How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Battlefront.com]

17 minutes ago, Grossman said:

Steve. There doesn't seem much doubt the strike was Hrim-2 on account of range and devastation. The firing pattern is an interesting observation. More Hrims are being built or have been built. The special target will be the Kerch Bridge. It hasn't been taken out for now because of the Ukrainian war strategy. It is the Russian supply link between the east and west fronts, the Donbas and Kherson. The UKR plan was to blow the Dnieper bridges and decoy Russian forces to Kherson, meanwhile reclaim the Donbas, fighting reduced Russian forces. We'll see the Kerch bridge eliminated when UKR wants to bottleneck RU troops in Crimea and isolate the Black Sea front . 

Agreed, though I do think it's a bit unlikely that Ukraine could reliable interdict the Kerch bridges today if it wanted to.  I don't think they have the Hrim-2 missiles "in stock" to do that.  They are more likely still getting built.

That said, I think that it's pretty clear Ukraine hit the bridges over the Dnepr hard when, and only when, they wanted them taken out of the equation.  All the strikes before that were likely designed to show that the offensive was near, but light enough to lull the Russians into a false sense of security needed to put more forces over the river.  "Comrade, it is but a little hole.  Fill or cover it, no problem!  Expect the crossing of a hundred tanks by the end of the week".

Crimea is just a big Kherson.  Let it fill up with expensive Russian systems and troops, cut the land bridge, then cut the bridges.  Oh, and what about all the possible shipping?  Well, has anybody seen Ukraine use a Neptune, Harpoon, or other anti-ship missile lately?  I'm guessing that isn't only because the Russian navy has been a bit shy since the Moskva.  I think once Ukraine decides to isolate Crimea there will be some more shipwrecks for adventure divers to explore in the future.

Oh. and while we're speculating, I think it's good to remind ourselves that we are being read by people who might not be as, uhm, enthusiastic about Ukraine's success as us.  Personally, as good of an analysis as we do here on any given topic, I doubt it is of practical use for whomever is taking notes to pass along to the Kremlin.  We're using OSINT and, so far, not saying anything wildly different than is being said by any number of good OSINT analysis.

Personally, as horrible as Russia's performance in this war has been, including on the information front, there's one thing I think they still excel at... information gathering.  I bet they know the serial numbers on each of the Hrim-2 that were fired and what order they were launched.  They probably have since learned where the launches too place.  What the Russians are not good at is doing something useful with all the data they gather.  Exhibit A -> thinking invading Ukraine would lead to success.  That and I really don't think they have the capacity to counter Ukraine's moves in any meaningful way even if leadership got the right information presented the right way at the right time.

Steve

[Cederic]

Russians appear to be dropping their balls.

http://www.hisutton.com/Mystery-Objects-Found-On-Black-Sea-Beaches.html

 

[Battlefront.com]

26 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

That was really great,  thank you for linking 

Another shout out to FancyCat for that post.  ChrisO does excellent work.  I also agree with FC's comments except for one tiny thing.

We've now seen a number of captured rosters from Russian units.  They do seem to be keeping decent track of their losses.  If they are inflating their numbers then there would be no Russians left in Ukraine   If they are deflating them, that means less resources and support for sure while only hoping they will get more replacements than they otherwise would.  No, I think these reports are fairly accurate.

How far up this information is getting is anybody's guess.  I'm thinking they are getting up high enough that strategic decisions are being made KNOWING how bad they are.  That's because their own incompetence and Ukraine hasn't given them any other choice.  Well, except wholesale withdrawal back to Russia.  And that is simply not an option Putin would allow.

The other reason we should suspect that senior levels of command know how weak their forces are is that they got Putin to sign off on the massive withdrawals from Kyiv and the north of Ukraine.  They wouldn't have even suggested such a thing if they didn't know how bad things were on the ground and Putin certainly wouldn't have authorized it if he wasn't similarly convinced that collapse was the alternative.

Steve

[Haiduk]

UKR pontoon bridge through Oskil

 

[Aragorn2002]

2 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

UKR pontoon bridge through Oskil

 

Partly under the surface. I remember that's an old Russian trick from ww2.

[Battlefront.com]

Over shadowed by events in Kherson and the lingering effects of the Kharkiv offensive is the Donbas front.  Ukraine has not only stopped the northern portion of the attack, but is actively retaking ground.  This is the second report of Ukrainian gains:

https://censor.net/en/news/3367744/dibrova_village_in_donetsk_region_returns_to_ukrainian_flag_soldier_of_national_guard_videophotos

Yet the Wagner led forces are still pressing to take Bahkmut.  Is there a washing machine factory there or something?  Because I don't understand what the point of attacking there is otherwise.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Good video on Ukraine's efforts to deceive Russian forces on the ground that there was no attack coming in Kharkiv:

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-counteroffensive-russian-soldiers-deceived-/32037693.html

This is an interesting concept.  While senior levels might have known something was up due to spies and higher level ISR, they would not likely communicate that downward.  It would be very un-Russian   So if the Ukrainians took steps that confused the situation at the local level, then they could achieve local and even operational surprise against the forces it would be directly engaging.

Smart.

Steve

[Haiduk]

155 mm SP-howitzer Zuzana-2 . Likely first combat footage

 

 

[Combatintman]

1 hour ago, Taranis said:

Indeed, that was a mistake on my part. Sorry. It is indeed a BMP-2 and not a PRP-3. Thanks @akd

Remedial reading for you my friend  

[akd]

Gotta catch’em all!

 

[Haiduk]

Russia has been moving AD assets, from St.Peterburg probably to Ukraine:  https://yle.fi/news/3-12626182

[Haiduk]

Just M113 )

[sross112]

7 minutes ago, Combatintman said:

Remedial reading for you my friend  

 

Has anyone else noticed the lack of ATGMs on the IFVs? I was always under the assumption that almost every Russian BMP had one and I've seen very few of them in pics and videos. If I'm wrong and just having an elongated situational awareness fail, please point it out to me. If I'm not, any idea why they aren't there? 

[chrisl]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Slight modification to the timeline.  I found, buried in a sub folder, I copied an eye witness statement.  Not sure where from, but I don't take clippings like that from RUMINT so it was likely a Western media source.  Here is what it said:

This means there was about 50 minutes from the launch of #1 to the last (dual #3 and #4) launch.  If they had real time satellite access (looks over at DC with a wink) then I think 40 minutes or so would be plenty of time to assess that the first strike did what it was supposed to do and a couple minutes more to verify the #2 did as well.  I mean... c'mon, the evidence is rather obvious even to an amateur

The first hit would have been a little harder to assess because of the smoke.  Thermal imaging might have been needed to be absolutely sure of the impact area.  But since they were most interested in hitting in the general area and having it go BOOM they wouldn't need to wait for the smoke to dissipate to know that they had a successful hit.  If they struck empty field they would not have seen what we all saw.  Again, even my untrained eye could tell that was a massive detonation, far greater than what any one munition could produce.

Steve

If they were using real time satellite observations, that interval would likely be to account for which satellites were going to be passing over and available to watch.  Do we have accurate clock times of the explosions?  There's enough in orbit that they could have been counting on both realtime imaging and short delay SAR (which can see through smoke) to see the after effects.

As far as the Kerch bridge goes - I'd consider just hitting the rail bridge first.  It would eliminate the best supply route that Russia has available, and put pressure on the trucks/motor vehicles that they need for supplying the main fronts.

[Haiduk]

Damaged UKR pontoon and causeway likely through Inhulets

 

[Halmbarte]

2 minutes ago, sross112 said:

 

Has anyone else noticed the lack of ATGMs on the IFVs? I was always under the assumption that almost every Russian BMP had one and I've seen very few of them in pics and videos. If I'm wrong and just having an elongated situational awareness fail, please point it out to me. If I'm not, any idea why they aren't there? 

The logistics guys & the crews stole them to sell on the black market? 

H

[The_MonkeyKing]

8 minutes ago, sross112 said:

 

Has anyone else noticed the lack of ATGMs on the IFVs? I was always under the assumption that almost every Russian BMP had one and I've seen very few of them in pics and videos. If I'm wrong and just having an elongated situational awareness fail, please point it out to me. If I'm not, any idea why they aren't there? 

In Finland (and many other countries) we removed them from the vehicles and they are used by anti-tank formations. IFV doctrine in Finnish terrain has very little use for IFV launched ATGM. Way more cost efficiency to have them in dedicated AT-formations.

This is a  matter of doctrine and what is the most fitting and cost effective solution for any specific country. (no idea why Russians don't have them mounted though)

[Haiduk]

13 minutes ago, sross112 said:

 

Has anyone else noticed the lack of ATGMs on the IFVs? I was always under the assumption that almost every Russian BMP had one and I've seen very few of them in pics and videos. If I'm wrong and just having an elongated situational awareness fail, please point it out to me. If I'm not, any idea why they aren't there? 

ATGM launcher is a part of BMP pack, but it sould't be necessarilly mounted. UKR BMPs also almost w/o own launchers - I posted a video yeterday with UKR BMD-2 fires with mounted launcher. All depends from situation. Though, BMP firing at tanks with ATGM likely remained only in Soviet doctrine of 70th. 

Edited September 18, 2022 by Haiduk

[Huba]

This photo started circulating on Twitter today. It was widely speculated that UA would receive 2 US batteries that were previously protecting DC - first is reportedly in Poland since June and used for training, the second could be delivered if operators are ready. 

Edit: reportedly it's a wooden mock-up, mane od these are being build in anticipation of actual launchers arriving. 

Edited September 18, 2022 by Huba

[LongLeftFlank]

On 9/17/2022 at 2:11 PM, LongLeftFlank said:

(e) .... could *air power* be the solution? Wouldn't it be ironic and delightful if the Ukrainians ended up being the first to successfully employ Tacair at scale in this war?  They can definitely put bases and SAMs a lot farther forward.  And again, the Russian air defences are operating in a more cramped space (I am well over my skis here, but someone will be in to advise).

That could complete the hat trick of humiliation for the ex-Soviet war machine, all arms.

Thoughts?

Hmm, both sides bolstering their air defences.

Perhaps there is something in the idea that Ukraine can solve for destroying a prepared defence by being the one to (finally) apply TacAir in volume?

[Letter from Prague]

Both sides are bolstering air defence but only one side has HARMs.

 

One thing I wonder about. If Russia starts firing tactical nukes into Ukraine, how would they do it? Bombers dropping bombs are obviously out of the questions (unless they decide to fly 100 of them and expect none of them to come back), and Ukraine has gotten pretty good at intercepting Russian cruise or ballistic missiles.

If they fire one, it likely won't get far. If they fire a bunch, they are risking much strong reaction from the world. The obvious solution is to use the "hypersonic" stuff but I think that has been shown to be pretty unreliable too.

Moreover, what happens with intercepted nukes? Do they have self-destruct system? Or would the Russians be risking Ukraine picking up a warhead, mounting it on Grom-2 and returning it to sender?

[kraze]

53 minutes ago, akd said:

Gotta catch’em all!

 

As you can see russians also included Nakidka in the first lend-lease package.

They also became the first country to support Ukraine with modern MBT. I think others should follow suit.

[kraze]

2 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

Moreover, what happens with intercepted nukes? Do they have self-destruct system? Or would the Russians be risking Ukraine picking up a warhead, mounting it on Grom-2 and returning it to sender?

According to treaties we can't have nuclear weapons on our territory - so of course it will be delivered back to the losing side using the fastest possible delivery method.

[Huba]

23 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Hmm, both sides bolstering their air defences.

Perhaps there is something in the idea that Ukraine can solve for destroying a prepared defence by being the one to (finally) apply TacAir in volume?

I'm repeating that since the moment we learned about HARMs. Rigg UA planes to drop JDAMs, ideally the ER variant, watch every fixed defence point get pulverized the way RU didn't think was possible. 

[akd]

1 hour ago, akd said:

Gotta catch’em all!

More imagery:

Not sure if this “2 in Hexagon” is related to 2nd GMRD or not. Might be a BTGr marking.

Edited September 18, 2022 by akd