Combatintman

Dovhenke is certainly useful if you want to motor down the main road into Slovyansk but indirectly.  It sits in dead ground to that road so direct fires onto it are not possible but I see this as either an operation to secure the flanks for anything rolling down the road by denying a safe haven for shoot and scoot ATGM equipped parties or potentially using a covered approach to get into the wooded feature east of the village which does offer LOS onto the road.  That then serves as a jumping off point to clear the woods SE and east.
This area of ground leapt out at me early on when I was doing the terrain analysis as either a potential Named Area of Interest (NAI) or a Target Area of Interest (TAI).  It is not a bad Engagement Area (EA) and sits between a battalion and company-sized defensive position.  If resources permit, the Ukrainians could bottle that road up comfortably with a battalion (see diagrams) and if resources are tighter, it is possibly doable with a company, particularly if supported by a reasonably swept up obstacle plan with some gunnery on priority call.  My instinct for the latter option would be to position the company where the southernmost company astride the road is located in the battalion laydown.

 

Dovhenke is certainly useful if you want to motor down the main road into Slovyansk but indirectly.  It sits in dead ground to that road so direct fires onto it are not possible but I see this as either an operation to secure the flanks for anything rolling down the road by denying a safe haven for shoot and scoot ATGM equipped parties or potentially using a covered approach to get into the wooded feature east of the village which does offer LOS onto the road.  That then serves as a jumping off point to clear the woods SE and east.
This area of ground leapt out at me early on when I was doing the terrain analysis as either a potential Named Area of Interest (NAI) or a Target Area of Interest (TAI).  It is not a bad Engagement Area (EA) and sits between a battalion and company-sized defensive position.  If resources permit, the Ukrainians could bottle that road up comfortably with a battalion (see diagrams) and if resources are tighter, it is possibly doable with a company, particularly if supported by a reasonably swept up obstacle plan with some gunnery on priority call.  My instinct for the latter option would be to position the company where the southernmost company astride the road is located in the battalion laydown.

 

Nobody noticed mate ... I think you got away with it 😉 - I had similar with trees once ... "why can't I see a bloody thing from this open field?"

Our vision is to be the recognized leader in full-spectrum airborne intelligence solutions. We take a long-term view of our relationships within the industry, partnering with our customers to rapidly identify, develop, and deliver tailored solutions for airborne intelligence requirements.
Our culture attracts and retains the very best talent, and we thrive in dynamic mission environments. Whether we are providing flight test support for the development of a new collection aircraft; operating a high-priority deployed unmanned aircraft system; or providing post-mission collection analysis for special operators, we follow through and deliver results, every time. We never lose sight of our customer, maximizing the full potential of our end users.
Our capabilities span three business units: Engineering & Technology, Flight Operations, and Intelligence Solutions. Through this combination of end-to-end services, we provide agile and customized approaches to the full spectrum of airborne intelligence collection needs. Our team supports projects both large and small, including turn-key Contractor-Owned, Contractor-Operated (COCO), Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated (GOCO), and Contractor-Owned, Government-Operated (COGO) services to the DoD, other government agencies, and commercial businesses. The sun never sets on AEVEX operations, with deployments in North and South America, Africa, Europe, the Pacific Region, and the Middle East.
Our valued end-user customers are diverse, including Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC), Air Combat Command (ACC), Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), Army Research, Development and Engineering Command (ARDEC), U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC), Special Operations Command Africa (SOCAFRICA), Special Operations Command Europe (SOCEUR), as well as seven Unified Combatant Commands. We also support allied foreign defense customers and numerous commercial aerospace and defense partners in pursuit of our vision.
If the above is too much of a read here's what it says ... "we make UAVs and flog them to the military."

His wife had probably insisted on a pink bathroom or something ... 😉

His wife had probably insisted on a pink bathroom or something ... 😉

His wife had probably insisted on a pink bathroom or something ... 😉

Nobody noticed mate ... I think you got away with it 😉 - I had similar with trees once ... "why can't I see a bloody thing from this open field?"

Writing bollox or making UAVs?

His wife had probably insisted on a pink bathroom or something ... 😉

Simple answer is I don't know.  The consistent figure across the reporting is 22 x BTGs up there.  Both Jomini and UAWar appear consistent about the formations up there.  A lot I think depends on which 22 x BTGs are being counted - if you track from Verbivka to Sievierdonetsk you arrive at 22 x BTGs.  If you look at the formations and work on the widely held view that that a regiment/brigade is capable of generating 1-2 BTGs then the 8 x regts/bdes in the area Verbivka-Pidlyman translates into eight to 16 x BTGs maximum there.  Given the information that people are working from I would say that what we're seeing on the UAWar overlay is as accurate is its going to get accepting that the numbers are going to be out by one or two here or there.
Given that Russia seems to be trying to expand that bridgehead to the west and concurrently push south to Dibrovne and Slovyansk it is trying to do too much with too little and dissipating its combat power.  Whatever launches out of Izyum seems doomed to fail unless the Ukrainian Army up there decides to have a 'let's fight like Russia day.'

On to the ground piece regarding these new developments around Izyum and Keminna.
AA1:  Izyum-Kramatorsk.  Reasonable manoeuvre terrain, pockets Slovyansk. AA2:  Izyum Slovyansk.  Poor manoeuvre terrain which forces the attacker into a frontal assault on Slovyansk.  I have already assessed that the drive to the city could consume at least 2-3 BTGs and an attack on the city will require 4-5 BTGs. AA3:  Keminna-Slovyansk.  I haven't analysed this in detail yet, but I don't need to spend hours cross-hatching a map to see that of all of the AAs, this is probably the worst for manoevre and it is impossible to avoid a fight for Lyman should the Ukrainians choose to contest it.  That will consume at least 3-4 BTGs then there is the water and woods obstacle between Lyman and Slovyansk.  Then Slovyansk itself.  True to form it appears that Russia has chosen the least favourable/most difficult AA if Slovyansk is the target. AA4:  Severodonetsk-Kramatorsk.  Reasonable manoeuvre terrain which pockets Slovyansk. Personally I would be going with a COA to pocket Slovyansk by aiming at Kramatorsk along AAs 1 and 4.

Still chipping away at the terrain analysis - here is the latest map army file:
BAE.milxlyz
Map Army link:
MilitaryMap - Plan your Mission

I suspect it would be an IMINT/SIGINT/ELINT lashup.  SIGINT will tell you what callsigns are speaking to each other and which nets are active.  As a simple illustration, if you have three callsigns on a regimental net - one will be the RHQ and the other two will be subordinate battalions/BTGs.  Easier if you're getting the raw voice transcript.  ELINT will be able to geolocate the transmitters which then allows you to cue up your IMINT sensor to collect at the geolocated areas.  Your IMINT will tell you what is physically there.

So running from buildings that are being shelled is actually a RL thing ... Lots of people and threads on this forum  appear to have disagreed with this notion in the past ... 😉

So running from buildings that are being shelled is actually a RL thing ... Lots of people and threads on this forum  appear to have disagreed with this notion in the past ... 😉

So running from buildings that are being shelled is actually a RL thing ... Lots of people and threads on this forum  appear to have disagreed with this notion in the past ... 😉

So running from buildings that are being shelled is actually a RL thing ... Lots of people and threads on this forum  appear to have disagreed with this notion in the past ... 😉

I suspect it would be an IMINT/SIGINT/ELINT lashup.  SIGINT will tell you what callsigns are speaking to each other and which nets are active.  As a simple illustration, if you have three callsigns on a regimental net - one will be the RHQ and the other two will be subordinate battalions/BTGs.  Easier if you're getting the raw voice transcript.  ELINT will be able to geolocate the transmitters which then allows you to cue up your IMINT sensor to collect at the geolocated areas.  Your IMINT will tell you what is physically there.

Here:
Jomini of the West (@JominiW) | nitter
or here:
UAWarData: Tracking the Russian invasion
 
 

On to the ground piece regarding these new developments around Izyum and Keminna.
AA1:  Izyum-Kramatorsk.  Reasonable manoeuvre terrain, pockets Slovyansk. AA2:  Izyum Slovyansk.  Poor manoeuvre terrain which forces the attacker into a frontal assault on Slovyansk.  I have already assessed that the drive to the city could consume at least 2-3 BTGs and an attack on the city will require 4-5 BTGs. AA3:  Keminna-Slovyansk.  I haven't analysed this in detail yet, but I don't need to spend hours cross-hatching a map to see that of all of the AAs, this is probably the worst for manoevre and it is impossible to avoid a fight for Lyman should the Ukrainians choose to contest it.  That will consume at least 3-4 BTGs then there is the water and woods obstacle between Lyman and Slovyansk.  Then Slovyansk itself.  True to form it appears that Russia has chosen the least favourable/most difficult AA if Slovyansk is the target. AA4:  Severodonetsk-Kramatorsk.  Reasonable manoeuvre terrain which pockets Slovyansk. Personally I would be going with a COA to pocket Slovyansk by aiming at Kramatorsk along AAs 1 and 4.

Still chipping away at the terrain analysis - here is the latest map army file:
BAE.milxlyz
Map Army link:
MilitaryMap - Plan your Mission

Hopefully not looking for cats which was a thing with the media a few days back.

Au contraire - I just felt that with everyone going on about the war winning capabilities of half-decent NCOs, it was worth demonstrating what we bring to the party.  Anyway - I've got some more map colouring in to do ... 😉

I'll see your Flight Simulator and raise you map army ...
MilitaryMap - Plan your Mission
I've been noodling around this one as well and am miles off finishing but I've done enough to work out in terms of ground alone that a Russian attack is going to be a big ask.

The images above are different map/imagery sets of the same area with the red line being the approximate FEBA as of a few days ago.  The area shown is basically Izyum-Slovyansk-Kramatorsk.
The broad COAs for Russian are basically:
COA1 - Deep Envelopment. COA2 - Medium Envelopment. COA3 - Shallow Envelopment.
Of the three COAs - COA1 offers the best opportunity for manoeuvre and is the preferred COA.  COAs 2 and 3 both involve moving through severely restricted terrain and a battle for Slovyansk.  As a guesstimate, moving through the woods to Slovyansk will swallow up a minimum of three BTGs if the Ukrainians choose to disrupt the advance on the approaches to Slovyansk.  Slovyansk cannot be bypassed which means that if it is going to be defended, it will require a minimum of 4-5 BTGs to subdue.  A number of 22 x BTGs has been banded around for the force assembling in Izyum meaning that COAs 2 and 3 will expend nearly a third of the available combat power in Izyum covering the first 35km.  That is assuming that Russia can knock Slovyansk over easily for which there is little evidence to suggest that it is capable of doing so should it be defended.  It will also probably take at least a week to clear out the defenders which means that COAs 2 and 3 stand little chance of achieving a face saving "victory" by 09 May.  In fact COA 2 will definitely fail to deliver on that timeline.
Map Army Files are below if anybody wants to rummage around the detail bearing in mind this is WIP.
BAE.milxlyzRussian FLOT 10 Apr.milxlyz
 

I'll see your Flight Simulator and raise you map army ...
MilitaryMap - Plan your Mission
I've been noodling around this one as well and am miles off finishing but I've done enough to work out in terms of ground alone that a Russian attack is going to be a big ask.

The images above are different map/imagery sets of the same area with the red line being the approximate FEBA as of a few days ago.  The area shown is basically Izyum-Slovyansk-Kramatorsk.
The broad COAs for Russian are basically:
COA1 - Deep Envelopment. COA2 - Medium Envelopment. COA3 - Shallow Envelopment.
Of the three COAs - COA1 offers the best opportunity for manoeuvre and is the preferred COA.  COAs 2 and 3 both involve moving through severely restricted terrain and a battle for Slovyansk.  As a guesstimate, moving through the woods to Slovyansk will swallow up a minimum of three BTGs if the Ukrainians choose to disrupt the advance on the approaches to Slovyansk.  Slovyansk cannot be bypassed which means that if it is going to be defended, it will require a minimum of 4-5 BTGs to subdue.  A number of 22 x BTGs has been banded around for the force assembling in Izyum meaning that COAs 2 and 3 will expend nearly a third of the available combat power in Izyum covering the first 35km.  That is assuming that Russia can knock Slovyansk over easily for which there is little evidence to suggest that it is capable of doing so should it be defended.  It will also probably take at least a week to clear out the defenders which means that COAs 2 and 3 stand little chance of achieving a face saving "victory" by 09 May.  In fact COA 2 will definitely fail to deliver on that timeline.
Map Army Files are below if anybody wants to rummage around the detail bearing in mind this is WIP.
BAE.milxlyzRussian FLOT 10 Apr.milxlyz
 

@Combatintmanand @The_Capt have won the Week, I think.