". Still not a major deal breaker, just sayin'. (I load those, wish I COULD get over 400).
Excellent article!
Thanks Mike!
Your articles are amazing, as is your pace of publishing. I cannot keep up!
You are welcome Piquet! And thank you.
Awesome article, Piquet.
I learned a lot.
And of course I fully agree with your assessment.
You portrayed the physical restrictions that the Russians have in terms of artillery shells.
We all are constantly joking about "Russia is running out of missiles".
Yes, that is unlikely. But as you pointed out the bottleneck is located at the artillery shell production.
I absolutely believe that Russia is still using up its large stockpiles and that the consumption is higher than the production. But I also think that the production will be brought up to speed before the stockpiles will run out.
Especially, since the Russian armed forces will be expanded dramatically.
Several months ago I wrote down my thoughts about that here.
https://bmanalysis.substack.com/p/operational-update
But your very professional research seem to confirm that.
Thank you very much!
They have been running out of Ammo and everything else for a year and a half now, constantly on the verge of collapse and running away, just one more sci-fi smart weapon strike from the West away from losing. Russia is Schrödinger's Enemy, they are both weak and a threat to the whole world depending on the narrative you wish to push, sometimes in the very same sentence. NATO justifies its expansions and build-up with claiming Russia is going to conquer all of 'Garden' Europe if NATO doesn't surround them. And yet at the same time the Russians are so weak they are fighting with cartoonish inferior equipment, mindless horde tactics, they are dumb orks that are starving, lack even basic clothes and shoes, and so poor and unequipped they have to fight with shovels and sticks.
The Ten Commandments of War Propaganda:
We don't want war, we are only defending ourselves!
Our adversary is solely responsible for this war!
Our adversary's leader is inherently evil and resembles the devil
We are defending a noble cause, not our particular interests!
The enemy is purposefully committing atrocities; if we are making mistakes this happens without intention
The enemy makes use of illegal weapons
We suffer few losses, the enemy's losses are considerable
Recognized intellectuals and artists support our cause
Our cause is sacred
Whoever casts doubt on our propaganda helps the enemy and is a traitor
As an aside, these are always easy to spot in the Other Guy, but one must always scrutinize one's own side as well.
The West lie about Everything!!!
" The West lie about Everything!!! "
Well , business as usual !
Thanks for the article, very interesting. I believe that Russia could be able to produce even one million 152mm rounds per month, which seems a lot, but actually requires relative small quantity of metals and chemicals (ca 50.000 tons, which is very little compared to russian industrial capacity). The most difficult part will be to manufacture one million fuzes (the fuze is by far the most complicated and expensive part of a artillery round), but even that can be achieved, eventually returning to the use of mechanical (non electronic) fuzes, a technology that worked well for most of XX century. Increasing the production while simplifying the tecnology could be (and perhaps is) a natural solution for Russia.
Another interesting topic is the size of the pre-war russian ammunition stock, which is perhaps the big mistery of this war.
However, there is some information about the size of the stock until 2013, specifically from this articles:
https://arsenal-otechestva.ru/article/157-hranenie-i-utilizaciya-boepripasov
http://old.redstar.ru/2012/02/02_02/1_01.html
What can be gleaned from them is that:
+Russia inherited 15 millions tons (!!!) of ordnance from SSSR
+SSSR produced ca 1+ million tons each year
+Russia had still 8 millions tons in 2010 (but 6.5M were considered "unsuitable")
+4.6 millions tons were disposed of in 2010-12
+Russia had 3.7 million tons by 1/1/2013, of which 1.1M were "unusable", so net is 2.6M
+year production was around 200.000 tons (according to a british source)
+likely stock in 2022 could be more than 4M tons (2.6M from 2013 plus production 10x200.000)
Even only 2M tons of ordnance will be an immense stock: ten millon rounds of 152mm calibre are just half a million tons.
In the end, Russia is unlikely to run out of ammo, but could have problems or limits in certain categories of ordnance because of industrial or techonological bottlenecks (I'm thinking about the most sophisticated weapons, like cruise or ballistic missiles).
Thank you StefanoVZ,
I calculate the same quantity of rounds (projectile + explosive) as you: 20 rounds per ton. The propellant is separate, and I wonder how much was/is available from stocks at the beginning of the SMO. Probably not a huge amount, because proper storage (dry, cool) is critical, and shelf life is not unlimited. Increasing propellant production is a high priority, and that is not too difficult. The chemistry is almost stupid-easy (nitrocellulose was discovered accidentally by a lab worker spilling a chemical mixture on a cotton lab apron). It's the purification and handling that is critically dangerous.
Your last point, and Aleks's point about rockets/missiles versus artillery rounds, brings up an interesting question: which is more important in this SMO, artillery rounds; or rockets/missiles?
I would like to hear people's comments on this!
That indeed is an extraordinary comment.
Thanks for that.
Provided the figures are correct, it correlates with my estimates and data that I roughly calculated a few months ago.
Nevertheless, the consumption is higher than the production.
Hence, Russia is still living from the stock.
I'm sure the Russians are working on this (as you pointed out).
Not only the operational stocks need to be replenished but also the strategic for the armies that are being built, and for potential large-scale conflict, which would make 20,000 shells/day look like a joke. Nevertheless, I still do not believe in such a scenario.
Nice comment. Thanks.
I was born in the UK during the1960's. By the 70's, even I knew that you don't f**k with Russia.
Thx Piquet, this makes to much sense, meaning the the West doesn't want to hear it.....and whats sad is, no offense, but what you did here, matching known and acknowledged production and resource levels, isnt rocket science ;) , but renders a clear example of how, even with the knowledge out there, the lack of and loss of curiosity, its debilitating and a sad reflection on the supposed 'Creation and Home of Reason', the West.
The Media is a venal, silent, serpentine killer, its almost parasitical in turning even smart people into supine dupes. ............ this whole Ukr Russian
No offense taken Trajan,
That is a great point. The information is (mostly) available from public sources, but it must be cross-checked with multiple (independent) sources because of the chaff that is on the internet. That is time consuming, and the results can still be inaccurate. That is why I have to use words like "somewhat", "approximately", and "likely". Before I retired, I had access to proprietary databases, and it would have been easier to write authoritatively. But we can still reach the "likely" appropriate conclusion by thinking reasonably.
When pundits insist that Russia is running out of ammunition/men/washing machines/ships/aircraft/missiles/cat litter/something else, they are not particularly concerned with the truth of their statements, as these statements are not offered for truth.
Rather, they are offered as a form of cheerleading, a slightly less juvenile version of making fun of some Russian leader's name.
More importantly, they are offered to keep the populace on side, just one more push, just one more big offensive, just one more escalation, just one more sacrifice and we'll win, we can't stop now!
I fully agree.
Meanwhile, I see that the Pentagon has found another "accounting error" allowing them to send another $6.2 billion in weapons to Ukraine.
Stop kidding yourselves. The US is nowhere near out of weapons, and is nowhere near done doubling down.
I agree.
Did someone say that the US is running out?
I certainly not.
The Europeans indeed.
Nevertheless, we mustn't mix up things.
The US brings its strategic reserves of land war equipment and ammunition down. At least to a low but not critical level. But, the US doesn't need this land war equipment for itself. It is rather for their "allies" which are being striped of it.
The US rather needs air and naval assets because that's their power projection assets.
Hence, the US allies are suffering from this.
The US will certainly not fight any ground war in the next time, so it is not critical to them.
If the US wants to smash a little country against the wall (a famous quote from Michael Ledeen) it will do it with its air assets and stand-off weapons of the navy.
If the US wants to piss on the foot of a larger enemy it will use proxys.
You got my point?
Bottom line: US is doing well by dumping its not needed ground assets on its proxy Ukraine to piss on the foot of Russia. The US will certainly not be engaged in any ground war against any serious opponent anytime soon.
Fighting a Naval war against China or Russia? That would be over very quickly because ALL fleets (Russian, Chinese and American) would be sunk very quickly. And for this short standoff time the stocks are more than sufficient.
I don't think that such a scenario will materialize anytime soon.
The grim reaper is already behind the corner and is on its way to take the Dollar with him.
And that will hopefully (one can't know of course) be the end of the US hegemony and the end of the imminent threat of a world war.
I will write about that in Economics and Empires 5 and 6.
"Did someone say that the US is running out?"
This is a common trope among Russia fans, that the United States cannot supply more missiles/uniforms/tanks/cat litter, etc. to Ukraine. It's the mirror image of Russia is collapsing because it is out of missiles/tanks/aircraft/ships/burrito coverings/etc..
The West has been saying Russia is going to run for at least the last 8 months. Also the economy was long ago supposed to collapse with Russia breaking apart
World famous expert for semiconductor technology, Ms Ursula von der Lyin, claimed that the Russian technicians, against all odds, managed to modify the plentiful electronic chips from washing machines to carry out the functions required for guidance systems in these sophisticated airborne munitions.
In that way, she, unintentionally, prised German technology of washing machines as capable of producing very dangerous weapons, much more dangerous than e.g. Leopard tanks .
To put it more clear, Russian guided amunnition, with electronic chips retaken from German washing maqchines easily destroy famous tanks on the real battlefield. It is not because of ingenuity of Russian technicians but because of effectiveness of chips from German washng machines.
It seems it would be better for Germany to supply UAF with washing machines instead Leopards.
As for Ursula herself, her name means little she-bear. All of us know quite well what is symbolic meaning of bear in Russia. Interesting, isn't it?
I am going to be picky...
Cotton is not required, CELLULOSE (the major constituent of cotton) is.
Wood is generally more than 60% cellulose by weight and sawdust/wood flour are much cheaper & higher abundance raw materials for nitrocellulose production than even the waste "lint" from a cotton mill. Straw and other agricultural wastes are also mostly cellulose, cheap, widely available & have been used.
Also, if your example presented of a 7.62 cartridge is the Russian standard 7.62x39, typical propellant loads are about 2X your estimated "over 400 per pound". Still not a major deal breaker, just sayin'. (I load those, wish I COULD get over 400).
Sooooo...no?
Oh not this again...