How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Haiduk]

Triple launch of UKR Tochka-U. Soldier with MANPAD covers their position.

 

[The_MonkeyKing]

6 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Curiosuly, I read some opinions the stand at Severdonetsk started from local Teritorial Defence/permanently located soldiers who refused to leave city and wanted to fight there for at least some time more. So UkrGenSaff added more and more units into the furnace as time go, and in the effect this street battle developed.

Historians will have plenty of work to do sorting this war out, so many '?'s .

With all repulsive personas in Russian state media landscape Skabaieva is one of the worst. She is xenophobic, brutal and burish, but most of all she has terrible hair.

Another video of Russian armoured train, this time longer and with shots from inside. We need those trains in CM...

 

 

I am really surprised we are still to see a derailing

 

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

No. Izium, Lyman, Siverodonetsk and Popasna groups are acting in one scenario. I will write about this later, but I need to gather most important things about this from long analysys of Mashovets and translate this. 

Not sure what you mean by "one scenario", campaign?  I mean unity in command and design.  This looks and feels like three separate, non-mutually supporting fights but maybe you have more.

[Gnaeus]

Re: Charities

NYTimes has this: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/03/02/opinion/ukraine-charity-donation-guide.html

I usually double-check charities with this: https://www.charitynavigator.org/ or this: https://www.charitywatch.org/.

[Beleg85]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

An example of an infiltration unit.  One of the many benefits of light infantry is you don't need massive bridgeheads to poke the enemy on the other side of a river

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarRoom/comments/vis3b3/exclusive_information_from_the_special_unit_wild/

Steve

Some areas in Eastern Ukraine  start to look like Vietnam when late spring comes. Music is very appropriate.

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, acrashb said:

We can reasonably, from an operations perspective, say "crazy" and "insane" but to (mis)quote another famous Russian leader, "Quantity has a quality all its own".

It's only really crazy if it somehow leads to an overall collapse or general failure of the (recast) objectives, which one could see if the concentration was leveraged by UA in counter-battery or the like (resulting in unsustainable losses of the concentrated RA artillery), but it appears that the RA is learning / adapting and that UA drone ops used to support destruction of RA artillery are waning in the main effort area due to more effective / more concentrated Russian air defense.

The arty concentration doesn't appear to be hurting the RA in other areas; they aren't advancing elsewhere but aren't materially losing ground either.

It seems to me that the RA is finally playing to its strengths, one of which is arty, and if inching gets the job done, then Putin gets harder to dislodge, like a tick burrowing in a little at a time.

Not trying to be argumentative, just thinking that when we use descriptions like the above we tend to underestimate how much fight is left in an opponent, leading to complacency.  

 

 

To clarify, I mean crazy by modern mechanized warfare standards.  900 guns on a 30 km frontage is WWI levels of concentration. How successful it will be versus the cost is still an outstanding question; however, based on the pretty slow Russian grind I am not entirely thinking it is doing the trick.  

It is the fact that the Russian had to do that level of concentration in order to even get moving on the offensive that is telling.  It is how the RA had to adapt that is the interesting bit.

[poesel]

3 hours ago, Huba said:

No surprises here, but great that it is now official. Welcome to the club!

To the candidate club... It is a step in the right direction, no doubt. But it will take a long time. Not because of anything special in Ukraine, but because the EU will have to reform itself before more countries can join. Many important decisions need a unanimous vote, which leads to a lot of blockages. Those rules stem from the time when there were 12 members.
Now there are 27 and with Ukraine & Moldova there are now 7 candidates. With the current system, it would be nearly impossible to decide on anything if those were included.
Some decisions can be made with the so called 'qualified majority' meaning 55% of the nations & 65% of the population. That needs to be extended to more areas.
 

3 hours ago, Huba said:

eh, Georgia didn't receive a formal candidate status. It is understandable, of course, if a little bit off-putting. Still including GE in the process is a big middle finger to Putin, and a signal to GE that getting their s**t together will be really beneficial.

Georgia is also a veiled middle finger in Turkeys direction.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

Typical Russian tactic - the tank slowly drives along the street and shot out with main gun each house. But when the tank probably was withdrawing for reloading something hit its engine. Video of 54th mech.brigade and K-2 UAV unit. Somewhere south from Donetsk

 

 

We shouldn't be seeing any videos of a single tank and some dismounts taking on this big of an area at all, yet we keep seeing it.

This is a huge war being fought on a very small scale.

Steve

[dan/california]

 

 

1 hour ago, Beleg85 said:

Curiosuly, I read some opinions the stand at Severdonetsk started from local Teritorial Defence/permanently located soldiers who refused to leave city and wanted to fight there for at least some time more. So UkrGenSaff added more and more units into the furnace as time go, and in the effect this street battle developed.

Historians will have plenty of work to do sorting this war out, so many '?'s .

With all repulsive personas in Russian state media landscape Skabaieva is one of the worst. She is xenophobic, brutal and burish, but most of all she has terrible hair.

Another video of Russian armoured train, this time longer and with shots from inside. We need those trains in CM...

 

 

We don't need a moving train, but a big fight over a derailed one would be awesome.

7 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

We shouldn't be seeing any videos of a single tank and some dismounts taking on this big of an area at all, yet we keep seeing it.

This is a huge war being fought on a very small scale.

Steve

Just some dismounts now, happily...

[Vanir Ausf B]

18 minutes ago, poesel said:

Now there are 27 and with Ukraine & Moldova there are now 7 candidates. With the current system, it would be nearly impossible to decide on anything if those were included.

Just wait until you hit 50 members. Trust me, nothing happens but bickering.

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, acrashb said:

We can reasonably, from an operations perspective, say "crazy" and "insane" but to (mis)quote another famous Russian leader, "Quantity has a quality all its own".

I'm with The_Capt on this.  While I agree it doesn't seem to be negatively impacting their ability to defend elsewhere, the simple fact that they need this much artillery to take a small city that they've been fighting in for 4 months is "crazy".  It's like using a howitzer to kill an annoying fly.  Sure, it might get the job done, but at what cost?  And why didn't a fly swatter work?

Some people are looking at this and saying "Russia is finally getting it's strengths in gear".  I think it's more like "Russia is finally realizing it sucks at war" and they're leaning heavily on the one thing that seems to be working even a little bit.

Steve

[Huba]

20 minutes ago, poesel said:

To the candidate club... It is a step in the right direction, no doubt. But it will take a long time. Not because of anything special in Ukraine, but because the EU will have to reform itself before more countries can join. Many important decisions need a unanimous vote, which leads to a lot of blockages. Those rules stem from the time when there were 12 members.
Now there are 27 and with Ukraine & Moldova there are now 7 candidates. With the current system, it would be nearly impossible to decide on anything if those were included.
Some decisions can be made with the so called 'qualified majority' meaning 55% of the nations & 65% of the population. That needs to be extended to more areas.
 

Georgia is also a veiled middle finger in Turkeys direction.

Fully agreed, EU has to redefine itself in next years if it is to accept new members. Parting with unanimity is needed - Poland should be OK with this I hope, if our history teaches us something, it is that liberum veto can easily destroy a democracy.

 

 

[Harmon Rabb]

Sweet mullet, looks like the kind of dude you would see at a biker bar.

[Harmon Rabb]

1 hour ago, Beleg85 said:

Some areas in Eastern Ukraine  start to look like Vietnam when late spring comes. Music is very appropriate.

 

[JonS]

3 hours ago, The_Capt said:

It is not how  a thing is done, it is what it does to an opponent.  By changing the range and speed of this narrow slice, the UA has overstressed the RA system (Doctrine, Organization and Equipment).  This has been enough, particularly when employed in depth, to stall every Russian offensive so far, even in open country...that is a lot more than a minor nuisance.  Adding in self-loitering, smart-next gen ATGMs and "combined arms" takes on new dimensions.

Finally, "narrow" is also not really accurate.  Tactically, on the surface, it appears as light infantry and artillery; however, there is an information aspect here which is having operational/strategic effects.  Showing the world in near-real time those Russian systems getting hit has paid off well beyond the losses of Russian offensive momentum.  Add to this space-based ISR and "combined arms" starts to stretch.

Maybe we are reluctant to recognize it as "combined arms" due to lack of armor - how many major tank battles have we seen in this war?  As far as we can tell the Russian have abandoned major armored manoeuvre as well.  Now before this turns into "the tank is dead...no it isn't!", I suspect that the tank may make an appearance when one side breaks after the attritional phase.  My money is on the UA, who have the logistics for it and the fact that the RA has not developed the same dispersed smart-mass defensive system.  They have gone with mass (they cannot sustain) or likely more traditional "digging in".  Once those RA lines give out, we may finally see massed armor but it will have to contend with air power - I can't see the Russian Air Force being able to sit it out in the face of a major UA offensive.  The cry will be for more western AD then.  In fact one can trace this ware by Ukrainian requests for support.  First it was ATGM/MANPADs and ISR, now artillery and deep strike, AD and offensive systems should be a good indication of moving to the next phase.

This is an elegant description of Maneuver Warfare, or Hybrid Warfare, or Ukrainian Way of War, or High-Intensity Counter Insurgency, or Information Warfare, or a Shaping Operation, or somesuch. But in my opinion it can only be described as CA by glomming on a bunch of things not in evidence, and prescribing intent in place of coincidence. The recce det may have regardless of season weather or terrain on the cap badge, but in this instance they were operating as a wholly owned subsidary of quo fas. IMO, to call it CA makes the phrase itself meaningless.

Quote

Maybe we are reluctant to recognize it as "combined arms" due to lack of armor

Nah. I have some pretty trenchant views on who was responsible for the 'win' at Cambrai (hint: not the tankies). I'm reluctant to recognise it as combined arms because of the lack of any, you know, other arms. If this is combined arms, then we should recognise a sniper pair operating alone as 'combined arms', or Hugh McManners' sneaky-peaky during the first half of the Falklands as 'combined arms'. Because functionally those two examples are equivalent to the vignette above.

Does this mean I think that Ukraine cannot 'do' CA? Of course not. If anything, it's a (another) damning indictment of the Russians. That Ukraine can have disproportionate effect when employing a single arm unsupported is ... wow.

[Beleg85]

Harmon RabbHehe, yes. Finally some good music in these videos, was really fed up with "Welcome to Ukraine" song.

So we may conclude that esthetic-wise: while Russians strive to recreate Russian Civil War era with a flair of final Soviet Union days, the Ukrainians prefer USA in late 60's esthetics.

Edited June 23, 2022 by Beleg85

[Harmon Rabb]

43 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Harmon RabbHehe, yes. Finally some good music in these videos, was really fed up with "Welcome to Ukraine" song.

So we may conclude that esthetic-wise: while Russians strive to recreate Russian Civil War era with a flair of final Soviet Union days, the Ukrainians prefer USA in late 60's esthetics.

The Ukrainian military now having M113s in their inventory definitely also helps the 'Nam vibe.

[Kinophile]

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-economy-western-sanctions-twilight-zone/31911576.html

Interesting article on the subtle and insidious effects proper sanctions have on a modern economy.

[acrashb]

3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Some people are looking at this and saying "Russia is finally getting it's strengths in gear".  I think it's more like "Russia is finally realizing it sucks at war" and they're leaning heavily on the one thing that seems to be working even a little bit.

So... their strength is in realizing that they suck at war?   I fully agree that it shows more weakness than strength, but even being institutionally aware of and adapting to that reality, as Putin has done, is a significant shift.

4 hours ago, The_Capt said:

To clarify, I mean crazy by modern mechanized warfare standards.  900 guns on a 30 km frontage is WWI levels of concentration. How successful it will be versus the cost is still an outstanding question; however, based on the pretty slow Russian grind I am not entirely thinking it is doing the trick.  

It is the fact that the Russian had to do that level of concentration in order to even get moving on the offensive that is telling.  It is how the RA had to adapt that is the interesting bit.

The light bulb has gone on over my head, I read it differently at first.

And on your second point / paragraph, 'how' is interesting, that they indeed have adapted is also interesting.  Is it a one-raindrop adaptation or is it a slow tide of innovation?  We can reasonably say it won't be a tsunami of change. 

Edited June 24, 2022 by acrashb

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, JonS said:

This is an elegant description of Maneuver Warfare, or Hybrid Warfare, or Ukrainian Way of War, or High-Intensity Counter Insurgency, or Information Warfare, or a Shaping Operation, or somesuch. But in my opinion it can only be described as CA by glomming on a bunch of things not in evidence, and prescribing intent in place of coincidence.

Huh?  So beyond mashing a lot of terms that describe everything from types of warfare theory to campaign themes to a joint operation - of which maybe only one applies, you are kind of losing me here.  Combined arms is what land forces do inside each one of those - it is an inner working gear of the several clocks you just put up.

2 hours ago, JonS said:

The recce det may have regardless of season weather or terrain on the cap badge, but in this instance they were operating as a wholly owned subsidary of quo fas. IMO, to call it CA makes the phrase itself meaningless.

Well I am not sure how you can be helped then.  I presented the doctrinal definition...no good.  Then a description of how it applies to this war, or at least how it has been unfolding, meeting the terms in that doctrine...no good. 

A combination of dispersed light infantry positioning forward through manoeuvre, and artillery supporting them through fires...is a combination of arms. I opened up the aperture to offer alternate and emerging forms of what an "arm" is, normally contributing to firepower and manoeuvre effects but we could do well to perhaps widen that definition.  For example, at what point are unmanned aerial systems to be considered an "arm" in the land force, much like tac aviation?

2 hours ago, JonS said:

Nah. I have some pretty trenchant views on who was responsible for the 'win' at Cambrai (hint: not the tankies). I'm reluctant to recognise it as combined arms because of the lack of any, you know, other arms. If this is combined arms, then we should recognise a sniper pair operating alone as 'combined arms', or Hugh McManners' sneaky-peaky during the first half of the Falklands as 'combined arms'. Because functionally those two examples are equivalent to the vignette above.

So right now we seem to be lacking what your personal definition of "combined arms" is, and is not.  You are entitled to your opinion of course; however, I am going to have to go with modern military doctrine as opposed to "some guy on the internet".  However, I did some searching around and maybe NATO agrees with you:

In land operations, relating to the synchronized or simultaneous application of several arms to achieve an effect on the enemy that is greater than if each arm were used against the enemy in sequence. (https://nso.nato.int/natoterm/Web.mvc).  

We (Canadians) do not go with this one either, we follow the US one because by this definition infantry and armor together are not combined arms - several meaning more than two but not many.  The important part is not two, three or more, it is: synchronization and the ability to achieve greater effect together - both conditions well met by the examples provided by Steve in the Ukraine.  

Edited June 24, 2022 by The_Capt

[Kinophile]

Further sanctions effects, creeping in relentlessly...

Source:

https://www.facebook.com/alexandra.polivanova/posts/10225093042887781

Edited June 24, 2022 by Kinophile

[JonS]

From one random guy on the internet to another, our difference is, I think, that you see the infantry/recce guys doing infantry stuff then supplementing that with some fires task, while I read the same vignette as a couple of infantry guys doing fires stuff throughout.

[Battlefront.com]

7 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Further sanctions effects, creeping in relentlessly...

Source:

https://www.facebook.com/alexandra.polivanova/posts/10225093042887781

One of the Twitter comments said they said it doesn't sound real.  I think the story sounds a bit too polished, but I believe it.  From a practical sense they aren't going to go around changing all the prices on the thousands of items every few days.  I don't think any business here in the US would try to do it either.  Maybe change the prices on some of the most popular and wildly increasing products, then tell people to expect the price to be higher on the rest.

Whether this particular story is true or not, the price increases on consumer goods will continue to climb for quite a while.

Steve

[Kinophile]

Yah I saw that but I'm beyond tired of random twitterati gombeen* throwing shade that something "doesn't sound real" because it's too well written - i.e. the original author can string more than two syllables together and has a sense of scene. Just because someone is **** at something doesn't mean others are, or what they say isn't true. They just said it better. Something can be real, true and well-written. Those aren't mutually exclusive concepts. Essentially I've no time for nitwits who are unable to spell y-o-u as a whole, three-letter word yet feel their puddle-deep, emotion-driven "thoughts" are actually worth more than gnat's fart in a hurricane.  

And SCENE.

The link isn't the first I've read of this kind of thing happening, the emptying shelves is definitely a trend that hasn't gone away. And as with all unequal societies, the sanctions are first hitting the poorer, margin-less people hardest. This absolutely jibs with the basics of capitalistic/kleptocratic societies. 

_{^* A real Irish word, meaning complete ****ing idiot.}

Edited June 24, 2022 by Kinophile

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, Kinophile said:

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-economy-western-sanctions-twilight-zone/31911576.html

Interesting article on the subtle and insidious effects proper sanctions have on a modern economy.

From the article:

Quote

The buzz about AvtoVAZ's Lada Granta Classic -- priced to sell at 678,300 rubles ($12,500) -- is about what it doesn't have: No airbags. No antilock brakes. No electronic stability system. No pretensioners to make the seat belts work properly. No GPS. An engine that complies with emissions standards from 26 years ago.

Ouch.

Thanks for posting this article.  I hadn't seen it yet, though I check their website frequently.

This tidbit I quoted above gives us details to some bit of Twitter fodder that was put out a week or two ago about Russian motor vehicle regulations having to be changed to accommodate manufacturing shortages.  The specific item mentioned was emission control systems.  This gives us broader view of the knock-on effects.

This quite important:

Quote

The Kremlin is betting that fiscal and industrial policies will help the economy withstand the shocks and substitute missing imports with homegrown Russian versions.

President Vladimir Putin alluded to this wager last week during what used to be Russia's marquee annual investors' event, though he asserted that his government has already had considerable success in softening the blow.

This is similar to what Putin said Russia would do to combat the 2014/2015 sanctions.  In combating Russia's heavy reliance upon imported food by making its own similar products.  It took years, but indeed it was able to make significant improvements on its domestic supply of replacement products.  However, this was done with vastly less stringent sanctions that did very little to block Russia's ability to import materials, products, and manufacturing technologies from other countries in order to build up its own domestic production.  Oh, and it was doing it without a full blown war and an economy that was in much better shape and fairly unfettered access to international markets (including financial).

Putin is now claiming that Russia can substitute a huge array of products covering all economic sectors using a manufacturing base that is clearly not designed for it.  They're going to have to do a lot of building of industrial capacity before it can produce the parts necessary for production pretty much on their own during a war with an already weakened economy.  Good luck with that!  Even if it is theoretically practical to do (I agree it is), this will take years and years and years.  Can the regime survive that long?

Oh yeah... and I forgot a big point... Putin's policies have pretty much destroyed Russia's entrepreneurial and middle class.  It was already on the outs in 2014, it is nearly gone now.  Hard to do big things even with the best and the brightest motivated to roll up their sleeves.  Russia's best and brightest are motivated, sure enough, but not in a good way.  They are either motivated to leave Russia or to stay wherever they fled to.

Steve