How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[kevinkin]

Nothing remarkably new in this summary of the causes of wars. But it does use the current conflict for its examples.

https://mwi.usma.edu/the-five-reasons-wars-happen/

It would serve as a pretty good starting point for a class in various subjects. 

PS: Just read the front  is 1500 miles long now. I knew that, but it does take your breath away when it hits home. 

Another summary from yesterday and mentions how the range of 152mm shells are key to planning:

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-october-16

"Tracing defensible lines requires constantly referring to the roughly 25-kilometer maximum effective range of the 152mm artillery system. All modern armies have ground-based systems with much longer ranges, to be sure. But 152mm guns are relatively easy and inexpensive to mass produce, as are the rounds they fire. They are also effectively impossible to defend against when used at scale."

Edited October 17, 2022 by kevinkin

[FancyCat]

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

5 hours ago, Taranis said:

Stupid... The Russians learned nothing from the bombings of Germany, the Blitz or the Vergeltungswaffen.... It has no impact on the population other than increasing the nation's resolve to go all the way. You could say it's for internal opinion but there would be no need to send such intensive attacks (they waste their weapons).

Yup, but this is what desperation looks like. 

Russia has known for some time now that it has lost the war unless something dramatic happens.  What does Russia need to win?  Soldiers who are equipped, trained, and motivated to fight.  This is not something that is solved by a handshake and exchange of modest amounts of money with near term delivery dates, therefore impractical.  The next best thing would be for the West to stop supplying Ukraine with weapons and money.  Russia's tried many approaches to this and none have worked.  So what's left?  Attempting to motivate the Ukrainians into suing for peace through weaponry that can be easily acquired from Iran.

Terrorizing Ukrainians into accepting a general cease fire might work.  Terrorizing them into negotiating a true end to the war in a way that is not total defeat for Russia is also theoretically possible.  Russia would have lots of other problems to deal with, but it might be possible to terrorize Ukrainians into something that improves Russia's immediate situation.  I'm not saying it's a good chance, but there is at least a better chance than fighting Ukraine on the battlefield.

In this light Russia's actions could, in theory, produce a better outcome than where things are headed now.  Unfortunately for Russia, Putin is still in control and he's the "master strategist" that got Russia into this mess.  Russia is in a weak position and Ukraine knows it, therefore Russia is going to have to give up something in order to bring Ukraine to the negotiating table.  Instead, Putin insists that Ukraine unconditionally surrender its sovereignty and cease to exist as a people.  No amount of terrorizing is going to achieve that, which means the terror attacks are only making things worse for Russia.  All because Putin is the "master strategist".

Steve

[FancyCat]

EU approves training mission, up to 15k trained personnel is suggested, two year mandate.

Important to emphasize, and as seen in the recent posts from frontline personnel, training is essential, if we assume the worst case and Russia pursues mobilization and long war, Ukraine will not only need equipment but personnel and money to wage this war, so continued EU support with money and personnel is just as important as equipment.

Use of Europe as safe harbor is all important especially as all of Ukraine is under threat of long range attack again. Important psychologically as well.

 

[FancyCat]

4 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup, but this is what desperation looks like. 

Russia has known for some time now that it's lost the war unless something dramatic happens.  What does Russia need to win?  Soldiers who are equipped, trained, and motivated to fight.  This is not something that is solved by a handshake and exchange of modest amounts of money with near term delivery dates, therefore impractical.  The next best thing would be for the West to stop supplying Ukraine with weapons and money.  Russia's tried many approaches to this and none have worked.  So what's left?  Attempting to motivate the Ukrainians into suing for peace.

Terrorizing Ukrainians into accepting a general cease fire might work.  Terrorizing them into negotiating a true end to the war in a way that is not total defeat for Russia is also theoretically possible.  Russia would have lots of other problems to deal with, but it might be possible to terrorize Ukrainians into something that improves Russia's immediate situation.  I'm not saying it's a good chance, but there is at least a better chance than fighting Ukraine on the battlefield.

In this light Russia's actions could, in theory, produce a better outcome than where things are headed now.  Unfortunately for Russia, Putin is still in control and he's the "master strategist" that got Russia into this mess.  Russia is in a weak position and Ukraine knows it, therefore Russia is going to have to give up something in order to bring Ukraine to the negotiating table.  Instead, Putin insists that Ukraine unconditionally surrender its sovereignty and cease to exist as a people.  No amount of terrorizing is going to achieve that, which means the terror attacks are only making things worse for Russia.  All because Putin is the "master strategist".

Steve

Reminder, punishing Ukraine and it's citizens is important domestically and militarily as well. Recall examples during WWII that note that attacks which stuck the enemy homeland were morale improving for front line German soldiers. Also lends boost to failing belief in the Russian government and country in general.

Domestic morale loss in response to Ukrainian advances can be effectively responded to with attacks like this. Any win against Ukraine, even the war crime variety is still a win. It's the best substitute since the battlefield goes poorly.

In that sense, it's either the choice of terrorizing Ukrainians or Russians believing all is lost, and for now, the idea of losing to Ukraine remains impossible for Russia to deal with so the former is the best. Desperation but also a signal as to how Russians view peace and Ukraine. Clearly they have not accepted the possibility of defeat.

I pointed it out before, Russia will keep escalating until it recognizes Ukraine as a independent state with the right to exist. (Sounds counter intuitive, but long term and short term, I think the belief Ukraine is not independent, and aspects like not recognizing Ukrainians as a people with the right to a state independent of Russia drives this war, if Russia were to acknowledge that it has no right to Ukraine, it would be rhetorically be deescalation.)

[chrisl]

3 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Well, 28 drones on Kyiv in two waves. 1 or 2 broke through in first wave at 7:00 anf 5 could break through in second wave about two hours later. One of them was shot down with rifles by police, but four fell on streets. Like Kraze already said they tried to hit old thermal elctric plant near Kyiv railway station. Looks like obly one drone hit the target, one more fell on the street nearby, third hit wasteland near railway station and fourth ruined half of old residential building. At this moment became knowingly about 3 dead and 3 injuried (all from ruined building), among them - pregnant woman. 

So do they show up on radar or is it just visual identification?  I suppose it might be better to keep ambiguous for now how they're being spotted and stopped, but it sounds like there are fairly effective defenses around Kyiv if ~75% are being stopped before they get there.  And they must move slow if police are able to hit them with rifles.  Based on the photo of the one in the policeman's hand, they're smaller than I expected - I had the impression they were much larger from the launcher photos.

Now that there are probably a bunch of pieces available for analysis, hopefully the shootdown rate will get closer to 100%.

[Zeleban]

16 minutes ago, chrisl said:

So do they show up on radar or is it just visual identification?  I suppose it might be better to keep ambiguous for now how they're being spotted and stopped, but it sounds like there are fairly effective defenses around Kyiv if ~75% are being stopped before they get there.  And they must move slow if police are able to hit them with rifles.  Based on the photo of the one in the policeman's hand, they're smaller than I expected - I had the impression they were much larger from the launcher photos.

Now that there are probably a bunch of pieces available for analysis, hopefully the shootdown rate will get closer to 100%.

they are detected by radar. But the problem is that they are used en masse, which overloads air defense control centers. In addition, the Russians use them from various directions. It is impossible to cover air defense in all directions

[Tenses]

A little bit stupid question but why are Shahed actually called drones? They function like just another cruise missile as far as I know, based on GPS and inertial guidance.

[Zeleban]

 

[Kinophile]

Those shahedsate increasing the burn rate of UKR SAM stocks. Not much yet, but not hard for them to increase. And we know there's more on the way. 

If course, this tactic is a double edged sword... 

[chrisl]

5 minutes ago, Tenses said:

A little bit stupid question but why are Shahed actually called drones? They function like just another cruise missile as far as I know, based on GPS and inertial guidance.

It sounds scarier.  Like the "Phoenix Ghost" drone - it's got an ominous name and there's no information on what it is, so it's scarier than if someone said "we put hand grenades on RC airplanes with inertial guidance systems"

[Battlefront.com]

9 minutes ago, Tenses said:

A little bit stupid question but why are Shahed actually called drones? They function like just another cruise missile as far as I know, based on GPS and inertial guidance.

This man's opinion...

Cruise missiles are, in a sense, a form of drone more than they are a type of missile.  It's just that they are so old in concept that they predate the common usage of "drone" and therefore are thought of as separate concepts.

The modern conception of drone is that it can be guided, autonomous, or a combination.  Cruise missiles fit into this because they "fly" to their targets instead of following a typical missile path of going up and then coming down.

Steve

[BlackMoria]

6 minutes ago, chrisl said:

It sounds scarier.  Like the "Phoenix Ghost" drone - it's got an ominous name and there's no information on what it is, so it's scarier than if someone said "we put hand grenades on RC airplanes with inertial guidance systems"

These drones aren't in the category of "we put hand grenades on RC airplanes with inertial guidance systems".   Hand grenades don't do the damage in the photo.   These Iranian drones are more like modern versions of German V1s from WW2 that are propellor driven and smaller.  

[TheVulture]

15 minutes ago, Tenses said:

A little bit stupid question but why are Shahed actually called drones? They function like just another cruise missile as far as I know, based on GPS and inertial guidance.

I suppose one difference is that a suicide drone could presumably be returned to base and land without detonating its warhead, whereas a cruise missile is not going to come home and land nicely to let you re-use it if it can't find a suitable target.

Don't know if the Shahed drones can actually do that (and it certainly not how Russia is using them) - but it's a possible distinction in behaviour.

[Battlefront.com]

38 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Reminder, punishing Ukraine and it's citizens is important domestically and militarily as well.

Yes, totally that.  I forgot to mention it as I was focused on what it means from the Ukrainian (and Western) point of view.

38 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

I pointed it out before, Russia will keep escalating until it recognizes Ukraine as a independent state with the right to exist.

And that won't be good enough.  Russia already recognized Ukraine as an independent state and even guaranteed it's security as such.  Russia, generally speaking, holds the opinion that any legal arrangements it makes as a state can be unilaterally ignored whenever it suits it.  There's a long history of this, including in the private sector (Yukos being a very high profile example).

The point is that Ukraine, and the West for the most part, understand that Russia can not be trusted to fulfill its obligations under any sort of arrangement.  Which makes for a difficult situation since arrangements between governments is how wars end.

Steve

[TheVulture]

10 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Those shahedsate increasing the burn rate of UKR SAM stocks. Not much yet, but not hard for them to increase. And we know there's more on the way. 

If course, this tactic is a double edged sword... 

Particularly for Iran.

If intercepting the drones with air defense systems is not cost effective in terms of cost of drone vs cost of air defence consumables (but very necessary in terms of 'cost' of damage), then a better solution might be to 'intercept' them between Iran and Russia, or try and remove Iran's will or ability to provide the drones in the first place.

 

Of course, that it politically and militarily a much tougher task.

[Battlefront.com]

4 minutes ago, TheVulture said:

I suppose one difference is that a suicide drone could presumably be returned to base and land without detonating its warhead, whereas a cruise missile is not going to come home and land nicely to let you re-use it if it can't find a suitable target.

Don't know if the Shahed drones can actually do that (and it certainly not how Russia is using them) - but it's a possible distinction in behaviour.

That would be a good way to look at it, but US Switchblade suicide drones can not return to ground after launched from what I gather. They can only be disarmed and crashed.

Steve

[Tenses]

Looking forward I think that this war shows how laser usage en masse will be a total game changer in future conflicts. Heavy laser defence of urban and static military targets, medium laser C-RAM of mechanized, artillery and SAM units, light laser on some individual vehicles for self-defense(especially airbone).

Massive laser usage adresses just so many problems, which adversaries struggle with right now, that it seems inevitable. It is really a shame that this is still not mature/declassified enough to hand it over to Ukraine.  

Edited October 17, 2022 by Tenses

[Battlefront.com]

Just now, Tenses said:

Looking forward I think that this war shows how laser usage en masse will be a total game changer in future conflicts. Heavy laser defence of urban and static military targets, medium laser C-RAM of mechanized, artillery and SAM units, light laser on some individual vehicles for self-defense(especially airbone).

Massive laser usage adresses just so much problems, which adversaries struggle with right now, that it seems inevitable. It is really a shame that this is still not mature/declassified enough to hand it over to Ukraine.  

Agreed.  For certain types of drone threats I don't really see any alternatives than lasers.  Even EW can't be counted on as there are work arounds already for certain types of drone uses (especially the suicide type).

The primary benefit of a laser is that it can engage multiple targets at no additional cost.  It too can be overwhelmed by numbers (lasers need to cool down at a minimum), but it's much harder than for traditional missile based defenses.  It is also more practical to have multiple laser systems as a solution to swarms than it is to have multiple missile systems.

Steve

[kraze]

Karma is beautiful this season in Yeysk

[akd]

3 minutes ago, kraze said:

Karma is beautiful this season in Yeysk

Indeed.

[danfrodo]

This is just rank desperation by Putin.  Continuing terror strikes in hopes of freezing conflict even though every single time this has led to MORE support for UKR not ness.  And now he is cracking down on the RU nats who had previously felt safe enough to criticize the war effort since they were all super pro-war -- no more.  

And mobilization seems to be beginning to have the knock-on effects that perhaps were the reasons Putler didn't want to mobilize.  Ethnic tensions, angry citizens, fleeing of everyone w the means to do it.  

I still think the only reason Putin is still in power is that the mechanics of overthrowing him are not in place.  He is like hitler where no one can get to him (almost) -- how else can he still be alive?

[Tenses]

16 minutes ago, akd said:

Indeed.

This is a crazy-good shot. Seems like taken by hand from behind a window in which case I bet it will win some photo competitions. Pilot does the job. Great symbol for Russia performance.

[MSBoxer]

23 minutes ago, akd said:

Indeed.

So, what is the load under the parachute?  Sub-munition?

[TheVulture]

2 minutes ago, MSBoxer said:

So, what is the load under the parachute?  Sub-munition?

Pilot, most likely. Only counts as a sub-munition if he lands heavily on someone.