How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Battlefront.com]

14 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

Interesting update from this retired U.S. tanker general on the supply of Abrams tanks:
 

 

I doubt that there is anybody in this thread that has had reason to fault Hertling's observations and advice pretty much since this war started.  He's one of the guys that really "gets it".  So when he says:

Quote

Those saying "just give them the damned tanks!" have likely never seen the choreography to making this work on the battlefield.

and:

Quote

All of this is VERY different from delivering and training individual soldiers on Javelin & Stingers, and crews on MRAPS, HMMWVS, HIMARS & Bradleys. Tanks, like aircraft, are a whole different ball game

and:

Quote

And for everyone also saying "the west should have given all this to them months ago," I'd say "maybe, but an army and country fighting for it's life had a few other things on their mind, and we hadn't reached this part of the fight just yet."

Exactly what some of us have been saying for months, so obviously I'd give Hertling a big thumbs up if I could.  Now that tanks are headed to Ukraine, we need people like Hertling to help set expectations correctly.  He's thinking 8 months for Abrams to be effectively deployed and supported, a bit less for Leopards.

Steve

[dan/california]

7 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

Interesting update from this retired U.S. tanker general on the supply of Abrams tanks:
 

 

My ideal scenario, and this will take some time to get working, as the General just pointed out, it isn't easy from a support standpoint. Is that the U.S./NATO finally get their coordination worked out so  that every month or six weeks a new fully equipped mechanized brigade rolls across the Polish Ukrainian border ready to make the Russians very sorry. So there might need to be as many as three brigades in various stages of the training process. While every brigade might not be equipped the same, they should do EVERYTHING they possibly can to make each brigade as uniform as possible. Similar model IFVs, very similar models of whatever tank the brigade is using. 

So if the Bradley unit that is working up in Germany right now can get Challengers faster than anything else, great. But that unit needs to stay Bradleys and Challengers. Abrams and CV90s make a certain amount of sense.. We could see Strykers and Leopard Ones before it is over. Just make it clear to the Russians there is an avalanche of metal headed their way, with no end in sight.

If the Russians realize that the taps for Ukrainian arms and support are truly, finally, wide open there is at least a microscopic chance they might have the sense to quit. And if they don't, well, even bad trenches make pretty good mass graves.

[FancyCat]

His resume certainly looks concrete. Washington Post article says that the M1s are expected to be ordered from manufacturers, and not arrive for months if not years instead of coming from existing stocks. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/01/24/abrams-leopard-tanks-ukraine/

 

[dan/california]

You know Strykers and Leopard Ones would make a pretty good medium force. Especially as a defensive reserve for a broader area of the front, or for exploitation if the door was really kicked open. Both are more mobile than units based around Abrams/Leopard 2/Challenger 2.

[The_Capt]

14 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I doubt that there is anybody in this thread that has had reason to fault Hertling's observations and advice pretty much since this war started.  He's one of the guys that really "gets it".  So when he says:

and:

and:

Exactly what some of us have been saying for months, so obviously I'd give Hertling a big thumbs up if I could.  Now that tanks are headed to Ukraine, we need people like Hertling to help set expectations correctly.  He's thinking 8 months for Abrams to be effectively deployed and supported, a bit less for Leopards.

Steve

6-8 month for formed units. Fighting formations that can sustain themselves is going to take longer.  Now the UA could take risks, but a well broadcasted screw up with burning western tanks is the last thing anyone wants, except the Russians and their supporters.  These are endgame systems and endgame needs to be timed right.

Of course no one is going to listen to this and in a month there will be cries of “why aren’t the Ukrainians using our tanks?” all over the place.  And of course there is also the uncomfortable possibility that massed manoeuvre forces are just as vulnerable and not able to do what they are supposed to for the Ukrainians as much as they were for the Russians.

Well now that the tank nuts are happy can we get back to actually winning this war?

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Well now that the tank nuts are happy can we get back to actually winning this war?

I am not a religious man, but if I were this would be my daily prayer right after wishing Putin a quick, but painful, fall out a window.

Seriously, I hope we can start winding down this obsession with the tank saga and get back to talking about the real war.  The German posters here will be thrilled with this request, because it would be great to get past that aspect of it as well.

Steve

[dan/california]

 

Quote

https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2022/10/10/general-dynamics-to-begin-building-us-armys-new-light-tank-next-month/

This new U.S. light tank is basically a VERY modernized Leopard One. Same basic weight, a modernized version of the same gun. Infinitely better optics/thermals/FCS/ect obviously.

 

[Battlefront.com]

Great video from Ukraine's Border Guards showing coordination between a UAV team, command center, and artillery unit. You can see the guys in the command center are able to take the time to strategize what to do and how to do it.  This is much harder to do with a single junior officer or NCO peering over the shoulder of a drone operator and making calls that way.  Mind you, there is a lot of need for that sort of thing, but there are benefits to having a more comprehensive view of the battlefield being used to direct fire.

 

[Battlefront.com]

Another good article from CNN.  They are having a good week   This one is a pretty good summary of how Wagner is fighting tactically and the problems it poses for Ukraine.  Nothing groundbreaking for us, but still useful:

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/23/europe/russia-wagner-tactics-report-ukraine-intl/index.html?fbclid=IwAR0BTxtBBU_qF0Rb6mYneNwV7knBnoItBd7sjKJTCUFvXnB6-Fj8KBTG_QY'

Steve

[MikeyD]

I recall reading a story some years back about a Brit Challenger crew who swapped out their tank for an Abrams to put through its paces. They were astounded how intuitive and foolproof the Abrams fire control system was compared to their mount. I expect Ukrainian combat training will go very quickly. But fire control use is merely the cherry on top, they will still have to be trained on the mundane tasks of maintenance, servicing, lubrication, inspection schedules etc etc etc. It not all playtime.

[Battlefront.com]

Recently I passed along some recommendations to a US policy maker.  In it I stated that it's time to list Russia as a State Sponsor of Terrorism.  My argument is that there is no country on Earth actively committing acts of terrorism more than Russia, yet Russia isn't on the list and little Cuba is.  Seriously, who here thinks Cuba is worse than Russia?  Well, that's what the current designations state.

I also pointed out that this is nothing new for Russia.  Terrorism has been an often used extension of its foreign policy, be it assassinations, funding terrorist groups, or killing civilians in neighboring countries.  When I was thinking about the latter, I specifically thought about this specific act 8 years ago yesterday that was effectively ignored by the West:

Steve

[Mattias]

1 hour ago, dan/california said:

 

This new U.S. light tank…

 

A pretty good look at it. Being a swede I say an upgraded IKV-91.

 

[Battlefront.com]

Looks like the Swiss didn't want to be left out of the "change of policy" camp.  They are now allowing transfers of Swiss made military items to Ukraine:

https://www.nzz.ch/schweiz/wende-bei-waffen-exporten-schweiz-ld.1722731

Steve

[MikeyD]

About MPF, nobody will be able to convince me that that isn't just an Abrams turret with the Chobham armor package removed. Just look at it, I mean LOOK at it! 

[_Morpheus_]

9 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Version of UKR SOF: despite river bank mining, UKR group successfuly crossed the river and destroyed command center (this was on territory or "Fishers hamlet" lodge in Dnipriany village near Nova Kakhovka), 12 Russian soldiers were killed, one captured, BTR-82A was destroyed. Russians thought, this was start of main forces crossing, so raised reserves, including aviation. The group spotted number of Russian reserves, which were raised and has withdrawn

Version of Russian milbloggers: UKR company, reinforced with heavy armor, landed on the left bamk near Nova Kakhovka, but was completely wiped out. Three of ten BMPs were destroyed. UKR artillry alsmost didn't support their troops, so they hadn't chances to survive %)

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by _Morpheus_

[Pete Wenman]

Good overview here of what is entailed in firing the M-777. 

 

[Butschi]

3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

The German posters here will be thrilled with this request, because it would be great to get past that aspect of it as well.

Amen.

[NamEndedAllen]

Perhaps the fog of piecemealism for re-arming of Ukraine/AFU is lifting a bit, revealing that at least the USA’s contributions may be more systematic than indicated by the frequent bickering, politicking and often frustrating (tanks!) public debates in Europe and the USA. Bradleys and Strykers soon, Abrams within this year, likely F-16s following that, if the item blow is accurate. Plus there was a recent announcement that the Royal Navy is  training Ukrainians on a Sandown type minesweeper, off Scotland.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-kyiv-claims-new-combat-aircraft-has-been-determined

Ukrainian pilots have visited the U.S. and the specific type of aircraft to be provided to Ukraine has already been selected, the top spokesman for the Ukrainian Air Force claimed on Tuesday.

“Our military pilots went to the United States, funds were allocated for the training of our pilots,” Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yuri Ignat said, according to ArmyInform an information agency of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine (MoD). “The type of aircraft, which is likely to be provided to Ukraine, and the corresponding terms of [personnel] training have already been determined.”

Ignat did not say which aircraft had been selected or offer any timeline for delivery or training.

But a Ukrainian defense and military expert in Kyiv told The War Zone on Tuesday that “based on the concept of the Ukrainian Air Force development, we are looking for a multi-role aircraft during the first phase. It could be some variant of the  F-16 fighter jet.”

That lines up with what Ignat previously told Air Force Magazine. He said that two 12-aircraft squadrons of F-16s, plus reserves, would be sufficient to help turn the tables against Russian airpower.

 

 

 

[DesertFox]

Not bad. 53 from Spain.

 

 

[Der Zeitgeist]

The German government has now officially confirmed yesterday's press reports about sending Leopard 2 to Ukraine as part of a broader coalition. Overall goal is to quickly provide equipment for 2 battalions of Leopard 2. 

 

[Bulletpoint]

13 hours ago, chrisl said:

I suspect the direction things are headed for dugouts is "landshark" attacks.  

Pairs or small groups of drones go in. The first one knocks on the door: "Candygram", and if they don't open up for the candy, it blows the door, probably not doing much damage inside, but opening a hole.  Second and later ones fly in the enclosed space and blow up.  The arms race will be to have some amount of autonomy to navigate around corners once they're inside and out of RF control.

It's possible, but the question is how much tech you want to put into a drone only to kill one or two enemy soldiers inside a dugout, when you could hit many more on the cheap outside.

[Huba]

"NATO" 56 vehicle battalion, new Ukrainian (44) or old (31)?  It would be logical to keep the Leo in 1 armored brigade, meaning at least 90 something vehicles. In any case, these numbers have to be treated as initial, before more is sent. But those are technicalities, we should be preparing to be emotional about aircraft now

[Der Zeitgeist]

1 minute ago, Huba said:

But those are technicalities, we should be preparing to be emotional about aircraft now

It already started over here. The chair of the parliamentary defense committee was asked what she thinks about sending fighter jets next, and she said she couldn't quite see this yet. Headline was "Strack-Zimmermann rules out sending fighter jets to Ukraine!!11!1". 

[Fernando]

1 hour ago, DesertFox said:

Not bad. 53 from Spain.

 

 

53 Leopard 2A4 are the ones on storage. It doesn't mean Spain is going to send all of them. Let's see what  the Spanish government decides.

[Butschi]

6 minutes ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

It already started over here. The chair of the parliamentary defense committee was asked what she thinks about sending fighter jets next, and she said she couldn't quite see this yet. Headline was "Strack-Zimmermann rules out sending fighter jets to Ukraine!!11!1". 

But Melnik has already demanded Germany hand over the Tornados that are going to be replaced by F-35s.

https://www.rnd.de/politik/ukraine-krieg-andrij-melnyk-fordert-deutsche-tornado-kampfjets-Y2S3XLFIIFEGVAEANMEKW7VZ5E.html