How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Battlefront.com]

Just now, Bulletpoint said:

Would chemical weapons even be a game changer militarily, if Putin decided to use them?

Good question.  The answer is no positive effect for Russia, tactically or strategically.  First of all because Russia can't kill its way out of the mess it is in.  More death ≠ victory.  Second, the historical record of chemical weapons having an impact on ground operations is just about zero.  Closest example would be in the Iran-Iraq War and I don't think anybody thinks that had a decisive effect.  Third, just inviting NATO to get involved.

Steve

[DesertFox]

1 minute ago, Battlefront.com said:

 Third, just inviting NATO to get involved.

I still have that bad feeling that the russian lunatic is about to set the stage for his personal ride of the valkyries to valhalla with his exit of the blue planet with a big showdown. I hope I am wrong.

[hm_stanley]

7 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Good question.  The answer is no positive effect for Russia, tactically or strategically.  First of all because Russia can't kill its way out of the mess it is in.  More death ≠ victory.  Second, the historical record of chemical weapons having an impact on ground operations is just about zero.  Closest example would be in the Iran-Iraq War and I don't think anybody thinks that had a decisive effect.  Third, just inviting NATO to get involved.

Steve

Yes, tactical nukes are more likely in my estimation than Novachuck (sp?)

[Kinophile]

They're a terror weapon, simply put.

Best tactically effective against unprepared/unwitting targets. Even in WW1, with so many gas attacks, the infantry on both sides quickly learned how to deal with it, with the thicker gasses being more useful for restricting defenders LOS.

But with this ****er, anything is on the table - mass chemical attack on Kharkhiv, causing utter civilian chaos, then ground attack. Weaponize the fear to clog roads and maneuverability. 

But even then, UA forces would just fight harder. And I'm pretty sure it would be a theatre wide no-prisoners policy.

Edited March 22, 2022 by Kinophile

[Haiduk]

Fuel truck - next spoil of John Deer brigade

 

Edited March 22, 2022 by Haiduk

[Taranis]

Quote

L’Ukraine reprend du terrain par endroits face aux troupes russes, selon le Pentagone
L’armée ukrainienne mène des contre-offensives qui ont permis, dans le sud notamment, de reprendre du terrain sur les troupes russes, confrontées à des difficultés de communication, a assuré mardi le porte-parole de Pentagone.

Les militaires ukrainiens « sont désormais, dans certaines situations, à l’offensive », a dit John Kirby sur CNN, affirmant qu’ils « pourchassent les Russes et les repoussent en dehors de zones où les Russes étaient par le passé ». « Nous savons qu’ils ont mené des contre-attaques (...) notamment ces derniers jours à Mykolaïv, » ville-clé du sud de l’Ukraine, a-t-il ajouté.

« Nous avons vu (ces gains territoriaux) augmenter ces derniers jours » au profit de l’Ukraine, a précisé John Kirby. « C’est une réelle preuve de leur capacité à combattre en suivant leurs plans, en s’adaptant et, à nouveau, à tenter de repousser les forces russes ».

L’armée ukrainienne a aussi lancé une contre-attaque à Izium, une petite ville au sud-est de Kharkiv (est), que les forces russes avaient prise pour tenter de faire jonction avec les zones pro-russes de Lugansk et Donetsk, a précisé un haut responsable du Pentagone. « Ce que nous voyons aujourd’hui, ce sont des combats significatifs de la part des Ukrainiens pour essayer de la reprendre », a dit à la presse ce haut responsable ayant requis l’anonymat.

M. Kirby a expliqué sur CNN que les forces russes « ne conduisent pas leurs opérations avec la coordination qu’on aurait pu attendre d’une armée moderne ». « Leurs commandants ne parlent pas toujours, ne se coordonnent pas toujours entre l’aérien et les forces au sol », a dit le porte-parole de la défense américaine.

« Nous avons vu des tensions entre les forces aériennes et terrestres sur la manière dont ils se soutenaient mutuellement, bien ou avec difficulté », et il en va de même pour la marine, poursuit-il. « Ils ont des problèmes avec le commandement et le contrôle » des troupes.

« Très concrètement, ils ont du mal à discuter entre eux, et cela conduit à l’utilisation de téléphones portables dans certains cas », estime ce responsable américain. Et en plus, « ils manquent d’essence, ils manquent de nourriture ». « C’est pourquoi nous pensons n’avoir pas observé [récemment] de réelle avancée majeure des Russes, à part dans le sud », où ils sont plus proches de leur base arrière en Crimée, a-t-il encore ajouté. « Donc oui, ils sont en difficulté ».

Le haut responsable ayant requis l’anonymat a précisé que les forces russes manquaient même d’équipement pour se protéger du froid. « Nous avons collecté des informations montrant que certains de leurs soldats ont souffert (du froid) et ne sont plus en état de combattre à cause d’engelures », a-t-il noté. Pour la première fois, la capacité de combat dont dispose encore l’armée russe déployée depuis l’automne aux frontières ukrainiennes est passée sous les 90%, selon lui.

Ukraine is regaining ground in places against Russian troops, according to the Pentagon
The Ukrainian army is carrying out counter-offensives which have made it possible, in the south in particular, to regain ground on Russian troops, faced with communication difficulties, the Pentagon spokesperson assured on Tuesday.

The Ukrainian military “is now, in certain situations, on the offensive,” John Kirby told CNN, saying that they are “chasing the Russians and pushing them out of areas where the Russians were in the past.” "We know that they have carried out counter-attacks (...) especially in recent days in Mykolaiv," a key city in southern Ukraine, he added.

“We have seen (these territorial gains) increase in recent days” in favor of Ukraine, said John Kirby. “It is real proof of their ability to fight according to their plans, adapt and, again, try to push back the Russian forces.”

The Ukrainian army also launched a counterattack in Izium, a small town southeast of Kharkiv (east), which Russian forces had taken in an attempt to link up with the pro-Russian areas of Lugansk and Donetsk, a said a senior Pentagon official. “What we see today are significant fights by the Ukrainians to try to take it back,” the senior official told reporters on condition of anonymity.

Mr. Kirby explained on CNN that the Russian forces “do not conduct their operations with the coordination that one would have expected from a modern army”. "Their commanders don't always talk, don't always coordinate between air and ground forces," the US defense spokesman said.

“We saw tensions between the air and land forces over how they supported each other, well or with difficulty,” and the same is true for the navy, he continues. "They have problems with the command and control" of the troops.

“Very concretely, they find it difficult to discuss with each other, and this leads to the use of mobile phones in certain cases”, estimates this American official. And in addition, "they lack gas, they lack food". "That's why we think we haven't seen [recently] any real major advance by the Russians, except in the south", where they are closer to their rear base in Crimea, he added. "So yes, they are in trouble."

The senior official who requested anonymity said the Russian forces even lacked equipment to protect themselves from the cold. “We have collected information showing that some of their soldiers have suffered (from the cold) and are no longer fit to fight due to frostbite,” he noted. For the first time, the combat capacity still available to the Russian army deployed since the fall on the Ukrainian borders has fallen below 90%, according to him.


Source : Le Monde


Have we got a cristal ball ?  

Edited March 22, 2022 by Taranis

[Sequoia]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Russians, even the nice ones, have an over inflated sense of importance.  This is one of the things that Putin has used most to keep himself in power.

 

I think you'd agree though, that quality is hardly exclusive to Russians. I heard a phrase "Once an Empire, Always an Empire" 

IIRC Iranians feel themselves to be inheritors of the Persian Empire and feel they are disrespected by not being treated as a great power. 

The UK seems to have better adjusted to no longer being an Empire than the French. Perhaps The Commonwealth preserves the appearances of an empire.

And I will certainly not leave out the USA. While technically never an empire, it certainly has been the leader of a hegemony for about 80 years. 

How many Americans does it take to change a light bulb? Just one. He holds up the light bulb, and the World turns around him to screw it in.

[Haiduk]

Two Ukrainain tanks... But I doubt this is Mariupol because of snow. Branches of Azov are operating now also around Kyiv and in Kharkiv

 

Edited March 22, 2022 by Haiduk

[The_Capt]

5 minutes ago, Taranis said:

For the first time, the combat capacity still available to the Russian army deployed since the fall on the Ukrainian borders has fallen below 90%, according to him.

He is being generous.  Based on probable losses, my bet is that is closer to 80% or lower at this point, and that is just on equipment losses, not soft factors like loss of C2 and logistical support. (e.g. Oryx is showing 27 BTGs worth of tanks lost).  As to personnel, that one is all over the place.  The middle estimate seems to be the US one of 9k but at 1:3, we are heading towards 40k out of battle in some way or another, if the initial build up was 190k troops , this also matches a 20% loss in combat effectiveness. 

What is not known is how many reinforcements have been pushed in, lots of speculation.  However, you cannot simply take a battalion/Bde and drop it in country, there is an entire RSOMI process (or should be) to get them integrated into the overall operational fight.  If the Russian's just crammed them forward then you really have reinforced with a disorientated armed mob that is waiting to die.  

As to Steve's point, the tipping point for most modern militaries is 70% but who knows in this case.

[danfrodo]

Wow, this is the best day in quite a while.  All the predictions that've been circulating here are starting to come true.  UKR appears to be gaining ground.  And nice of TheCapt to throw some shade on the continually wrong prognosticators

The russian failure reminds me of discussions of Fall Blau, where looking at Stalingrad mess folks say "why did the germans do this plan w not nearly enough resources?".  The answer is that the germans did have enough resources relative to their assumptions.  They assumed that they'd encircle and smash the remaining soviet armies in the south and then simply drive to the Volga and the oilfields.  Similar thing here, where the Russian plan was fine relative to Putin's beliefs about what would happen. 

So now the question is whether he is actually seeing and understanding the situation.  Ordering Belarus into the fight looks like a bad idea, but it's easy to see how he could talk himself into it if he thinks he just needs one more big push to achieve victory (whatever he thinks that is at this point).  I wonder what he thinks is the problem?  Is he blaming his generals?  Troops?  traitors & spies? 

I doubt he'll use chemicals or nukes because he fears escalation w NATO even more than we do, but hey, he's not shown great judgement.

I do worry about a russian missile strike taking out Zelensky.  I hope UKR has a solid succession plan.

 

[Baneman]

5 minutes ago, Sequoia said:

...

The UK seems to have better adjusted to no longer being an Empire than the French. Perhaps The Commonwealth preserves the appearances of an empire.

Nope, uh uh, sorry.
The lack of adjustment has been on pretty public display since 2016.

Which strengthens your point.

[BeondTheGrave]

8 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

He is being generous.  Based on probable losses, my bet is that is closer to 80% or lower at this point, and that is just on equipment losses, not soft factors like loss of C2 and logistical support. (e.g. Oryx is showing 27 BTGs worth of tanks lost).  As to personnel, that one is all over the place.  The middle estimate seems to be the US one of 9k but at 1:3, we are heading towards 40k out of battle in some way or another, if the initial build up was 190k troops , this also matches a 20% loss in combat effectiveness. 

What is not known is how many reinforcements have been pushed in, lots of speculation.  However, you cannot simply take a battalion/Bde and drop it in country, there is an entire RSOMI process (or should be) to get them integrated into the overall operational fight.  If the Russian's just crammed them forward then you really have reinforced with a disorientated armed mob that is waiting to die.  

As to Steve's point, the tipping point for most modern militaries is 70% but who knows in this case.

This is a stupid question, but one I have always wondered re: these casualties statistics. When you report wounded, what are we actually talking about here? Is everyone who reports to a medic station a 'casualty' whether its a traumatic wound or a cut hand? 

To rephrase the question slightly, how many of that 40k are actually Russia bound vs. treated in place and will eventually return to their unit? 

Edited March 22, 2022 by BeondTheGrave

[The_MonkeyKing]

12 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Two Ukrainain tanks... But I doubt this is Mariupol because of snow. Branches of Azov are operating now also around Kyiv and in Kharkiv

 

 

[riptides]

30 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

I still have that bad feeling that the russian lunatic is about to set the stage for his personal ride of the valkyries to valhalla with his exit of the blue planet with a big showdown. I hope I am wrong.

I am waiting for that someone in the Military, whose love for Mother Russia and their institute of the Military -  to step forward. My goodness, that career military person has just been embarrassed on the world stage and now in history for some ex-KGB bureaucrat? They know their whole being and world has been dismantled, forever, with Putin in power.

[danfrodo]

17 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Two Ukrainain tanks... But I doubt this is Mariupol because of snow. Branches of Azov are operating now also around Kyiv and in Kharkiv

 

I have fought a lot of CMBS & CMSF2 battles that look just like this (sans frosty ground)

[Vet 0369]

6 hours ago, Haiduk said:

128th mountain-assault brigade captured Russian high-ranked officer. Claimed he is lt.colonel Alexandr Koshel, the chief of PsyOps counteraction group of 58th CAA (Southern Military District, N.Osetia, Vladikavkaz)

Though, his documents says he is mayor, serving in m/u 21250 - 212th Training center of tank troops (Syberian Military district). He can be promouted to lt.colonel and appointed lately on the duty of PsyOps in 58th CAA and hadn't time to change own military ID.   

The place of ambush, where Russian officer was captured. Probably Zaporizhzhia oblast. The same source yesterday issued in own FB photos of destroyed T-90A in the same oblast.

Why is he wearing a civilian sport jacket? Was he captured while wearing it, or was his uniform ruined or destroyed so the capturing Ukrainians gave him something to wear? 

Being captured while wearing civilian clothing, even over his uniform, allows the Ukraine to execute him as a spy under the Geneva Conventions.

[sburke]

47 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

Nice one...

 

 

just another day added to the "what the fk are they thinking?" column.  

[akd]

23 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Two Ukrainain tanks... But I doubt this is Mariupol because of snow. Branches of Azov are operating now also around Kyiv and in Kharkiv

 

Shevchenka Boulevard, looking west:

47.11657° N, 37.52632° E

Maybe not from today.

Edited March 22, 2022 by akd

[Combatintman]

38 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Would chemical weapons even be a game changer militarily, if Putin decided to use them?

Nerve gas is highly dangerous if you're in the area of effect, but it's not like a nuclear weapon where one small bomb can level a city.

How big of an area effect do chemical weapons have? How many missiles full of nerve agent would they need to fire in order to defeat the Ukrainian Army?

Would it even be useful militarily as anything apart from yet another Russian terror weapon?

Its a science, if you forgive the pun, in itself.  Blood agent, nerve agent, choking agent, incapacitating agent, persistent agent, non-persistent agent are just a few variables for starters.  Generally you need mass, so MBRLs in battalion handfuls should be the preferred method of delivery.  Then of course there is the weather factor - wind direction, wind speed, temperature and humidity.

In terms of effect, it is going to depend on whether the folks on the receiving end have equipment to protect themselves against it and, where applicable, have taken drugs to ameliorate the effects of certain agents, and have the means to decontaminate.

They generally work on the basis of being a terror weapon so there is potentially a huge psychological effect but also as just a means of causing casualties that the medical chain has to deal with.  Combine that with AFVs operating closed down and just the rigid PITA of performing basic tasks with a bulky suit on, your view of the world being restricted to two pieces of glass, your ears covered by the suit hood and wearing two pairs of gloves.  Shooting, which I learned was a vaguely important soldiering skill during my time in two armies, in NBC kit is an art in itself.  Now try and write on a log sheet, type on a computer, twiddle the dial on your radio or even speak, listen and be understood/understand on the radio with those gloves and that mask on.

[dan/california]

5 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:

Why is he wearing a civilian sport jacket? Was he captured while wearing it, or was his uniform ruined or destroyed so the capturing Ukrainians gave him something to wear? 

Being captured while wearing civilian clothing, even over his uniform, allows the Ukraine to execute him as a spy under the Geneva Conventions.

His facial expression implies they just explained that to him...

[warrenpeace]

Some random thoughts.

1) When war started, I was in Vermont skiing with an old friend.  He thought Zelensky would abandon Ukraine right away:  "He's a comedian".  I told my friend that if he did, war would be over quick, but if he didn't, this would be no cakewalk.  Part of my confidence came from playing CMBS, which really reinforces the lethality of modern warfare.  It also told me that hidden infantry with Javelins are really deadly.

2)  Russia had 200,000 troops deployed for the invasion.  For Barbarossa, Germans deployed 3,000,000.  Even for Poland, they deployed 1,000,000.  200K was not going to get the job done.

3)  Biggest surprise to me so far is the lack of decisiveness of Russian air superiority.  I'd have thought it would be impossible to move on roads in Ukraine.   Are Stingers the key here?

4)  My biggest worry is tactical nuke option if Putin feels he is losing.  Not sure what West would do.

 

Warren

 

 

[BlackMoria]

5 minutes ago, Combatintman said:

Its a science, if you forgive the pun, in itself.  Blood agent, nerve agent, choking agent, incapacitating agent, persistent agent, non-persistent agent are just a few variables for starters.  Generally you need mass, so MBRLs in battalion handfuls should be the preferred method of delivery.  Then of course there is the weather factor - wind direction, wind speed, temperature and humidity.

In terms of effect, it is going to depend on whether the folks on the receiving end have equipment to protect themselves against it and, where applicable, have taken drugs to ameliorate the effects of certain agents, and have the means to decontaminate.

They generally work on the basis of being a terror weapon so there is potentially a huge psychological effect but also as just a means of causing casualties that the medical chain has to deal with.  Combine that with AFVs operating closed down and just the rigid PITA of performing basic tasks with a bulky suit on, your view of the world being restricted to two pieces of glass, your ears covered by the suit hood and wearing two pairs of gloves.  Shooting, which I learned was a vaguely important soldiering skill during my time in two armies, in NBC kit is an art in itself.  Now try and write on a log sheet, type on a computer, twiddle the dial on your radio or even speak, listen and be understood/understand on the radio with those gloves and that mask on.

Amen, brother.   The worst 8 hours in my military career was 8 continuous hours in full 'Zoot' suit.   I am not exaggerating.  The worst 8 hours of my life in the military.  I hate NBC training....

[Ts4EVER]

If they end up using chemical weapons they will probably gas their own troops because they wouldn't manage to inform everyone in time.

[BlackMoria]

Just now, Ts4EVER said:

If they end up using chemical weapons they will probably gas their own troops because they wouldn't manage to inform everyone in time.

The Russian troops performance is so abysmal, I don't think they have the skills, discipline and moral to even consider fighting in an NBC environment.  If Putin plays the chemical card, a whole lot of his troops are going to die as well...

[The_Capt]

14 minutes ago, BeondTheGrave said:

This is a stupid question, but one I have always wondered re: these casualties statistics. When you report wounded, what are we actually talking about here? Is everyone who reports to a medic station a 'casualty' whether its a traumatic wound or a cut hand? 

To rephrase the question slightly, how many of that 15-40k are actually Russia bound vs. treated in place and will eventually return to their unit? 

And here we need to get into some staff tables and medical modeling.  The answer is always "depends".  The old metric, was the whole thirds thing.  One third out of battle permanently, one third out for something like weeks and then one third minor injuries and rotated back in less than 72-95 hours.  Time frames shift and there are some pretty complicated models out there.  

Further, modern battlefield medicine has also thrown those ratios around a lot.  For example in Afghanistan we were seeing 1:10, one death for every 10 wounded because we could get medical care forward much faster and we also had a lot more medical training in the forward units (e.g. half my guys were TCCC).  However, we sent a lot more people home out of excess caution too, so our "going home" ratio was likely higher.

So what?  Well the Russians are probably in and around WW2 (or maybe worse) so if they are showing 9k dead, then we can extrapolate that another 27k-ish have been hit in some shape or size.  About a third to half of those should be out for good and the rest come back in at some time frame.

Here is another good one that shows the stats for WW 2 on page 339:

https://learning-media.allogy.com/api/v1/pdf/59ca4340-e2f2-4a1d-92d9-ee0398092628/contents

In WW2 for example about 83 percent of those that were hit either died or were so badly hurt they had to be pulled out.  Were as in Iraq and Afghanistan that number was down to 52 percent.  Bottom line, is that of the say 40k who got hit, maybe 1/3 get rotated back in after a set period of time...theoretically.