How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Machor]

15 hours ago, c3k said:

Using helos to shoot down drones would be incredibly difficult. Helos don't have air-to-air radar. So, finding the drone would be nearly impossible.

Two questions:

1. Wikipedia states that the Ka-52 has both air-to-ground and air-to-air radar, the former in the nose, the latter in the mast. If true, would this make the Ka-52 an exception to your statement?

2. Again, if the above information is correct, is the Ka-52 unique in this regard? Does the Longbow radar not have an air-to-air mode? (I had no luck searching on Google.)

[dan/california]

https://www.newsweek.com/china-planned-taiwan-invasion-fall-alleged-russian-intel-leak-claims-1688449

Apparently Xi and Putin were thinking about a one two punch to put the West out of business.  The minute the Ukrainians run out of Russian vehicles to kill we need to start pumping them into Taiwan at at least same rate. Actually we need to help the Taiwanese set up their own production lines. Twenty thousand Javelins, and ten thousand stingers and the island is just not getting conqured . A bunch of the bigger vehicle mounted stuff too obviously.

[Battlefront.com]

This was posted a couple of pages back, but I think it is still relevant to discuss:

9 hours ago, Erwin said:

What military power has Ukraine got to attack with to remove the Russians?  If Ukraine needs a 3:1 ratio to be successful, they probably can only attack one Russian enclave at a time.  That would almost certainly require weakening their forces elsewhere - opening opportunities for Russian attacks there. 

Not really.  When combating a static enemy force you don't need the 3:1 rule of thumb in any place other than the area of main effort.  Other factors can be brought to bear that act as force multipliers, such as choosing to attack places that intel shows are running low on supplies, have been abandoning posts after minor skirmishes, don't have well protected flanks, belong to units that just lost their command and control center, etc.

What's important to note is that Ukraine does not need to have 3:1 superiority in things like tanks or APCs.  Going in with light infantry supported by artillery and drones should be fine.  Why?  Because Russia is already showing signs of digging in its armored vehicles which means they aren't maneuvering.  Should be pretty easy pickings for ATGMs and drones.  No need to risk bring up your own armor when you have those things in play.

Once Russian positions have been identified it should be fairly easy to isolate, smash, and assault.

As for thinning out the lines elsewhere.. not going to be a problem for local counter attacks for sure, but soon Ukraine will have more forces available to it than Russia.  This will make it even easier to attack in multiple places concurrently without leaving gaps in their own defenses.

If I were commanding the Ukrainian forces I would keep probing and pushing back a little here and there until I had enough forces to do a general counter attack across the entire front.  Russia does NOT have the resources to hit back everywhere simultaneously. 

What will happen is as Ukraine makes a gain the Russian units not directly affected will get very nervous, especially if they feel the attack leaves their positions more vulnerable.  This will decrease morale further and lead to tactical retreats and possibly defections.  Russia can't handle this happening on a significant scale without the front collapsing.

9 hours ago, Erwin said:

In addition, the Russians may have advantages playing defense.  Can Ukraine endure/replace the losses that attacking will surely result in?  What will the effect be on the Ukrainian population/morale when their casualties rise dramatically?  

As long as the Russian bodies and POWs are steadily increasing while also losing ground, I don't see Ukrainian determination wavering even with significant losses.  Significant losses without real gains might.  See above why I don't think that scenario is likely.

As for the numbers game... I've already run this in detail.  Russia's forces are on the decline, Ukraine's are on the increase.  That will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.

Steve

[Kinophile]

Pace @Haiduk's post on RUS PGM usage, this from the ISW site:

The Ukrainian General Staff also reported the Kremlin shifted Russia’s military-industrial complex involved in producing Kalibr and MLRS “Tornado” ammunition to “around-the-clock" production due to the “consumption of almost all missile ammunition” as of March 18.[8]

Anyone know how long does it take to build PGMs? The internets is an abyss of no info.

[dan/california]

2 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

I also expect the Russians to use the nasty old tactic of creating 'denied zones' by scattering millions of cheap (Chinese?) plastic mines and bomblets, which will sadly be killing civilians for another 2 generations.

They are obviously willing to do this sort of awfulness. But it also amounts giving up on ever advancing again, you would have to cross your own minefields. Might want to start breeding those special rats in quantity though.

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, dan/california said:

https://www.newsweek.com/china-planned-taiwan-invasion-fall-alleged-russian-intel-leak-claims-1688449

Apparently Xi and Putin were thinking about a one two punch to put the West out of business.  The minute the Ukrainians run out of Russian vehicles to kill we need to start pumping them into Taiwan at at least same rate. Actually we need to help the Taiwanese set up their own production lines. Twenty thousand Javelins, and ten thousand stingers and the island is just not getting conqured . A bunch of the bigger vehicle mounted stuff too obviously.

China must be very unhappy with what the West is learning about Russia's capacity to wage war.  Why?  Because China's military suffers from pretty much all the same deficiencies that the Russians do.  Corruption, I suspect, is one that isn't as pronounced with China.  Plus, Russia is failing BADLY even though it has massive numerical advantages (or had, I should ay) and recent combat experience.  China's numbers are not all that great given that they have to land their forces by air and sea, which means there's a built in limit to how many forces it can get into the fight at once.

Steve

[LongLeftFlank]

14 minutes ago, Machor said:

If the soldiers fighting the war are openly expressing their ideology in these terms, this can go to very dark places...

It is definitely going that way, sad to say.

But I'm also hoping that there are enough ethnic Russians fighting for the UA, so that the wannabe ethnic cleansers (which sadly may include some folks on here ) don't get to have their day, a la Croatia's savage retaliatory expulsion of Serbs (and Bosniaks) from the.... wait for it... Krajina region.

There is no future for Ukraine as an 'ethnic state' along the lines of the Baltics. Too many groups have crisscrossed, colonised and intermarried in that territory for too long. Federalism and (hopefully) stronger links to Central Europe, plus better government at home, must be the future; the alternative is disintegration and impoverishment, except perhaps in the Galicia zone and Odessa (?)

Thoughts, anyone else?

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Pace @Haiduk's post on RUS PGM usage, this from the ISW site:

The Ukrainian General Staff also reported the Kremlin shifted Russia’s military-industrial complex involved in producing Kalibr and MLRS “Tornado” ammunition to “around-the-clock" production due to the “consumption of almost all missile ammunition” as of March 18.[8]

Anyone know how long does it take to build PGMs? The internets is an abyss of no info.

I don't know, but significant.  Plus. even if the materials are all in Russia's hands (and that might not be the case) there's a practical problem with having run their stocks down so low.  Sending a few completed rockets to the front each day won't do very much.  These things need to be used en mas and repeatedly to achieve results.  The slow production means the Russians won't have effective use of these systems for anything other than limited localized purposes for quite some time.

Steve

[Machor]

13 hours ago, Phantom Captain said:

Does one truck hold enough ammo to keep a battery going for a day?  Two days?

 

12 hours ago, Combatintman said:

Now I have no idea how much 122mm or 152mm a Ural-375 can carry but there will be a gunner out there who can give some sort of answer.  I would hazard a minimum of two reloads and of course each 2S1 and 2S3 would have had a turret load of some description.

This expert made calculations for how many 'rounds' of artillery ammo Russian trucks can carry, a 'round' including both the shell and the accompanying charges. He calculated a six ton Ural can carry 40-50 152mm rounds, or some 80 122mm. That may help visualize the battlefield impact of a burnt-out truck wreck, assuming it was carrying ammo to your CM game. Also sobering to see that going from 122 to 152 has a 2x impact on the logistic tail.

 

[Battlefront.com]

7 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

It is definitely going that way, sad to say.

But I'm also hoping that there are enough ethnic Russians fighting for the UA, so that the wannabe ethnic cleansers (which sadly may include some folks on here ) don't get to have their day, a la Croatia's savage retaliatory expulsion of Serbs (and Bosniaks) from the.... wait for it... Krajina region.

There is no future for Ukraine as an 'ethnic state' along the lines of the Baltics. Too many groups have crisscrossed, colonised and intermarried in that territory for too long. Federalism and (hopefully) stronger links to Central Europe, plus better government at home, must be the future; the alternative is disintegration and impoverishment, except perhaps in the Galicia zone and Odessa (?)

Thoughts, anyone else?

i think we're going to see pretty much "equal opportunity slaughter" rather than the more targeted type of slaughter in the Balkans.

Where I think the bigger impact will be is on post war relations with Russia.  Since 2014 the Ukrainian state has become less and less receptive to suggestions of having good neighborly relationships with the Russian state.  This was NOT the case prior to 2014.  We're already seeing this play out right now.  There is likely no meaningful push by anybody in Ukraine today to support the Russian agenda in any form.  That will continue for a long time after this war.  The primary political fight will be between more radical anti-Russian and moderately anti-Russian positions.

Steve

[dan/california]

1 minute ago, Kinophile said:

Pace @Haiduk's post on RUS PGM usage, this from the ISW site:

The Ukrainian General Staff also reported the Kremlin shifted Russia’s military-industrial complex involved in producing Kalibr and MLRS “Tornado” ammunition to “around-the-clock" production due to the “consumption of almost all missile ammunition” as of March 18.[8]

Anyone know how long does it take to build PGMs? The internets is an abyss of no info.

I have no clue how many they were making before, but at best you can triple it by adding shifts. You would be looking at several months even in a panic program though to do more than that. You just don't set up a new aerospace production line on a whim. That is before we discuss whatever little special bits just got sanctioned. The Chinese might be willing to help, but that is just more time to reverse engineer whatever little odd bits they were buying from Germany. Not just the odd bits that go in the missile, but the tooling to make the missile. The sporting goods companies that sold out in a week at the beginning of the pandemic are only NOW getting new production lines up. If you want a nice new mountain bike at the moment most companies are quoting a six month delay, full price, take it or leave it. 

[Machor]

2 hours ago, BletchleyGeek said:

That somebody implies a threat to start a nuclear war is something sure to attract attention and focus the minds. But to what end?

I agree that the Kremlin (we keep saying 'Putin' as shorthand, but let's remember he isn't running the show all alone) does not want an escalation. But at the same time, they need to come up with answers for a public that was being served the Kool-Aid below (in Russian, but I think anyone can get the point). Therefore, 'escalate to deescalate' is definitely on the table.

 

[dan/california]

22 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

It is definitely going that way, sad to say.

But I'm also hoping that there are enough ethnic Russians fighting for the UA, so that the wannabe ethnic cleansers (which sadly may include some folks on here ) don't get to have their day, a la Croatia's savage retaliatory expulsion of Serbs (and Bosniaks) from the.... wait for it... Krajina region.

There is no future for Ukraine as an 'ethnic state' along the lines of the Baltics. Too many groups have crisscrossed, colonised and intermarried in that territory for too long. Federalism and (hopefully) stronger links to Central Europe, plus better government at home, must be the future; the alternative is disintegration and impoverishment, except perhaps in the Galicia zone and Odessa (?)

Thoughts, anyone else?

IF Zelensky makes it thru the war I am reasonably hopeful that he will direct the vast amount of residual anger at Russia, as opposed to ethnic Russians. He just seems to be an extraordinarily sane and well adjusted guy, and he will effectively have near absolute power in post war Ukraine. Not in a bad way, but he effectively becomes the Ukrainian George Washington if he pulls this out. It is my great hope that he will follow Washington's example and retire after a reasonable period of time. I would assume he could have any senior EU job he wanted by that point. We need to make very clear to the Russians that if they try to kill him after the end of hostilities we are going to find a way to deprive them of ANOTHER trillion dollars.

[LongLeftFlank]

2 minutes ago, dan/california said:

We need to make very clear to the Russians that if they try to kill him after the end of hostilities we are going to find a way to deprive them of ANOTHER trillion dollars.

"Stop sending people to kill me. We've already captured five of them, one of them with a bomb and another with a rifle (...) If you don't stop sending killers, I'll send one to Moscow, and I won't have to send a second."

- Josip Broz Tito

[dan/california]

34 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

China must be very unhappy with what the West is learning about Russia's capacity to wage war.  Why?  Because China's military suffers from pretty much all the same deficiencies that the Russians do.  Corruption, I suspect, is one that isn't as pronounced with China.  Plus, Russia is failing BADLY even though it has massive numerical advantages (or had, I should ay) and recent combat experience.  China's numbers are not all that great given that they have to land their forces by air and sea, which means there's a built in limit to how many forces it can get into the fight at once.

Steve

Can you imagine the inspections Xi has ordered? The entire Chinese military is going to spend the next six months losing their minds from audit, after inspection, after readiness review. I wonder if we will ever know how many senior people come to bad ends when whole warehouses of stuff turn out not to exist.

[Battlefront.com]

Interesting article on Russian propaganda messaging confusion:

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/03/17/putin-russia-state-tv-news-00018304

[Machor]

Re: Corruption

I had always thought the best strategy for Russia in Ukraine post-Maidan was to wait it out, just as they successfully did after the Orange Revolution. Turns out this was not viable due to organized crime figures losing power. One of the many bad things about kleptocracies is that they have dynamics that defy Realist strategy:

 

[Machor]

On a lighter note... Can we have tankriders in CMBS? Oh wait! 

 

[Battlefront.com]

7 minutes ago, Machor said:

Re: Corruption

I had always thought the best strategy for Russia in Ukraine post-Maidan was to wait it out, just as they successfully did after the Orange Revolution. Turns out this was not viable due to organized crime figures losing power. One of the many bad things about kleptocracies is that they have dynamics that defy Realist strategy:

 

This was clearly evident during the 2014 "unrest" in eastern and southern Ukraine.  Several well known mobsters were involved in the "demonstrations" and eventually armed takeovers.  One of the more infamous ones was in Odessa where Vitaly "Boatswain" Budko shot and killed at least one Maidan supporter while seemingly under the protection of riot police.  Subsequently it was alleged that he was helped by a prosecutor immediately after.  This sort of thing indicated the reach of organized criminals, many of which reported directly back to some of the big named Russian mobsters:

https://inforesist-org.translate.goog/vsu-unichtozhili-komandnyj-punkt-rf-pod-hersonom-predvaritelno-pogiblo-neskolko-generalov/?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

16 minutes ago, Machor said:

On a lighter note... Can we have tankriders in CMBS? Oh wait! 

This was first posted to a Russian propaganda Twitter account with the caption that it was from a NATO country.  It was mocking the supposed superiority of NATO.  I haven't tried to figure out which army this is, but the high ramped APC the guy runs into is not something the Russians have as far as I know.  Not sure what it is TBH.  Tank looks like it might be a Leopard 2.

Steve

[LongLeftFlank]

44 minutes ago, Machor said:

Re: Corruption

I had always thought the best strategy for Russia in Ukraine post-Maidan was to wait it out, just as they successfully did after the Orange Revolution. Turns out this was not viable due to organized crime figures losing power. One of the many bad things about kleptocracies is that they have dynamics that defy Realist strategy:

 

4/ The Russian and the Ukrainian organized crime have always been partners. The most important Russian mafia organization, the Solncevskaja bratva, is governed by a diarchy: the Russian Sergej Michajlov, called "Michas", and the Ukrainian Semyon Mogilevich, called "The Brain".

[kraze]

8 hours ago, Probus said:

@Battlefront.com or if someone else knows, I am being told by a friend that when Germany re-unified that the West secretly (at the time) promised Russia that NATO would not "expand" further East.  Is this true?  Does someone have a source for these (declassified) documents? 

This had the effect of allowing Russian Hardliners (like Putin) to get into power in Russia, pointing at the West and saying "See, you can't trust them".  This was the first I'd heard of this, water under the bridge now but is unfortunate if true.

Although it doesn't justify Russia's blatant and unlawful attack on Ukraine, I could see where allowing nations like Poland and others into NATO is kinda like pokin' the Bear and giving hardliners political ammunition to use in their arsenal.

This has been the only argument against the West I've heard that is very troubling (if true).

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/feb/28/candace-owens/fact-checking-claims-nato-us-broke-agreement-again/

https://www.france24.com/en/russia/20220130-did-nato-betray-russia-by-expanding-to-the-east

I've also read much of Bloodlands which makes me think that Ukraine is very justified in wanting to become part of NATO.  That poor area was stuck between Hitler and the USSR, both of which seemed to want to destroy a significant part of its population. 

Very confusing and convoluted subject and may not be a good fit for this thread as I would prefer to see reports of what is going on in Ukraine right now. So don't let me derail my own thread.  But this thread also has very knowledgeable folks who may very well be able to put this issue to rest in my mind.

You seem to be missing the key point here.

Why would anyone be bothered by some country joining an exclusively defensive alliance - unless that anyone wants to attack said country?

[billbindc]

8 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I just finished reading the NY Times post about the "no expansion" crap that Russia keeps harping on.  Basically, Baker said that he used a poor choice of words in a very preliminary discussion.  When the discussion was reviewed he was shown that and afterwards tightened up his language and made sure Gorbachev understood the change.  Baker said he did and they went forward in discussions based on the new concept.  THIS is what the Soviet Union signed, not the preliminary discussion point.

The article also goes into detail about the Russia double standard of the West not living up to something it never agreed to while Russia blatantly violates things it did agree to.  Not to mention the mass murder stuff.

Steve

Russia was never promised dick about NATO expansion. And everyone in the Kremlin knows it.

[TheVulture]

28 minutes ago, kraze said:

You seem to be missing the key point here.

Why would anyone be bothered by some country joining an exclusively defensive alliance - unless that anyone wants to attack said country?

I think it is because Putin its assuming that everyone is operating in the same world view that he has. Countries "applied to join" the Warsaw Pact because Russia had a strategic military use for them, combined with an ability to force them. I suspect he genuinely believes that e.g. the baltic states had pro-western governments put in and then instructed to ask to join NATO so that NATO could expand. In this world view the governments of 'minor'  countries are chosen by the covert decisions of the 'major' ones, and the idea of being responsive to the wants and needs of the population doesn't come up. 

In this world view, since the givens government of Ukraine wasn't chosen by Russia, then of course it was imposed and forcefully maintained by the west.  And the west have no legitimate military strategic interests in Ukraine unless their goal is to be able to threaten Russia.

The Western view of course is that countries get to choose their own governments,  and that countries can freely decide to join a security alliance (if they meet the entry conditions), and that this is a good thing because ultimately mutual defence reduces the chance of wars and leads to rising prosperity for all. 

As an aside,  Putin also has the "American disease" of assuming everything is about Russia, in the same way that Americans think that everything is about America ("why did Russia invade now? Let's look at what has changed in the USA recently to see what has caused this..." Ukraine might will view NATO membership as directly related to Russia, for obvious and entirely valid reasons,  but for the west,  Ukraine joining NATO isn't really about Russia. I'ts about extending the "peace bubble" to protect the lives and enhance the wellbeing of everyone inside it. 

But that's not something Putin would do,  so it's not something that he believes anyone else does either. 

[BletchleyGeek]

3 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

There is no future for Ukraine as an 'ethnic state' along the lines of the Baltics. Too many groups have crisscrossed, colonised and intermarried in that territory for too long. Federalism and (hopefully) stronger links to Central Europe, plus better government at home, must be the future; the alternative is disintegration and impoverishment, except perhaps in the Galicia zone and Odessa (?)

There will always be extremists, but I don't think that the Ukrainian society that comes out of this will be an 'ethnic state'. If anything, it will reinforce their sense of being at a "border" between civilisations. How will that play out is anyone's guess? 

And I say "civilization" because I am pretty sure Russia won't be the same after this. 

 

3 hours ago, Machor said:

I agree that the Kremlin (we keep saying 'Putin' as shorthand, but let's remember he isn't running the show all alone) does not want an escalation. But at the same time, they need to come up with answers for a public that was being served the Kool-Aid below (in Russian, but I think anyone can get the point). Therefore, 'escalate to deescalate' is definitely on the table.

 

Who makes these videos? A humorist? They should have put angel wings on those parachutists jumping over Warsaw...