Smoke from Ukraine airstrike within eyeshot of Kremlin, after Russia hit iconic church(Ukraine Battlefield update, Day 1,573)

Every day, the Ukraine Battlefield update newsletter offers a clear look at how the war is unfolding on the ground. Subscribe for free here to get the full text delivered to your inbox.

Ukraine hit a refinery in Moscow, 15 km from the Kremlin. It was revenge for the damage to the cathedral in Kyiv, Ukrainians said. One third of Russia’s refinery capacity is offline, Russia may be heading towards the biggest fuel crisis in its history. Another Russian strategic bomber Tu-22M3 crashed. Maps of the day: How Rybar and the Russian command diverge from reality. Videos of the day: A fighter drone misses a Geran, a helicopter showed Ukrainian fortifications.

Residents of Moscow should get to a petrol station as soon as possible, while there is still something left to fill up. This was how the Ukrainian account Bachmut Demon reacted to the images coming from Moscow on Tuesday morning.

Despite the extensive air defences that the Russians kept reinforcing with new Pantsir systems, Ukrainian long-range drones reached the capital of the Russian Federation on Tuesday morning. The FP-1 and Lutyj types were mentioned. Residents of Moscow could watch from their tower blocks as some of them flew with impunity across the multi‑million city.

The main target was the Moscow refinery, located about 15 km from the Kremlin. Since the attack took place in daylight, it was possible to film a shot of one drone directly hitting the refinery complex.

The Russian mayor Sergei Sobyanin reported that Russian security forces had shot down at least 60 Ukrainian drones.

But not all of them.

It seems the Ukrainians found a blind spot in the air defences. As Radio Liberty journalist Mark Krutov wrote, there was no Pantsir air‑defence system near the Moscow refinery, even though the Russians had been placing Pantsir systems on towers or high‑rise buildings in Moscow.

“The tower for the Pantsir system was built near the Moscow oil refinery only recently, in mid‑June, and as of 14 June it had not yet been fitted with the Pantsir system itself. The nearest other Pantsir tower is located almost five km away,” Krutov wrote.

It is not clear whether the refinery, owned by Gazprom, was protected by other systems, but it is certainly noteworthy that the Russians did not have a Pantsir system at this location. The refinery in Moscow had already been attacked by Ukrainians in 2024.

The Russian Z‑blogger Alexander Kots viewed the attack somewhat differently. According to him, it was essentially a Ukrainian failure and Russian air defences worked well, since in his view only one drone got through.

“Compare this with yesterday’s attacks on Kyiv – dozens of our missiles and drones hit military‑industrial facilities. Russia has a significant lead in the ‘war of capitals’,” he wrote.

That is true, the Russians were still able to destroy the Ukrainian capital much more easily. In particular, the Ukrainians were not able to shoot down ballistic missiles effectively, even though, in the case of cruise missiles and drones, their success rate was currently over 90 percent. Yet let us look at it from another perspective – back in February 2022, the Russians probably could not even have imagined that they would be watching Ukrainians set refineries ablaze in their heavily defended capital.

The attack took place a day after, according to Ukrainians, Russian Geran drones hit the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra – the oldest Orthodox monastery in Ukraine. It was the first time they had hit this historical landmark, which is also on the Unesco cultural heritage list.

The Russians immediately claimed on Monday that it had in fact been hit by a Ukrainian Patriot air‑defence missile. Later, some bloggers spread an alternative explanation – that the cathedral had been set on fire from the inside. The pro‑Russian account Yuriy Podolyaka shared an overhead photograph of the cathedral which, he said, showed no signs of a direct hit by a Geran.

However, already on Monday the Ukrainians published photos of Geran debris that they had found in and around the cathedral. This was confirmed, for example, by Polish journalist Piotr Kaszuwara.

“A Russian Geran‑2 drone fell on the Pechersk Lavra. And if these are not its fragments, I am a Bengali princess,” he wrote.

The Ukrainians made it clear that Tuesday’s attack on Moscow was revenge for the attack on the Lavra. “This is a just response to Russian attacks,” Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky wrote.

The commander of Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces, Robert Brovdy, alias Magyar, also wrote that it was revenge for the Lavra. Ukrainians even wrote this on the drones they sent to Moscow. “The Lavra will stand for centuries, Moscow will fall,” they wrote.

“Explosions of fuel instead of explosions of anger – a pragmatic punishment without emotions and unnecessary words,” Magyar wrote.

The Moscow refinery, also known as Kapotnya after the district in the south‑eastern part of Moscow where it is located, ranks among the ten largest refineries in the country. It processes 12m tons of oil per year. It is particularly important for Moscow itself, as it produces 40 percent of the petrol and 50 percent of the diesel consumed in the Russian capital.

According to bloggers, the footage suggested that the drone hit the ELOU AVT‑6 primary oil‑processing unit, which is a key part of the refinery. Nevertheless, at nine in the morning the Russian Ministry for Emergency Situations announced that the fire had been extinguished and the attack had not affected operations. Given the fire and the hit on such an important facility, that is hard to believe.

In Moscow, as elsewhere in Russia, reports about regulating fuel purchases have already started to appear. As the Kyiv Post wrote over the weekend, restrictions have appeared at some petrol stations in several regions, including Moscow and Saint Petersburg. For example, at Tatneft stations it is permitted to fill up a maximum of 20 litres of petrol and 40 litres of diesel. Rosneft and Lukoil have introduced similar measures in the capital.

Overall, Russia is experiencing a serious fuel crisis. The company Energy Intelligence wrote this in an analysis last week.

“The Ukrainian campaign targeting the Russian energy sector, especially facilities in the oil‑processing and distribution sphere, has caused extensive damage, to such an extent that the country now appears headed this summer for what could be its worst fuel crisis in history,” it stated.

According to the analysis, in the first week of June one third of Russia’s oil‑refining capacity was offline. In total, the refineries were able to process four million barrels of oil per day, the lowest level in 21 years.

“If Ukrainian drones continue to inflict damage on the country’s refining sector, Russia faces a paralysing crisis on the domestic fuel market,” the authors wrote in the analysis.

On Monday Russia lost another strategic bomber, a Tu‑22M3 (Nato designation Backfire). Even though this happened far from the front and was almost certainly an accident, it is worth mentioning, since Russia has only a limited number of these aircraft.

Videos circulated widely on social media showing one of the bombers plunging nose‑first in the Irkutsk region in north‑eastern Siberia. After it crashed, a cloud of black smoke appeared. Footage of these aircraft going down is relatively rare; this time, several videos from different angles emerged.

Later, footage emerged directly from the crash site.

The loss of the Tu‑22M3 was also confirmed by the Russian Ministry of Defence. As the website The War Zone wrote, it announced that the aircraft had crashed during a training flight without weapons on board, all crew members had safely ejected, and there had been no casualties on the ground.

The Russian Z‑channel Fighterbomber, which generally has good information from within the Russian air force, wrote that the entire crew was alive. The navigators were pulled from the water and the pilots also landed safely on the ground.

The Russian Ministry of Defence did not disclose the reasons for the accident. However, Fighterbomber wrote that, according to preliminary information, one engine had failed over the training range (test site) and the second failed during the return flight home.

The Tu‑22M3 strategic bombers are an important part of the Russian air force during the war in Ukraine. Cruise missiles used to strike Ukrainian cities are launched from these aircraft. According to TWZ, these are mainly Kh‑22 and Kh‑32 missiles.

Of course, training‑flight aircraft accidents also occur elsewhere. On Monday, an American B‑52 bomber also crashed at Edwards Air Force Base in California, killing eight crew members, The War Zone reported.

During a war, however, accidents occur more frequently because of the wear and tear on aircraft. Even before this, three Russian Tu‑22M3 bombers had crashed without any Ukrainian involvement – in April 2024, August 2024 and May 2025. This was therefore the fourth accident.

“Intensive use during combat operations, combined with the age of the aircraft, leads to the accumulation of new technical problems, resulting in the loss of these missile carriers outside combat,” the Russian channel Military Observer wrote.

In addition, the Ukrainians managed to destroy several of them. During last year’s Operation Cobweb, which specifically targeted these strategic bombers, they destroyed four aircraft and damaged another two, according to TWZ. They may also have caused minor damage to another four bombers.

Overall, according to Oryx, since the start of the invasion Russia has lost nine Tu‑22M3s, and another three have been damaged.

That is not an insignificant number. The War Zone writes that Russia may have around 50 such aircraft in active service.

These aircraft have not been produced for decades. Given their low numbers, previous losses, and their role in the war, every loss of such a bomber is significant news. It is an added bonus when it is well documented on video, as in this case.

Maps of the day

It seems that Russian official and unofficial sources are drawing frontline maps that are increasingly detached from reality. This was pointed out by the account Vitaliy, who noticed that the map of the Rybar channel differed significantly from the way the Ukrainian account DeepState UA depicted the front.

This concerns a section of the front east of Velyka Novosilka. When it comes to mapping the front, the Rybar channel often follows the line of the Russian army. If a Russian soldier with a Russian flag appears in a village, they consider it Russian territory.

Of course, the Ukrainian command sometimes exaggerates as well. But in this particular section of the front, the maps of the General Staff match the DeepState UA account.

Recently, a map from the Russian command in the Zaporizhzhia region was leaked. Here too it can be seen that the Russians are completely detached from reality when we compare it with DeepState UA.

Videos of the day

One fighter drone narrowly missed a Russian Geran, but a second one – Sting – did not.

A Ukrainian Mil Mi‑24 military helicopter, nicknamed Crocodile, flies low over Ukrainian fortifications. We can see dragon’s teeth, anti‑tank ditches and embankments.

What are the losses

Last updated on Monday (6 June).

As of Monday (6 June), Russia had demonstrably lost 23,593 pieces of heavy equipment (23,556 on Monday (1 June)). Of this, 18,585 (18,551) pieces were destroyed by Ukrainians, 982 (979) were damaged, 1,199 (1,199) were abandoned by their crews, and 2,827 (2,827) were captured by the Ukrainian army. This includes 4,397 (4,394) tanks, of which 3,300 (3,293) were destroyed in combat. Ukraine has lost 11,425 (11,397) pieces of equipment, of which 8,888 (8,863) were destroyed, 680 (678) damaged, 670 (669) abandoned and 1,187 (1,187) captured. This includes 1,426 (1,424) tanks, of which 1,091 (1,089) were destroyed in combat.

Note: Neither side regularly reports its dead or destroyed equipment. Ukraine publishes daily figures for Russian casualties and destroyed equipment, which cannot be independently verified. In this overview we use data from the Oryx project which, since the start of the war, has compiled a list of equipment losses documented exclusively by photographic evidence.