Rokossovski

There were lots of discussion on logistics in first 500 pages, when the war was still in the "maneuver" phase. 
I highly recommend below article as a quick start reading on this topic
" FEEDING THE BEAR: A CLOSER LOOK AT RUSSIAN ARMY LOGISTICS AND THE FAIT ACCOMPLI"
https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/
This is an estimation based on idea situation. Russian Army , after the 2008 Serdyukov reform, has changed from Soviets' style deep battle to an army that will limit it's operation to no more than 50km. The relatively low number of trucks under the Army HQ should not be a big issue in a low intense - high tech warfare. But in this  "WW I style bombardment" war,  it has already become an issue. Part of the reason Russian crawling from Rubizhne, Popasna into Severodonetsk-Lysychans'k is, usually they running low on artillery shell after 3 days operation, so next offensive to push another 10km into UA defense line needs a week to buildup.   Now , with ammunition dump move to a place >100km to the front line troops, the issue could become a disaster. Back in March when Russian tanks were 150km-200km away from the railhead they can barely keep 1/3rd of the force operational.  
 
 
 
And I would like to add one more thought here. This is not about Russian army or US army, this is more about the human nature (and many big corporations are likely to make the same mistake) . If a congestion happens and that reduces the frontline troops' received supplies significantly, the decision maker is very likely to push more trucks with supplies down the road, which in turn causes more congestions and reduce the received supplies further.

The Ukrainian's previous victories have come when they just made it too unpleasant for the Russians to stay somewhere. I am expecting that Kherson will go the same way. The supplies just get ever more strangled. The partisans get ever more supplied with platter charges and claymores and all kinds of unpleasant go bang, and the rain of 155 just never stops. Any unit that displays real competence gets GMLRSed. Remember that the Ukrainian supply situation is considerably easier on that side of the Dnipro. It should be by far the easiest place for them to win the artillery logistics battle. My biggest question is when the Russians want to go, do they let them to lessen civilian casualties? Or go for a full up cauldron and try to take five or ten thousand Russian prisoners?

Well said, Dan/CA. 
But is Kherson such a big propaganda loss for Putler that he decides it must be held at all costs?  It could be a potential disaster for RU, both in lost forces and in propaganda. 
I like that UKR has very low risk in fighting on this front while RU has great risk of taking massive losses.  If RU counterattacks UKR can simply fall back locally and there's no operational objectives at risk.  While for RU, they are in constant danger of having a huge portion of their forces being completely cut off and losing a region that Der Putler has already boasted will be a new breakaway republic/puppet state..  I am starting to see why UKR is concentrating their current efforts there.  Low risk, high reward.  And maybe has the nice benefit of getting RU to shift even more forces into a trap.

Yah I saw that but I'm beyond tired of random twitterati gombeen* throwing shade that something "doesn't sound real" because it's too well written - i.e. the original author can string more than two syllables together and has a sense of scene. Just because someone is **** at something doesn't mean others are, or what they say isn't true. They just said it better. Something can be real, true and well-written. Those aren't mutually exclusive concepts. Essentially I've no time for nitwits who are unable to spell y-o-u as a whole, three-letter word yet feel their puddle-deep, emotion-driven "thoughts" are actually worth more than gnat's fart in a hurricane.  
And SCENE.

The link isn't the first I've read of this kind of thing happening, the emptying shelves is definitely a trend that hasn't gone away. And as with all unequal societies, the sanctions are first hitting the poorer, margin-less people hardest. This absolutely jibs with the basics of capitalistic/kleptocratic societies. 
* A real Irish word, meaning complete ****ing idiot.

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-economy-western-sanctions-twilight-zone/31911576.html
Interesting article on the subtle and insidious effects proper sanctions have on a modern economy.

1.  I actually make my living in the energy business, so please believe me when I say there are still a boatload of perfectly functional coal plants in Europe (google RWE) which can keep the lights on there if need be for some years, in spite of the CO2 consequences (which, indeed, we humans must all live with collectively. Especially tundra and taiga dwelling Russians, who get to experience them long before the river-valley-dwelling fellow Slavs whose lands they feel entitled to colonise).
TL:DR  Europeans have many choices about freezing in the dark, and those choices are NOT made in Moscow.
Extending remarks: 
2. I went to MBA school in the 1990s with a GAZPROM egghead who was a flat out genius. And he was quite firm on one point: ever since fur trading days, in spite of throwing its best brains at the question, Russia has always been a piker at the global resource and commodities game, with at best 'swing supplier' leverage. Even tiny overregulated Canada kicks their arse.
3.  Deciding which key resources go where on the planet, and for how much, has been an exhorbitant privilege of the Anglo-Saxon maritime civilisations since before 1500. I backdate that to include the Dutch Republic and pre-union Portugal. When Bajazet took full control of the old Silk Route from the Mamluks c.1480, it forced Henry the Navigator and his backers to explore beyond the Mediterranean basin. Raise your hands,  nation states whose seafarers can deal with the Atlantic (or North Sea). The rest is history.... 
4.  More broadly yet, ever since it was codified by guilds of cloth merchants in Flanders in the post Black Death 1380s, and then further refined by Baltic traders, market capitalism (even when harnessed, for a time, by ambitious kings and republics) consistently chews and spits out authoritarianism/despotism + kleptocracy (those invariably come as a package) in the event of conflict.
Kapital siegt on allen fronten.
[Note that none of this sidebar pontificating negates my worry about the ruinous consequences of a long drawn out war for the dear Ukrainians, as expressed above. Capital can be a heartless, faithless sh*t as well, seeking low lying ground like water]

You do recommend to buy his lies, comrade.
 
And your talking point about Nazi reminds me about Olginka building, comrade.
 
Comrade, your masters' tactics of using useful idiots to throw in RU propaganda as if it is not coming directly from RU is well known. 
His talking point were already discussed and disproven. Notably by your own side, comrade

This shows your disconnect from critical analysis. You see, Einstein was in fact a genius who knew what he was talking about, whereas the man you are promoting here (assuming it is the same Mercouris, which you haven't denied) has been shown to have a very tenuous relationship with the truth (just one example from his rap sheet: "you purported to obtain a statement from H that was not a true document and you knew was not a true document and you had not had any contact with H").
You talk about facts but have not discussed any, instead dropping a link with no explanation. I don't accept anything as fact without verification, and certainly not when provided by some sketchy dude intermixed with a bunch of his reckons.
Don't bother replying to me personally. I have added you to my ignore list as your contributions here are valueless.

Married to an Afghan lady who is both pro-Russian and anti-NATO (for the rest we're doing fine, thank you) I truly don't see what more could have been done in Afghanistan. It's Afghan corruption and stupidity that prevented a better outcome. 

Apologies for releasing the Trump here.

The idea that pulling out of Afghanistan was a sign of weakness was certainly a favorite trope for CNN journalists who made their careers there but what's never noted is that Afghanistan kept American resources (both diplomatic and military) tied up in a region that was completely removed from any strategic interest to the country. Worse, it forced the Pentagon into retaining a force structure that was not geared towards near peer warfare. 
The pullout was certainly not the US' finest hour but from a state competition standpoint, it was a net negative for Russia and China which would become more of a negative as the US reoriented globally. 

I truly hope the war in Ukraine will have the same uniting influence upon the American people as it has on Europe (well, that process is still going on, but we'll get there). Especially since your differences in the eye of a European such as myself are so minor, that it's bewildering to see how they can tear you apart like this. 
I've been an idiot at this forum more than I care to admit, but looking back at it, it's just not worth it. 

This is a lie. You know the level of knowledge about Ukraine present here.  Can’t believe you would try and trot this out in front of this crowd. Since everything else is just Fox News talking points also, I doubt there is any reason to address this in detail, but broadly:
-Biden worked to end corruption in Ukraine, carrying out the policy of the US and our European partners, including putting pressure on Ukraine to fire the prosecutor who WAS NOT actively pursuing an investigation of Burisma (which concerned issues predating Hunter Biden’s term on the Burisma, and so COULD NOT have been an investigation of H. Biden).
-Trump tried to extort a fake investigation of H. Biden by Ukraine for purely domestic US political purposes by threatening to withhold military aid, in direct contravention of US foreign policy.
If you don’t think the latter display of complete contempt for Ukraine on the part of the US didn’t play into Russia’s plans in Ukraine (which did not start out of the blue in Nov 2020), then I don’t know what to say.

And this is why c3k is on my block list - I suggest you do the same  . Posting this sort of blatant propaganda in this  forum/thread is really just a sign of disrespect for the rest of us .

Thanks ) Just became some more of work, my wife turned back and often occupies PC because her work, also it's hard to live three months 24/7 as war news translator, so I took small vacations 

Alright!  Steve committed to adding an OP layer to CM!....... kidding......

@Battlefront.com@The_Capt@Haiduk@kraze et al..
Appreciate any perspective on the following regarding Crimea.
1. Should reacquiring Crimea be a strategic/operational goal at all for Ukraine?
2. If yes, what would you anticipate Russia’s response to be, given the current condition of the RA & political climate?
3. Would a majority of the Crimean population actively support or reject such an endeavor by Ukraine?

Unfortunately, I have no idea, not having seen the interior of the vehicle and not knowing the Ukrainian radio systems. I do think a Digital Fire system was set up but how I have no idea. One of the previous articles implied that modifications had been made by Nexter (the manufacturer) and that contracts had been put in place. It would be a really big handicap if the latter wasn't implemented, which makes me 90% think they've found a way (which one I don't know).
The vehicle does not have a traditional aiming system, relying on the SIGMA-30N. It only has an LTD (Lunette de Tir Direct = direct fire sight) to be fitted only if necessary. Its usefulness would really be for the neutralization of fortifications because a CAESAR in the front line would really not be a good thing... It could also be for making an ambush on suddenly appearing tanks (but OMG, the silouhette is so high !).  I think that there was no degraded system put in place for the sake of lowering the cost already height of the vehicle and that it is intended in case of damage or anomaly to return to the base to be repaired (it is not a very armored vehicle, if one already considers that it is armored). Only the cabin is armored for protecting the crew.
From a more general point of view, the French doctrine of the Régiments d'Artillerie (US Artillery Battalion equivalent) is to combine 120mm RTF-1 and 155mm CAESAR mortars. The first is rustic, not digitized, towed by a VAB and is used for the short range (approx 0-13km) while the CAESAR covers the rest (approx 6-40km). The doctrine really emphasizes its long distance side which should not be engaged in the front line because it is the rustic 120mm RTF-1 which is there for that. Lower mortars (81mm) are distributed in infantry units. The 120mm was in infantry units before but is now exclusively in artillery units (since 1990-2000)

To sum up, the CAESAR relies solely on its technology. The software and sensors had flaws when the vehicle was introduced to the units, but I could see the improvement in reliability with my own eyes. It works well and I think the units can have confidence in it, as the first positive feedback also indicates. However, the vehicle remains fragile and requires a rear base available in case of repair. In theory, being quick to set up, to fire and to fold, it should not have to undergo counter-battery and therefore damage. The doctrine seems to me very coherent but as we all know, War = SNAFU
 

Caught the BMP by surprise.
No one expects the Spanish Instalaza.

Caught the BMP by surprise.
No one expects the Spanish Instalaza.

Caught the BMP by surprise.
No one expects the Spanish Instalaza.

Caught the BMP by surprise.
No one expects the Spanish Instalaza.

Caught the BMP by surprise.
No one expects the Spanish Instalaza.

Caught the BMP by surprise.
No one expects the Spanish Instalaza.