How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

Steve said

To put this into perspective, a full strength BTG has about 225 infantry available to it.  300 if you're talking about a BTG that is infantry centric.  Let's call the minimum force requirement 5000 dismounted infantry.  That's the equivalent of 17-22 BTGs.  Russia has something like 80 or so in the fight right now and they are all fully committed, so they don't count.  It has probably another 30 or so reconstituting behind the lines with another 40 or so probably too shattered to even think about.

Me

From me, 5000 seems too low, 5000 seems WAY too low. Tre Russians have to attack on a front SEVERAL kilometers wide, just keep ATGMs from being able to shoot clear across the width of the breakthrough the are trying to create. Then they have to hold the flank of every kilometer they  advance. Even if you assume they could get by with 50 men per linear kilometer, and I think that is totally in adequate, that only buys you a a hundred kilometers of infantry coverage, You have to cover both sides of your salient, and you SURELY need more than 50 men per linear kilometer to actual front of the attack. So 5000 men might get you a five or ten kilometer front 25 kilometers deep. I don't see that accomplishing anything except a great many dead Russians. 

If the game has taught me anything it is that a company of infantry can only handle so much contested ground, and trying to exceed that goes rather poorly.

Edited April 15, 2022 by dan/california
spelling

[kraze]

2 hours ago, panzermartin said:

I don't understand the tone sorry. The refugee crisis is a humanitarian disaster since the West decided to  violently intervene in Middle east and Afghanistan but without really investing in a long term plan for the day after. 

The tone is such that the upcoming even larger refugee crisis is already fueled in large part by stubbornly keeping on feeding the beast.

Without oil and gas money (which account for about 70% of their income) Russia would quickly collapse within just a few months saving millions from suffering. Even middle eastern troubles are mostly because of Russia feeding every single terrorist organization it can find - from Hesbollah to Taliban.

There is a strong connection between refusing to let go even of coal until August and Africa being threatened by famine.

[BFCElvis]

3 hours ago, TheVulture said:

From what I've seen there might be a bug in the forum software if you keep the page open and keep hitting the 'show new replies' popup as more stuff gets added. It definitely screws up some of the embedded twitter links - someone will post a new link, and for me it shows a duplicate of a twitter message from further up the page (which usually makes the text they've just written make no sense). If you do a hard reload it sorts itself out. 

I think I've seen some wonky stuff happen with quoting as well, but won't swear to that.

No, I didn't want to repeat what he'd said by quoting it....So I changed his text to "blah, blah blah." If his PM box wasn't full I would have have sent him a PM instead.

[Bil Hardenberger]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Ok, so apologize for what will be a longish post, even for me.  So welcome to The Capt's terrain analysis for the possible upcoming fight between Izyum and Donetsk.  Basically I wanted to get a view of the terrain this next major fight is sqauring off over and try and pull some deductions from that.  

So here is what I did.  I booked an MS Flight Simulator (MSFS) flight from Donetsk to Kharkiv roughly along this google maps line:

For reference you can see the ISW map of where this next great Russian offensive is spooling up:

They buried Donetsk under the legend but this is the area of concern.  So I did not use live weather as it is pissing rain there right now and based on what I am seeing it is a big reason the Russian have not started anything.  I flew at 1000 feet up but employed the drone feature to get down and grab a birds eye view.  Overall I would summarize the terrain in military terms as such:

On the 8th day, while recovering from a hangover God looked upon the earth and said to himself "You know these shaved apes are going to go at each other the second I turn my back so I may as well make it interesting.  Let there be tank country!"

These shots are just south - southwest of Izyum.  So on the surface you can immediately see a lot of room for manoeuvre tailor made for armored warfare.  I mean I can see frontages of kms just aching for big ol tank formations to come charging through with all sorts of room for bypassing, flanking and all that good stuff.  But then go a bit deeper:

So if you take a look at that last one, check out the VFR map in the upper right.  There are a lot of water features distributed all over this area and in the spring they are going to be deep and muddy.  Little lakes and rivers just about everywhere that amphib IFVs can probably bounce but tanks, arty and logistics are going to have trouble with.  So what?  Target the engineering stuff with all them fancy switchblades, then arty, then C2...we will get to logistics.  Next how about all them rectangles:

 Yep, a lot of these little and big squares all over the place...damn Ukrainian real estate laws.  For armored warfare these are going to be a problem.  Easy button answer...arty them all!  Well no one on earth has enough arty for that as these things are everywhere.  Each one a short range tank hunting dream, with ready made tractor trails to boot off on once you have fired off a couple NLAWS and are falling back to the next one to re-set.  These thing will soak up attacking infantry to sweep and will slow things down a lot.  Oh wait there is more:

These are not CM3 previews (but we can dream) but in MSFS you can drop right down to eye-level and wow.  First off this area is not flat. "Undulating" is the term we would use, with lots of small hills and ridges, all of which give some sightlines we normally only see in a desert.  So if I had a smart, fire and forget ATGM system with a listed range of 4.0km and was trying to sell it, these are the marketing shots I would take.  I found these everywhere along the route but more so towards the south end of the likely Russian advance (or North from Donetsk but that is all trench country from the last war, so not likely). 

Ok so what? 

- First off if this thing goes off it will be a conventional battle for the history books.  I mean the next one with this sort of potential is likely Armageddon itself.  We have a near perfect storm of mass meets mass forming up.  The collision on this has potential to be heard around the world. 

- Second, this will be a major exam for conventional armored warfare.  "End of Tanks: No They Are Not" may very well be settled in this one.  You cannot really find much better terrain for armored warfare on one hand.  While on the other, this is also excellent terrain for an mobile defence.  The Russians should be able to create a break out with overwhelming mass here, if they play it right.  While at the same time between prepared defenses and a combination of short and very long sightlines the Ukrainian defence should be able to stop them cold - that is an epic collision in the making. 

- Third, so much of this will hinge on C4ISR it is looking more like an aerial dogfight than a traditional land-battle.   The side that can see first at the tactical level will likely hit and win first.  We should see more exchanges like were seen in the Nagorno-Karabahk which were very long range and then working in for the dirty work.  

- Fourth, the Russian offence is going to have to evolve.  They cannot bring their last fight to this one.  They will need to rethink C4ISR collection and sharing, logistical planning - pushing a lot more forward faster, and targeting.  The UA can keep doing what it was to be honest but it had better have made use of this pregnant pause to put in a lot of AT minefields that tie those water obstacles and rectangles together, they had the time and I can only hope they have the resources; this country is set up for nightmare defensive belts.

- Fifth, this will also be an exam for artillery, ATGMs, self-loitering and unmanned systems.  This will show what they can really do together, primarily in the defense but let's not forget the offence as well.  There are sightlines that can make full use of the ranges these systems can come bring to bear.  Honestly if I were the UA, I would stick with hybrid at the front end, and then wait for my moment for a conventional c-attack because it could be a bone crusher.  Given enough gas, a UA formation could drive right into the Russian rear areas and cry-freakin-havok back there looking at this terrain.

- Sixth, the awkward conversation about airpower.  This is perfect CAS country, the Russian's need it, the UA needs to deny it. With full on air superiority this country would be a challenge for an attacker, without it we could be looking at a nightmare. 

Finally, I would close by saying that I also get the sense that this is perfect terrain for an operational trap - it is what I would do.  

#1 - Resist Russian main axis of advance...but just enough to attrit but give them hope.  I would use obstacles to keep them on those axis and help channel them to what they want.

#2 - Oh look at how happy they Russian are, they have their great pincer BUT do not give them time for reorientation or to dig in, or they could use this country against you.

#3- Bil Hardenberger.  That old bastard has snap the jaws closed on me more times than I care to remember.  This country is made for a conventional c-attack to cut that corridor up and off.#4 - Feeding time.

This terrain supports this and the Russians have given the UA a lot of time to set it up.  Higher risk but the payoff is intense. 

Just spit-balling here and I have every confidence they UA commanders on the ground have a grip on this but for a defender that 1) knows what they are doing, 2) are well resourced and 3) have the time to prepare, this could make for a textbook defence that could be turned into something else.

I believe that in this terrain long range fires, Javelin, Stugna, tanks, precision artillery. etc. will be more important than ever. 

There will always be opportunities for short range (less than 1000m) ambushes, but Ukraine will need to rely on their long range AT fire to blunt the forward momentum (the slower they move, the more open to attack they are), but basically let them penetrate and provide a nice long train of follow-on forces.  Ukraine can give up a lot of territory here... that isn't important.. they need to fight the enemy, not the ground.

Then infiltrate in close, and preferably in the rear to decimate the follow-on formations and support convoys.  I suspect the pocketed Ukrainians (in Warren's #2 image) will have a field day in this role... like an angry badger stuck in a chicken coop.

That's what I would do at the sharp end of this thing.

Good analysis Warren.

Edited April 15, 2022 by Bil Hardenberger

[The Steppenwulf]

 

39 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

 

Of all the multitude of problems Russia has, there's major one that's at the root of all Russia's failures so far... lack of infantry. 

 
 Indeed - back to the "manpower" problem!!

It was clear 4 weeks ago that Russia did not have the troops to continue this war without a radical rethink about the solution.  Russia's best units have suffered serious degradation in combat power, or others are successfully tied up by Ukrainian's defensive set up in Donbass. 

And it's all well and good for the RA to bring more and more tanks and heavy weaponry into theatre, but who is going to operate that equipment at the level of effectiveness that is required? Once this battle starts I cannot see the Russians being able to develop the kind of sustained assault, with the commensurate level of organisation and cohesion that will be needed to seize and hold positions deep in the UA rear with such impaired numbers of trained personnel to prosecute it.

Once the cohesion cracks and splinters it will likely shatter because, on evidence, most of their troops do not have the heart to dig deep and fight hard, but the Ukrainians do and that will undoubtedly show.

Edited April 15, 2022 by The Steppenwulf

[Maquisard manqué]

14 minutes ago, kraze said:

The tone is such that the upcoming even larger refugee crisis is already fueled in large part by stubbornly keeping on feeding the beast.

Without oil and gas money (which account for about 70% of their income) Russia would quickly collapse within just a few months saving millions from suffering. Even middle eastern troubles are mostly because of Russia feeding every single terrorist organization it can find - from Hesbollah to Taliban.

There is a strong connection between refusing to let go even of coal until August and Africa being threatened by famine.

I’m not sure I follow. Are you saying that if EU counties stopped buying Russian fuels then there would be no issue with world food prices? Or that it would clear up quicker because the war would be over sooner?

If so, that’s a bit of a stretch, to put it mildly. Neither Ukrainian exports nor Russian will recover quickly from this. Russia’s (larger) exports are also likely to remain embargoed - until Putin goes too.

So there’s no way the rest of the world/consumers of Russian wheat, fuel & materials is aligned with Ukraine’s plight. They will want to buy from Russia again/already asap and are angry with the US & friends for making their lives harder. Sure, the same countries don’t think much of Russia for its wanton and egregious aggression, but they are as self interested as the rest.

Only the US and EU pretend to be anything other than self interested.

[Aragorn2002]

25 minutes ago, BFCElvis said:

No, I didn't want to repeat what he'd said by quoting it....So I changed his text to "blah, blah blah." If his PM box wasn't full I would have have sent him a PM instead.

About the sinking of the Moskva, to be precise. My emotions got the better of me. 

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, Probus said:

@The_Capt, I know the Russians haven't been all that savvy about finessing a situation, but if they used weather conditions that caused severe foggy/hazy conditions to attack in, would that really help or hurt the Ukrainian defense.  It would make for better NLAW conditions but the longer range ATGMs may prove much less useful.

I really wish Black Sea could come out with a pre-release that had all the Western AT weapons included in the TOE for the Ukrainians. Plus leopards, M113s,... so we could simulate the possible upcoming battles and see how the simulations match reality.

I don't know to be honest.  A lot of the longer range stuff uses IR and thermals, I am not sure what fog/hazy does for that.  I do think that the Javelin is made for this country as it locks quickly and then takes off above tree lines until it goes for the terminal attack.

I would save the swtichblades for deep strike on engineering stuff and enemy artillery and then own arty and UAV strike for logistics.  This plus Javelin/NLAW in this country will again create enormous friction along the entire Russian axis - attrit, slow, stall and then roll in your own conventional mass to completely crush.

As Steve points out the Russians do not have anywhere enough "fast" infantry to be able to sustain momentum and their tanks will become coffins without that.  They need recon pull, highly linked in as well.  This is highwater mark combined arms type stuff.  But even before all that, how about pre-strikes on Ukrainian information infrastructure?  The UA can still use irregulars seasoned with SOF up front to make life miserable but they have been using cell infra (allegedly); however, the UA SOF may very well have satellite backbone via the west by now, so Russia is screwed unless they can deny LEO and geosynchronous, which is a laughable idea.

Nope my bet is the Russians are going to try more "dim-mass", now very brittle because their expertise is looking at the map and going "tank country...yay".  However, they have not read the fine print, nor really figured out the implications.  If they had they would not have given the UA nearly a month to prepare, maybe.

I get the sneaking sense that Russia is doing this war like a scene from Tenet - backwards.  They should have started in the south with much narrower operations, with their best troops, in this country before the UA could prep and then expanded once they broke the back of the UA.  They had surprise at the very beginning as well.   By trying to play this war in reverse it is all sorts of messed up...just like that freakin movie.

Edited April 15, 2022 by The_Capt

[kraze]

5 minutes ago, Maquisard manqué said:

I’m not sure I follow. Are you saying that if EU counties stopped buying Russian fuels then there would be no issue with world food prices? Or that it would clear up quicker because the war would be over sooner?

If so, that’s a bit of a stretch, to put it mildly. Neither Ukrainian exports nor Russian will recover quickly from this. Russia’s (larger) exports are also likely to remain embargoed - until Putin goes too.

So there’s no way the rest of the world/consumers of Russian wheat, fuel & materials is aligned with Ukraine’s plight. They will want to buy from Russia again/already asap and are angry with the US & friends for making their lives harder. Sure, the same countries don’t think much of Russia for its wanton and egregious aggression, but they are as self interested as the rest.

Only the US and EU pretend to be anything other than self interested.

What I'm saying is that most major problems in the world have a single root cause. And it's Russia. If it didn't constantly start wars or supported dictators and terrorists all around the globe - there most likely would be no refugee crisis in EU in the first place. Russia has been fighting aggressive wars and occupying other countries since the day USSR was over - so, naturally, pouring trillions of $$ into it now results in even larger wars and more misery and now another 3 mln refugees running into EU.

Current russian embargoed exports aren't making a large enough dent, not only because whole existence of Russia stands solely on gas and oil being sold, but also because what's done now is half measures. Russia still hasn't been taken off SWIFT for example.

[sburke]

4 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Maybe, but based on Russian reactions I am thinking the UA pulled it off.  Why not show video?  Any number of OPSEC reasons.  For example, it could be that it wasn't a Ukrainian Neptune missile but a western missile system that we have not "declared" or how the film would show how the UA pulled it off.  Remember that most of the social media we have seen is from irregulars and territorial defence, the conventional UA is pretty tight on this stuff.

funny thing is one of the news media outlets had a headline of video of missile attack on Mosva.  The video turned out to be the shelling of kherson... 

[sburke]

1 minute ago, kraze said:

What I'm saying is that most major problems in the world have a single root cause. And it's Russia. If it didn't constantly start wars or supported dictators and terrorists all around the globe - there most likely would be no refugee crisis in EU in the first place. Russia has been fighting aggressive wars and occupying other countries since the day USSR was over - so, naturally, pouring trillions of $$ into it now results in even larger wars and more misery and now another 3 mln refugees running into EU.

Current russian embargoed exports aren't making a large enough dent, not only because whole existence of Russia stands solely on gas and oil being sold, but also because what's done now is half measures. Russia still hasn't been taken off SWIFT for example.

Much as I really love bashing Russia, blaming them for most of the world's problems is a stretch.  Humans are good at f'n things up. We are incredibly short sighted.

The US has a long history (as do many countries) of supporting gov'ts that do things we like regardless of the consequences.  This is especially true when it comes to strategically important resources.  Saudi Arabia is our own version of Russia.  They export Wahabist teachings and oil. They murder their own civilians in their embassy, and we whine and complain and at the end of the day sell them weapons.

[db_zero]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Ok, so apologize for what will be a longish post, even for me.  So welcome to The Capt's terrain analysis for the possible upcoming fight between Izyum and Donetsk.  Basically I wanted to get a view of the terrain this next major fight is sqauring off over and try and pull some deductions from that.  

So here is what I did.  I booked an MS Flight Simulator (MSFS) flight from Donetsk to Kharkiv roughly along this google maps line:

For reference you can see the ISW map of where this next great Russian offensive is spooling up:

They buried Donetsk under the legend but this is the area of concern.  So I did not use live weather as it is pissing rain there right now and based on what I am seeing it is a big reason the Russian have not started anything.  I flew at 1000 feet up but employed the drone feature to get down and grab a birds eye view.  Overall I would summarize the terrain in military terms as such:

On the 8th day, while recovering from a hangover God looked upon the earth and said to himself "You know these shaved apes are going to go at each other the second I turn my back so I may as well make it interesting.  Let there be tank country!"

These shots are just south - southwest of Izyum.  So on the surface you can immediately see a lot of room for manoeuvre tailor made for armored warfare.  I mean I can see frontages of kms just aching for big ol tank formations to come charging through with all sorts of room for bypassing, flanking and all that good stuff.  But then go a bit deeper:

So if you take a look at that last one, check out the VFR map in the upper right.  There are a lot of water features distributed all over this area and in the spring they are going to be deep and muddy.  Little lakes and rivers just about everywhere that amphib IFVs can probably bounce but tanks, arty and logistics are going to have trouble with.  So what?  Target the engineering stuff with all them fancy switchblades, then arty, then C2...we will get to logistics.  Next how about all them rectangles:

 Yep, a lot of these little and big squares all over the place...damn Ukrainian real estate laws.  For armored warfare these are going to be a problem.  Easy button answer...arty them all!  Well no one on earth has enough arty for that as these things are everywhere.  Each one a short range tank hunting dream, with ready made tractor trails to boot off on once you have fired off a couple NLAWS and are falling back to the next one to re-set.  These thing will soak up attacking infantry to sweep and will slow things down a lot.  Oh wait there is more:

These are not CM3 previews (but we can dream) but in MSFS you can drop right down to eye-level and wow.  First off this area is not flat. "Undulating" is the term we would use, with lots of small hills and ridges, all of which give some sightlines we normally only see in a desert.  So if I had a smart, fire and forget ATGM system with a listed range of 4.0km and was trying to sell it, these are the marketing shots I would take.  I found these everywhere along the route but more so towards the south end of the likely Russian advance (or North from Donetsk but that is all trench country from the last war, so not likely). 

Ok so what? 

- First off if this thing goes off it will be a conventional battle for the history books.  I mean the next one with this sort of potential is likely Armageddon itself.  We have a near perfect storm of mass meets mass forming up.  The collision on this has potential to be heard around the world. 

- Second, this will be a major exam for conventional armored warfare.  "End of Tanks: No They Are Not" may very well be settled in this one.  You cannot really find much better terrain for armored warfare on one hand.  While on the other, this is also excellent terrain for an mobile defence.  The Russians should be able to create a break out with overwhelming mass here, if they play it right.  While at the same time between prepared defenses and a combination of short and very long sightlines the Ukrainian defence should be able to stop them cold - that is an epic collision in the making. 

- Third, so much of this will hinge on C4ISR it is looking more like an aerial dogfight than a traditional land-battle.   The side that can see first at the tactical level will likely hit and win first.  We should see more exchanges like were seen in the Nagorno-Karabahk which were very long range and then working in for the dirty work.  

- Fourth, the Russian offence is going to have to evolve.  They cannot bring their last fight to this one.  They will need to rethink C4ISR collection and sharing, logistical planning - pushing a lot more forward faster, and targeting.  The UA can keep doing what it was to be honest but it had better have made use of this pregnant pause to put in a lot of AT minefields that tie those water obstacles and rectangles together, they had the time and I can only hope they have the resources; this country is set up for nightmare defensive belts.

- Fifth, this will also be an exam for artillery, ATGMs, self-loitering and unmanned systems.  This will show what they can really do together, primarily in the defense but let's not forget the offence as well.  There are sightlines that can make full use of the ranges these systems can come bring to bear.  Honestly if I were the UA, I would stick with hybrid at the front end, and then wait for my moment for a conventional c-attack because it could be a bone crusher.  Given enough gas, a UA formation could drive right into the Russian rear areas and cry-freakin-havok back there looking at this terrain.

- Sixth, the awkward conversation about airpower.  This is perfect CAS country, the Russian's need it, the UA needs to deny it. With full on air superiority this country would be a challenge for an attacker, without it we could be looking at a nightmare. 

Finally, I would close by saying that I also get the sense that this is perfect terrain for an operational trap - it is what I would do.  

#1 - Resist Russian main axis of advance...but just enough to attrit but give them hope.  I would use obstacles to keep them on those axis and help channel them to what they want.

#2 - Oh look at how happy they Russian are, they have their great pincer BUT do not give them time for reorientation or to dig in, or they could use this country against you.

#3- Bil Hardenberger.  That old bastard has snap the jaws closed on me more times than I care to remember.  This country is made for a conventional c-attack to cut that corridor up and off.#4 - Feeding time.

This terrain supports this and the Russians have given the UA a lot of time to set it up.  Higher risk but the payoff is intense. 

Just spit-balling here and I have every confidence they UA commanders on the ground have a grip on this but for a defender that 1) knows what they are doing, 2) are well resourced and 3) have the time to prepare, this could make for a textbook defence that could be turned into something else.

Good use of FS 2020.

I took a look at this article and it mentions that in one of the potential what ifs (Scenario 2) is Dnipro becoming a key piece of terrain and if so that implies heavy urban combat. Looks like this person believes the main axis of the offense is further West.

https://mwi.usma.edu/what-comes-next-in-ukraine-three-scenarios/

In another analysts I read that many of the potential battlegrounds have already been fought over since 2014 and are heavily entrenched with towns and industrial areas interspersed between open areas, many of which are already heavily damaged and defended by the most experienced Ukrainian units. 

Whatever the case I would have to believe that control of the roads and hubs that links roads will be critical. Keep hearing its not the strategy, operational and tactical stuff that matters, but logistics. If that's the case then a lot of the towns and other areas cannot be bypassed, but would have to taken and controlled otherwise your supply line become vulnerable.

In the late 42-43 phase of the war in the east the Germans made good use of strong points that the Soviets would have to assault or bypass at great peril.

Edited April 15, 2022 by db_zero

[benpark]

"Death of the tank" is probably premature, as this war has shown just about every way to not use them effectively. I tend to think the situation dictates, and this one is quite particular in the hands of an inept army versus a motivated, trained, and well-equipped one.

In this case (especially in the infantry-deficient Russian force, as Steve highlights), the tempo and use could be decidedly different in the offensive. APC's are also incredibly vulnerable for longer range movements in this terrain. Stall these attacks across like ground with drones and man-portable AT weapons, and then tanks on the defensive (which can switch to local offensive uses) become useful tools again.

The Russians don't seem to have any of the tools in their box to pull off a big, coordinated offensive with a singular purpose (the previous were fingers from different hands). If they got their air-power situation together, that would be one thing but that doesn't seem like likely happen when they are off war-crime-ing.

[Huba]

15 minutes ago, db_zero said:

Good use of FS 2020.

I took a look at this article and it mentions that in 1 of the potential what ifs (Scenario 2) is Dnipro becoming a key piece of terrain and if so that implies heavy urban combat. Looks like this person believes the main axis of the offense is further West.

https://mwi.usma.edu/what-comes-next-in-ukraine-three-scenarios/

Regarding the proposed axis of advance from the article, i.e. the pincers converging on Dnipro. Nice thing about the idea is that it allows to basically take the whole east in one operation, all the ATO forces would be trapped and couldn't retreat probably given the distance to cover before leaving the cauldron.

But the feasibility of it? Compared to driving straight south from Izyum, the distance to cover by the advancing forces is roughly twice as big. In the south, you have Zaporizhia wedged into your flank, probably a fortress at this point. On the north you are not really moving away from Kharkhiv, instead it remains a base for operations against your flank. But even if you disregard all of that, the main problem is the amount of forces needed for operation of this size - at the moment it looks like pure fantasy to me. 

Edit: BTW, I'm sure you guys know this site, but I think it's nice to link it anyway. It shows the dislocation of Russian units based on OSINT sources and is as good at it as we gonna get:

https://uawardata.com/

Edited April 15, 2022 by Huba

[Battlefront.com]

56 minutes ago, dan/california said:

From me, 5000 seems too low, 5000 seems WAY too low.

Heh.  After posting I had to run an errand and I was thinking "I don't think I emphasized minimum requirement enough in my post".  So I'm here to belatedly do that

5000 functioning dismounted infantry would likely have a shot at keeping the attack from collapsing before it got very far, it might keep the flanks secure enough for the initial phase, and could possibly keep enough with the pointy bit of the spear to take new ground.  For a while and only if things went nearly perfectly (which we know doesn't happen).

What this would look like is a deep penetration into Ukraine's rear that disrupts its supply lines to a good chunk of troops.  Depending on what Ukraine has in the area to counter attack, this could present significant problems for a couple of days.

Without more infantry even this nearly-fantasy perfect attack would quickly crumble as Ukrainian artillery, partisans, local counter attacks, etc. started to take bites out of the gains.  The bites would become chomps and from chomps to total consumption of the Russian forces not able to retreat back to its start line.  Another 5000 (total 10,000 dismounts) would likely be necessary to prevent this from happening.  That's roughly 2000 at the pointy bits of the attacks, 2500 on each flank, 2,000 as mobile reserves/security, and 1000 out of action from wounds.

If Russia is to make up for all of its failings with mass, then it probably needs somewhere in the range of 15,000-20,000 dismounted infantry.  This would allow Russia some ability to recover form its proven ability to waste troops on stupid attacks.

Russia doesn't have that sort of dismounted manpower to put into this attack.  I'm not sure that it even has the minimal 5000 available to it short term.  And even if it did, it also needs to bulk up its fighting forces along the existing lines of contact with Ukrainian forces for this attack to be worth a damned.

What this all boils down to is Russia not having the forces to conduct such a battle for several months minimum.  I'm not sure they can muster this much infantry even if they rushed all that they have to the front and tried to Humanwave this thing with random rounded up cannon fodder.

Steve

[Kraft]

3 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

  I'm not sure they can muster this much infantry even if they rushed all that they have to the front and tried to Humanwave this thing with random rounded up cannon fodder.

Steve

Steve you are forgetting the 60.000 Syrian Elite Troops that have surely been deployed by now. 

[FancyCat]

JFO looks solid as hell. Throwing themselves against that fortified region sounds like a recipe for disaster. Best to take their rear from north and south. Notably, with the weather and mud, Ukraine's road networks pretty much have cities and towns as nexus points, and like the Kiev front shows, keeping them isolated and bypassed requires troops Russia does not really have.

Now the question is, does Kherson fall before the Russian offensive kicks off? If Kherson falls, with the Black Sea Fleet out of action, can Ukraine threaten Melitopol? If so, there's a chance the southern piercer never kicks off.

Also, what the hell is Russia thinking? End the bridges over the Dnipro. The idea that Russia has been holding back that many pro-russian analysts have suggested falls completely flat when Russia can't disrupt the transit west to east. As far as I can tell, there is a completely unbroken road network from Lviv to Dnipro. Russia has bridge layers, Ukraine? Does not?

I really want to know if Ukraine has lost S300 systems, or if Russia is lying. Obviously Ukraine will seek to hide that loss immensely. So far the way their sorties are slowing down, indicates a pause, rest, but if they want to succeed at the new offensive, they will need to up their sorties much more soon no? Or do you suppose the S300s are still contesting the sky?

So I've seen conflicting info about the Moskva, did it carry missiles used in targeting land based targets or was it purely acting as a fleet anti-air platform?

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, Huba said:

Regarding the proposed axis of advance from the article, i.e. the pincers converging on Dnipro. Nice thing about the idea is that it allows to basically take the whole east in one operation, all the ATO forces would be trapped and couldn't retreat probably given the distance to cover before leaving the cauldron.

But the feasibility of it? Compared to driving straight South from Izyum, the distance to cover by the advancing forces is roughly twice as big. In the south, you have Zaporizhia wedged into your flank, probably a fortress at this point. On the north you are not really moving away from Kharkhiv, instead it remains a base for operations against your flank. But even if you disregard all of that, the main problem is the amount of forces needed for operation of this size - at the moment it looks like pure fantasy to me. 

Charging off to Dnipro or Odessa would be a suicidal.  They'd likely not get very far towards their objectives before getting crushed, then pushed back to their start line.  Even if they somehow managed to get near their objectives, they certainly don't have the infantry to take either.  Especially because their LOCs would be so exposed to disruption that effectively they would cut themselves off.

I don't have much good to say about Russian leadership in this war, but even I don't think Russia is stupid enough to try for Dnipro or Odessa.  A relatively short, sharp action behind the Donetsk front is what, I am sure, they are focused on.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, Kraft said:

Steve you are forgetting the 60.000 Syrian Elite Troops that have surely been deployed by now. 

Heh.  And the roughly 12,000 random men in Donetsk that were on their way to pick up a liter of milk and found themselves tossed into the back of a truck.  Have the Russian prisons been fully emptied yet, or are there still more guys in there to get to the front?

Steve

[akd]

Strange crops growing in the fields of Ukraine this year:

[benpark]

I wonder how the Russian old warhorse, the artillery will be used here. I see a lot of images of it moving up by rail, but that's just looking through a keyhole. Without decent drones (the coke-bottle gas tank drones aren't cutting it by any stretch), dealing with the pin-point nature of how I imagine the Ukrainian forces will be initially be arrayed won't play nice with the principle of massed-fire. That branch also seems more in the civilian depopulation of Ukraine game than the military at the moment as well.

The entire idea of another offensive is....offensive. Both on a human level, and a military one.

[FancyCat]

9 minutes ago, Huba said:

On the north you are not really moving away from Kharkhiv, instead it remains a base for operations against your flank.

So true, a attack from Izyum into JFO will have Kharkov stabbing them in the back. Really a push on Dnipro is impossible without Kharkov. I guess the question is what's their deployment of units in the area of Kharkov? I believe the reports are that Russia is prepping for a new offensive on Kharkov.

[Commanderski]

I think you can add this guy to your list of KIA officers.

Putin news: Anton Kuprin is said to have died after the Moskva was fatally hit (Image: EAST2WEST)

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1596636/putin-news-russia-anton-kuprin-killed-moskva-warship-sunk-ukraine-missile-attack

[Battlefront.com]

4 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

JFO looks solid as hell. Throwing themselves against that fortified region sounds like a recipe for disaster. Best to take their rear from north and south. Notably, with the weather and mud, Ukraine's road networks pretty much have cities and towns as nexus points, and like the Kiev front shows, keeping them isolated and bypassed requires troops Russia does not really have.

Now the question is, does Kherson fall before the Russian offensive kicks off? If Kherson falls, with the Black Sea Fleet out of action, can Ukraine threaten Melitopol? If so, there's a chance the southern piercer never kicks off.

I think the southern pincer isn't going to happen at all.  It seems like their efforts are going to be to come down from the north only.  That's more of a hunch than something based on gathered intel.

4 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Also, what the hell is Russia thinking? End the bridges over the Dnipro. The idea that Russia has been holding back that many pro-russian analysts have suggested falls completely flat when Russia can't disrupt the transit west to east. As far as I can tell, there is a completely unbroken road network from Lviv to Dnipro. Russia has bridge layers, Ukraine? Does not?

My guess is Russia has all bridges over the river ready to blow.  Once they feel Kherson is not defendable they will attempt to withdraw all of their forces on the western side of the river north of Kherson, then do a fighting withdrawal to the bridge, cross over, and blow 'em.

Once the bridges are blown this is pretty much the end of Russia's fantasy of moving westward.  It doesn't have the ability to bridge the river in any sustainable way.

On the plus side for Russia, once they blow the bridges that means Ukraine isn't able to cross either.  Both sides would likely put up screening forces along the banks and divert attention to the southern line running from the river to Donetsk.

Steve

[sburke]

2 minutes ago, Commanderski said:

I think you can add this guy to your list of KIA officers.

Putin news: Anton Kuprin is said to have died after the Moskva was fatally hit (Image: EAST2WEST)

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1596636/putin-news-russia-anton-kuprin-killed-moskva-warship-sunk-ukraine-missile-attack

I'll put him in the tentative column.  @Haidukas Captain of first rank that is equivalent to Colonel, correct?