Jump to content
emccabe

ukraine military vs russia

Recommended Posts

i am aware that Ukraines military is undersized and underfunded and the Russian have better technology. than how will Ukraines military be able to stand up to Russian forces in black sea do they have any advantages

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people were able to manage it as Syria vs NATO in CMSF, I'm assuming they will be able to manage it here, since the comparative tech gap is much smaller. I'm guessing in many of the scenarios the Ukrainians will be on the tactical defensive, which gives significant advantages with modern technology. Hills, woods, buildings etc can provide important los blockages, which allow defenders to hit the attackers piecemeal, get flank shots on armour, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ukraine military seems to be weaker then Syrian, as recent events showed. So, you can compare with Shock force.

They have a lot of Soviet vehicles. Artillery firepower is huge, though officers have a lack of expirence. They trend to use an area fire. Most of light vehicles, (BMPs, BTRs) are now lost, they have problems with mech infantry. Huh, NATO was right, when started to set anti-14.5 armor on their IFV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-84 sure is a very interesting asset. Despite the low numbers of most advanced vehicles, I am sure it will be interesting to see Ukraine military units against russian units, and I belive there will be more balance than there was with BMP-1, BTR-60, T-54, 55, 62, 72 syrian forces of CMSF used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
T-84 sure is a very interesting asset. Despite the low numbers of most advanced vehicles, I am sure it will be interesting to see Ukraine military units against russian units, and I belive there will be more balance than there was with BMP-1, BTR-60, T-54, 55, 62, 72 syrian forces of CMSF used.

Exactly, the Ukraine has sophisticated weapon platforms, a search on the Oplots, and even the BTR4 make them look pretty good on paper, I expect in reality too. Factor in production numbers by 2017 and you have a formidable formation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ukraine military seems to be weaker then Syrian, as recent events showed. So, you can compare with Shock force.

Definitely true when the conflict started in the late winter and spring, but not true now.

Ukraine suffered from years and years and years of horrid corruption. The military budget was simply a way for higher officers to make money. Yanukovych also ensured that the military did not have the money it needed to fully modernize because that would antagonize Russia (i.e. Russia doesn't want additional modern military forces on its borders). The combination was crippling to everything.

On top of that, the senior level of the military was born and raised in the Soviet military system. A system which has been proven inferior to the Western system on a tactical level, even as far back as WW2. The Soviets always made up for that by focusing on operational and strategic levels of warfare. Both of which the Soviets were awesome at.

However, two things happened. First, the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact evaporated overnight. Masses of forces were always a significant part of the overall Soviet doctrine. With that taken away the Soviet doctrine was unworkable. Second, as tactical weapons and systems became increasingly lethal/effective (aka "force multiplier") the larger the operational and strategic advantages had to be in order to compete with the stronger tactical level. In short, if it used to take a Soviet style tank regiment to defeat a Western tank battalion, it now took a Soviet style tank regiment to defeat a Western tank company.

The combination of losing the force size advantage AND having more difficulty at the tactical level was a double whammy. The chances that a nation could have a single Soviet type tank regiment doing tactical battle against a single Western tank company was exceedingly unlikely. And that doesn't even take into consideration what Western air and artillery forces bring to the battle.

The point of this is the Ukrainian military was a combination of Cold War Soviet style equipment, doctrine, and training riddled with corruption and ineptitude. It was bound to fail since Russia has been spending billions since 2008 on modernization and professionalization.

However, things are very different today. Very different. Much like the US Army in 1942 or the Soviet Army of 1941, the Ukrainian military started out weak, but it was not defeated and now is much more dangerous to Russia than it has EVER been. Look at the battles for the Donetsk airport or the battles going on for Debaltseve. They have learned a lot already and continue to learn. This is the military that we will simulate in CMBS, not the one from last year.

They have a lot of Soviet vehicles. Artillery firepower is huge, though officers have a lack of expirence. They trend to use an area fire. Most of light vehicles, (BMPs, BTRs) are now lost, they have problems with mech infantry. Huh, NATO was right, when started to set anti-14.5 armor on their IFV.

This is all changing as we speak. The best thing to happen to the Ukrainian military was this war. Modernizing under peacetime conditions is always slower and less effective than under wartime conditions PROVIDED there is not an outright defeat. What is going on now is comparable to what happened to the Soviet military in 1941. The Germans destroyed old and ineffective vehicles, which were then replaced by superior ones. The crony and incompetent military leaders were killed (sometimes by Stalin) or were relieved of command and capable leaders took their places. Old tactics that had no chance of success were abandoned and replaced by more effective tactics that were directly applicable to fighting the Germans. And motivation to fight for the Motherland was increased 1000 fold by the stupidity of German policy.

In the end, Germany won many battles but lost the war.

Look at the military engagements going on now and they are night and day different than those of 3-4 months ago. One major change has been their use of artillery. They are getting very, very, very good at pinpoint time sensitive strikes. They nearly killed the leader "Motorola" this week, and that was no accident. Which is why Russia has risked moving in top of the line counter battery fire equipment which it can not claim was captured from Ukraine since only Russia has such equipment. That is a clear indication of how good the Ukrainians have become with their artillery fire.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which is why Russia has risked moving in top of the line counter battery fire equipment which it can not claim was captured from Ukraine since only Russia has such equipment.

Steve

B2P6kffCIAE0uCB.png

ARK-1 «Lynx» 1RL239

Produced - 1981–1986 (USSR)

B2P6lKuCcAEwjk4.png

SNAR-10 1RL-232 “Big Fred”

Produced - 1970–1991 (USSR)

top of the line

since only Russia has such equipment.

Really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SNAR-10 and ARK-1 were the ones snapped near Torez a few days ago. These are older types, but that one photo does not prove the Russians do not have more modern equipment in country. The speculation is that these vehicles were supplied to the Rebels by the Russian, but are manned by Russian specialists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to figure out the respective capability of Ukrainian vs Russian forces is difficult since the situation is evolving rapidly and reliable info is hard to come by.

However, the performance of Russian troops/units in Ukraine so far has not been what you would expect from a first tier western military. Losses of men and equipment has been surprisingly high which would seem to point out issues with training and tactics. This would lead to the speculation that either the Russians are not as competent as we thought and/or that the Ukrainian military is more competent than we thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally the most interesting Ukraine versus Russia match up will be T-72b3 against BM Bulat. Which of these legacy platforms with their various upgrades is the fighting-ist. Personally, I root for Bulat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To piggyback off of what Steve said, I would contend that everyone (as in all the Reddit commentators with no military experience and people in general) are really writing off Ukraine as a fight force; unfairly if I say so myself. I don't know the force compostion of the Ukrainian military in their so-called "ATO", but from what I gather it is actually a very small fraction of their military as a whole. And I'm talking about before the ceasefire and not the Battle of Donetsk Airport going on right now.

It seemed like most of the fighting was done by volunteer battalions (Aidar, Azov, Svobdo, Dniepr-1, etc.) along with certain VDV battalions. It seemed like they didn't put in their infantry divisions proper. Of course, this is speculation from following the conflict from the Kiev protest days.

But anyway, now Ukraine has a couple thousand veterans from months of combat along with a restructuring and increased training of their military I think Ukraine would put up a hell of a defense against a Russian assault. In fact, I don't think Russia has really abandoned their strategy of Deep Battle nor revamped their FMs from Soviet-style regiment-battalion-company-platoon tactics which emphasizes MBT and IFV mutual support. If Ukraine get a comprehensive defense line around DPR and LPR than Russia would be really bogged down especially in urban combat because the approved method of sending in troops for urban combat is around 6 to 1. But I digress, I don't think Russia will really go that far. Just look at the casualty ratios in Russian troops from the Fall(?) offensive around Mauripol and Illovaisk. The information is very hard to come by obviously, but Russia suffered a couple hundred dead apparently along with whole units getting wiped out (I have add that this is probably Ukrainian propaganda since it was said that a grad attack wiped them out in one instance).

Russia's army isn't really all that. Yea, Putin and their defense minster has been revamping the Army's capabiliteis since 2008 (probably due to the Georgian-Russian War), but they don't have teh sustainability that it would take to expand the separatists locations into the rest of Novorossiya.

I'm getting off track now, but in conclucsion, Ukraine can hold it's own. Not without Western help, however, but long enough to send a couple thousand "Cargo 200s" back to Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I belive we should really start separating what's real facts in actual ukraine crisis and CMBS game.

Not only because CMBS, being as good as it can get, is still a video game, but mostly because the setting is so different (despite some people won't go further the geographical names) that the battles/campaigns won't in any way be close to actual and recent events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trying to figure out the respective capability of Ukrainian vs Russian forces is difficult since the situation is evolving rapidly and reliable info is hard to come by.

However, the performance of Russian troops/units in Ukraine so far has not been what you would expect from a first tier western military. Losses of men and equipment has been surprisingly high which would seem to point out issues with training and tactics. This would lead to the speculation that either the Russians are not as competent as we thought and/or that the Ukrainian military is more competent than we thought.

Russia is never as weak or as strong as it seems. Hopefully improved since Georgia though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Russia is never as weak or as strong as it seems. Hopefully improved since Georgia though.

Being a member of the US military I'm gonna disagree and say I really, really hope they haven't improved at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ukrainian Army isn't fighting its own people, nor is it fighting the Russians. Quite a few Ukrainian military personnel have found gigs fighting for the rebels (and they've taken their equipment with them) the rest are doing the bare minimum to keep from being labelled traitors and are not engaging. On top of that, the Russian military has more than a few Ukrainians serving - people who have family in the civil war zone - these are the guys taking vacations and they're taking their kit with them. Kiev is being bled white as its available mercenary base is destroyed and no-one, certainly not the US or NATO, is going to save them. 18 pairs of used boots - that's what was supplied by the Ukraine Army to the mercenary battalions.

Azov and the rest cannot move from their positions: while it suits Russia and the rebels to have them in place (there's a narrative to sustain), they will remain alive. If you want to know what the narrative is, its all about ethnicity - the Slavic people. The second question in the interrogation of captured Kiev forces is "How much are they paying you?" The third question is "Are you a Slav?" The fourth question is "Who is paying you to kill [your brother] Slavs?"

On a side note, Saakashvili is now based in Ukraine. All the **** is gathered in one place and the embarrassment to the US is prepped to be flushed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russian military is big but they've got to be everywhere at once in a country spanning eight time zones. From opposite the border with Finland to guarding the western fringe of the Kamchatka peninsula and everyplace in between. Ukraine, on the other hand only has to concern itself with the eastern edge of its own border. Plus they're fighting on home ground. People who know where the foot paths through the forest lead and what's behind the next hill. That has something of a leveling effect on the forces facing each other. Russia's not about to strip its units along the Chinese border to wage war over the possession of Donetsk airport. They're figuratively fighting with one arm tied behind their back.

Which brings us to this title. What to you think, is this an all-out (fictional) war in Ukraine or is it an expanded regional conflict? I doubt the backstory is going to involve B2 bomber raids over Moscow or submarine launched cruise missiles on Washington. Which means the conflict will be contained and the available force numbers limited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't make wrong assumptions about "VDV units in Ukraine" e.t.c.. All is much more complex. As Steve says, Ukrainian army quickly learn to use artillery. They really learn, and someone helps them to learn, to reorginise their units, to educate personell. :) And someone helps to rebels. Also there are a lot of different volunteers and advisers, who take part in action. That looks like civil war in Spain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't make wrong assumptions about "VDV units in Ukraine" e.t.c.. All is much more complex. As Steve says, Ukrainian army quickly learn to use artillery. They really learn, and someone helps them to learn, to reorginise their units, to educate personell. :) And someone helps to rebels. Also there are a lot of different volunteers and advisers, who take part in action. That looks like civil war in Spain.

Men put into battle learn from trial and error what works. After some time in battle they know more than any advisor could possibly teach them. That is as true for the Ukrainian volunteer forces as well as the true volunteer forces of the DPR/LPR. The abysmal performance of all of these forces at the start of the war is a clear indication of this!

As for training/advising, On the DPR/LPR side, however, there is a massive training camp near Rostov that has been well documented by inside and outside sources. Then there are the "vacationing" Russian soldiers who are entering Ukraine with formal training and the small battle groups of Russian Army forces that have been cycled in (especially for the August counter offensive). This means the forces fighting against Ukraine are a mix of poorly/quickly trained locals, fully trained individuals without units, and fully trained individuals operating with their units.

This is not happening on the Ukrainian side. Although I spend a couple of hours a day reading and talking about events in Ukraine at a very detailed level, I have seen no evidence that the West is actively participating in any significant amount of training on the Ukrainian side. The volunteer units are made up of a mix of trained and untrained personnel. At the start of the conflict their performance ranged from good to horrid. But with many months of combat experience that has improved greatly.

However, the status quo is not going to remain the same. The US has very publicly said it will start helping train Ukrainian forces starting this Spring. As far as I know nothing has started so far. And if it has, it is on a tiny scale that is limited to special operations type training, not regular line infantry training.

As an aside, I have a friend who was training young Ukrainian officers before the war started. He is ex-US military working directly for the Ukrainian government. He said that it was a daily frustration of dealing with the "Soviet mentality". The training program was terminated before the start of hostilities, but it is pretty clear that the Soviet mentality is quickly disappearing.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Men put into battle learn from trial and error what works. After some time in battle they know more than any advisor could possibly teach them. That is as true for the Ukrainian volunteer forces as well as the true volunteer forces of the DPR/LPR. The abysmal performance of all of these forces at the start of the war is a clear indication of this!

As for training/advising, On the DPR/LPR side, however, there is a massive training camp near Rostov that has been well documented by inside and outside sources. Then there are the "vacationing" Russian soldiers who are entering Ukraine with formal training and the small battle groups of Russian Army forces that have been cycled in (especially for the August counter offensive). This means the forces fighting against Ukraine are a mix of poorly/quickly trained locals, fully trained individuals without units, and fully trained individuals operating with their units.

This is not happening on the Ukrainian side. Although I spend a couple of hours a day reading and talking about events in Ukraine at a very detailed level, I have seen no evidence that the West is actively participating in any significant amount of training on the Ukrainian side. The volunteer units are made up of a mix of trained and untrained personnel. At the start of the conflict their performance ranged from good to horrid. But with many months of combat experience that has improved greatly.

However, the status quo is not going to remain the same. The US has very publicly said it will start helping train Ukrainian forces starting this Spring. As far as I know nothing has started so far. And if it has, it is on a tiny scale that is limited to special operations type training, not regular line infantry training.

As an aside, I have a friend who was training young Ukrainian officers before the war started. He is ex-US military working directly for the Ukrainian government. He said that it was a daily frustration of dealing with the "Soviet mentality". The training program was terminated before the start of hostilities, but it is pretty clear that the Soviet mentality is quickly disappearing.

Steve

Fascinating stuff Steve, can you post what sources you read about Ukraine from so I (And I guess everyone else too :D) can learn more as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, the performance of Russian troops/units in Ukraine so far has not been what you would expect from a first tier western military. Losses of men and equipment has been surprisingly high which would seem to point out issues with training and tactics. This would lead to the speculation that either the Russians are not as competent as we thought and/or that the Ukrainian military is more competent than we thought.

I do believe that the Russians are not as competent as they would like everybody to believe. They are definitely getting better over time, but they've not fought a prolonged military action against an organized "well" armed defender. Not even Georgia counts since Russia had superiority in all categories and the war was over within a week. The last major action that Russian forces took part in was in Chechnya and that is a whole different thing.

In August, when large numbers of Russian Army units were involved in the counter attack, their performance was mixed. At the tactical level they had some successes and some major failures. At the operational level they achieved significant success due to surprise, which led to a short term strategic victory (i.e. the preservation of DPR/LPR). However, they were unable to do more than arrest the Ukrainian's attack, not significantly reverse it. A look at the before and after maps clearly show this.

In defense of the Russian forces fighting in Ukraine, they are not fighting the way they would if Russia openly invaded as they did Georgia. First, they left most of their best equipment in Russia in order to keep up the mask of "captured Ukrainian equipment". Occasionally a BTR-82 shows up, but only recently did we start to see quantities of T-72s enter the fight. Second, for most of the conflict they have been fighting without much of their supporting arms, again in order to keep up the illusion that Russia is not in Ukraine. They have also had no air support. Artillery support, however, has been liberally available since about July.

The short is we've not seen the Russian military fully engaged. But what we have seen of it, so far, has been mixed for sure.

But anyway, now Ukraine has a couple thousand veterans from months of combat along with a restructuring and increased training of their military I think Ukraine would put up a hell of a defense against a Russian assault.

...

I'm getting off track now, but in conclucsion, Ukraine can hold it's own. Not without Western help, however, but long enough to send a couple thousand "Cargo 200s" back to Russia.

Indeed. The conflict is "cooled" but not "frozen". The Spring is going to be very interesting.

The Ukrainian Army isn't fighting its own people, nor is it fighting the Russians. Quite a few Ukrainian military personnel have found gigs fighting for the rebels (and they've taken their equipment with them) the rest are doing the bare minimum to keep from being labelled traitors and are not engaging. On top of that, the Russian military has more than a few Ukrainians serving - people who have family in the civil war zone - these are the guys taking vacations and they're taking their kit with them. Kiev is being bled white as its available mercenary base is destroyed and no-one, certainly not the US or NATO, is going to save them. 18 pairs of used boots - that's what was supplied by the Ukraine Army to the mercenary battalions.

Azov and the rest cannot move from their positions: while it suits Russia and the rebels to have them in place (there's a narrative to sustain), they will remain alive. If you want to know what the narrative is, its all about ethnicity - the Slavic people. The second question in the interrogation of captured Kiev forces is "How much are they paying you?" The third question is "Are you a Slav?" The fourth question is "Who is paying you to kill [your brother] Slavs?"

On a side note, Saakashvili is now based in Ukraine. All the **** is gathered in one place and the embarrassment to the US is prepped to be flushed.

I've been following this conflict at a detailed level for anywhere between 2-6 hours a day since we saw the first signs of Russian invasion (Feb 22, days before the Green Men appeared in Crimea). Based on this I'd say about half of what you wrote is horribly out of date, the other half was never true at any point. I'll be kind enough to leave it at that.

There's a quite a bit of truth to this, but it's designed as a work of propaganda and therefore it has to be called into question. I few spots caused me to laugh out loud :D Some of it is just out of date.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fascinating stuff Steve, can you post what sources you read about Ukraine from so I (And I guess everyone else too :D) can learn more as well?

There is no one-stop-shopping trip to make. I read tons of stuff from a variety of sources. Sometimes one article is all I read from a particular source and then nothing else ever again. I also have things sent to me by people who are keeping tabs on Ukrainian and Russian media (I speak neither language).

For a while I got a lot of my information from a collection of insane people who post on one of the many "new world order" blogs. The majority posting are likely "Putinbots" (paid by the Russian government to spread propaganda and disinformation), but there was a great source of material there if you could stomach the worst Humanity has to offer the Internet. The amount of hatred and paranoia got too much for me so I stopped going there. And no, I am not going to link to it.

If you're looking for a single spot to get information, I recommend this one:

http://liveuamap.com/e/2014/16-september-in-rada-appeared-bills-to-abolish-the-special?ll=48.8829;31.18100000000004&zoom=8

It is obviously pro Ukrainian, so there is a problem with that if you are not experienced enough to know what to pay attention to and what to throw aside. It does attempt at being more about sharing information than propaganda.

If you want a snapshot of the DPR/LPR side, you can go here. Be warned, however, this is absolutely a propaganda tool from start to finish. Very little of it is based on reality. Which means its value as a source of information is extremely limited. But it is an excellent way to view the alternate universe that exists on the other side of the fight.

http://slavyangrad.org/

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

id like to know your sources for all these tactical successes and major failures that the russians have gone through in Ukraine. I didnt see much credible info in the open source section of the internet. Unless you are using classified info leaked by some military professionnal gamers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...