Jump to content
H1nd

Strategic and tactical realities in CMBS

Recommended Posts

People keep bringing up separatist failures at securing Donetsk airport.

 

Separatists have a very limited amount of essentially everything, ranging from armored transports (APC's/IFV's) to guided munitions needed to secure what is a fortified bunker with underground tunnels surrounded by absolutely flat terrain. Against them is a poorly supplied, but fairly well supported entrenched infantry. Their support included tanks and, up until late autumn, IFV's.

 

To be noted, the Ukrainian side could not secure the airport even with grossly larger numbers and better equipment earlier this year essentially for the same reason. Separatists fortified their portion of the airport surrounded by flat terrain. With the additions of irregular forces to CMBS I'm sure this would be an interesting scenario to build and try. 

I would add that currently separatist forces are being rebuilt around mechanised OOBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People keep bringing up separatist failures at securing Donetsk airport.

Some people here are really believe what assault were lead by russian regular troops, Thats the case why they refer to airport all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people here are really believe what assault were lead by russian regular troops, Thats the case why they refer to airport all the time.

 

:rolleyes:

 

Yeah what would ever give us the impression attacks on that airport were led by Russian regulars.

 

 

Boy those separatists stole quite a few tanks, marked em up like Russian tanks too...

Edited by Raptorx7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Among other things, to reach Kiev in a week or less would require pre stacking an enormous logistical tail up the M3 and the relatively small number of side roads capable of heavy truck traffic.  Their would be no possibility of surprise. The vulnerability of a target like that to air or missile strikes is staggering.  The Ukrainians have already proved they can get a missile on target in the right circumstances.  Even if you assume they won't strike Russian territory it would take time to suppress and otherwise preclude the risk to the kind of logistical tail it takes for that kind of corps sized armored force.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ikalugin, thank you for your detailed response! My interest in this game mainly cover the prospects of ukraine military vs russians since I too doubt the possibility of timely NATO intervention among other points of interest. I will follow up shortly with my "case study" (Read plans for some maps and scenarios) for potential defensive scenario along Moscow-Kiev Highway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Among other things, to reach Kiev in a week or less would require pre stacking an enormous logistical tail up the M3 and the relatively small number of side roads capable of heavy truck traffic.  Their would be no possibility of surprise. The vulnerability of a target like that to air or missile strikes is staggering.  The Ukrainians have already proved they can get a missile on target in the right circumstances.  Even if you assume they won't strike Russian territory it would take time to suppress and otherwise preclude the risk to the kind of logistical tail it takes for that kind of corps sized armored force.

A few points:

- you assume that those resources are extensive (and not carried by the units themselves, the depth and the nature of the initial operational leap allows that to happen actually), are not pre positioned (in Belgorod and Kursk) or cannot be pre positioned rapidly and covertly (something Russia and USSR did on a number of occasions in last 40 years).

- you assume that Ukraine has a capability to deliver valid missile and air strikes against Russia to preempt such an attack. This notion is simply false, as Ukraine lacks the firepower even for a single saturation attack (count how many combat aircraft and TBMs Ukraine has available), as I have said Russia has a complete air and fire power superiority there.

Edited by ikalugin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't think the tank crew operating that tank might, just MAYBE, be Russian?

Yeah they can. And they can't at the same time.

That is not evidence in any meaning of this word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't think the tank crew operating that tank might, just MAYBE, be Russian?

There is a difference between stating a possibility of a regular Russian crew and stating with certainty that not only this was the Russian crew, but that said regular Russian crews were providing a substantial input into the overall separatist war effort in that particular operation. Beyond digiflora on one of the tank crew members I do not see anything else that could be viewed as hinting that the crews were regular Russian (much less proving that or proving the truth of other related statements).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't think the tank crew operating that tank might, just MAYBE, be Russian?

 

As in ethnically or as in active RA service? With T-72B being in service for almost 32 years, the pool of personnel that is capable of operating it is significantly larger than current active Russian servicemen. Even Chechens had active tanks in operation during first and second campaign with half-rained crews.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, meanwhile (we wait for the OP to make the summary that he has promised), some of the items Russian Armed Forces is to procure this year (ie in 2015):

- 701 AFVs (including but not limited to, for the parade only, 12 BMD4Ms, 12 BTR-MDMs, 12 Kurganets IFVs, 12 Kurganets APCs, 12 Armata MBTs, 12 Armata IFVs, 12 Bumerang APCs).

- 1545 automotive vehicles.

- 126 fixed wing aircraft.

- 88 helicopters.

 

Note - the "parade" vehicles may be already procured and in reality more may exist now and/or by May, as information about the presence comes from the maintenance orders for the "parade" grouping.

 

Sources:

http://www.militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=1&nid=362731

http://zakupki.gov.ru/epz/order/extendedsearch/search.html?sortDirection=false&sortBy=UPDATE_DATE&recordsPerPage=_10&pageNo=1&searchString=Техническому+надзору&placeOfSearch=FZ_44%2CFZ_223&searchType=ORDERS&morphology=false&strictEqual=false&orderPriceCurrencyId=-1&okdpWithSubElements=false&orderStages=AF%2CCA%2CPC%2CPA&headAgencyWithSubElements=false&smallBusinessSubject=I&rnpData=I&executionRequirement=I&penalSystemAdvantage=I&disabilityOrganizationsAdvantage=I&russianGoodsPreferences=I&orderPriceCurrencyId=-1&okvedWithSubElements=false&jointPurchase=false&byRepresentativeCreated=false&selectedMatchingWordPlace223=NOTICE_AND_DOCS&matchingWordPlace94=NOTIFICATIONS&matchingWordPlace44=NOTIFICATIONS&searchAttachedFile=false&changeParameters=true&showLotsInfo=false&customer.code=01731000045&customer.fz94id=727414&customer.title=Министерство+обороны+Российской+Федерации&extendedAttributeSearchCriteria.searchByAttributes=NOTIFICATION&law44.okpd.withSubElements=false

Edited by ikalugin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off I want to thank you every one for participating in this interesting discussion! Please do continue presenting your visions/speculations about the tactical and strategic nature of this hypothetical war.

 

I will now follow with my "case study" for a Ukraininan defensive delaying action in a strategic location along the E101 Highway near town of "Krolevets"

When planning this study I was struck by the enormous distances each military unit will have to cover. Gone are the days when battalions, brigades or even divisions would share common borders with their Areas of Operations. I was also struck by what seemed at first glance as impossible terrain to defend or even to conduct delaying action of any sort. However after some late nights spent with google earth i began to find some defendable locations along the Moscow-Kiev Highway, wich would be vital to clear and capture regardles of the ultimate goal of the war. It is simply strategically very important if you are going to attempt offensives towards Kiev.

 

One of these locations is Krolevets with it's surrounding terrain of forest, marshy riverbeds, hills and gullies with broken farmlands and minor villages. It is by far NOT a perfectly defendable location, (if there ever is one) and would be bypassed eventually, but the aim here is to buy as much time as possible and deplete the enemy as much as possible, even with the prospect that the defending troops never get to go home again.

 

The following picture is the rough outline of defensive sector of single Ukrainian Mechanized Brigade (would be most likely the 72nd)

 

zl2el0.png

 

The AO for the brigade is way way too large but the problem here is that ukraine military does not have the brigades to defend along the entire border. Therefore we must make do with what we have and this is my estimate of a possible AO. Now the catch is this: There is also a ukrainian artillery brigade or at least elements of it, within the Mechs AO near "Baturin" wich should be able to use their BM-30 smerch (or similar systems) to strike at advancing RA-forces  along the E101 and as well as other locations of importance (demonstrated by the yellow "explosion" markers)

 

The brigades objective is to act as the first line of defence, buy time, wear down the RA-advance units and protect the artillery brigades assets while they pound the invading enemy as long as they can (asuming the first airstrike wont neutralise them withing first hours of war). Brigade has been divided into three separate mechanized combat teams: one in Krolevets, one screening the SE direction near Konotop and one in reserve near Baturin ready to reinforce either one of the two other combat teams and/or conduct counterattacks with or without support from armored brigade situated around "Borzna, Nizhyn, Ichnya" -area. If the brigade is bypassed or otherwise compromized, the remaining units are to fall back towards Chernigov for regroup and refit. Expected RA forces will range from 3-4 mech and tank brigades in strenght, attacking in battalion formations. Brigade must rely on recon screen in Shostka, Buryn, Terny -directions  to provide intel on enemy axis of advances and counter them by redeploying battalion combat teams accordingly as well as provide target info for the artillery brigade assets.

 

Next picture is the possible locations I have planned to map (if RL allows) in the Krolevets area:

 

t6w2vt.png

 

Each should be reasonably plausible locations for actions ranging from platoon to company/depleted battalion scale. They can also be easily converted for use with more robust defensive formations (for example an entire brigade defending the locale) and should cover the most likely paths of advance by RA-units locally (naturally the entire locale is possible to bypass elsewhere)

 

Next three pistures are my very rough demonstrations of a possible defensive plan for the ukrainian Mechanized taks force defending Krolevets:

 

28wp1z6.png

 

-the broken blue arrows represent the intended direction of retreat  and should these direction be compromized the battalion will be isolated quickly. The "toothed" blue lines are possible prepared defensive locations wich a mechanized company can occupy according to the situation at hand. As with the brigade, the battalion must also rely heavily on intel to be able to respond to the multiple possible directions of threat. This intel is to be provided by attached brigade level recon screen and drones.

 

2hzmn13.png

 

-Likely russian routes of advance, the hollow arrows point out the threat of flanking through "Yaroslavets-Bezkrovne" -area but that is something the defenders will just have to live with.

 

282g681.png

 

and finaly the rough demonstration of planned demolitions and minefields to cut the highway E101 and provide some security along flanks. Naturally each mechanized company has own mine fields and other demolitions in their corresponding AO's  depending on available time and materiel. The primary taks of the attached brigade level engineers and corps level engineer assets is to deny the E101 from the enemy. The more time there is to prepare the better. If preparations are begun well before the advent of war, all of the avenues of advance will be covered with extensive minefields, demolitions, and AT-ditches.

 

The defending battalion must be proactive in it's defence and ready to pull back to secondary and tertiary defensive positions in timely manner before the inevitable RA artillery grinds to dust any known point of resistance. Concealment must be taken from built up and wooden areas. Krolevets will be the last stand before the remaining men and materiel are to fall back towards west and north west. (I seriously doubt there will be any!)

 

Any thoughts, comments and/or critique is much welcomed!

 

Cheers!

-H1nd

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone could always pull out those VDV POWs.  

 

Either way hope this crap stays on this thread.  Rest of the forum is pretty civil so far.

 

Actually this thread has been civil too.  Sure people are disagreeing but hey that is allowed - right.   I am sure there will be more disagreement and I hope this forum keeps its reputation as being a civil place (relatively speaking).

 

I only think we have a problem when people start in with the personal attacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will now follow with my "case study" for a Ukraininan defensive delaying action in a strategic location along the E101 Highway near town of "Krolevets"

When planning this study I was struck by the enormous distances each military unit will have to cover. Gone are the days when battalions, brigades or even divisions would share common borders with their Areas of Operations. I was also struck by what seemed at first glance as impossible terrain to defend or even to conduct delaying action of any sort. However after some late nights spent with google earth i began to find some defendable locations along the Moscow-Kiev Highway, wich would be vital to clear and capture regardles of the ultimate goal of the war. It is simply strategically very important if you are going to attempt offensives towards Kiev.

Wow, that could form the basis for a campaign or two right there. Nice.

 

Next picture is the possible locations I have planned to map (if RL allows) in the Krolevets area:

Wow, pretty ambitious but sounds like it could lead to lots of fun.

Have you seen what @kohlenklau is doing over on the CMFI Maps and Mods forum? You could enlist some help and do something similar. Check out http://community.battlefront.com/topic/117490-campaign-factory-job-openings-apply-now-no-experience-required/.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good work. Three questions:

- why do Russian Forces attack on that specific operational axis (and do not instantly shift south when meeting resistance, for example down to Sumy-Romny-Kiev).

- are there any air assaults or para drops?

- why do Russian Forces do not enfix the Ukranian Forces well forward (ie Krolevec) while pushing from up north via the Klimovo-Gorodnya-Chernigov axis?

 

The other obvious question is - why concentrate the main effort against Kiev (and relevant routes towards it) at all, if there are no objectives there?

Edited by ikalugin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone could always pull out those VDV POWs.  

 

Either way hope this crap stays on this thread.  Rest of the forum is pretty civil so far.

 

Crap? No I don't think its crap, and I am being very civil. I will drop it, but I have no problem saying I disagree with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that could form the basis for a campaign or two right there. Nice.

 

Wow, pretty ambitious but sounds like it could lead to lots of fun.

Have you seen what @kohlenklau is doing over on the CMFI Maps and Mods forum? You could enlist some help and do something similar. Check out http://community.battlefront.com/topic/117490-campaign-factory-job-openings-apply-now-no-experience-required/.

 

Aye, it will probably take whole year to get everything done, but that might not be necessary since I have no idea how quickly the defenders get depleted. That might cut the plausible scenarios to 4-5 and thats about it. I tend to be pretty meticulous with my mapping efforts as can be seen from the two RT -maps I managed to publish earlier last year, but I absolutely suck at turning them into proper scenarios. However things are going to be different (hopefully) with this modern setting since a) i'm more familiar with it due to rl-military training B) because i'm a lot more invested in it due to my rl-military training (once gain hopefully :D), c) The scale of the battles is small even if the maps are HUGE d) I plan for the possible scenarios to offer the players free hand in deploying his/her defences as he sees fit coupled with large maps, this should mean lot's of possible variations and fun! Also with the more limted scale, AI will be easier to produce. f) Mapping a modern day setting should be easier because of google earth and the rest of the fancy stuff, plus naturally I am more familiar with it :D So with luck there will be some fun to be had! I can tell for sure I have never been this excited about any other CM tittle :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Russia shouldn't see it as a treat?

NATO was created even before Warsaw PACT as a dirrect opponent to USSR durring cold war. You are wrong saying that western plans was only about stopping the Soviets invading. West actually had some offensive plans either. The first plan called Peancer made by US in 1945 (even before NATO creation) was about bombing USSR with nuclear weapon which USSR didn't have yet.

Plans, schmans. That's what militaries do. There might even be plans stored away somewhere in the Canadian Force HQ for an invasion of the US (yeah probably not) but I know there are plans for what to do if the US invades us. Military HQs are "what if scenario" and plan generators.

I know you guys in Russia have been fed a long diet of NATO wants to invade us and destroy us various other crazy stories.  I don't want to get to sucked to far into that rat whole but let me simply assure you that that was never the intention of the NATO governments and it sill isn't.  Oh I know someone somewhere can find some crazy government official or elected parliamentarian saying things that make you nervous - trust me we Canadians know all about that.  But the existence of plans and some low ranking guy's statements are not evidence of hostility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That might cut the plausible scenarios to 4-5 and thats about it.

 

Well that is enough for a campaign.

Edited by ian.leslie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plans, schmans. That's what militaries do. There might even be plans stored away somewhere in the Canadian Force HQ for an invasion of the US (yeah probably not) but I know there are plans for what to do if the US invades us. Military HQs are "what if scenario" and plan generators.

I know you guys in Russia have been fed a long diet of NATO wants to invade us and destroy us various other crazy stories.  I don't want to get to sucked to far into that rat whole but let me simply assure you that that was never the intention of the NATO governments and it sill isn't.  Oh I know someone somewhere can find some crazy government official or elected parliamentarian saying things that make you nervous - trust me we Canadians know all about that.  But the existence of plans and some low ranking guy's statements are not evidence of hostility.

Hence why I do not think that NATO (and Russia too actually) would openly participate in that war - the stakes are too high.

Edited by ikalugin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good work. Three questions:

- why do Russian Forces attack on that specific operational axis (and do not instantly shift south when meeting resistance, for example down to Sumy-Romny-Kiev).

- are there any air assaults or para drops?

- why do Russian Forces do not enfix the Ukranian Forces well forward (ie Krolevec) while pushing from up north via the Klimovo-Gorodnya-Chernigov axis?

 

The other obvious question is - why concentrate the main effort against Kiev (and relevant routes towards it) at all, if there are no objectives there?

 

Yeah I agree, I'm under the impression the main objective would be the destruction of the enemy's forces, not terrain capture based.  Of course you need to capture terrain to facilitate this, but its not about conquering it is more or less punitive in nature.  "You want to join NATO, we are going to kill your sons, destroy your military and make your population turn on the government and NATO."  You don't have to capture Kiev to do that.

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...