How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[poesel]

May I ask why Russia is allowed to reinforce their troops in Kherson? In my understanding, the UA could blast all ferries and bridges whenever they want. Why don't they? Or do they and we don't know? Or is that intentionally to get the good stuff in range?

[sross112]

2 minutes ago, poesel said:

May I ask why Russia is allowed to reinforce their troops in Kherson? In my understanding, the UA could blast all ferries and bridges whenever they want. Why don't they? Or do they and we don't know? Or is that intentionally to get the good stuff in range?

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake?

That is part of why I think the UA is more concentrated on killing Russians and degrading their equipment in the south. If they were more concerned about taking area back they would probably be doing a lot more trying to stop reinforcements coming in. Since every additional mobik that crosses over is another burden on strained logistics it actually helps the UA end game to let the RA stuff as much as they can into the cauldron.

[womble]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

I think the combination of the NATO threat and knowing that the West can cause a lot of damage to Russia are keeping them from going on the offensive.

Which is a pretty good indicator that the Kremlin isn't interested in the more fiery radioactive death variations on MAD, either.

[Zeleban]

10 minutes ago, poesel said:

May I ask why Russia is allowed to reinforce their troops in Kherson? In my understanding, the UA could blast all ferries and bridges whenever they want. Why don't they? Or do they and we don't know? Or is that intentionally to get the good stuff in range?

The ferry is a moving target, it is not so easy to blow it up. 

In case of damage, they are very easy to replace

Edited October 26, 2022 by Zeleban

[danfrodo]

3 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

The ferry is a moving target, it is not so easy to blow it up. 

In case of damage, they are very easy to replace

I bet there's often a lovely traffic jam heading into the ferry.  What's range of artillery?  Of excalibur?  Once UKR arty is in range of ferry & dam even the small amount of traffic will be doomed.  An excalibur round would be quick enough to hit upon intel that ferry was on right bank.  

[Beleg85]

51 minutes ago, poesel said:

May I ask why Russia is allowed to reinforce their troops in Kherson? In my understanding, the UA could blast all ferries and bridges whenever they want. Why don't they? Or do they and we don't know? Or is that intentionally to get the good stuff in range?

They would need entire length of the river under regular barrel artilley fire, Himars and similar are too expensive while boats are difficult targets. Generally I have a feeling we often overstimate how effective is "cutting by fire" of Kherson pocket by rocket artillery, beyond of course big ammo dumps and obvious targets like bridges.

On curious note, Russians recently removed from Kherson remains of count. Potiemkin, statues of adm. Ushakov and their butcher-general Suvorov. I wonder how they transported this priceless cargo through the river, it must have been quite a sight.

Oh, and another chapter of satanistic epopeia. They don't allow this topic to die naturally, need to admitt. Note 95% of what this guy is describing is pretty acurate image of Russian state...denial and projection mechanisms as basis for social framework are so painfully obvious in this one:

 

[Fenris]

Noticeable uptick in the number of clips featuring POWs today

https://twitter.com/666_mancer

[dan/california]

41 minutes ago, Fenris said:

Noticeable uptick in the number of clips featuring POWs today

https://twitter.com/666_mancer

More mobiks getting shoved to the front. The get a little taste of knee deep cold water in a trench, or some evidence of what 155 airburts can do, and surrender in double quick time. If they shove them up there without food an ammo it just happens even faster. Men won't stand and die when they have been treated wrong at every step from mobilization on. Ukraine has been brilliant with things like feeding POWs on camera, and letting them call home. It is NOT like surrendering to the Germans in WW2, and despite Russia's best attempts a lot of the mobiks know it.

All of the video of units filming protest videos this week will be of the same units surrendering next week when they realize the only thing coming is WINTER.

[fireship4]

19 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

(note slight typo in the translation should read "Bombed Donbas" instead of "Dombed Bonbas"

I am no expert on this but... the translation reads 'Dombed Bombas' and I believe it is intentional.  I have heard Volodymyr Zolkin refer to Donbas as 'Bombas' a number of times in the past and I think it may be in reference to Russian refrains on it being under attack.

[Fenris]

Nice little report on the AU Bushmaster (auto translate it ok).  I believe it's been announced that 30 more will sent over.

 

[Calamine Waffles]

People also tend to forget Russia is not the only one with tanks in cold storage.
 

Quote

The brigade received the traditional equipment of air assault brigades – Kozak MRAPs, BTR-3E armored personnel carries and T-80BV tanks. The equipment, in all fairness, seems to be taken out directly from a storage yard and we all gotta hope it gets some love before it goes to the front.

https://militaryland.net/news/ukraine-forms-a-new-airmobile-brigade/

[chuckdyke]

One thing worse than nazism is putism. He doesn't even need Goebbels. 

 

[Artkin]

Lol wow, Putin's lost it way more than Biden. 

[akd]

I assume this is the pontoon bridge alongside the Antonovsky bridge:

 

[danfrodo]

27 minutes ago, akd said:

I assume this is the pontoon bridge alongside the Antonovsky bridge:

 

I don't know art but I know what I like.  Thanks for sharing this AKD, I was worried RU was having too easy of a time w the ferries.  Hopefully there's a bunch of supply trucks & troops that got hit. 

[NamEndedAllen]

1 hour ago, Artkin said:

Lol wow, Putin's lost it way more than Biden. 

Let’s nip in the bud partisan sniping about the President, and be glad we have Administration that has been at least reasonably competent in handling the tightrope of supporting Ukraine and managing relations within NATO in this war. While not making us all into glow in the dark Halloween skeleton decorations lighting up a desolate nuclear winter.

(Although it isn’t over yet, Jack!)

Edited October 27, 2022 by NamEndedAllen

[Artkin]

23 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:

Let’s nip in the bud partisan sniping about the President, and be glad we have Administration that has been at least reasonably competent in handling the tightrope of supporting Ukraine and managing relations within NATO in this war. While not making us all into glow in the dark Halloween skeleton decorations lighting up a desolate nuclear winter.

(Although it isn’t over yet, Jack!)

I don't disagree. It's just hugely ironic. 

[Battlefront.com]

5 hours ago, womble said:

Which is a pretty good indicator that the Kremlin isn't interested in the more fiery radioactive death variations on MAD, either.

Yes.  This and the fact that Russia has probably done LESS provocative moves against NATO militaries and airspaces since the war started than in years past.  At least that's my impression.  The recent dust up with the Brits was very instructive.  Whether it was on purpose or by accident, Russia very quickly did the equivalent of an apology.

Steve

[dan/california]

Even by recent severe standards the Russians had a very bad day. And i think they lost a Ka-52 late in the afternoon that will presumably be on tomorrow's list.

[Battlefront.com]

9 hours ago, The_Capt said:

It was based on absence of the facts..at which point the plan is really a well constructed delusion.

Not necessarily.  I'll illustrate why:

"I need to rebuild my gravel driveway.  I am going to use my 1/2 ton pickup truck to transport a load of gravel and my tractor to spread it.  I need to do it before it rains at noon.  I expect it will take 3 hours to transport the gravel and 2 to spread it. I will start my work day at 7am."

The goal is clear and the means of achieving it look sensible, including the time necessary to achieve it.  Might be a little ambitious as there's no room for error (like truck breaking down, rain starting early, etc.), but it is logical and internally consistent.

I start my day at 5am as planned and arrive at the gravel pit a 1/2 hour later.  Uh-oh!  I find out the weight of the gravel exceeds the truck's ability to haul it.  Attempting two or more trips isn't feasible due to the time constraint and overloading the truck, even if the gravel can physically fit in the truck, will break the truck.  I need a new plan!

Was the original plan delusional?  No, but my planning process sure was flawed.  I should have found out what the weight/volume of the gravel beforehand and planned accordingly.  On the other hand, if I knew that my truck couldn't do the job as planned, and did it anyway, then it would be delusional.

 

Stepping away from the analogy for a sec, we may never know for sure, but I think Putin honestly thought that Ukraine wouldn't put up a significant fight.  This apparently was backed up by his intel people.  Should Putin have known better?  Hard to say, given that he's an autocrat of 20+ years surrounded by yes who all believe in Russia's inherent superiority over Ukraine at all levels.  Therefore, I'm going to give Putin the benefit of the doubt and say that he really did, honestly, believe Ukraine wouldn't put up a fuss.

Based on this plan everything we saw in the first few days of the war makes complete logical sense.  The plan required rapid advances over a huge expanse of territory with the forces on hand.  This resulted in penny packeted BTGs, 3 days of food, unsupported OMON "decapitation" missions, not worrying about air superiority, multiple unsupported helicopter VDV attacks, plans for air transporting supplies, etc. were all necessary for the plan to succeed. 

In fact, I think the plan was so well thought out, internally consistent, and within Russia's ability to execute that it probably would have worked if Ukraine's will to fight really was as poor as the Russians believed it to be.  And this is coming from a guy who thinks Russia Sux™

 

Believe it or not, I don't think the initial plan's primary flaw ("Ukraine won't resist") was the biggest mistake of the war.  In my view the award for worst mistake goes to trying to implement the original plan even after it was clear that the entire premise for it was utterly detached from reality.

We all saw this in action.  For the first few days Russia continued executing the original plan seemingly unmodified!  And when all of that inevitably failed, we watched for weeks as Putin doubled down on pressing harder thinking it would change the situation, even after the dead and wrecks were piling up without any noticeable gains.  This was delusional and I have no doubt Putin was in the loop the whole time.

Back to my analogy, Putin did the equivalent of me ordering the gravel pit guys to overload my truck because I believed my desire to get the job done would override basic physics.  Or perhaps I thought that I could make 2+ trips and still have time to spread it, thus believing time could be bent to my will.  Or maybe I figured the rain would magically hold off simply because I needed it to.  Any of that would be delusional.  And that's the sort of stuff Putin did.

 

9 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I had heard of the challenges coming out south out of Belarus - they did have forces up there.  It looks like a massive swamp.  And next to the Polish border.  We are talking one hellava risk and some tight coordination to pull it off…but Russia is currently living what was behind door #2.  Of course the UA may have simply pulled out the same rabbit they did elsewhere and the RA would have died in a swamp too.  My point being that at least it was a viable plan.

I suspect the Lviv option was considered and found to be too risky even for the planners of this fiasco.  The primary likely reason is they thought that the western part of Ukraine WOULD resist, at least enough to bog things down.  If they had enough forces to bog down around Lviv and do all the other stuff on their wish list, perhaps they would have tried.  We know they didn't have even enough without Lviv, so I suspect they knew they couldn't do both.  Plus, if they had secured the east, Kyiv, and the Black Sea coastline then the rump state left around Lviv could be tackled later (perhaps years later) or just left to whither on the vine.  Either way, whatever remained of Ukraine wouldn't have the strength to liberate all the lands seized by Russia.  Lviv, therefore, wasn't important.

9 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Simply creeping in the Donbas, solidifying gains and “liberating” was also a workable plan.  Basically doing Phase II first while they still had half decent troops.  If they did that I am not sure the west would have gotten so worked up, particularly if they played the R2P card and had LRP and DRP leading the charge.  Keep it clean and try not to commit warcrimes.

Exactly.  As much as I was sure that Russia would fail at a larger war, I thought they had a very good chance of winning (even if temporarily) a more limited one.  Again, this is coming from someone who ascribes to the Russia Sux™ school of thinking.

9 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Well I guess we will never know which is a good thing.  

Yup, though I strongly suspect that this horrible war is the best for Ukraine long term.  Maybe even for Russia if it results in putting it on a path towards being better citizens a couple of generations from now.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

As always, some interesting tidbits in the ISW report for yesterday.  Here's two using original sources:

British MoD says a domestic Russian anti-war group is claiming responsibility for blowing up a section of Russian rail line.  ISW reminds people that domestic Belarusians did similar things several months ago.  This "Stop the Wagons" group could be Ukrainians in disguise, or at least working with some help from Ukraine.  But it could also be as it seems:

And this one is of particular interest to us here.  Reuters reviewed captured Russian documents from units in the Balakliia area at the start of the Kharkiv offensive.  Now we have some numbers to play with.  ISW cited this:

Quote

Reuters’ investigation found that Russian units near Balakliya were severely understrength, with a combat battalion at 19.6-percent strength and a reserve unit at 23-percent strength.

Ouch!

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/ukraine-crisis-russia-base/

Some of this information has started to come out in various Twitter feeds over the past few days, but this seems to be the most comprehensive account so far.

Steve

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

As always, some interesting tidbits in the ISW report for yesterday.  Here's two using original sources:

British MoD says a domestic Russian anti-war group is claiming responsibility for blowing up a section of Russian rail line.  ISW reminds people that domestic Belarusians did similar things several months ago.  This "Stop the Wagons" group could be Ukrainians in disguise, or at least working with some help from Ukraine.  But it could also be as it seems:

And this one is of particular interest to us here.  Reuters reviewed captured Russian documents from units in the Balakliia area at the start of the Kharkiv offensive.  Now we have some numbers to play with.  ISW cited this:

Ouch!

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/ukraine-crisis-russia-base/

Some of this information has started to come out in various Twitter feeds over the past few days, but this seems to be the most comprehensive account so far.

Steve

The Reuters' data makes the resemblance to the initial part of the Normandy campaign even stronger. The Russians held until they just didn't have anything left to hold with, and then collapsed completely when pushed.

 

From https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/combat-studies-institute/csi-books/Doubler-Bocage.PDF

"Even when First Army failed to seize terrain and make large advances during the fighting in the hedgerows, it achieved, in considerable degree, the principal objective of combat operations: the destruction of enemy forces. The terrible carnage of the hedgerow fighting cannot help but impress anyone studying the Normandy campaign. By 17 July, the Germans had suffered almost 100,000 casualties but were unable to replace many of their losses. Only enough fresh troops arrived in Normandy to replace 12 percent of the losses. First Army had fared little better but was capable of replacing more of its casualties."

The whole paper is excellent as a summary of the Normandy campaign, I assume quite a few people here have seen it before...

It also makes clear how much lower the force densities are in Ukraine

I also hope the Ukrainians are not paying quite as high a bill as the Allies did in the Bocage.

Edited October 27, 2022 by dan/california

[Taranis]

 

[Holien]

9 hours ago, womble said:

Which is a pretty good indicator that the Kremlin isn't interested in the more fiery radioactive death variations on MAD, either.

Could be that plan was discarded after some private chats after Russia floated the dirty bomb idea.

I do get the sense that they would quite happily destroy Kherson if Ukraine took it back. 

Let's hope Ukraine can work on a plan to screw Russia over without taking too many losses. I fear that might mean Kherson is not taken as quickly as we had hoped. 

[cesmonkey]

Interesting:

U.S. speeds up plans to store upgraded nukes in Europe 
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/26/u-s-plans-upgraded-nukes-europe-00063675

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61_nuclear_bomb#B61_Mod_12

Is this a subtle sign to the Russians that the U.S. is prepared to respond with its own tactical nuclear warheads if Russia wants to threaten their use?