How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[chuckdyke]

Just now, Huba said:

Tanks are a bit more tricky. I think that at this point the value of 100 Leo1 is negligible,

According our Austrian YouTuber the Leo1 could function as an Assault Gun. Read Infantry support in an urban area. Marder judging by playing the game are capable of breaching in urban settings and can defend itself against MBT's. Leo2 may not the best idea according to some Germans lots of the inside is possibly still classified to put it on the export market. 

[Huba]

Just now, chuckdyke said:

According our Austrian YouTuber the Leo1 could function as an Assault Gun. Read Infantry support in an urban area. Marder judging by playing the game are capable of breaching in urban settings and can defend itself against MBT's. Leo2 may not the best idea according to some Germans lots of the inside is possibly still classified to put it on the export market. 

SPG-9 on a Bushmaster could do that too, being only slightly less protected  Joking aside, creating whole logistics chain just for 100 obscure vehicles might be not worth it, the urgency is much less than some time ago. I bet UA would very much prefer the remaining PT-91s.

IMO at this stage any western tank deliveries have to be done with post-war UA army in mind, which will be transitioning to NATO equipment. And this means either Leo2 or M1, there are no alternatives. As for the secrets, well these are exported widely across NATO, and we can treat Ukraine as practically NATO member at this point. Worst case, transfer the A4 versions, still plenty of these to find, and should be much better to anything Russian anyway.

[chuckdyke]

2 minutes ago, Huba said:

Ukraine as practically NATO member at this point.

It will be essential this will be one of the nonnegotiable requirements in the postwar. Ukraine a fully-fledged member of NATO. Russia should be less relevant in European politics than Liechtenstein. My apologies to the nice people in Liechtenstein. 

[Grigb]

20 minutes ago, Huba said:

Tanks are a bit more tricky. I think that at this point the value of 100 Leo1 is negligible, these would be good in March/ April perhaps. Leo2 would be great, but these are rather scarce. 

Watching all the skirmishes I got a different opinion. Leo 1 will be very useful. Apart from mech pushes like UKR did at Izum there are a lot of small skirmishes where often lone tank used for long range support of infantry. Like mobile protected assault gun that can move quickly to the most threatened point and give some support to hard presses infantry. Remeber that you do not need to hit tanks that much - there are ATGMs for that. What you need is to put HE somewhere close to RU assault group to make it to back off. So, you put Leos 1 in support of infantry fighting in Donbass and transfer UKR tank units in reserve to use in offensive.

Also keep in mind that Leo 1 is significantly less flammable than Soviet designed tanks. There are good tanks. There is still use for them.

[Huba]

17 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Watching all the skirmishes I got a different opinion. Leo 1 will be very useful. Apart from mech pushes like UKR did at Izum there are a lot of small skirmishes where often lone tank used for long range support of infantry. Like mobile protected assault gun that can move quickly to the most threatened point and give some support to hard presses infantry. Remeber that you do not need to hit tanks that much - there are ATGMs for that. What you need is to put HE somewhere close to RU assault group to make it to back off. So, you put Leos 1 in support of infantry fighting in Donbass and transfer UKR tank units in reserve to use in offensive.

Also keep in mind that Leo 1 is significantly less flammable than Soviet designed tanks. There are good tanks. There is still use for them.

I'm not saying these are useless, far from it, but just not worth the hassle IMO. I doubt that setting up the whole logistical chain for them is worth it, given that there won't be more arriving, and these are useless for a future UA army. Also see my arguments in the other post.

Edit:
Though after a bit of consideration, I think that if Leo1 is offered, UA will take them. If not for their battlefield value, then for the symbolic one, as M1s will probably follow. And humiliating Scholz even more just for the sake of it would be stupid.

Edited September 14, 2022 by Huba

[Zeleban]

 

It looks like the first feature film on the theme of this war

[Eddy]

Military History Visualized did I video on the very topic of Leo 1s. Worth a watch I reckon 

It's split into chapters so you can just jump to the conclusion if you want

Edited September 14, 2022 by Eddy

[BletchleyGeek]

Interesting bit, on Ukraine acquiring anti drone systems via Poland

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-defense-firm-selling-anti-drone-systems-to-ukraine-by-way-of-poland/

Maybe Poland may want to buy other stuff as well from Israel.

 

 

 

[Grigb]

As per out discussion of RU Nats let's check if they do have capabilities to detect UKR offensive or it was just a fluke with Kharkiv offensive (Even a Broken Clock is Right Twice a Day). I am using Girkin statement, but he is repeating that other are saying. Plus I added Mashkovets because he thinks RU defensive preparation could be preparation for offensive. 

 

[Butschi]

1 hour ago, poesel said:

Scholz and his party get A LOT of flak from everyone (including the other two parties in the coalition) for it. I'm not sure how long he can keep that up. Especially since his dearest excuse ('no-one else delivers tanks/IFVs' 'we only do it together with NATO') has been defused quite nicely by the US ambassador who basically gave a carte blanche for weapons delivery on Twitter.

I guess his reasoning comes from the part of the population who are absolutely horrified of war in general and see a cease fire as the first and utmost thing that has to happen. I'm not sharing that idea, but it is what some people think.

The flak has reduced in intensity lately, at least that is my impression. If only because, predictably, the whole gas/electricity/heading discussion has now started in earnest. There are those, as you say, who just find the whole idea of war horrible enough to want peace. Though too me it seems the real pacifists are a minority and the far larger group wants peace for entirely selfish reasons. I mean, recently you see many protests of the form "we can't afford energy prices any more, so we want a diplomatic approach with the goal too have a cease fire (so we can lift sanctions and get cheap energy again). The thing is, I guess we realize now that it is not about having to freeze this winter but then everything will be fine. Instead there will not be any short or even mid term solution no matter what we do unless we somehow go back to cheap Russian gas.

Also, again my impression, by now it is less about any explicit binding NATO internal ban on delivering tanks/IFV but that no one wants to be the first.

[Huba]

Some very positive news. Combined with vastly increased  exports by rail, it looks like UA food exports are completely back on track  

 

 

[kevinkin]

Short summary for a recent US Army meeting -  the Maneuver Warfighter Conference at Fort Benning, Ga. mentions Ukraine in passing. (future fight scenario that sounds as deadly — but even more complex — than what daily reports out of the Russian invasion)

Mentions EW, armor and integration of the force. 

https://www.armytimes.com/news/2022/09/13/howManeuver Warfighter Conference at Fort Benning, Ga.-the-armys-tackling-these-six-goals-for-future-wars/

• "fight will play out on, “an expanded, noncontiguous battlefield that features dispersed forces.”"

Nothing new

•  "ground forces, unlike most of the major wars the Army fought over the past half-century will mean the service has to “pay attention to their sea flanks and air flanks,”"

Makes sense

• "wants the Army to converge hidden forces at optimal times, striking enemy targets."

An age old objective

• "“win the fires fight,” meaning strike from farther with more accurate munitions, both steel on target and cyber or electronic warfare tools." "work to extend howitzer tubed artillery to push past 40 miles and other platforms capable of reaching 1,700 miles"

1,700 miles for the Pacific?

• "future Army must sustain itself for post-combat operations, the protracted fight and fuel the rest of their partners, especially in the Pacific where the Army is the logistics overlord for all the services."

Interesting reason to be for the US Army post Russia. US is slow in modernizing its sealift capacity. Needs to protect pre-positioned supplies during war while the Navy has its hands filled?

• "Keeping soldiers and their systems hidden but survivable means a tougher, faster “Armor Fist,” the secretary said. She highlighted recent work upgrading the Abrams tank, Bradleys and the upcoming Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle"

Rethinking armor but not going away soon.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 14, 2022 by kevinkin

[Grigb]

And RU is preparing to defend Nuclear station against another UKR landing.

[Battlefront.com]

Old Time CMer put me onto this Twitter account.  It is someone who documents (mostly) Russian propagandists and apologists in context with facts.  For example:

You'll notice that the account uses screenshots to capture the subject's content.  Which, if you see the above one, is a wise move because Twitter just banned the user and that means all the original content disappears from view.

Here's another gem that sums up the best way Russians can be OK with what is happening... stop looking at the Internet:

 

Anyway, this is a pretty good way to quickly skim for some chuckles and to see what the Russian side is using for spin material.

Steve

[Grigb]

State of RU defense just before the of UKR offensive

Quote

Our guys would have stood to the last if there had been powerful artillery support in the first place. But the artillery has been working carelessly for the last month. That's why they were able to gather such a powerful fist.

And aviation, too. [Their] chopper was ironing us, and the air defense was silent. There were none of our helos at the same time. Their tanks were firing [at us], and our tanks were at the same time five to seven kilometers from our positions in the forest. Is this normal?

It's about August, about what preceded the surrender of Izum and Kupyansk. The [RU troops] work was very uncoordinated, it led to this result."

 

[Battlefront.com]

21 minutes ago, Grigb said:

State of RU defense just before the of UKR offensive

Our guys would have stood to the last if there had been powerful artillery support in the first place. But the artillery has been working carelessly for the last month. That's why they were able to gather such a powerful fist.

And aviation, too. [Their] chopper was ironing us, and the air defense was silent. There were none of our helos at the same time. Their tanks were firing [at us], and our tanks were at the same time five to seven kilometers from our positions in the forest. Is this normal?

It's about August, about what preceded the surrender of Izum and Kupyansk. The [RU troops] work was very uncoordinated, it led to this result."

Heh.  I guess he's saying Russians aren't as tough as Ukrainians.  I mean, Ukraine has fought most of the war without "powerful artillery support" or air defense and they didn't run away.

These guys really don't see how offering up excuses only makes things worse for their image!

Steve

[akd]

45 minutes ago, Grigb said:

And RU is preparing to defend Nuclear station against another UKR landing.

Uh-huh.

 

[Huba]

More and more fun in the Caucasus:

Called that earlier! It's strange why they didn't fill up the lock long ago, should be pro-active about that:

 

Edited September 14, 2022 by Huba

[Grigb]

Nobody can explain like Don Kadirov

Quote

I will calm the most violent and the most skeptical commentators. During the course of the SMO, we are not retreating anywhere. These are all stuffing and Western provocations. Don't let yourself be fooled.
There are such concepts as tactics and strategy. Our troops have a thinner [smarter] one.

We cannot afford to indiscriminately shoot at everyone, including civilians, just to satisfy the maniacal desires of the couch ignoramuses. Russia is trying to minimize human casualties in this special operation. But the Bandera Nazis can afford it up to the point that they shoot at their own. Hence the differences in tactics.

Our generals who have graduated from military academies are well versed in the intricacies of military affairs and allow the enemy to do only what is beneficial to us. To destroy enemy units, you need to use various techniques: stretch his strength, pull, clamp into the boiler, force him to go out into the field or lure him into a trap. And the leadership of the army perfectly combines all these methods.

 

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Grigb said:

As per out discussion of RU Nats let's check if they do have capabilities to detect UKR offensive or it was just a fluke with Kharkiv offensive (Even a Broken Clock is Right Twice a Day). I am using Girkin statement, but he is repeating that other are saying. Plus I added Mashkovets because he thinks RU defensive preparation could be preparation for offensive. 

 

I think we need to start taking weather into consideration.  The next 4-5 days are expected to be rainy in the Kharkiv area, which means we aren't likely to see any significant combat advances.  At least not dramatic ones.  Next week the night time temperatures are starting to get significantly colder.  People think that it takes freezing at night to produce bad mud during the day (that is certainly true), but it's not quite that simple.

Here is my first hand layperson's guide to Mud Season.  You're going to say "duh, everybody knows that" for the first half, but I feel it's necessary to state the obvious to make sure the point is understood:

Ground gets muddy because of water.  Ground gets harder because the water dissipates deeper into the soil or into the air.  Air temperature and sunlight heavily influence both processes.  During the war season even heavy and prolonged rains might make the ground soft, which can cause significant offroad problems, but it generally doesn't turn the ground into a quagmire.  What we think of Mud Season (quagmire) happens when the ground temperature cools and the sun spends fewer hours with lessening strength.  Cooler temperatures and reduced energy from the sun slows down the efficiency of moving the water out of the soil (down or up).  That, in turn, means that frequent rain events, even fairly minor ones, have a cumulative effect of making the soil muddier.  At some point, long before the ground and air temperatures approach freezing, the ground is a total mess.  Then night temperatures go below freezing which makes things worse as it freezes only the top layer and the sun has to thaw that before it can warm up the soil enough to get things moving again.

My point here is that we are already in Mud Season and the difficulties that come from it will accelerate from now on until the weather is sufficiently cold both at night and during the day to freeze the soil down to the frost line (around 1.3m where I live).  Sadly, the weather in Kharkiv for the next week looks like it's going to have a severe impact on combat operations already.

I think that Ukraine's offensive in the north can continue, but it's going to be mostly road bound and that makes it easier for Russia to stop/delay Ukrainian progress.  I'd love to see some more bold moves, but I'm guessing the weather is already working against that happening.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

11 minutes ago, Huba said:

More and more fun in the Caucasus:

Sooooo... who here wants to go on the record and state, unequivocally, that Russia is not going to fall apart because of this war?  Clearly state your intentions and the Forum will note the date and time of your statement.  We'll announce the winners of the contest at a later date

OK, so some of you might be saying "yeah, but these places that are now suddenly shooting at each other again aren't Russia, so git stuffed!".  Technically that is correct, but one has to remember all of these places were part of the Soviet Union.  The tensions that caused these areas to break away from the Soviet Union and fight amongst themselves exists on the arbitrary line on the map that separates these places from the remains of the Soviet Union (i.e. The Russian Federation).

Since the early 2000s Russia, once it regained its footing, kept both sides of border in the Caucuses relatively quiet.  It was a bloody and destructive path to get it that way, but it did.  However, like all things Russian, the policies from the Kremlin never even tried to do anything to get at the various roots of the Caucuses problems.  Nope, short cuts and violence have been their go-to strategy here as elsewhere.

We are already seeing the effect of a weaker Russia on the Caucuses.  For now it's mostly on the other side of its border, but it won't stay there.  It never has and that is exactly why Russia has put so much effort in keeping things peaceful in the former Soviet territory.

No timeline on when things go from bad to worse, but it will inevitably get worse.  Sadly, probably MUCH worse.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Earlier I pointed out that the recent flair up between Armenia and Azerbaijan was "nothing new".  That is true, however I should have mentioned that it is still significant.  One of these times a flair up will turn into a larger scale conflict.  Not just between these two countries, but between several others who have longstanding grievances that Russia has largely kept tamped down.  Maybe this latest one between the two As leads to a more active shooting war, maybe not.  But eventually it will.  This is a reminder to me that I need to keep in mind that circumstances have changed and even small flair ups now have potential to rapidly escalate.

Steve

[Grigb]

3 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I think we need to start taking weather into consideration.  The next 4-5 days are expected to be rainy in the Kharkiv area, which means we aren't likely to see any significant combat advances.  At least not dramatic ones.  Next week the night time temperatures are starting to get significantly colder.  People think that it takes freezing at night to produce bad mud during the day (that is certainly true), but it's not quite that simple.

Here is my first hand layperson's guide to Mud Season.  You're going to say "duh, everybody knows that" for the first half, but I feel it's necessary to state the obvious to make sure the point is understood:

Ground gets muddy because of water.  Ground gets harder because the water dissipates deeper into the soil or into the air.  Air temperature and sunlight heavily influence both processes.  During the war season even heavy and prolonged rains might make the ground soft, which can cause significant offroad problems, but it generally doesn't turn the ground into a quagmire.  What we think of Mud Season (quagmire) happens when the ground temperature cools and the sun spends fewer hours with lessening strength.  Cooler temperatures and reduced energy from the sun slows down the efficiency of moving the water out of the soil (down or up).  That, in turn, means that frequent rain events, even fairly minor ones, have a cumulative effect of making the soil muddier.  At some point, long before the ground and air temperatures approach freezing, the ground is a total mess.  Then night temperatures go below freezing which makes things worse as it freezes only the top layer and the sun has to thaw that before it can warm up the soil enough to get things moving again.

My point here is that we are already in Mud Season and the difficulties that come from it will accelerate from now on until the weather is sufficiently cold both at night and during the day to freeze the soil down to the frost line (around 1.3m where I live).  Sadly, the weather in Kharkiv for the next week looks like it's going to have a severe impact on combat operations already.

I think that Ukraine's offensive in the north can continue, but it's going to be mostly road bound and that makes it easier for Russia to stop/delay Ukrainian progress.  I'd love to see some more bold moves, but I'm guessing the weather is already working against that happening.

Steve

I think UKR intent is to try to force RU retreat back to Svatove (with of capture Svatove if possible) and that's it.  Maskovets says Svatove is important due to location and proximity to important roads (toward Severodonetsk). He claim RU defenses in front of Svatove are "embryonic". They are digging there like mad.

So, that's what I think we should expect before mud season calms everybody down - UKR cutting road to Kreminna and rolling RU flank forcing RU to retreat to Svatove and if possible, to capture it. 

 

[Kinophile]

 Considering how close Poland & Ukraine havd become in Defense,  we should probably look at a post-war UA army as both NATO but also deliberately mirroring some Polish approaches, while retaining UKR specific force structures. 

(naturally,  each army in NATO has its own characteristics and approaches, I'm saying that the POL-UKR defenses establishments will be uniquely tightly bound together). 

An important aspect of Polish aid to UA has been the ease of transfer of 100s of tanks, AFV,  SPGs etc,  due to the commonality of equipment, logistics and training. Eg. the Twardys sent were 99% familiar to UA, they had existing stocks of parts and anything different was easily sourced from Poland. Germany has been of minimal use in terms of AFVs, in comparison. Plus everything is in German,  whereas Polish & Ukrainian are very similar (my Polish wife can understand  Ukrainian, but not really speak it. But it would be easy to brush up, she says). 

Poland is now consolidating its tank fleet to 1-2 models, building the support infrastructure and logistics skillset as well as doctrine and if I was a Polish CJCS  I would very much integrate UKRs battle experience into the new doctrine.

And vice versa - a New Model UKR Army should both reflect the new realities of modern war and integrate closely with the Polish brethren. That cross-border binding would make a POL UKR alliance a fearsome enemy to any Russian attack. 

So a UA tank fleet should really echo whatever Poland builds, with a strong communication between the two forces.

A good parallel would be US-UK defense relations, but more balanced and far more integrated/mutually informed down to the tactical level (whereas US-UK is more if a strategic relationship with operational interoperability.) 

Edited September 14, 2022 by Kinophile

[Grigb]

5 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Earlier I pointed out that the recent flair up between Armenia and Azerbaijan was "nothing new".  That is true, however I should have mentioned that it is still significant.  One of these times a flair up will turn into a larger scale conflict.  Not just between these two countries, but between several others who have longstanding grievances that Russia has largely kept tamped down.  Maybe this latest one between the two As leads to a more active shooting war, maybe not.  But eventually it will.  This is a reminder to me that I need to keep in mind that circumstances have changed and even small flair ups now have potential to rapidly escalate.

Steve

Ru Nats claims Armenians officially requested RU help, which is RU do not want to provide but cannot openly refuse the request.