How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Cederic]

Little propaganda piece with a nice hero story:

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/08/2/7361480/

Survives multiple grenades, calls in friends, Russians abandon their kit and flee. All very believeable.

Sadly so is 'pretend to surrender then shoot them'. That's not conducive to civilised warfare.

(That's not criticism. It's an observation.)

[Cederic]

Journalists have moved on from tanks.

 

 

(Yeah, I stole this - also, please, don't uptick me - save those ticks for the people adding real value on this thread)

Edited August 2, 2022 by Cederic

[Battlefront.com]

2 minutes ago, Cederic said:

Journalists have moved on from tanks.

 

 

(Yeah, I stole this)

Good one!

It's not just journalists.  Seems everytime something goes boom on the Russian side the Nats say it was a HIMARS strike.  Haven't seen the same attention paid to 155 PGMs, which by now Ukraine has likely used in significant numbers I would think.

Steve

[dan/california]

3 hours ago, Grigb said:

Yes. RU are still in the fight because UKR CB as a system is much less capable than NATO. That why I personally give RU a about a week against NATO. 

Nowhere near that long actually. although there are variables we don't know enough about even now. But 24 hours after a mostly successful SEAD campaign the Russians would be done. The Russians would come apart almost instantly once the PGMs started raining down from 30,000 feet.  The Russians have barely been able to function with a small fraction of that amount of pressure on their supply lines. Never mind what a heavy brigade or two would do the Russians excuse for an army. CMBS does a nice job of modeling what would happen if you try to run a couple of companies of T-72s down a road at a platoon of Abrams.

Edited August 2, 2022 by dan/california

[DesertFox]

First time I saw that. Most likely DM22 PARM hit went through that T-80U.

 

 

[Cederic]

 

[Eddy]

9 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

It's not just journalists.  Seems everytime something goes boom on the Russian side the Nats say it was a HIMARS strike

Yep. Seen that before:

• Every panzer in Normandy was a Tiger
• Every artillery piece in North West Europe was an 88
• Every Luftwaffe pilot shot down in the Battle of Britain was shot down by a Spitfire, never a Hurri

Once somethings got a reputation, it sticks I suppose.

[Huba]

Just now, Cederic said:

 

Too lazy to look for the article, but IIRC she said that "she expects ATACMS will be sent in 3 to 6 weeks". Which still would be great news, but is far from certain...

[Battlefront.com]

Thanks for the further discussion about Russia's internal stability.  Of all the things that are going on right now, long term this is the most important from a geopolitical standpoint.  It is important to make sure we keep some attention looking beyond the immediate war.

12 hours ago, panzermartin said:

My theory is that the melting point of these breakaway republics is past its date. It was in 1991 and the fall of the Soviet Union. 

You could have said the same thing in 1989 about the period 1917-1920s.  "Well, they didn't break away back when the Tzar fell and didn't, therefore they will forever be part of the Soviet Union".  And you'd have been wrong, of course.

The other thing you need to keep in mind is that republics today have 30 years of experience living under Russian rule.  The track record is one of declining benefits.  Even if the bulk of a region was happy to stick with Russia in 1991, they might not be so optimistic about staying with Russia now.

12 hours ago, panzermartin said:

You brought some valid points about current culture diversity in Russia but still that's not enough to suggest that there is desire to cut the umbilical cord.

Oh, for sure the desire is there.  Heaps of evidence to show that, even though Russia deliberately keeps it suppressed.  The issue is will there be a crisis in Moscow that is sufficiently bad enough to make people act on their desires.  Certainly that was the case for many areas in when the Tzar fell, when the Nazis challenged Soviet rule, and when the Soviet Union collapsed.  And before each of these events there was "no hints" that it would happen.

Let me say this another way.  Three times in the last 100 years there was a major challenge to Moscow's control over areas that had been under Russian domination for (often) hundreds of years.  Each time this happened there were significant moves by ethnic groups to get out from under Russian authority.  Russia is currently headed towards another significant challenge of its control.  Odds are much better that "history will repeat itself" rather than "nothing will change because history is in the past".

12 hours ago, panzermartin said:

I think most predict this event along a catastrophic collapse for Russia. Well it's one of the possible outcome of this war. But we are very early in this war to tell.

Sure, and I've said as much many times.  The regions will fit into one of four categories:

• genuinely desire to remain (with or without renegotiating power with Moscow)
• reluctantly remain because it seems better than the alternative (with or without renegotiating power with Moscow)
• try to leave but find themselves unable to (outmaneuvered or defeated in combat)
• leave successfully

For sure we will see a mix of these results, just like it was in all the past challenges to Russian rule.  Some will switch from one to another and then maybe switch again a few more times.  However, notice that only 1 of the 4 possibilities is "positive" for Moscow.  The others all require Russia to expend energy in the form of political/social ops, bribery, butchery, and/or outright military conflict.  The bigger the central authority crisis, the more of this will come about, and the less likely Russia will be able to put out all the fires successfully.

Steve

[dan/california]

Another Javelin kill in VERY similar terrain to the one on the last page. I wonder if they are both from the same action?

[Grigb]

@Haiduk do you know anything regarding UKR defensive positions Большой и малый муравейники? And thank you again for info!

[Huba]

UA rules the internet:

 

[Haiduk]

Who waits an update about Russian concentration on the south, Mashovets issued first part of his article, tomorrow will be the second part. So I need to compile four his articles in one. Damn %)

Spoiler. He believes, Russian offensive will have as a goal not Mykolaiv or Kryvyi Rih, but Zaporizhzhia.

Edited August 2, 2022 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

5 minutes ago, Grigb said:

@Haiduk do you know anything regarding UKR defensive positions Большой и малый муравейники? And thank you again for info!

I don't hear anything about them since 2017

[Grigb]

2 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

I don't hear anything about them since 2017

Do you have their location?

[Battlefront.com]

5 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Who waits an update about Russian concentration on the south, Mashovets issued first part of his article, tomorrow will be the second part. So I need to compile four his articles in one. Damn %)

Spoiler. He believes, Russian offensive will have as a goal not Mykolaiv or Kryvyi Rih, but Zaporizhzhia.

I've seen people talking about a Russian offensive in Kherson.  I don't believe it is feasible.  Zaporizhzia?  Possibly in connection to the continuing Donbas offensive, but something unrelated sounds unlikely.  At least it would be a very bad idea.  Hmm... when I put it that way... all bets are off

Steve

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, JonS said:

I thought he was mangling Machiavelli?

y'all are thinking I know enough to mangle these old fellers.  Just paraphrasing something I heard once.  Obviously UKR war was an attempted coup that turned into a war.  And now the reasons for that war are simply so that Putin can save face enough to survive.  That's not why the war started but it's why it continues. 

WW1 started over various things, but it kept going because the Kaiser needed to find a way out that he could call a victory.  France couldn't end the war by just walking home, they already were home.  The kaiser was the only one that could simply walk away and have the war end w/o anyone losing territory.  But hey, it's all about the optics, no?  what's a million dead when the only other choice is I look bad?  

[danfrodo]

7 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I've seen people talking about a Russian offensive in Kherson.  I don't believe it is feasible.  Zaporizhzia?  Possibly in connection to the continuing Donbas offensive, but something unrelated sounds unlikely.  At least it would be a very bad idea.  Hmm... when I put it that way... all bets are off

Steve

exactly!  Feasible is really a secondary concern, if it's even on the list of concerns.  I know I sound like a broken record but every day I'm thinking "OMG they just keep doubling down in Kherson, how clueless can Putin be?".  And every day he plumbs new depths of stupid.

[Battlefront.com]

14 hours ago, FancyCat said:

10 days ago, July 20th, in response to the HIMAR made holes in the Antonovsky bridge, you wrote the battle for the right bank of the Dnipro had been decided. 10 days since those holes in the bridge, Russia seemingly is still reinforcing Kherson oblast. ISW stated that Khariv counter offensive was announced May 5th, with Russian forces withdrawing by May 12th. 7 Days, tho Khariv had no statements on explaining the withdrawal. 

I double checked wiki on Snake Island, June 17th was when the regular attacks on the Russians on Snake Island began, and their pullout was announced June 30th, so 13 days. 

March 29th, the "goodwill gesture" for Kiev was announced, after Ukraine announced a counter offensive on March 16 according to wiki, or 13 days. 

Im doubtful it will be so aptly 13 days, either way, within a couple of days, the Russian General Staff and Putin should wise up to the fact that not pulling out their forces in Kherson oblast is inviting disaster on the scale of Kiev, and accordingly pull out. That or if they really are going for the rabbit in the hat trick, Russia will make no indication of retreat anytime within the next week. 

Good look into the patterns here.  Adding to this is that two weeks into he war I said that Russia would have to retreat or face collapse in the Kyiv area.  It was about 2 weeks from then that they actually did.  So yeah, there seems to be a coincidental 2 week lag between when something major is suspected and when it is confirmed.

This is a good time to remind people that when someone makes statements that X or Y is "decided" it is in reference (or should be!) to some critical factor that just changed and is not likely reversible.  For example, the sinking of the Muskova "decided" that Russia's domination of the Black Sea west of Crimea was now untenable.  It wasn't until Russia suffered it's humiliation at Snake Island that this was proven.  Further lack of Russian activity in the area has also demonstrated that Russia's domination in this part of the Black Sea is over.

Similarly, my comment about the battle for Kherson being "decided" when Ukraine surgically struck the bridges was an indication that Ukraine could cut off Russian forces on the western bank whenever it wanted to.  Because military forces can not operate without supplies, and there is no reasonably way to resupply these forces without bridges, it is a pretty safe conclusion that Russia has lost the battle.  Depending on what Ukraine does, it could be months before this end happens... or it could be weeks.  Hell, could even be days if Russia's forces route.  We just don't know what the timetable is nor do we know what Ukraine has planned.  All we know, with a good degree of certainty, is that Russian forces in Kherson can not operate there is Ukraine decides to openly challenge their presence.

Steve

[Haiduk]

17 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I find it interesting that we are still seeing O and V markings on units currently engaged in operations.  These vehicles have Os on them and much of the engineering equipment sent to Kherson last week had Vs on them, for example.  Clearly they have had enough time to replace these markings with Zs and, of course, this is the symbol Russia has promoted as representing the operation.  Are individual units sticking with their old markings as a sort of veteran bragging rights thing?  Like "I was there a the very beginning"?

This is special puzzle for you

[Chibot Mk IX]

1 hour ago, chrisl said:

They might work as bright decoys for radar guided missiles, but I don't think they're concealing anything from anybody.  They probably look like a nice set of calibration targets from the sky, and you can't really move them around to make someone think the bridge is somewhere else. There's also no shortage of optical observations going on - they're just another cope cage.

It does obscure the SAR surveillances, see the right below image. Now imaging RUS put two BM-21 on the ferry, it is very hard for the SAR operator to tell if those two trucks are civilian trucks or military target.  At this moment , the targets can still be identified at the exit point, but it prolongs the UKR's OODA cycle. It changes from "Hey, two arty pieces sit on a ferry, they are going to arrive the other side of river in 20min. I need a battery of 155mm get ready" to " two arty pieces exits the ferry, they are heading towards residential area "

Yes, they are plenty of other platform that can have a optical identification. Just like that thedrive article mentioned, people first thought Russian is building a new pontoon bridge via SAR but satellites image tells a different story.  But it needs time to bring the optical surveillance on station (or spread information in timely manner, for example, visual contact by resistance fighters needs time to reach UKR HQ) . They could not provide an on-time update for Artillery PGM strike. 

Edited August 2, 2022 by Chibot Mk IX

[Battlefront.com]

22 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

This is special puzzle for you

HAHA!  Well, it is VDV so it is quite possible it was assigned to all three forces, one after the other.  At least the crew took some time to let us know

Steve

[cesmonkey]

Any confirmation of this?

 

[Battlefront.com]

2 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

Any confirmation of this?

 

Interesting.  The Twitter source is usually reliable.

Whether this particular incident turns out to be true or not, I do think we're going to see less gains by Russian forces in the coming days.  Odds are that Ukraine is going to try and slow down Russia's ability to take even small amounts of new territory.  Given how worn out the Russians are, this shouldn't take too much effort.

Steve

[Eddy]

28 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

This is special puzzle for you

This is an heroic level of can't-be-arsed. Or they've run out of green paint!