Separatist push/Ukraine shove back

[Battlefront.com]

Let's keep this civil.

Ukraine gets accused of lying about its casualty statistics and yet I've not seen any proof that they are inaccurate.  For sure they are sometimes slow to be updated, and maybe a little slower than for a country like the US, but early in the conflict the Ukrainian government learned to not try and deliberately hide losses.  Why?  Because the volunteers and the free media embarrassed them many times.  So they learned from their mistakes.

On the other side of the equation there is nothing BUT lies.  No accurate information, nothing that can be verified by anybody.  Mostly because Russia doesn't even admit it has soldiers fighting in Ukraine, so Russia's casualty statistics are 100% inaccurate 100% of the time.  The DPR/LPR are criminal organizations and have absolutely no interest in transparency, therefore they don't have any disincentives to lie.

So let's not try to pretend both sides are the same in terms of lying about their own casualties.  It is just stupid to make such a claim.

As for estimating the enemy casualties... this is where the two sides are on more even ground at the tactical level.   It is normal for forces to overestimate the casualties of the other side.  Fog Of War is what it is.  However, at the strategic level things are a little different.  Ukraine tends to keep their estimates reasonable, DPR/LPR come up with some wild statements.  Again, they are criminal organizations with criminal motivations, therefore it makes sense that they over estimate Ukraine's losses just like they underestimate their own.

Since DPR/LPR/Russia can not be trusted to produce accurate statistics about their own losses, I generally take Ukraine's estimates and radically reduce them.  How I do that depends on the nature of the fighting.

Steve

[Nefron]

3 hours ago, kinophile said:

Multiple, separate non-government sources are still putting total Ukrainian casualties as far lower than the DPR ones, so far - for now.  

What would non government sources know about DNR loses? 

 

 

 

Edited December 24, 2016 by Nefron

[Nefron]

13 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

As for estimating the enemy casualties... this is where the two sides are on more even ground at the tactical level.   It is normal for forces to overestimate the casualties of the other side.  Fog Of War is what it is.  However, at the strategic level things are a little different.  Ukraine tends to keep their estimates reasonable, DPR/LPR come up with some wild statements.  Again, they are criminal organizations with criminal motivations, therefore it makes sense that they over estimate Ukraine's losses just like they underestimate their own.

This could be a new development, but I remember Ukraine coming up with some seriously ridiculous claims, like 1000 "terrorists" dead in airstrikes etc. and this was coming from the president himself. 

And then you have myths about Donetsk airport defenders heroically mowing down scores of attackers every day, artillery strikes on mysterious Russian columns etc. 

[DMS]

Just now, Battlefront.com said:

On the other side of the equation there is nothing BUT lies.  No accurate information, nothing that can be verified by anybody.  Mostly because Russia doesn't even admit it has soldiers fighting in Ukraine, so Russia's casualty statistics are 100% inaccurate 100% of the time.  The DPR/LPR are criminal organizations and have absolutely no interest in transparency, therefore they don't have any disincentives to lie.

"Criminal organisations", "terrorists", "Russian-occupational forces", "Russian-terroristic forces" e.t.c - are political terms.

 

[JUAN DEAG]

47 minutes ago, Nefron said:

like 1000 "terrorists" dead in airstrikes etc. and this was coming from the president himself

[citation needed]

47 minutes ago, Nefron said:

And then you have myths about Donetsk airport defenders heroically mowing down scores of attackers every day

A score is 20. Russians lost a lot more than 20, way more. Even the most extreme separatist sources do not deny this, only you.

57 minutes ago, Nefron said:

What would non government sources know about DNR loses? 

They conduct investigations and estimate casualties based on the scientific method.

2 hours ago, DMS said:

It is so naive to say that Ukrainian society is so open and democratic, that hiding losses and censoring news are impossible.

It's happened before except that time it got exposed by Ukrainian bloggers, soldiers, and volunteers. It's in the government's best interest to produce accurate information about casualties because it would not be in the spirit of the Maidan Revolution to deny facts.

"open and democratic" = more goodies from America and EU (and other democracies around the world)

"open and democratic" = larger likelihood of getting reelected 

"open and democratic" = contentedness among the population

Ukrainian society is light-years away from perfect but the Russian government's attempt to use state-owned media to portray Ukraine as a grim, unforgiving, "Russophobic", and totalitarian state has failed spectacularly and hilariously. Russian news is considered entertainment in Ukraine, right after goose stepping, burning Russian language books, worshiping Stepan Bandera. 

2 hours ago, DMS said:

Hiding losses is not a conspiracy theory, but a usual thing.

Especially concerning losses of Russian troops in Ukraine. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another video from militant positions:

 

 

[DMS]

Just now, JUAN DEAG said:

  it would not be in the spirit of the Maidan Revolution to deny facts.

Okey, okey, if you say so...

[JUAN DEAG]

8 minutes ago, DMS said:

Okey, okey, if you say so...

If you disagree with that statement why don't you provide some evidence.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

P.S. What's with the smiley faces?   

[VladimirTarasov]

Call me crazy, but why does this whole Debaltsevo thing look familiar. 

[JUAN DEAG]

7 minutes ago, VladimirTarasov said:

Call me crazy, but why does this whole Debaltsevo thing look familiar. 

What do you mean?

[VladimirTarasov]

22 minutes ago, JUAN DEAG said:

What do you mean?

Not trying to be funny or anything, but doesn't this remind you of the setting for that notorious Russian counter-offensive there? 

[JUAN DEAG]

1 hour ago, VladimirTarasov said:

Not trying to be funny or anything, but doesn't this remind you of the setting for that notorious Russian counter-offensive there? 

Not really. Currently Ukrainian troops are not surrounded and not in Debaltsevo either.

[VladimirTarasov]

8 minutes ago, JUAN DEAG said:

Not really. Currently Ukrainian troops are not surrounded and not in Debaltsevo either.

Almost there  

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, Nefron said:

This could be a new development, but I remember Ukraine coming up with some seriously ridiculous claims, like 1000 "terrorists" dead in airstrikes etc. and this was coming from the president himself. 

And then you have myths about Donetsk airport defenders heroically mowing down scores of attackers every day, artillery strikes on mysterious Russian columns etc. 

Oh yes, the early days were awful!  This is what I mean... the Ukrainian government was called out on this sort of behavior and has, for the most part, gotten better at keeping the estimates reasonable.

As for Donetsk Airport, the attackers suffered very high casualties.  Same with Debaltseve.  The degree of losses were confirmed by independent sources and, to some extent, the separatists themselves.  I saw and read reports where separatist commanders stated exact losses and complained that the Russian commanders used them like cannon fodder.  This was before Russia went about wiping out troublesome, independent minded separatist leaders.  I've not heard much complaints about their casualties since.

2 hours ago, DMS said:

"Criminal organisations", "terrorists", "Russian-occupational forces", "Russian-terroristic forces" e.t.c - are political terms.

No, they are accurate   I am a historian and I have been following this conflict since the day it started.  The statements I make are not hyperbole.

As for your earlier objection to my use of the term "Russian artillery".  So here is why I say that:

1.  The artillery pieces were supplied by the Russian government

2.  The transport of the artillery pieces (if not SP) was provided by the Russian government

3.  The ammunition fired by the artillery is supplied by the Russian government

4.  The gunners were trained by the Russian government

5.  The artillery is under the direct supervision of the Russian government

6.  The fire control systems, intel, and coordination are also at a minimum supervised by the Russian government

As to who is actually loading the shells and firing them?  Chances are very high that they are at a minimum citizens of the Russian Federation, not citizens of Ukraine.  There is also a good chance that the personnel are contractors of the Russian Armed forces, either directly positioned in Ukraine or there under illegal contracts.

And under all circumstances the people shooting the artillery are paid by the Russian government in some way or another.

There is also a good chance, but not a great one these days, that the unit is an actual Russian Army artillery unit.

So when I say "Russian artillery" I think it's a better term than "coal miners".

Steve

[Kinophile]

@Haiduk superb account,  thank you. An incredibly visceral read. I think I'll clean up the English a little and repost for clarity,  later. Even then,  the broken grammar has a deep authenticity to it. 

What it underscores is the current UKR narrative - a sudden, opportunistic Ukrainian attack to silence/blind a ridge being used to direct artillery on them.

It describes ineffectual Sep defense,  caught on the hop by the speed of the UKR advance,  followed by disconcerted counter attacks. Heavy but ultimately ineffective shelling. 

UKR seem to have had enough troops on stand by to execute the attack and back it up. I wonder if the assault had been planned/intended for a while, and took this opportunity as it struck? 

 

Edited December 25, 2016 by kinophile

[John Kettler]

JUAN DEAG,

Thanks for the video. Don't ever recall seeing such a closeup of someone's face while under artillery fire. Yet despite the effects it's having on the reporter, this is, not that I'd want to be under it, desultory shelling, not even as high as a minimum rate CMx2 two-tube max duration shoot. During the Vietnam War, An Loc got hit with 11,000 rounds of artillery in five hours. 152 mm and 130 mm guns, 122 rockets and 120 mm mortars. Artillery Division at work! Source is The Tragedy of the Vietnam War: A South Vietnamese Officer's Analysis of the War, by Van Nguyen Duong, Page 156.

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited December 25, 2016 by John Kettler

[John Kettler]

Haiduk,

Hugely appreciate your translating that gripping account. Look forward to seeing what you present next!

Regards,

John Kettler

[SeinfeldRules]

9 hours ago, Haiduk said:

As I promised, I post translated story of Ivan Myrnyi, serviceman of 54th brigade...

As others have stated, a gripping account of the fighting, and one that shows a first hand view of what I've read elsewhere... using older technology to avoid effects of Russian EW, soldiers choosing to ride on the top of APCs, etc... and again hitting my point earlier about the use of vehicles in a fight of this scale, it seems that they are being used solely as a logistical transport asset, and not a fighting vehicle. When the soldier mentioned asking higher for more people/weapons/thermal sights, it seems the perfect answer to me would have been sending up an APC to reinforce the position. Why are the leaders on the ground not getting these vehicles into the fight? Are these vehicles more vulnerable then we think? Is the ground/terrain not adequate for employment of vehicles? Do they just turn into big targets? @Haiduk I would love your input on this one.

[Nefron]

7 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

[citation needed]

Really? It's a minute away on Google.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2689865/Massive-bombardment-Ukrainian-war-planes-kills-1-000-rebels-Kiev-vows-avenge-deadly-missile-attack-separatists.html

7 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

A score is 20. Russians lost a lot more than 20, way more. Even the most extreme separatist sources do not deny this, only you.

Nobody actually knows who lost what, but the Ukrainians were pretending that they fought back assaults every day.

When it came to it, they were defeated, and their fighters were humiliated and slapped around on camera, while the scores of separatists that supposedly died were never documented. 

7 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

They conduct investigations and estimate casualties based on the scientific method

How does that look like exactly? Where's the scientific method in estimating casualties in Eastern Ukraine?

 

5 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

As for Donetsk Airport, the attackers suffered very high casualties.  Same with Debaltseve.  The degree of losses were confirmed by independent sources and, to some extent, the separatists themselves.  I saw and read reports where separatist commanders stated exact losses and complained that the Russian commanders used them like cannon fodder.  This was before Russia went about wiping out troublesome, independent minded separatist leaders.  I've not heard much complaints about their casualties since.

That's cool, but the real, tangible result of those battles were the dead bodies of Ukrainians, and the Ukrainian POWs being slapped around on camera. The separatist leaders always bitched about their losses and general inferiority, because they want to get as much help from Russia as possible. 

[DMS]

6 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

No, they are accurate   I am a historian and I have been following this conflict since the day it started.  The statements I make are not hyperbole.

As for your earlier objection to my use of the term "Russian artillery".  So here is why I say that:

1.  The artillery pieces were supplied by the Russian government

2.  The transport of the artillery pieces (if not SP) was provided by the Russian government

3.  The ammunition fired by the artillery is supplied by the Russian government

4.  The gunners were trained by the Russian government

5.  The artillery is under the direct supervision of the Russian government

6.  The fire control systems, intel, and coordination are also at a minimum supervised by the Russian government

As to who is actually loading the shells and firing them?  Chances are very high that they are at a minimum citizens of the Russian Federation, not citizens of Ukraine.  There is also a good chance that the personnel are contractors of the Russian Armed forces, either directly positioned in Ukraine or there under illegal contracts.

And under all circumstances the people shooting the artillery are paid by the Russian government in some way or another.

There is also a good chance, but not a great one these days, that the unit is an actual Russian Army artillery unit.

So when I say "Russian artillery" I think it's a better term than "coal miners".

Steve

Hm, many people said that bolshevik's party is a criminal organisation. Or American rebels. Did they kill soldiers of legal British forces? Did they offend local loyalists?

I won't argue - they all are Russians, from Donetsk they are or from Rostov. And if goverment helpls them to stand against Ukrainian nationalists (armed by _Soviet_ weapons, produced in Russia, by the way. Some times supplied from Eastern Europe) - it's ok. I wouldn't like to see militia with hunting guns, AKs and few AT weapons being smashed by 203mm howitzers and dozens of T-64 tanks, supported by Su-25 and Mi-24. Some other countries also supply weapons to anti goverment forces, don't they?

Low rank personnel probably is local. Advisors and specialists must be well paid, in first. No need to send gun loader from Russian army if locals can do it as good,

[Haiduk]

11 hours ago, kinophile said:

@Haiduk superb account,  thank you. An incredibly visceral read. I think I'll clean up the English a little and repost for clarity,  later. Even then,  the broken grammar has a deep authenticity to it. 

What it underscores is the current UKR narrative - a sudden, opportunistic Ukrainian attack to silence/blind a ridge being used to direct artillery on them.

It describes ineffectual Sep defense,  caught on the hop by the speed of the UKR advance,  followed by disconcerted counter attacks. Heavy but ultimately ineffective shelling. 

UKR seem to have had enough troops on stand by to execute the attack and back it up. I wonder if the assault had been planned/intended for a while, and took this opportunity as it struck? 

 

Thanks :). I doubt about "enough troops". We have lack of soldiers in "linear" units. Platoon strongpoints guarded by 10-15 men instead full platoon with support. So, operation was very risky - to attack enemy positions without appropriate information about enemy forces there and without enough reserves

Are you asked about UAVs in this battle ? On the video above on 4:23 separatist crying: "Ask Anatolyi, is this our "bird" or not ?", on 4:35 "A drone! Is this our "bird" in the sky ?". And answer "No, not our". So, this shelling is adjusting with Ukarinain UAV. On 10:30 you can hear the same in English ). Also separatists discussed what system shelled their trenches - either 82 mm 2B9 automatic mortar or 152 mm SP gun.

8 hours ago, SeinfeldRules said:

Why are the leaders on the ground not getting these vehicles into the fight? Are these vehicles more vulnerable then we think? Is the ground/terrain not adequate for employment of vehicles? Do they just turn into big targets?

Enemy positions lays on the forest ridge. Forest is too dense for any armor, so infantry have entered into the forest on own foot, armored vehicles remained only for reinforcement and ammo delivering to the battle.

Edited December 25, 2016 by Haiduk

[Kinophile]

The fact that the terrain is so unusable by vehicles is possibly also why the DNR counter attacks were so ineffectual - reverse slopes, uneven terrain, forest cover seem to drastically limit casualties if the target infantry are in decent trenches.

Once the UKR troops took the DPR trenches and properly established themselves, it would have taken much stronger and well organized infantry attacks to winkle them out. IFVs would be of great help, but would have lost heavily to UKR protective barrages. DPR counter attacks had artillery support but not enough, or of heavy enough caliber to make a proper impact.

Of course, a smerch/tornado/uragan platoon would make short work of the UKR defenders, certainly enough to allow the DPR militia to attack.

 

[DMS]

They fell back, as I said, There is video, where Ukrainian Nazguard leutenant admits it. He says, that there is no sence in such small atacks while there is no order to "attack until border". They took "green" (forest), got intensive artillery fire, didn't receive enough support and retreated, 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO7pg955w8U

[Haiduk]

38 minutes ago, DMS said:

They fell back, as I said, There is video, where Ukrainian Nazguard leutenant admits it. He says, that there is no sence in such small atacks while there is no order to "attack until border". They took "green" (forest), got intensive artillery fire, didn't receive enough support and retreated, 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO7pg955w8U

Heh, this is typical "all is lost" "expert". From where common lieutenenat, which wasn't in this battle, can know about situation there ? There is no any National Guard units in that sector. Here the video from 24th Dec - Ukrainian troops on seized enemy position - looks like this "Kikimora", I cant say exactly. In reportage its named "former separatists positions and now it's our close rear". There is was agreement with enemy, that during truce they will allow our search group to take the body of killed soldier, but when volunteers came on field, they were shelled and forced to return. 

Where Gram Philips with own video from northern position "Kikimora" ? 

 

Here is a map from separatist sources. Even they showed half of forest under UKR control and half in neutral zone

 

Edited December 25, 2016 by Haiduk

[JUAN DEAG]

16 hours ago, Nefron said:

Nobody actually knows who lost what, but the Ukrainians were pretending that they fought back assaults every day.

When it came to it, they were defeated, and their fighters were humiliated and slapped around on camera, while the scores of separatists that supposedly died were never documented. 

And separatists were pretending to attack to, of course. Everyone was pretending. George Bush also did 9/11. 

(I'm keeping the photos in link form because they are graphic)

http://community.battlefront.com/uploads/monthly_2016_12/EI-CH419_CT_UKR_P_20140527171958.jpg.6fa0bd4af44b192946f4db5812f6a984.jpg

http://community.battlefront.com/uploads/monthly_2016_12/imgres.jpg.98880778d0011b603d491631e691cdd4.jpg

http://community.battlefront.com/uploads/monthly_2016_12/384661508.jpg.7aa7dcdc94e324227f6aafbc6c077302.jpg

http://community.battlefront.com/uploads/monthly_2016_12/in-photos-aftermath-of-donestk-airport-attack-1401306551.thumb.jpg.f73e5eceb3e397c18787bb4f9598da9f.jpg

^ "Scores of separatists never documented" If you're not convinced I can give you more.

I like how you're the only one claiming this, even the most extreme separatist sources admit at least 40+ casualties, and those are the same sources that claim that the Ukrainians lost over 400 troops. Everyone agrees that this was not a good battle for the militants, except your conspiracy theories of course.

16 hours ago, Nefron said:

Really? It's a minute away on Google.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2689865/Massive-bombardment-Ukrainian-war-planes-kills-1-000-rebels-Kiev-vows-avenge-deadly-missile-attack-separatists.html

Really? Some obscure and unnamed pilot reported by a tabloid magazine, hardly the Ukrainian president.

13 hours ago, DMS said:

And if goverment helpls them to stand against Ukrainian nationalists (armed by _Soviet_ weapons, produced in Russia, by the way. Some times supplied from Eastern Europe) - it's ok.

Because super scary Ukrainian nationalists were coming to consume poor Russian babies before Russia decided a democracy that bordered Russia was not good and sent Girkin across the border to "start a rebellion". I thought the 'Ukraine will enslave the populace and make them sing the national anthem' meme was properly debunked at this point, but Russian propaganda is still going strong. Also, terrorism is not okay and Russia should stop funding it in neighboring countries.

13 hours ago, DMS said:

No need to send gun loader from Russian army if locals can do it as good,

Early in the war separatists were a high percentage of locals and Russian paramilitaries (revival Cossacks) in DPR/LNR but their performance was shockingly horrendous so if the Russian government wanted to keep the "rebellion" alive they were going to have to change some things around. First, they began to disarm a majority of the revival Cossacks and some of the locals (that were not listening to orders/incompetent/just there to loot and take advantage of lawlessness). Second, they started bringing in better equipment like later generation T-72s, UAV, artillery, EW systems to replace the 'plausible deniability' equipment like the T-64s and BMD-2s which they stole from Crimea or pulled out of storage. Third, they began to fire artillery from the across the border to push the Ukrainian military out of border towns in order to open up supply lines to give the separatists steady supply of ammunition, and uniforms, and other goodies. Forth, Russian military counter-offensive.

Local militants are absolute garbage. They need to at least say thank you to Putin for taking money from Russian pensioners and using to buy weapons in order to save the separatists from like 20 years in Ukrainian prison. What a kind man!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@VladimirTarasov

You're in the Russian military right? Can you explain to me what a typical preparatory barrage looks like and for how long does it extend for? What area does it cover?

@Haiduk

How effective is artillery against infantry in trenches? Are trenches dug to Soviet standards? Are there any specific tactics for the placement of trenches?

22 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:

Almost there  

I think it's just the winter look that's giving you the Debaltsevo vibes. Also, the recent positions that the Ukrainians took are only 7 km from Debaltsevo.

 

 

 

[VladimirTarasov]

2 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

You're in the Russian military right? Can you explain to me what a typical preparatory barrage looks like and for how long does it extend for? What area does it cover?

Was, if I am now I can't tell you anyways (just kidding) I was in the VDV but I've observed our regular motor rifles as well. A regular barrage varies on the target; for the sake of this post let's say a village was the target. A battalion usually has at least a battery of artillery with them, and if it is an important objective the brigade HQ can get some BM-21s to wreck havoc, as usually we rely on heavy fire support to smash through enemy defenses.

I wasn't an FO, but I can tell you it doesn't really matter how long you are shelling if you will be assaulting, it can be as fast as 3-5 minutes where you can totally smash defenses into pieces with concentrated fire, and usually just before the barrage is over an assault begins. You need to be specific with the artillery systems used, we have many variants in service. 

2 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

How effective is artillery against infantry in trenches? Are trenches dug to Soviet standards? Are there any specific tactics for the placement of trenches?

I know I am not Haiduk but I can tell you how it is. Since world war 2, artillery would pose a threat to trenches, however as long as it didn't hit inside the trench (and Russian standards of trenches are pretty narrow) you should be fine. Air burst can ruin your day. It's better to use mortars against such targets, air burst or not it's way better from what I've observed. (not personally but you get what I mean) You can check separatist totally not rebellion army's videos there's quite a few style of trenches they use however they are usually narrow and dug into the ground deep. 

2 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

I think it's just the winter look that's giving you the Debaltsevo vibes. Also, the recent positions that the Ukrainians took are only 7 km from Debaltsevo.

Probably. 

Edited December 26, 2016 by VladimirTarasov