How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Battlefront.com]

40 minutes ago, hcrof said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62602367

According to the article, damage to the transmission lines are the biggest risk that may cause overheating because that energy has to go somewhere. But the reactor has been set up to hopefully safely shut down in that event, using the existing diesel generators for power during this time.

Well, it's getting pretty late in Ukraine and (knock on wood) still nothing provocative with the nuke plant.  Here's my theory and, sadly, I'm hoping it is the case.

As I said in my longish post two pages ago, Putin knows he needs to do something equal to the desperate situation he is in.  Screwing around with nukes is an obvious path to go towards.  However, as I said he just needs to up the ante (escalate) not cross a red line.  In fact, he probably understands that crossing a red line likely means his death and the whole point of this is to avoid that.

I'm theorizing that pulling the Russian and Ukrainian workers WAS the operation and therefore the message.  Get people sweating.  Get them thinking that maybe they should do what he wants.

This is standard mafia tactics.  If you owe a bookie a ton of money the last thing they do is kill you.  They threaten, intimidate, and otherwise pressure you for payment.  Because PAYMENT is what they want and they would prefer it with a minimum of violence because violence increases the risks/costs.

If I'm correct, we already saw Putin's message.

Steve

[The_Capt]

13 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Always cautious, but the Twitter account is an unambiguous name with unambiguous claims that link to a real guy who is verifiable:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Pfarrer

That box is checked

Hey respect to this guy for his time in, but that was over 35 years ago.  It is a small community so he likely kept in touch, but his clearance would have been pulled (unless he did some contracting).

That said, a lot has changed in the last 35 years, particularly in the area of ISR and explosives technology.  Hell under the right conditions this could have been cyber - but not likely in the airfield case.  Even then, as we noted, he is not wrong on the DA - unless we get some more evidence.

Now as to whether the UA can keep this up is an interesting question. 

Edited August 19, 2022 by The_Capt

[Battlefront.com]

5 hours ago, FancyCat said:

Also, Russian unpreparedness for the invasion, did confuse Ukraine, as the SZR sent recon teams to check the forward units across the border and found them not ready for invasion. A lot more info than this in the article.

Great article, not yet finished reading it. However, the contradictory information that Ukraine's intel services had in the last couple of weeks of the war is now pretty easy to understand.  I agree with the theory that the West's regular and public announcements of Russian plans threw a major monkey wrench into Russian planning. 

It seems to have delayed the start of the war by perhaps as much as a month.  This helped contribute to the discipline problems within the Russian forces because they were literally sitting around in crappy living conditions in the winter with NOTHING to do and NO direction from above (this has been confirmed by lots of Russian POWs).  Idle soldiers in bad conditions for any length of time is not good, even in well disciplined militaries.  And we know for sure Russia's is not well disciplined.

Out of fear of more leaks the Kremlin denied it's military leaders on the ground access to any useful information until the very end.  Low level knowledge was poor (some units had some sense, others had none) even as they moved out on the 23/24th of February.  Since they were expecting a cakewalk senior leaders thought this wouldn't bite them in the butt.

It also seems that Russian propaganda campaigns were kept muzzled because that is also a way to gauge what's going on within the Kremlin.  I've seen charts documenting the use of key terms/words in the Russian propaganda channels and they didn't start up until maybe the week before (I forget exactly when) and ramped up exceptionally quick.  There was no usual gradual Russian buildup for a deliberate operation (as there was in 2014).

Taken all together, Russia's moves did confuse Ukraine and some of the Western countries, but it also made Russia's piss-poor plan for invasion even less likely to work.  Well done Putin

Steve

[dan/california]

22 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Hey respect to this guy for his time in, but that was over 35 years ago.  It is a small community so he likely kept in touch, but his clearance would have been pulled (unless he did some contracting).

That said, a lot has changed in the last 35 years, particularly in the area of ISR and explosives technology.  Hell under the right conditions this could have been cyber - but not likely in the airfield case.  Even then, as we noted, he is not wrong on the DA - unless we get some more evidence.

Now as to whether the UA can keep this up is an interesting question. 

 

Since we are speculating for the heck of it...

I think if the SOF was on the base, as opposed to up the coast bleeping with radars, they were there with fake ID/credentials that let them walk right to the bomb storage to install the "new fuses/guidance kits". Then the question becomes how? Did they turn the actual bomb handlers? Was it a multi year op to place an agent as a bomb handler, or near enough? A really great forgery of Russian id/orders? A double agent that can issue REAL ID/orders? The possibilities go on forever and I hope the people involved live to write book. 

I think next great opportunity for Ukrainian special forces is to take advantage of the Russians ever more chaotic supply situation and quietly add some very bad ammo to their supply stream. A sudden outbreak of rounds going off in the barrel would do wonders for Russian morale.

[keas66]

Apologies for a facebook link  - but this randomly popped up in  my feed   - about the supposed accuracy of modern  AT missiles

https://www.facebook.com/groups/5783024564?multi_permalinks=10159322206869565&hoisted_section_header_type=recently_seen

Which was referring to this  US Army report/doc :

https://www.benning.army.mil/Armor/eArmor/content/issues/2021/Winter/1Brown21.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0EEbvfBAe9KJcaSJzWct3_YQesGczxyUr7vj1MpvBB1BHTIQinlhFxi9U

 

Kind of interesting and I wonder what sort of stats the AFU has been collecting themselves on this .

[Battlefront.com]

23 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Hey respect to this guy for his time in, but that was over 35 years ago.  It is a small community so he likely kept in touch, but his clearance would have been pulled (unless he did some contracting).

That said, a lot has changed in the last 35 years, particularly in the area of ISR and explosives technology.  Hell under the right conditions this could have been cyber - but not likely in the airfield case.  Even then, as we noted, he is not wrong on the DA - unless we get some more evidence.

Yup, all taken into account too   One lesson I've learned from my years of simulation design work is that people you think should know what they are talking about sometimes don't.  Not because they are incompetent, but sometimes they don't know as much as they think they know simply because they weren't trained to know it.

Classic example is a WW2 vet being interviewed about all the Tigers he saw in Normandy or (my favorite) how the Panther's "88mm gun" was so deadly.  Another classic example was me asking a veteran about his uniform, looking for some details about when x was introduced and when.  He said something like "they gave me a uniform, I wore it, I turned it in when I left.  The details weren't important so I don't remember them".  This from a guy that wore the same clothing every day for many years.

In a sim details matter and 22 years of experience I've found that veterans often get the details wrong even if they get the gist of things spot on.

23 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Now as to whether the UA can keep this up is an interesting question. 

I suspect the SOF ops will slow down.  The ones we've seen appear to be a carefully coordinated campaign.  Groups likely selected their own targets within their areas and spent time doing recon, planning, resource accumulation, and practicing.  There's only so much they can do before they've done everything they are prepared for.  I expect we'll see a lot more "easy" targets of opportunity, such as small bits of critical infrastructure such as rail and power lines, individual unit motor pools, etc.

Steve

[poesel]

1 hour ago, billbindc said:

Is there an assessment out there that looks at gun barrel depletion in relation to ammunition expenditure for the Russian army? 

Well, it is right there on the graph under 'artillery resources'...

[Kinophile]

There are some other considerations that rule out direct SOF presence on the runway proper - what if the op goes wrong/betrayed/discovered?  What if one or more of your operators is captured/killed and left behind? 

If anyone get captured at this first stage (of what is now a mini campaign) then you have a very bad intel leak and your campaign is 100% done. 

Another variation on the SOF involvement is that they could have been present, near/in the base but not actually planting explosives. They could have been more "clearing the way" -  take out specific AD assets in the area, sniper key personnel,  guide whatever munitions it was onto target then GTFO,etc. 

Being on the runway itself seems highly dangerous - long distances to travel to exfil if the op goes wrong and zero cover available. Plus what if the planting is interrupted and a firefight ensues, around all that 'splodey stuff? You don't want to lose your key demo guys on the very first stage. 

Plus you'll want to keep that team in good health to go make more Ivan's spontaneously decorate their paper underwear over the next few days. 

This all harkens back to my idea previous, of a modern weapon used in a new way (for this War ),  but in a way very familiar to Western SOF.  

Using SOF to carve temporary approach & exit channels for something air/ground launched that does the fun stuff seems sensible. 

[Calamine Waffles]

Bronk is usually pretty good but I have some issues with his claim that the Russians have a 1.6 million man mobilization pool under the current plans.

[Battlefront.com]

34 minutes ago, keas66 said:

Apologies for a facebook link  - but this randomly popped up in  my feed   - about the supposed accuracy of modern  AT missiles

https://www.facebook.com/groups/5783024564?multi_permalinks=10159322206869565&hoisted_section_header_type=recently_seen

Which was referring to this  US Army report/doc :

https://www.benning.army.mil/Armor/eArmor/content/issues/2021/Winter/1Brown21.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0EEbvfBAe9KJcaSJzWct3_YQesGczxyUr7vj1MpvBB1BHTIQinlhFxi9U

 

Kind of interesting and I wonder what sort of stats the AFU has been collecting themselves on this .

Here is the full report he bases his numbers on.  As expected, there's more too it than what he stated:

https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2021/Winter/1Brown21.pdf

Note that the Javelins hit about 33% of the time (3 out of 8 ) and the other was TOW-2, which we did not give the Ukrainians.  So the FB guy should have used 33%, not 19%.  And the author of the report makes it very clear that the sample size is WAY TOO SMALL to base calculations on (which the FB author obviously didn't pay any attention to).  I see this all the time... "I lost my 5 Panthers to 3 Shermans.  It should have taken 15 Shermans to do that because some guy said the ratio to knock out a Panther is 5:1.  Your game sucks!".

I personally used a Javelin trainer.  I was hitting AFVs left right and center with only a few minutes of instruction.  The trainer was very sophisticated and simulated terrain obfuscation.  I remember hitting a BMP that was moving in and out from behind hills obscured by trees.  That got some cheers from the 20+ people watching me (yeah, no pressure!).

The Colonel that hosted me said this was typical and that it was reflected in their experience on the line with live firing.  The problem he said, and the reason he contacted me, was that they had difficulty with training the teams to put themselves into good positions in order to be in the right place at the right time.  In other words, the Javelin is as accurate as it is claimed to be, but no weapon used incorrectly works as well as it otherwise would.

This is what the report is talking about.  Soldiers finding themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time and deciding to engage when they in fact should not.  I'm sure there's plenty of this in Ukraine, especially with NLAW which is not an unskilled weapon (there is an infamous video of one in Mariupol being fired within the minimum arm range).

So the guy's basic conclusion is correct.  5000 Javelins delivered ≠ 5000 dead Russian targets.  That's the only conclusion he can make, so the rest of what he said is questionable.

Steve

[Calamine Waffles]

9 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Here is the full report he bases his numbers on.  As expected, there's more too it than what he stated:

https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2021/Winter/1Brown21.pdf

Note that the Javelins hit about 33% of the time (3 out of 8 ) and the other was TOW-2, which we did not give the Ukrainians.  So the FB guy should have used 33%, not 19%.  And the author of the report makes it very clear that the sample size is WAY TOO SMALL to base calculations on (which the FB author obviously didn't pay any attention to).  I see this all the time... "I lost my 5 Panthers to 3 Shermans.  It should have taken 15 Shermans to do that because some guy said the ratio to knock out a Panther is 5:1.  Your game sucks!".

I personally used a Javelin trainer.  I was hitting AFVs left right and center with only a few minutes of instruction.  The trainer was very sophisticated and simulated terrain obfuscation.  I remember hitting a BMP that was moving in and out from behind hills obscured by trees.  That got some cheers from the 20+ people watching me (yeah, no pressure!).

The Colonel that hosted me said this was typical and that it was reflected in their experience on the line with live firing.  The problem he said, and the reason he contacted me, was that they had difficulty with training the teams to put themselves into good positions in order to be in the right place at the right time.  In other words, the Javelin is as accurate as it is claimed to be, but no weapon used incorrectly works as well as it otherwise would.

This is what the report is talking about.  Soldiers finding themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time and deciding to engage when they in fact should not.  I'm sure there's plenty of this in Ukraine, especially with NLAW which is not an unskilled weapon (there is an infamous video of one in Mariupol being fired within the minimum arm range).

So the guy's basic conclusion is correct.  5000 Javelins delivered ≠ 5000 dead Russian targets.  That's the only conclusion he can make, so the rest of what he said is questionable.

Steve

The other thing of course is that the top attack mode is not some 100% guaranteed instant kill even against T-72s etc. You've got things like the big gun breech that can potentially absorb a hit and prevent a K-kill in the top attack profile.

[danfrodo]

9 hours ago, Aragorn2002 said:

You know I love you, Dan, but if you call Patton a lunatic again and forget again to mention the Dutch for CM-NATO I will block you.

Dang, that would ruin me Aragorn.  OKOKOK I apologize.  Patton was not a lunatic.  Patton was a a great general who knew that violence of action mattered in war.  I will formally apologize to his ghost.

Dear General Patton, I am sorry I called you a lunatic.  I was wrong.  You are a lovely person..  Well, ghost person.   

Am I forgiven?

Can't believe I forgot the Dutch for CM-NATO.  Now that is unforgivable.  

[FancyCat]

Probably a big reason why Russia has been able to craft a nuclear plant narrative is despite Russia controlling the plant, energy produced by it still flows to Ukraine. 20% of Ukrainian energy needs is supplied by the plant. People assume due to war and Russian forces being on the site of the plant, that the disconnect already took place.

So whenever Russian or pro-Russian people say it's ridiculous that Russia would bomb their own controlled territory, the reality is the plant is still connected to the Ukrainian grid and is still supplying energy to unoccupied Ukraine. It is well within reason for Russia to cut this off and cause severe hardship for Ukraine.

Cut off of the facility from the grid without connection to the Russian Crimean grid would endanger the operation and safety of the plant and therefore the region. That's why Ukraine stuck power lines from Crimea to the plant to push back the connection.

 

[sburke]

it is behind a paywall, but the NY times has an interview with Ukrainian partisans and info on the kinds of activities they have been doing.

Behind Enemy Lines, Ukrainians Tell Russians ‘You Are Never Safe’ - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

[FancyCat]

Also if the UN Secretary General is stating the principle of energy production is outside the scope of warfare, that implies that cutting off energy in the form Russia is seeking is not accepted IHL practice. This explains aside from making Ukraine look bad, why Russia is focused on crafting a narrative where Ukraine is trying to cut off energy, cause their own attempt to take energy to the Russian grid is considered a bad action to take internationally.

On that note, Putin and co. continue to take no actions towards de-escalation or even remotely attempting to empower pro-peace factions in the west. Stealing land, energy, resources, are not moves that can seen as encouraging peace or framing Russia's conquest of Ukraine as a just cause.

I and I'm sure other people were suspecting Putin would do his best to divide the west by seeking status quo stabilizing moves like ceasefires but moves like this, even Germany and France will be hard pressed to seek de-escalation when Russia is simply stealing and basically killing Ukrainians who try and resist.

The question is why? If Putin were satisfied or thinks that what he has is enough, shouldn't he be switching to calling for ceasefire and ceasing these extremely escalatory moves?

So he isn't satisfied. Maybe he isn't confident but he must realize his military can't push any longer. Now, obviously Ukraine would ignore ceasefire attempts, but that should lend more weight to Putin ordering the Russian military to stop moves like the nuclear plant and the referendums but they are still presisting and draining pro-ceasefire arguments in the west.

Maybe for whatever reason, Putin is confident in a coming Ukrainian collapse? Is he really understanding his military will be unable to make offensive actions?

[billbindc]

1 hour ago, poesel said:

Well, it is right there on the graph under 'artillery resources'...

Ah…traveling as I read and missed it. Thanks. 

[Battlefront.com]

32 minutes ago, Calamine Waffles said:

The other thing of course is that the top attack mode is not some 100% guaranteed instant kill even against T-72s etc. You've got things like the big gun breech that can potentially absorb a hit and prevent a K-kill in the top attack profile.

Correct.  The live test I saw (I got to sit in a running T-72 just before they blew it up) was a M-kill.  The Javelin impacted the track, likely due to ground temperature interference.  However, the damage to the running gear was extensive and would have required a factory rebuild.  I don't recall now about spalling, but I don't think the crew was evaluated to have been injured.

Steve

[Huba]

US arms packages are almost an weekly event now, more frequent than during peak of battle of Severodonetsk:

 

Edited August 19, 2022 by Huba

[Battlefront.com]

13 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

I and I'm sure other people were suspecting Putin would do his best to divide the west by seeking status quo stabilizing moves like ceasefires but moves like this, even Germany and France will be hard pressed to seek de-escalation when Russia is simply stealing and basically killing Ukrainians who try and resist.

The question is why? If Putin were satisfied or thinks that what he has is enough, shouldn't he be switching to calling for ceasefire and ceasing these extremely escalatory moves?

He tried this before when his hand was even stronger (i.e. March), and it didn't go anywhere because Ukraine + West refused to give into Putin's maximalist war aims.  Russia's position is weaker now than than before because it has given up about 30% of the territory it took, is desperately staving off a military collapse, and Ukraine is getting ready to deal Russia a major military defeat somewhere on the battlefield.  At the same time, he's done absolutely nothing but reinforce Ukrainian and Western resolve to see Russia defeated instead of negotiated with.

Without something new to bargain with, he's not going to get anywhere with negotiations.  I'm sure he knows that.  Doesn't matter if he's satisfied with what he has if he doesn't have the means to keep it, militarily or through political settlement.

Steve

[sburke]

another sign that Russia is realizing it isn't secure enough in the south.

Russia May Delay Annexation Moves as Ukraine Invasion Progress Slows (msn.com)

Quote

 

The Kremlin is considering the possibility of putting off votes to annex territories it’s taken in southern and eastern Ukraine as its military advances in the regions have stalled, a potential setback to Russia’s drive to cement its gains.

The referendums, originally targeted for next month, may be held as late as December or January because Russian troops haven’t yet been able to take full control of the areas the Kremlin seeks to claim as its own, according to people familiar with the discussions. The possibility of a delay was first reported Thursday by the Meduza news website.

For the moment, however, the Kremlin hasn’t abandoned hopes of holding the votes in September and preparations are continuing, the people said. Publicly, Russian occupation officials have said the dates will be set once the security situation allows it.

Though any vote would be rejected internationally as illegal, the Kremlin aims to use the referendums as a symbolic triumph for the domestic audience in Russia more than six months after the invasion began, signaling its determination to keep control over the land even as Ukraine vows to eject its forces.

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

NY Times sent around some reporting via email (only available to subscribers) that shows the narrative of how this war is going is slowly changing.  The reporting was pretty upbeat about how the war is progressing, not necessarily that Ukraine is going to defeat Russia on the battlefield but that Russia is unlikely to defeat Ukraine.  Much of the evidence is stuff we've talked about for months now, so it's good to see people finally catching up   Here's one interesting piece:

Quote

Victory, stalemate, defeat

As a reminder, here are the three scenarios we described last month, which were based partly on public comments by Avril Haines, the U.S. director of national intelligence:

Russia starts to win. Russia would continue to take over more of eastern Ukraine, as it did in the spring, and ultimately control all of the Donbas region. This progress might break Ukrainians’ will to fight elsewhere — and weaken support for the war in Western Europe and the U.S. The war falls into a stalemate. Many analysts, including Haines, consider this scenario the most likely. In it, Russia would dominate the east but would not be able to go much farther. Ukraine starts to win. Ukraine would halt Russia’s advance in the east and also succeed in launching counterattacks, potentially reclaiming some territory in the south, where Russia has also taken over some cities.

Looking back at this list now, we are struck that the recent events seem to fall somewhere between the second and third scenarios.

In the early summer, Russia seemed to be making progress toward taking over all of eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region, which includes two provinces, Donetsk and Luhansk. But that progress appears to have slowed. Russia controls only Luhansk, not all of Donetsk.

I am hoping that the public comments by Haines was overly cautious for reasons of setting public expectations lower than what the DNI's opinion was internally.  I think the bulk of us here did not predict Russia would get very far this summer, nor that Ukraine would just let things stalemate.  Because stalemate requires both parties to accept the situation, and there's no signs that Ukraine wants to or has to do that.

Still, good to see the NYT leaning towards "Ukraine starts to win" and nobody they interviewed continuing to think "Russia starts to win" is even remotely possible.

Steve

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, poesel said:

Well, it is right there on the graph under 'artillery resources'...

You know when I see this, I think O’Brian (is that his name?) might be onto something.  Battles may be better viewed as symptomatic of the collision of war, not the primary mechanism thru which war happens.

I wonder what the UA destruction rate of that stockpile is?  

[Haiduk]

Results of yesterday strike on Russian ammo dump in Belgorod oblast. This turned out not military base of 752nd MRR of 3rd MRD near Solotino village as was previously geolocated, but NW from nearby Timonovo village. Near it is located some facilities, which didn't mark on Wikimapia, but looks like new-built storages of ammo dump. Russians reportedly moved part of ammunition to the forest, but this didn't save it. "Cigarettes" hit exactly the forest. 

Video from thermal camera

Ammo dump near Timonovo

SAR image of burning place in the forest before and after

Edited August 19, 2022 by Haiduk

[Aragorn2002]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

Dang, that would ruin me Aragorn.  OKOKOK I apologize.  Patton was not a lunatic.  Patton was a a great general who knew that violence of action mattered in war.  I will formally apologize to his ghost.

Dear General Patton, I am sorry I called you a lunatic.  I was wrong.  You are a lovely person..  Well, ghost person.   

Am I forgiven?

Can't believe I forgot the Dutch for CM-NATO.  Now that is unforgivable.  

And yet I forgive you for both your sins, Dan.

[fireship4]

35 minutes ago, Huba said:

US arms packages are almost an weekly event now, more frequent than during peak of battle of Severodonetsk:

 

Scan Eagles... they look like something the 'War in Ukraine' channel mentioned as a missing component of the AFU, Russia has the Orlan-10 and this seems to fulfill the same role, with a long loiter time.  Cost, numbers and flight ceiling however... quick Wikipedia sourced ballparks, Orlan-10 / Scan Eagle:  $160,000 / $3.2 million, a good proportion of the over 1,500 built / 16 to the AFU in this package, 5,000m / ???.

Edited August 19, 2022 by fireship4