How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Kinophile]

I believe (from various twitter threads) that that is the RUS ammo resupply of Kherson following the various UKR tickles of their ammo dumps. Timing this out with the removal of the Belarussian stocks, plus the increased UKR pressure on Kherson suggests the RUS are trying to get back in/stay in the artillery game in that theatre.

Now would be a good time to drop the Kherson bridge,  leave the dam causeway upriver to create an almighty bottleneck. Leave the dam itself alone - but pound the connecting banks as the RUS cluster to cross.

 

 

[dan/california]

37 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

Whatever happens w the war, it's clear that Europe must be free of dependence on RU resources.  That will take time & pain and hopefully voters won't be so stupid as to think there's some magic, simple answer to this complex problem and vote in clowns.  This is a pivot point that is a terrible challenge but also an opportunity.  Some sectors will continue to need fossil fuels, some things can be transitioned away over time to other resources, but many can't.  Fools (yeah, that's me included) who hoped that mutually dependent trade would mostly tame Putin have learned our lesson.  

And while I am reviling dependence on evil Putin, I suppose there's those nasty Saudis that deserve mention.  Weaning off fossil fuels is not just for lefty tree huggers -- it's a military strategic imperative.  We'll need fossil fuel still, but we certainly don't need to use it for nearly as much as we do now.  

There is literally NO reason except laziness and stupidity not to get off fossil fuels as quickly as humanly possible. It would cause all of our enemies except China to go broke. It would keep the planet from cooking itself. And as not insignificant bonus you get a large improvement in public health due to less air pollution. The anti nuclear folks just need to be canceled and governments just need to get behind this thing and PUSH!

[danfrodo]

There would be so much poetic justice if Putin orders big buildup in Kherson, only to have it completely cut off.  We would all be laughing at his stupidity for decades to come.  

So, y'all:  could HIMARS actually take out the big bridge?  What about that other crossing -- is it a dam?  Can UKR actually cut off the Kherson bridgehead?  

[Artkin]

3 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

I think you are reading to much VISEGRAD stuff and harshly condemn Germany, mainly because of imagination.

Geopolitics isn't as easy as sending a couple of hundred of Leo2A4s, which is also not as easy as you think. At least I think so

So Germany will throw its NATO boys under the bus instead when the time comes for it? Everyone else is sending heavy equipment now. 

Are they waiting for Putin's grace? 

Leo is so widely used that it is a great alternative to M1 Abrams. The FCS is less advanced, it's an older tank than the T-90s being used. 

[Lethaface]

2 minutes ago, Artkin said:

So Germany will throw its NATO boys under the bus instead when the time comes for it? Everyone else is sending heavy equipment now. 

Are they waiting for Putin's grace? 

Leo is so widely used that it is a great alternative to M1 Abrams. The FCS is less advanced, it's an older tank than the T-90s being used. 

 

AFAIK those and other heavy stuff is actually German ;-).

Anyway not that I think Germany's political leadership has been that bright of an example, but the continued bashing has not much merit imho.

[Aragorn2002]

Sobering. Please comment.

Edited July 13, 2022 by Aragorn2002

[danfrodo]

on Germany and other RU fuel consumers, it's important to remember that Putin can only use this lever for so long.  He can exert heavy pressure in the short term, but only at high cost to his own coffers.  And in the longer term these countries will find other resources, even if at higher price due to transport costs (getting via the pipeline was relatively cheap).

[Huba]

9 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

There would be so much poetic justice if Putin orders big buildup in Kherson, only to have it completely cut off.  We would all be laughing at his stupidity for decades to come.  

So, y'all:  could HIMARS actually take out the big bridge?  What about that other crossing -- is it a dam?  Can UKR actually cut off the Kherson bridgehead?  

IMO the crossing on the dam is no less vulnerable than other bridges, guessingby how it is built, but I'd be happy to hear another opinion. As for bridges vulnerability, I guess the spans can be taken out with enough rounds - M30 weihgts 90kg and travels at mach 2.5, that's more kinetic energy than round from 2S4. And you can keep hitting the same spot until it fails.

On 7/7/2022 at 10:59 PM, Huba said:

Take a stroll on it in Google Steet View  Road bridge is built next to the main dam structure. Railway tracks go on top, but on a superstructure of sorts, that should be susceptible to damage without risk to the main structure.

https://earth.google.com/web/@46.77717365,33.37031604,18.30456848a,0d,60y,8.02263025h,83.41342832t,0r/data=IhoKFjZsRUxCVnBEME9FMW9KY2RTQVJxS3cQAg

 

Edited July 13, 2022 by Huba

[Artkin]

Sure the SPGs are nice, and are a definite game changer. I believe they are one of the most modern versions in the world.

But as Europe's most prosperous economy, they are letting Poland do all the heavy lifting. 

 

I've only stated my opinion on it once. The best game changer in Ukraine was NLAW and Javelin. Those without a doubt did the most to stop Russia's advance more than any other Western aid. Germany's contribution helps, but people are dying, what's going on isn't right, and it's time to end it already. 

NATO's foreign policy goals are pretty much fufilled. Russia can't scratch them after this. 

This is all before the nuclear problem though. 

If Ukraine wanted to use leo2 to spearhead their attack onto russian soil, that'd be different

[Aragorn2002]

24 minutes ago, Harmon Rabb said:

I was hesitant to even knowledge some of these Twitter clowns that believe this idiotic Russian propaganda but I'm looking forward to Russia showing off all these recently bought Ceaser and HIMARS artillery that they probably managed to buy for a Ruble a piece. 

"We'll send you the ammo first..."

[danfrodo]

5 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:

"We'll send you the ammo first..."

Ah, some professional-grade humor from Aragorn.  Nicely done!  

[hcrof]

12 minutes ago, Huba said:

IMO the crossing on the dam is no less vulnerable than other bridges, guessingby how it is built, but I'd be happy to hear another opinion. As for bridges vulnerability, I guess the spans can be taken out with enough rounds - M30 weihgts 90kg and travels at mach 2.5, that's more kinetic energy than round from 2S4. And you can keep hitting the same spot until it fails.

 

I think the only people who know how many rockets will take out a bridge have higher security clearance than we do. With the right software it is perfectly possible to model exactly what the effects of an explosion on any part of the bridge would be but most engineers don't do that as their day job!

Edit: for context, engineers would model very generic scenarios for accidental or deliberate damage to bridges but other than vehicle impacts you can't really predict an attack well enough to deliberately design for it.

Edited July 13, 2022 by hcrof

[Huba]

Just now, hcrof said:

I think the only people who know how many rockets will take out a bridge have higher security clearance than we do. With the right software it is perfectly possible to model exactly what the effects of an explosion on any part of the bridge would be but most engineers don't do that as their day job!

We're just guessing of course, I bet when it comes to it, they'll take the most optimal approach to it. I'm just arguing for the principle of it being possible due to crossing not being an integral part of the dam itself. In case of other Dnipro dams, like ones in Kremenchuk or Kamyanske, where road and tracks go directly on the top of concrete dam structure, I guess you'd need to drop MOP or tactical nuke to take it out. Or revive the Dam Busters

Meanwhile, European Commission apparently caved regarding the transport of goods to Kaliningrad. Perhaps it is a part of deal regarding gas transports or grain corridor, in which case it might be for the better. Still there's a risk that tracks might got damaged and will have to be closed for repairs, you never know....

 

 

[Butschi]

37 minutes ago, Artkin said:

So Germany will throw its NATO boys under the bus instead when the time comes for it? Everyone else is sending heavy equipment now. 

Are they waiting for Putin's grace? 

Leo is so widely used that it is a great alternative to M1 Abrams. The FCS is less advanced, it's an older tank than the T-90s being used. 

Come on, we already had this a few times. Whether by coincidence or an agreement between NATO countries, no western MBT or IFVs are delivered to Ukraine. None from the US nor from the UK, France, etc. I don't know the exact reasons but that's how it is. Poland and others have sent their Soviet-era equipment. Is it convenient that we don't have much of that to give? Sure. Could we deliver more other heavy weapons? Maybe. You can condemn this as much as you like and probably be right. There has been a lot of waffling on our side. But w.r.t. MBTs/IFVs it is a bit too convenient to single out Germany for bashing.

Edited July 13, 2022 by Butschi

[danfrodo]

14 minutes ago, Huba said:

We're just guessing of course, I bet when it comes to it, they'll take the most optimal approach to it. I'm just arguing for the principle of it being possible due to crossing not being an integral part of the dam itself. In case of other Dnipro dams, like ones in Kremenchuk or Kamyanske, where road and tracks go directly on the top of concrete dam structure, I guess you'd need to drop MOP or tactical nuke to take it out. Or revive the Dam Busters

Meanwhile, European Commission apparently caved regarding the transport of goods to Kaliningrad. Perhaps it is a part of deal regarding gas transports or grain corridor, in which case it might be for the better. Still there's a risk that tracks might got damaged and will have to be closed for repairs, you never know....

 

 

this just made me realize that the Kaliningrad supply route is a nice bargaining chip for Europe.  Putin wants to cut gas supplies?  OK, Kaliningrad railway is blocked.  Good arrow to have in the quiver.  

[Aragorn2002]

14 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Come on, we alreadyhj  had this a few times. Whether by coincidence or an agreement between NATO countries, no western MBT or IFVs are delivered to Ukraine. None from the US nor from the UK, France, etc. I don't the exact reasons but that's how it is. Poland and others have sent their Soviet-era equipment. Is it convenient that we don't have much of that to give? Sure. Could we deliver more other heavy weapons? Maybe. You can condemn this as much as you like and probably be right. There has been a lot of waffling on our side. But w.r.t. MBTs/IFVs it is a bit too convenient to single out Germany for bashing.

If I'm not mistaken the EU is financing all arms deliveries by member states to Ukraine. This means that for example Poland gets financial compensation for the mainly outdated Russian weapons it sends to Ukraine. I don't doubt Polish dedication to the Ukrainian cause, but in the end it's paid for by Brussels and the Poles get better equipment for their armed forces. Now that's what I call a win-win situation. Add to that the fact that Poland is one of the EU countries that cash much more money from the EU than they have to pay and the fact that countries like Germany and the Netherlands contribute the most to our great European dream and the whole picture of Poland 'doing the heavy lifting' looks a lot different...

INCOMING!!! 

Edited July 13, 2022 by Aragorn2002

[Butschi]

5 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

this just made me realize that the Kaliningrad supply route is a nice bargaining chip for Europe.  Putin wants to cut gas supplies?  OK, Kaliningrad railway is blocked.  Good arrow to have in the quiver.  

Ah, but Putin doesn't care if his people in Kaliningrad suffer and will happily use it for propaganda against evil EU/NATO.

[danfrodo]

1 minute ago, Butschi said:

Ah, but Putin doesn't care if his people in Kaliningrad suffer and will happily use it for propaganda against evil EU/NATO.

good point.  You are probably right -- but why then does EU want the railway opened?  If it's not for some kind of leverage then why?

[Huba]

Just now, Butschi said:

Ah, but Putin doesn't care if his people in Kaliningrad suffer and will happily use it for propaganda against evil EU/NATO.

But if he allows that to happen and does nothing, he looks weak. This he can't have. I think RU will announce victory now, do the customary boasting and keep pumping gas. Perhaps even allows the grain transports to start in another goodwill gesture (much less likely). 

[Grigb]

12 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Ah, but Putin doesn't care if his people in Kaliningrad suffer and will happily use it for propaganda against evil EU/NATO.

It is not about people. It is about Putin reputation of RU defender. The "Blockade" of Kaliningrad ruins it. It is a serious problem for Putin. 

[Butschi]

23 minutes ago, Huba said:

But if he allows that to happen and does nothing, he looks weak. This he can't have. I think RU will announce victory now, do the customary boasting and keep pumping gas. Perhaps even allows the grain transports to start in another goodwill gesture (much less likely). 

 

9 minutes ago, Grigb said:

It is not about people. It is about Putin reputation of RU defender. The "Blockade" of Kaliningrad ruins it. It is a serious problem for Putin. 

Huh. So, where's the difference, then, to sanctions against Russia as a whole? Don't they make him look weak, too? Too me it looked more like he can use those for propaganda.

[Twisk]

4 hours ago, Grey_Fox said:

I actually want to respect you because of the outstanding work you put in on CM Cold War, but that's ridiculous.

I have avoided posting much because my input is not always needed but please stop polluting this thread with your complaints and take them elsewhere. You are showing absurd entitlement to new game product. Owner of company has responded to you and workers on the game have also responded to you. This is more respect than most developers give random user on forum and you waste it on more complaining and arguing because of your need for entertainment is so high.
 

[Huba]

6 minutes ago, Butschi said:

 

Huh. So, where's the difference, then, to sanctions against Russia as a whole? Don't they make him look weak, too? Too me it looked more like he can use those for propaganda.

He sanctioned us all back, didn't you notice?  Tit for tat.

Meanwhile, Ukraine reportedly negotiates ATACMS. Sounds plausible, this is the weapon that in numbers can neutralize Crimea. It will takes weeks/ months before anything comes out of it, if ever, but Russians are already quite scared by the prospect:

 

[Billy Ringo]

42 minutes ago, Grigb said:

It is not about people. It is about Putin reputation of RU defender. The "Blockade" of Kaliningrad ruins it. It is a serious problem for Putin. 

I know it's more complicated than this, but when you clear all the smoke and see the situation clearly; it's still all about Putin's ego.   Most everything else is secondary and could be resolved relatively quickly.

 

Kill Putin's ego. End the war.

[Harmon Rabb]

NATO posted an animated video today replying to some commonly heard talking points we hear from Putin's government and its sympathizers about the organization.

 

Edited July 13, 2022 by Harmon Rabb