How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[kevinkin]

Quick read:

https://defense.info/featured-story/2023/01/germany-the-war-in-ukraine-and-its-future-role-in-europe/

“the geographical locus of Europe has shifted East as security has become a more urgent part of the European agenda and as the United States has re-engaged (however temporarily) in Europa with a military buildup the likes of which has not been seen since the late 1970s and early 1980s.  Even Kissinger is calling for Ukrainian membership in NATO. That shift also reflects a growing European recognition of the need to counter not just Russian, but Chinese influence in Central Asia. 

the pivot Germany needs to make. “Germany´s military policy in Europe needs to focus less on France and more on the intermarium region from the Nordic countries, to the Balts, Poland, and the belt of states along the Black Sea including Ukraine – if Berlin wishes to retain its leadership role in Europe. So far it is failing to do so.”

Well there is one longer term geopolitical view for you. Just when you thought it safe to pay most attention to China and sea lanes with nice and clean air/naval deterrence, Putin farts at the dinner table with a gross land war. 

[danfrodo]

13 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

Well there is one longer term geopolitical view for you. Just when you thought it safe to pay most attention to China and sea lanes with nice and clean air/naval deterrence, Putin farts at the dinner table with a gross land war. 

Seems China's dictator has realized he is killing the goose that lays golden eggs.  Foreign companies now see China as an unreliable partner and many that can are moving to other countries.  So it seems he's trying to backtrack some of his belligerence, at least that's what I've seen.

[Harmon Rabb]

17 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

So a bunch of already violent traumatized inmates are sent to front for further trauma, subjagation & oppression, and are then set free in russian society.  Seems like a good plan.  The only better idea would be to let them take home their AKs.

If I'm not mistaken for a while Prigozhin denied having connections to Wagner and the troll factories.

Would not surprise me if he employs these newly freed "zeks" to work in some of his other shady businesses that we don't even know about yet.

[Bulletpoint]

35 minutes ago, sburke said:

ruh roh

Russians Urged to Keep Kids Indoors—as Wagner’s Freed Convicts Come Home (yahoo.com)

I wonder how many of these convicts actually survive 6 months at the sharp end of the meat grinder and how many of those that are then set free as promised.

Risk to Russian civil society is likely very small.

[cesmonkey]

28 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Listened to a speech by Mitch McConnell

Perhaps it was this floor speech?
https://www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ID=0A95C194-8234-4727-9DFA-750CA639EA91

[poesel]

3 hours ago, The_Capt said:

And while we are at it as far as I can tell we have not sent the UA anything like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM395_Precision_Guided_Mortar_Munition

In the text, it is said they decided on GPS over laser designation. The reason being that the enemy often hid behind ridges and such.

I wonder if nowadays it would be possible to put a laser on a drone (for pointing). A drone always has the height advantage. You would need good gimbals, camera & good control. Not an easy task, but seems doable. Even if it wouldn't enhance precision, it would shorten the targeting loop.

[Lethaface]

3 hours ago, Huba said:

Well, hold your horses there, gentlemen, we are not done with the tanks yet. Quite a bit of news is still coming in, like this:

Or this:

Also Biden is to make an official announcement in 2h, presumably to speak on the subject of M1s.
And, PL MoD Błaszczak spoke with US SecDef today, and reportedly we are not yet done with big news for today.

Ok to stay on tanks

One thing which I think will be interesting to see unfold is who exactly sends what kind of tanks. Leo2A6 is much more capable compared to 2A4. The same goes for M1A2SEPv2 (or 3) vs the M1A1SA.

If countries send old junk (2A4 / M1A1SA) they might as well (finance) send upgraded T-72s, or probably preferably. FWIW CMSF(2) shows that the Turms-T package isn't much worse compared to the Leo2A4. Especially with some decent ERA and modern /good ammo (which does exist, but not in CMSF). 
AFAIK that was what US, Czechia and NL (maybe others) decided upon a couple of months ago, but I haven't seen deliveries / whatever of those yet. A couple of hundred of those are imo still much better for Ukraine compared to a few dozen of Leo2A4s, especially because they already use the platform. Same thing probably goes for the PT-91s. 

If I was on the tank bandwagon I'd be pushing for these tanks to be shipped to Ukraine yesterday, all of m (and cooperate on replacing capability based on a shared platform). All the old 2A4 etc could be upgraded in the meantime while eventually Ukraine joins the same shared platform as the rest. From a logistics, effectiveness and efficiency POV that seems superior imo.

But I guess PR wise there was more to win with the 'free Leopard' campaign. /rant :D.

Edited January 25, 2023 by Lethaface

[Lethaface]

3 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I am going with @Lethaface on this one.  We are in the middle of winter and other than some dry humping by the RA there is not much going on.  The reflex is “oh my god, the conflict is frozen!”  So the follow on “send them the entire German military!” to keep things unfrozen makes sense…from a certain point of view.

I suspect - also from that video Steve posted - the weather has not cooperated and it is too muddy for any major UA operations.  It took the UA the entire summer to set up for the Fall Offensive, so if a major winter offensive is off the table it is not because the UA is unable to attack, it is because they do not want to.  Conditions are not right and it is more advantageous right now to let the RA break its hands at places like Bakhmut.

 

My guess was people gave themselves some copies of Guderian's/Balck memoirs for Christmas and found some inspiration in those ;-). Good reads though. 
But indeed before the mud came Ukraine achieved some major results, I don't see a reason to think they have lost the capability to achieve those results and or need 300 western tanks for that. 

[danfrodo]

9 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Ok to stay on tanks

One thing which I think will be interesting to see unfold is who exactly sends what kind of tanks. Leo2A6 is much more capable compared to 2A4. The same goes for M1A2SEPv2 (or 3) vs the M1A1SA.

If countries send old junk (2A4 / M1A1SA) they might as well (finance) send upgraded T-72s, or probably preferably. FWIW CMSF(2) shows that the Turms-T package isn't much worse compared to the Leo2A4. Especially with some decent ERA and modern /good ammo (which does exist, but not in CMSF). 
AFAIK that was what US, Czechia and NL (maybe others) decided upon a couple of months ago, but I haven't seen deliveries / whatever of those yet. A couple of hundred of those are imo still much better for Ukraine compared to a few dozen of Leo2A4s, especially because they already use the platform. Same thing probably goes for the PT-91s. 

If I was on the tank bandwagon I'd be pushing for these tanks to be shipped to Ukraine yesterday, all of m (and cooperate on replacing capability based on a shared platform). All the old 2A4 etc could be upgraded in the meantime while eventually Ukraine joins the same shared platform as the rest. From a logistics, effectiveness and efficiency POV that seems superior imo.

But I guess PR wise there was more to win with the 'free Leopard' campaign. /rant :D.

Great take on the tank debate.  I just want more better, don't really care which ones as long as they are more & better.  My main hope is getting lots of IFVs to the infantry ASAP, w tanks coming later.

[The_MonkeyKing]

20 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Ok to stay on tanks

One thing which I think will be interesting to see unfold is who exactly sends what kind of tanks. Leo2A6 is much more capable compared to 2A4. The same goes for M1A2SEPv2 (or 3) vs the M1A1SA.

If countries send old junk (2A4 / M1A1SA) they might as well (finance) send upgraded T-72s, or probably preferably. FWIW CMSF(2) shows that the Turms-T package isn't much worse compared to the Leo2A4. Especially with some decent ERA and modern /good ammo (which does exist, but not in CMSF). 
AFAIK that was what US, Czechia and NL (maybe others) decided upon a couple of months ago, but I haven't seen deliveries / whatever of those yet. A couple of hundred of those are imo still much better for Ukraine compared to a few dozen of Leo2A4s, especially because they already use the platform. Same thing probably goes for the PT-91s. 

If I was on the tank bandwagon I'd be pushing for these tanks to be shipped to Ukraine yesterday, all of m (and cooperate on replacing capability based on a shared platform). All the old 2A4 etc could be upgraded in the meantime while eventually Ukraine joins the same shared platform as the rest. From a logistics, effectiveness and efficiency POV that seems superior imo.

But I guess PR wise there was more to win with the 'free Leopard' campaign. /rant :D.

those two are not mutually exclusive

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, billbindc said:

My broken record response to this is that Prigozhin is not fighting a battle to win in Ukraine, he's fighting a battle to win in Moscow. As such, the normal strategic judgements don't apply to the Russian effort. His goal isn't to "win" in Ukraine but to "win" in Bakhmut and so solidify some sort of ascendancy in Moscow's power vertical. It's not looking like he's managed either...which may be why the old guard is back at the MOD.  

Correct, but that's just what I'm talking about.  Prigozhin is a shameless opportunist, not a military strategist.  He is currently sitting in the corner instead of the lime light in part because Bakhmut has been such a disaster.  Imagine his delight if Ukraine pulled out of Bakhmut and appeared to be making a new defensive line further west, leaving a couple rings of suburbs minimally defended.  Do you not think a guy like that would order his forces into the void to seek new glories for his political ambitions even if his commanders smelled a trap?  I do.

Again, I don't think Ukraine will do such a thing.  I was just citing this as an example of "thinking outside of the box" alternatives to bleeding good Ukrainian units white standing in front of Bakhmut.

Steve

[Lethaface]

2 hours ago, billbindc said:

In the larger picture, it's pretty fascinating to observe the "WTF is taking so long?" vibes.

This conflict is 11 months old. Ukraine lost 36% of the country and regained 18% back in that time. Something like 4 or 5 major land campaigns have been fought out. The air/drone/missile war has gone through multiple iterations. Casualties are something north of 300,000 and vast global political and strategic forces have been transformed. 

I blame social media (or the internet, or video games, or something) I guess.

Good point, agreed on the social poison media ;-).

[The_Capt]

38 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

If this war goes into 2024 would you rather fight it w T64/72/BMP or w bradleys & Leo2s & abrams?   We continually see UKR forces attacking w HUMMVs & MRAPs -- is that all just fine because we have great ISR & drones & precision arty?  The ISR & precision is UKR critical advantage but they still need to actually fight for and hold ground w minimum of casualties. 

This right here is where the wheels come off the theory of success.  First off, the UA already has AFVs and tanks - if some of the charts being tossed up here are accurate, the UA already has a large fleet of each, in the thousands....so why have they not been able to "actually fight for and hold ground w minimum of casualties" already?  How are a couple hundred western tanks going to fundamentally allow the UA to do more than what they are already doing?  None of the numbers being thrown around are going to equate to numerical advantage nor a shift in force ratios.  How is a Leo2 going to succeed where a T72 has failed in this war? 

This has been the deep flaw in the "send them all the tanks" argument...there is no argument.  No one has been able to articulate what and how these vehicles are going to create competitive advantage on the battlefield.  We have articulated a lot of risks and opportunity costs but the other side of the argument is pretty much "Leo2s = win!!"  This is not thinking...this is a bandwagon.  What we have seen on the RA side is that it doesn't freakin matter what tank you show up in; T90s to T62s, you are spotted and made dead before you can get into direct fire range in order to support the infantry.  Most of these western tanks excel at the one thing we have seen the least of in this war - killing other tanks.  We have seen some such actions but they are in the marginal minority.  This much steel rolling around the battlefield and we have not seen one major amour clash or decisive action, yet somehow we are doubling down all over this capability.  "But infantry support!"  Well the UA looks damn well like it has figured out infantry support, that much is obvious.  Those poor shivering HUMMVs and MRAPs took back half of what Russia tried to grab in less than a year, which according to almost every western military doctrine should be impossible.

Now there is an argument that the Soviet-model fleets are drying up, so a deliberate conversion to western systems would make sense in that regard, but then pick a single fleet and buy in bulk and expect a long integration, and not this jumbled nightmare forming up.

"But the UA asked for them!!"  Well dare we speak heresy and push back on the UA?  What evidence do they have that more tanks will actually work?  A lot of the UA higher ups are western trained, are they falling into the same trap as us?  Is the UA thinking post-war?  

Well they are getting exactly what should not have happened, a hodge-podge grab bag of western tanks in various states of readiness.  The UA are not stupid and we will see some western tank somewhere shooting (they did the same with the arty), but when the RA is not swept away by 12 Challenger 2s, the blow back from the pro-Russian crowd is going to get very loud.  

 

[Battlefront.com]

The train of Abrams spotted in the Netherlands is now in Poland.  It is a mix of Abrams, M88 recover vehicles, and Bradleys.  Again, this is for US Army's 1st Cav for its scheduled rotation, but that's not the thing to focus on.  Instead, look at this and think of how much raw power it represents.

The other thing to note is how many M88s are present.  This is something we've discussed before, but a really good summary of this was made on a BBC interview this morning.  The expert reminded people that handing over the tanks is the easy part, everything else ("unsexy") is just as important, if not more so, and yet far more difficult to do.  He explicitly mentioned the M88s being needed because Ukraine doesn't have vehicles capable of recovering an Abrams.  He also mentioned that Ukraine's engineers have bridges designed for much lighter Soviet era tanks, not Abrams monsters.  Which means either they are gifted some significant engineering capabilities or all Russia has to do is blow the one good bridge in a sector of front and the Abrams will get stuck on the wrong side.  Spare parts and maintenance training were, of course also mentioned.

In addition to the things he mentioned, he did not mention thing such as dedicated fuel delivery because Abrams don't run on diesel, therefore they can't use Ukraine's existing fuel infrastructure.  That's not only new holding tanks, but also new fuel trucks.

All of these things can be overcome with enough time, money, and thought.  8 months would be lighting fast to work around these things.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

BTW, it seems that Reddit has turned off the super annoying autoplay for embedded links.  I am putting that to the test with my previous post.  I am not seeing autoplay, how about you guys?

Steve

[danfrodo]

2 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Those poor shivering HUMMVs and MRAPs took back half of what Russia tried to grab in less than a year, which according to almost every western military doctrine should be impossible.

Great points, TheCapt.  The only thing I'd differ w is that UKR has only made significant gains over well entrenched RU forces was in Kherson, where RU left because of logistics not because UKR shoved them out.  But my point here is still irrelevant to the other points made by TheCapt. 

Which brings up the question about why does UKR want leo2s so badly?  Maybe they have overly optimistic about what they would gain?

I still think better IFVs can make a big difference.  basically because upgrade in firepower & off road mobility.

[Huba]

41 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Ok to stay on tanks

One thing which I think will be interesting to see unfold is who exactly sends what kind of tanks. Leo2A6 is much more capable compared to 2A4. The same goes for M1A2SEPv2 (or 3) vs the M1A1SA.

If countries send old junk (2A4 / M1A1SA) they might as well (finance) send upgraded T-72s, or probably preferably. FWIW CMSF(2) shows that the Turms-T package isn't much worse compared to the Leo2A4. Especially with some decent ERA and modern /good ammo (which does exist, but not in CMSF). 
AFAIK that was what US, Czechia and NL (maybe others) decided upon a couple of months ago, but I haven't seen deliveries / whatever of those yet. A couple of hundred of those are imo still much better for Ukraine compared to a few dozen of Leo2A4s, especially because they already use the platform. Same thing probably goes for the PT-91s. 

If I was on the tank bandwagon I'd be pushing for these tanks to be shipped to Ukraine yesterday, all of m (and cooperate on replacing capability based on a shared platform). All the old 2A4 etc could be upgraded in the meantime while eventually Ukraine joins the same shared platform as the rest. From a logistics, effectiveness and efficiency POV that seems superior imo.

But I guess PR wise there was more to win with the 'free Leopard' campaign. /rant :D.

The immediate value of the major Western AFVs is in signalling: we are ready to, with time, re-arm UA with our equipment, the supply will not dry up and the quality will go up, not down.
Then starting to build the logistic chains, preparing the support base, expertise on handling and maintaining all the vehicles if started now, will start to bring effects after a lot of time, so starting ASAP is quite crucial.

And of course it doesn't look like anybody intends to stop bringing in the ex-Soviet equipment, but the reserves of that are melting fast - adding all that can be found in Europe there are maybe 700 tanks, a lot of these beyond repair. Some more can probably be obtained in some less obvious places like Africa, but at the end this is a finite resource that has been severely thinned out already. Supply of things like ammunition, engines and gun barrels is probably an even larger bottleneck, everything outside Russia and Ukraine are just boutique manufactures.

All of that is largely applicable to IFVs too. Given that UA is also suffering losses that can be counted in hundreds, I think they will exhaust all the available reserves of ex-Soviet AFVs in 2023 anyway. In this context starting to re-arm them now is an not so usual, but very commendable example of foresight. The added element of psychological pressure on RU is not to sneeze at either.

8 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

The other thing to note is how many M88s are present. 

I'm not sure if this was posted here, but reportedly there are to be 8 M88s going in with the 31 pledged M1s. 1 per platoon is a little more then usual TO&E implies I suppose  Expectation seems to be that there will be a lot of recovering...

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Huba

[The_Capt]

Just now, Battlefront.com said:

The train of Abrams spotted in the Netherlands is now in Poland.  It is a mix of Abrams, M88 recover vehicles, and Bradleys.  Again, this is for US Army's 1st Cav for its scheduled rotation, but that's not the thing to focus on.  Instead, look at this and think of how much raw power it represents.

The other thing to note is how many M88s are present.  This is something we've discussed before, but a really good summary of this was made on a BBC interview this morning.  The expert reminded people that handing over the tanks is the easy part, everything else ("unsexy") is just as important, if not more so, and yet far more difficult to do.  He explicitly mentioned the M88s being needed because Ukraine doesn't have vehicles capable of recovering an Abrams.  He also mentioned that Ukraine's engineers have bridges designed for much lighter Soviet era tanks, not Abrams monsters.  Which means either they are gifted some significant engineering capabilities or all Russia has to do is blow the one good bridge in a sector of front and the Abrams will get stuck on the wrong side.  Spare parts and maintenance training were, of course also mentioned.

In addition to the things he mentioned, he did not mention thing such as dedicated fuel delivery because Abrams don't run on diesel, therefore they can't use Ukraine's existing fuel infrastructure.  That's not only new holding tanks, but also new fuel trucks.

All of these things can be overcome with enough time, money, and thought.  8 months would be lighting fast to work around these things.

Steve

Now that is what a "complete capability package" looks like.  You want to re-tool the UA, this is what is looks like and it will take years.  I can definitely see this for the post-war reconstruction era, and if we got it all together maybe even a formation before the end of this war.  That mass might be enough to do the trick...maybe, so long as you integrate it with ISR and fires.

[rocketman]

2 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

BTW, it seems that Reddit has turned off the super annoying autoplay for embedded links.  I am putting that to the test with my previous post.  I am not seeing autoplay, how about you guys?

Steve

Autoplay on an iPad with Safari browser.

[poesel]

3 minutes ago, rocketman said:

Autoplay on an iPad with Safari browser.

Also autoplay with Firefox on Mac

[JonS]

6 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

I would think fighter jets are going to be a way easier thing to get going than mechanized force equipment was. 

Interceptor fighters are just a part of air defense. Just s supplementary capability to the western AA systems being given.

 

6 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

Air space deconfliction existed before IFF was even invented. At least in Finland IFF is just the very last safeguard in a long sequence of procedures and safeguards. Something has already gone horribly wrong if AA operator ever needs to rely on the IFF.

Yes, it is hard and it is almost its whole field of military science. 

Soooooo... which is it?

[Battlefront.com]

NY Times has a new article on Wagner's losses.  It includes additional video footage of the Wagner cemetery we saw taken by a guy walking down the rows:

Aerial photo of the same place:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/24/world/europe/wagner-group-cemetery-russia-ukraine.html?searchResultPosition=4

Steve

[dan/california]

4 hours ago, The_Capt said:

That is an outstanding example of what I think is happening all along the frontline.  It is corrosive warfare in action.  The precision with which they are calling fires is insane - “move a little right and hit that trench”.  They are clearing trenches and hitting single vehicles from kms away.

Now if we want to really make a difference it looks like the UA needs: more trained and equipped recon infantry, better UAS with longer endurance and can see in all-weather, and as much artillery as we can send them.

And while we are at it as far as I can tell we have not sent the UA anything like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM395_Precision_Guided_Mortar_Munition

They have the larger Excalibur but a JDAMs-like attachment to an existing lighter mortar would make things even more deadly and could be put into action soonest.

I poked the internet in general, and Wikipedia in particular rather hard on this and I cannot find a reference to the program later than 2017. No clear indication of what happened. I think a guided 120mm mortar round makes a LOT of sense. Either they hit some sort of engineering road block they didn't think was worth the time and money to get past? Or it is so amazing it has been classified top secret? Or the wrong congress-critter lost an election and the contractor hasn't rounded up another one? Or? I would really like to know...

[billbindc]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

Dang it, now I have to hate him less.  But I gotta give credit where credit is due, so here goes:  THANK YOU, MITCH.

I'm not at all in partisan alignment with McConnell but there's no argument that he's been anything but 100% there for Ukraine and that goes for 80% of Republicans in the Senate.

[Der Zeitgeist]

13 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

BTW, it seems that Reddit has turned off the super annoying autoplay for embedded links.  I am putting that to the test with my previous post.  I am not seeing autoplay, how about you guys?

Steve

NO autoplay with Chrome on Windows 10.