hcrof

I think we should write off the first few weeks of the war as an aberration - we can't learn very much from that other than don't get cocky. The question is how a modern army would handle the donbass. I'm sure the US could with enough air power, but if the Ukrainians had a NATO quality army I'm not sure they would do much better. If nothing else the attacker would suffer heavy casualties and potentially get bogged down (and the donbass is only held by a few brigades, not divisions). Edit: and just imagine a non-US force try to take the donbass. Our UK/CAN/GER/NED force would be cut to pieces.

I get the impression that the battles in CM are very unusual compared with mobile warfare doctrine. Both NATO and warpac were not planning on fighting carefully balanced scenarios and take heavy casualties despite tactical genius by the commander. It was more like bomb the hell out of an area and then drive a tank battalion through it at speed for the breakthrough. Careful dancing around with keyholed tanks on the offense may happen in reality but I don't think it is doctrine.

Do we know the intent behind these attacks? They don't seem to be doing much damage so I guess it is just to cause confusion/discontent?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62602367 According to the article, damage to the transmission lines are the biggest risk that may cause overheating because that energy has to go somewhere. But the reactor has been set up to hopefully safely shut down in that event, using the existing diesel generators for power during this time.

The world is not black and white. India is a historic ally of Russia that is moving away from that partnership, albeit slowly. China is a nominal russian partner but there are serious trust issues between them and they only despise each other marginally less than the USA. Neutrality is a spectrum, not an absolute.

My guess is a RPG shot at the BMP but it was rushed because he wanted to fire before the mine blew up (which would kind of throw your aim off). Most definitely an ambush though.

If I wanted to block a runway, parking a 45tonne tank on it and blowing it up would be at least as effective as cratering it - maybe sabotage?

No it's an expensive way to do a dirty bomb. I think even Russia would not do that - they can guess the consequences...

If the Ukrainians are saying they used a Ukrainian missile to hit the airbase, could it be tochka-u? Edit: if so it would be a great warmup for the atacms act

Am I missing something here? The song is about how the British would not be hardcore enough for a fight in dpr but all the footage is a royal marines recruitment video (so super pro UK)? It just doesn't seem to make any sense?

Rotor wing though - fixed wing is further. I assumed a heli would be fairly stationary while firing.

Wiki says brimstone II has a range of 40+ km?

I kind of like the idea of sneaking in an easily concealed brimstone platform close to the front line - it would be cheap, mobile and very fast to respond due to the reduced range compared with a SPG like Caesar playing "ping pong".

Brimstone missiles sound like exactly what you are looking for - Ukraine even got them mounted on a pickup! What happened to that experiment btw?

I have not seen anyone suggest that the whole of Siberia will form a unified political bloc that is capable of leaving the Russian federation. It's a very big place and those resources are scattered over very large areas: getting bits of Siberia is not very valuable - you need the whole lot.

Thanks, I am not old enough to remember 1994 well, but looking at a map at both those locations suggests to me why they never left in the first place. Buryatia is a forest with less than 0.5m people in it and 1 major road, next to Irkutsk which is larger and has the infrastructure to be a military staging ground. Tartarstan is right in the middle of the Russian heartland and is not going anywhere in any scenario short of the apocalypse!

Doesn't that very long list suggest that any ethnic group that wants to break away would have done so already? Other than some statelets in the Caucasus I really don't see how any new nations are likely without external backing (meaning China) but the gain of some sparsely populated forest doesn't really offset the bad example of ethnic breakaway states for them imo.

What you show will work but is a bit conservative - the Overbridge does not need to sit on the supports directly, but about a quarter of the way in so a 30m Overbridge would work for a 50m span. Of course if the damage is done to about a quarter of the way from the support that is not possible. It is an interesting problem of where to hit the bridge for the best mix of immediate damage (centre span) Vs preventing Overbridging (quarter span) Vs maximum destruction (support).

Agreed, by the time the engineers finish their assessment the campaign in Kherson will be over. But I have a feeling that the Russians will just do an "accelerated" assessment by driving trucks over it anyway and watching what happens...

From ISW - seems like the bridge in Kherson has indeed got a weight limit on it that prevents movement of trucks or military vehicles. Now they need to disrupt the rail line too!

Loving the guy that says 15cm of steel will protect the bridge - genius! Just give up trying to run vehicles on it as well

This is true, and also means you only need to repair one span if you only destroy one span. On the other hand, the Russians may find it easier to reinforce a single damaged span, for example by laying a tank bridge over the damaged section. That is only a temporary solution though, unless they can solve the himars problem so let's hope the Russians retreat before more damage is done (and forget to blow the bridge properly).

I'm on my phone but it looks like at least one of the main beams has been badly damaged(?), which will result in weight restrictions if true. Cars are not that heavy (car parks are very lightly built) but military vehicles might be more of a problem already.

Grigb thanks for all the great material today! Do you think RU is going to push out of Kherson or are they just preparing for a UA offensive?

This was the much hyped extraordinary session right? And they decided nothing? How much ability does the Duma have to set or change the agenda? Some people say they just rubber stamp what the Kremlin says but it would be strange in this case for the Kremlin to organise this session for no reason!