How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Battlefront.com]

21 minutes ago, Huba said:

According to the most prominent Polish military news site, 100 BATT UMG armoured cars are heading to Ukraine, with deliveries starting in June. 

There's been a couple of reports of light armored vehicles being moved to Ukraine, but since they aren't super sexy artillery or tracked stuff, they've not got much media attention.

21 minutes ago, Huba said:

War in Ukraine seems to be proving that various MRAPs are quite useful in conventional conflicts and not only in counter-insurgency actions. Quite a change from conventional wisdom from occupation of Iraq times. Is motorized infantry in close to original meaning of the term becoming a thing again? I guess for many applications fully mechanized, IFV equipped infantry is really not cost effective, if it is to fight in locations where direct support by the vehicles is not possible. 

The biggest use I can see for these is small scale supply vehicles for TD units in particular.  Using unarmored civilian vehicles to zip in and out of the frontline areas is in some ways probably better than large military trucks (harder to spot, more maneuverable, easier to replace), but I suspect the attrition rate in the hot spots is fairly high.  Especially because mines are coming into play more and more it seems.  Light armored vehicles would be a very good upgrade for those activities.

Personally, I wouldn't use them for frontline activities.  Too easily lost.

Steve

[Calamine Waffles]

The problem for Ukraine is they absolutely need to mechanise the TDF and reservists if they want to use them for anything more serious than local defence. That is why their requests for APCs are second only to those for artillery for their ground forces.

[Battlefront.com]

2 minutes ago, Calamine Waffles said:

It takes more than that to assemble and train units (well). It took the US the better part of 6 months before it started deploying Army units during WW2.

When we had a discussion about training times early in this war the various sources and personal experiences showed that 3 months was sufficient (not great, but sufficient) for light infantry.  However, the criticism I've seen (including that previous Tweet) is that the TD units are more like a couple of weeks of training, not a couple of months.  That is a head scratcher.  As for going to the front inadequately armed, three months is more than enough time to figure out how to equip TD units, so I don't get what the issue is with weaponry at all.  Unless the author is expecting them to be riding into battle in IFVs supported by tanks.  TDs aren't supposed to have that sort of stuff, so I'm guessing that's not the author's expectation.

Steve

[dan/california]

13 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

This I don't get.  Ukraine has had three months to assemble units and give them proper training.  As for equipment, one of the reasons there was supposedly so much stuff sitting in western Ukraine is they were holding it to stock new units that hadn't yet been moved to the front.

I don't know how to reconcile what I just said with the reports of TD units being both under trained and under equipped.

Steve

Complete speculation to follow...

Ukraine is probably not incorporating its newly raised troops into the territorial defense, but incorporating them into the regular army, with cadres from the same regular army. The territorials might last in line for everything as the newly raised "regular" troops are trained and equipped. This works as long as no one gets the idea it would be convenient to have the territorials do real high intensity fighting. A mistake they have made at least once. Ukraine is clearly trying to train its newly raised regular units as long as it possibly can, and is willing to spend blood at the current front to allow that.

I do have a strong impression that one new brigade equipped with upgraded t72s from Poland either has been or is about to be committed to action around Kherson. Presumably as an exploitation force so hopefully we will see more of it soon.

Edited June 12, 2022 by dan/california

[Artkin]

I would argue mraps are only useful until your opponent gains access to guided man portable AT weapons similar to Javelin and Nlaw. 

[Calamine Waffles]

2 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

When we had a discussion about training times early in this war the various sources and personal experiences showed that 3 months was sufficient (not great, but sufficient) for light infantry.  However, the criticism I've seen (including that previous Tweet) is that the TD units are more like a couple of weeks of training, not a couple of months.  That is a head scratcher.  As for going to the front inadequately armed, three months is more than enough time to figure out how to equip TD units, so I don't get what the issue is with weaponry at all.  Unless the author is expecting them to be riding into battle in IFVs supported by tanks.  TDs aren't supposed to have that sort of stuff, so I'm guessing that's not the author's expectation.

Steve

Ukraine has mobilised about 700,000 men. How many do you think can they train at once within these 3 months? Do you think they have the facilities and instructors to give all of them the same level of training over 3 months?

[dan/california]

4 minutes ago, Artkin said:

I would argue mraps are only useful until your opponent gains access to guided man portable AT weapons similar to Javelin and Nlaw. 

No IFV in the world can stand up to a Javelin of an Nlaw without APS, which seems to be a grade of tech beyond what we think the Ukrainians can deal with, or we are really worried about the Russians getting ahold of it. MRAPS are way better than pick up trucks for getting from 15 miles out to one mile out from contact undamaged.

[Huba]

Just now, Calamine Waffles said:

The problem for Ukraine is they absolutely need to mechanise the TDF and reservists if they want to use them for anything more serious than local defence. That is why their requests for APCs are second only to those for artillery for their ground forces.

That exactly. Crossing Bakhmut- Lisichansk road in a softskin does nit sound like an enticing proposition. I guess for basically any activity in immediate back of the front you'd like to have something armored to move around, if only possible.

Given that UA is to have 700K men at arms at the moment, it isn't possible to have all of them in tracked/ wheeled IFVs. There are also many areas, where fighting is almost a pure leg infantry mission - forests, swamps, often cities. Not being able to pour bodies there seems to be the chief weakness of RU at the moment, and something more or less inherent of heavy forces designed for mounted maneuver combat. Having ability to safely drive large numbers of infantry guys to the place where they are needed seems useful. 

[danfrodo]

maybe UKR's TD forces are not adequately supplied.  But maybe that's a prioritization issue.  There's a ~6-800km front, mostly manned by TD except in pretty hot areas.  Assume there's regular army units available somewhere in each area that can respond to RU attacks within a day or so, because if that weren't true RU would've had bigger breakthroughs. 

If your strategic objective is to build up enough offensive military power to drive the orcs out of the shire, then maybe the TD forces are just expected to make do.  Maybe the training & equipping of the regular army is simply taking up most of the available resources, and the TD forces get what is left over & trickles in.  -- kinda like the US marines, who the navy doesn't ever want to properly fund because the navy prioritizes ships, planes, and sailors.

So I am saying that maybe the under-equipping of the TD forces  my simply be a calculated risk in order to prioritize the units that will actually achieve the nation's strategic objectives.  Having said that, I would be pretty salty if I were in the TD in an active area.

[Beleg85]

12 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

When we had a discussion about training times early in this war the various sources and personal experiences showed that 3 months was sufficient (not great, but sufficient) for light infantry.  However, the criticism I've seen (including that previous Tweet) is that the TD units are more like a couple of weeks of training, not a couple of months.  That is a head scratcher.  As for going to the front inadequately armed, three months is more than enough time to figure out how to equip TD units, so I don't get what the issue is with weaponry at all.  Unless the author is expecting them to be riding into battle in IFVs supported by tanks.  TDs aren't supposed to have that sort of stuff, so I'm guessing that's not the author's expectation.

On the other hand, author is just a journalist so his example may be anecdotal.

Interesting, unless this is spectacle more or less agreed before, UA General Stuff seems to feel the real pressure.

[danfrodo]

1 minute ago, Huba said:

That exactly. Crossing Bakhmut- Lisichansk road in a softskin does nit sound like an enticing proposition. I guess for basically any activity in immediate back of the front you'd like to have something armored to move around, if only possible.

Given that UA is to have 700K men at arms at the moment, it isn't possible to have all of them in tracked/ wheeled IFVs. There are also many areas, where fighting is almost a pure leg infantry mission - forests, swamps, often cities. Not being able to pour bodies there seems to be the chief weakness of RU at the moment, and something more or less inherent of heavy forces designed for mounted maneuver combat. Having ability to safely drive large numbers of infantry guys to the place where they are needed seems useful. 

I would rather be in a unit that had lightly-protected mobility (MRAP/armored cars) than driving around in shiny white zero-protection hyundai mini SUV. 

[Calamine Waffles]

Quote

An ad hoc US Air Force task force known as the “Grey Wolf Team” is advising Ukraine’s air force in its defensive air campaign against Russia’s invasion. 

“We exist because there’s a bunch of motivated people who want to help out. There’s not another team like this in the Air Force that’s doing the same thing,” said an Air Force fighter pilot who has worked extensively on the Grey Wolf Team.

Named in honor of Col. Oleksandr “Grey Wolf” Oksanchenko, a legendary Ukrainian pilot killed in the war’s opening days, and based at Ramstein Air Base in Germany, the Grey Wolf Team focuses on understanding the limited technological tools available to the Ukrainians, whose air force comprises mostly Soviet-era hardware. With input from Ukrainian counterparts, the team passes recommendations up the Department of Defense’s chain of command for “low-cost, game-changing” solutions to Ukraine’s air combat challenges, one team member told Coffee or Die Magazine.

...

Service on the Grey Wolf Team is voluntary, and members are typically requested by name. There is no other such group in the US Air Force, and no template exists for the team’s unique mission, which began only after Russia’s Feb. 24 full-scale invasion. To achieve its goals, the Grey Wolf Team promotes ingenuity and forward thinking among its members — akin, in some ways, to the creative culture of a Silicon Valley startup.

https://coffeeordie.com/grey-wolf-team/

[Huba]

4 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

I would rather be in a unit that had lightly-protected mobility (MRAP/armored cars) than driving around in shiny white zero-protection hyundai mini SUV. 

Just don't use theme in LOS of the enemy. You are leg infantry, just with some protected mobility to move behind the lines, evacuate, resupply. You have to walk to battle, not drive though.

Edited June 12, 2022 by Huba

[dan/california]

25 minutes ago, Calamine Waffles said:

https://coffeeordie.com/grey-wolf-team/

Some sort guidance on those rockets they are currently aiming with not much more than prayer would seem high on the list. Maybe adapt the laser guidance nose cone from the U.S. 70 mm rocket. or run up the bits to attach actual laser guided 70 MM rockets to a SU-25. Even if wasn't very flexible and had to be coordinated with a specified FO or drone unit in advance it would be better than the current lofting technique. I mean that has to have a CEP of well over a kilometer. And yes I realize it is actually an oval.

Edited June 12, 2022 by dan/california

[Calamine Waffles]

I'm sure they'll consider all possible options...would be nice if they could give HARMs to Ukraine.

[Huba]

9 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Some sort guidance on those rockets they are currently aiming with not much more than prayer would seem high on the list. Maybe adapt the laser guidance nose cone from the U.S. 70 mm rocket. or run up the bits to attach actual laser guided 70 MM rockets to a SU-25. Even if wasn't very flexible and had to be coordinated with a specified FO or drone unit in advance it would be better than the current lofting technique. I mean that has to have a CEP of well over a kilometer. And yes I realize it is actually an oval.

I don't really get it too, it has to be way less accurate than Grad and waaaay more expensive too. The only advantage I see is an ability to get to launch area really quickly. Hardly cost effective,  wonder if it makes sense to bother at all. Maybe for morale effect? 

I recall that some APKWS were delivered to UA at one point, but AFAIK are ground launched. 

Edited June 12, 2022 by Huba

[Kinophile]

11 hours ago, Armorgunner said:

Hey, I missed that! Can I still be a part of that? And if? how? I can give like 50 dollars! Give me a PM, if its not to late!

For sure! Go here.

[Kinophile]

9 hours ago, The_Capt said:

So for the record, calling Jomini a "little conservative" is akin to calling Billy Graham "a little religious" - the man tried to create a deterministic theory of warfare based on geometry, and Clausewitz called him on it...and frankly I think Uncle Carl was extremely conservative by modern standards.

That said, I am not sure what the story is around Severodonetsk to be honest.  I completely disagree with J of the West assessment that Severodonetsk is a "strategic decisive point for the RAF" and by taking it they gain "a pivot for operations" and a "pivot for manoeuvre".  If we look at wiki for the latest situation:

And then a G-Earth shot (I will try and do an MFSF flight later):

None of what J of W is stating as "importance" makes sense.  If this was a break out battle over the river and to take Lysynchansk, maybe.  But his argument that the "undefendable terrain of the western Donetsk Oblast" on the other side of this river, also make no sense as we know the RA advances out of Popasna have stalled.  As have the attempts coming down from the North out of Izyum...this is all the same type of rolling terrain spotty with water features.  The idea that if the RAF somehow takes the far bank town of Severodonetsk it is set up for a rolling breakout manoeuvre battle is sensationalism at best, and applying metrics from the Gulf War to this one at worst.  If the RA takes Severodonetsk, they still have a major water obstacle dominated by a very long ridge line to try and assault, then more urban area, and then rolling terrain which the UA has stopped them on along other axis.  So seriously, WTF "Jomini of the West"?

This battle is likely more along the lines of Verdun albeit what I suspect are for different reasons (I am not sure of the historical angle but Haiduk did mention this was a big fight in WW2).  This is a "I want that" and "you can't have it...jerk" type fight.  The UA is there because it is a spot they can make the RA's life miserable an pull in forces. The RA wants it...well why does the RA want anything?  Likely because Putin has been briefed and figures it is also "really important" for reasons.

This battle is interesting in 1) it is definitely attritional, and 2) it looks like it may be the one spot where the Russians have managed to create information parity (but I have a major caveat to this).  The noise about guns and UA casualties is just that "noise".  The UA is not stupid, that is one thing they have proven in this war.  They would not be holding onto a far bank defence - one they really do not need - unless there was some serious advantage attached to it.  My bet is that it comes down to two things: the concentration of arty and EW.

Lets leverage Jomini for a second and lay it out (in some ways he was not wrong):

I am going to be extremely generous here and say the RA has its guns positioned within 30km of Severodonetsk based on ranges (D-20s do about 18 and the Pions can reach out at about 37, so for arguments sake).  That is a slice of a pizza that is 188 km around.  The Russians can realistically put their guns in about 1/3 of that circle - so about a 63 km arc, which translates into about 942 sq kms.  At "900 guns" that is a density of a gun per sq km.  That is a pretty high density of gun positions - not WWI - but likely the highest of this war.  Further you have all the logistics to support all them guns.  

Finally, the RA has concentrated a lot of EW to try and make this op box go dark for the UA: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-kyiv-technology-90d760f01105b9aaf1886427dbfba917  All these emitters are pumping out an ungodly amount of EM and easily visible.

So what?  Well there is a lot of talk of Ukrainian losses in this fight, and I believe them.  But war is negotiation and sacrifice.  Those lives are not being spent for the far bank town the UA really does not need.  They are likely being spent to pull in the concentration of arty and EM...so the UA can hit them - attrition, like tracers, cuts both ways.  What is missing from all this is the RA losses on key arty, EM and logistics because  they are concentrating them around and on top of this operationally near-worthless town, that when successfully taken will bring all the joy of a colicky baby because you still have to take that brutal set of ridges...on the other side of a freakin river.

We have no idea how bad the Russians are taking it right now, because "dark box"...but you know who does...the UA.   The one thing all that EW cannot turn off are the space-based ISR assets that the West (primarily the US) are beaming directly to the UA.  All those RA assets are very visible to multi-spectral space-based ISR and I have every faith are being hit regularly in this fight; it is the only thing that makes any sense - the UA are trading infantry for RA arty, EW and logistics right now.  If they wanted to trade infantry-for-infantry they would be doing it from all those ridges, which is the the obvious fallback position.

The Russians on the other hand are trading their own critical resources so that Putin can declare a "great victory" of very little military value - just like they have done throughout this war.

That was classic The_Capt. Very clearly put, sir.

[Huba]

Nice article from Politico. This is exactly the kind of narrative that needs to be embraced:

Quote

The defense of Ukraine is not only about national sovereignty and territorial integrity — historically, the two foundational principles of democratic governance — but ultimately about pushing Russia out of Europe, thereby ending three centuries of its imperial drive. The independence of Ukraine, and by extension of Belarus — for, once Ukraine has defended its sovereignty and territorial integrity, Minsk wouldn’t remain in Moscow’s orbit for long — would end Russia’s claim to being a key “Eurasian power in Europe.”

As such, for the first time in the modern era, it would force Moscow to come to terms with what it takes, economically and politically, to become a “normal” nation-state. 

https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-could-be-an-inflection-point-eu-us-west-war-russia

Edited June 12, 2022 by Huba

[Machor]

5 hours ago, G.I. Joe said:

I also remember reading somewhere (pretty sure it was here, and I think they had a cited source) that the Russian Air Force never flew in anything larger than two-ship formations in Syria. Not being able to coordinate even four-ship flights (in NATO, that would be the basic building block for air tactics as I understand it) looks like a massive red flag regarding their readiness and training.

Four Ukrainian Su-25s in formation, and they actually seem to be doing formation training - maybe, start with line astern and transition to line abreast? @c3k

And a tantalizing thought: Though I've never flown one - virtually, of course; I've never flown anything IRL  - the Su-25 looks like it should have docile handling and make for a good advanced trainer. Could these be pilot cadets who've skipped the L-39 and are completing their training on Su-25s, simultaneously gaining experience with an operational platform?

[Calamine Waffles]

I doubt you would send pilots into an Su-25 before doing basic and advanced training in an L-39. The Su-25 is not a Mach 2.0+ fighter, but it's still considerably more complex than an L-39.

[dan/california]

There seems to be an entire mineshaft underneath the bottom of the barrel at this point.

[Machor]

5 hours ago, Vet 0369 said:

NOTE: My use of “The Russia” is not a typo. It is intentional. As Haiduk explained in a reply to a question from me long ago in this thread, regarding “The Ukraine” vs. “Ukraine,” using “The” indicates an inferior territory or region.

 

4 hours ago, Vet 0369 said:

I place the the major difference here as being that the US or the UK haven’t tended to use the article to indicate an inferior subject region or territory as The Russia does.

This is the same usage in English with examples like 'The Congo' and 'The Sudan': It indicates not so much inferiority, rather a perspective where the territory under discussion lacks sovereignty - it is precisely a colonial 'territory', not a sovereign 'nation'. Therefore, trying to return the favor to Russia doesn't make sense: It's like saying "The Congo invaded Belgium."

[Machor]

8 minutes ago, dan/california said:

There seems to be an entire mineshaft underneath the bottom of the barrel at this point.

Interestingly, this is what Ukrainians get to field in response:

 

[Bearstronaut]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

I would rather be in a unit that had lightly-protected mobility (MRAP/armored cars) than driving around in shiny white zero-protection hyundai mini SUV. 

FWIW at my last active duty unit my intel platoon operated out of MATVs (basically upgraded MRAPs) and every single one of us hated the damn things.