How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[LongLeftFlank]

12 hours ago, cesmonkey said:

It appears this topic is being talked about more broadly now:
 

 

 

A sign of the times that traditionally 'credentialed' think tank expert Kofman is now retweeting amateur 'Twitter Expert' DefMon3, who I believe is a retired Navy analyst.

Oh look, page 1979. Time for some vintage Corrigan....

Edited January 28, 2023 by LongLeftFlank

[sburke]

Ruh Roh again

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-soldiers-bring-weapons-home-185926967.html

[LongLeftFlank]

6 hours ago, Zeleban said:

Corruption has always been a big problem in Ukraine. It has deeply penetrated into all structures and state institutions, including military procurement. This greatly harmed the defense capability of our state. I am sure that before the start of the war, our military-political leadership could do much more than was done in reality. But apparently the real threat of destruction, as well as the close attention of the world community riveted to our armed forces, favorably influenced a sharp decrease in corruption, at least in the army.

 

Yes, this article quite accurately reflects the causes of high corruption in Ukraine. It lies in the mentality of Ukrainians, their selfishness, their desire to "outsmart fate." But the problem of corruption was characteristic of all countries of the communist bloc. I think this is due to the low standard of living in these countries, the lack of goods and the desire to achieve these benefits of civilization at any cost.

In the understanding of my parents, the most important thing is meeting the right people. In their youth, any significant things could be achieved only by contacting people they knew in this area and giving them a present - not necessarily money, it could be a box of chocolates or imported alcohol rare in the USSR. So it was possible to achieve better service in the hospital, the purchase of high-quality Romanian or Hungarian-made furniture (Soviet furniture was of terrible quality), rare imported clothes, even car maintenance (in the Soviet Union there were no car repair services, and if you didn’t know how to fix your car yourself, you could negotiate with a mechanic from the nearest car park for a bottle of vodka).

Thus, life without corruption in the USSR was much harder than with it. Society, as it were, inclined you towards corruption. Then you become a director of an enterprise or a deputy or a minister, and voila, a new corrupt official is ready

 

This strays well off topic, so I'll limit my comment to the observation for our Ukrainian friends here that your society isn't as far off 'normal' as it may seem.

Personal connections matter very much in life everywhere. Thailand and Malaysia were and remain deeply, deeply corrupt, yet they have been able to move to a standard of living and infra quality that exceeds some US counties within 25 years, the average working life for a single generation. I am seeing it happen again now in Vietnam and (here and there) in the Philippines and Indonesia.

Foreign investment -- first Japan, and then a host of others -- was key to making this happen! Even the most corrupt officials soon realised they themselves were far better off in a rich country than a poor one.

Ukraine is a logical location for the next stage of European economic growth. The human material has proved itself first rate and the infra will be rebuilt to standards North Americans may envy.

Ukrainians will not lose the peace once they win it! Your best men (and not a few women) have paid for their rights and independence with their blood. Don't be afraid to demand respect from your officials, and to replace them if they do not serve the people's interests effectively.

...On the other hand, don't spend that newfound independence being crabs in a bucket. There will be wealthy people, some obscenely (and unfairly) so, but if you do things right, their wealth will be deployed right at home, not in Cypriot bank accounts. And there will be plenty of opportunity to go around for your daughters and sons.

Here endeth my catechism.

[FancyCat]

I saw this comment chain on Reddit, linked here

According to the linked article, up until now, https://www.kyivpost.com/post/5970

Quote

Ukraine’s top general, Valeriy Zaluzhny, has taken a rare step into domestic politics with a public call for tougher penalties for soldiers deserting their units, as fighting and casualties intensified in the eastern city of Bakhmut.  Speaking in a Dec. 18 video posted on his personal Facebook page, Zaluzhny said he supports a bill recently approved by Parliament which, if signed into law by President Volodymyr Zelensky,  would change penalties to soldiers convicted of abandoning fighting positions or defying their commanders from the current practice of a slap on the wrist and a minor fine, to jail sentences ranging from three to 12 years.

Zaluzhny said that under the present rules, any Ukrainian soldier can, if he wishes, flee an assigned position or defy his commander and face little more than a 10 percent deduction from his military salary.

Harsher sentences generally are probated so that the "refusnik", Zaluzhny said, might stay with his unit and hopefully fight better the next time.

More info can be found in the article, most likely I'm ignorant to Western practices, and perhaps the article is lacking some context, but this sounds quite strange vs any western military no?

[dan/california]

 

Quote

https://www.ft.com/content/fb2186cc-d61d-47f0-8886-abd94c27df96

A Moscow diary: fear, loathing and deep denial

Nothing we didn't know, but a lot of detail if your interested. I would just add that an elite that can do this good a job of ignoring a catastrophic war could do just as good of job ignoring Ukraine in NATO and the EU.

[Battlefront.com]

9 hours ago, _Morpheus_ said:

Great video with good comments , analyses from `3rd separate assault brigade` about one operation in Bakhmut.

 

That was an excellent video.  A very good example of how an apparent quick success can quickly turn into a prolonged disaster.  Here's what I got out of this video...

It is difficult to know exactly what went wrong, but I got the impression that two platoons went in fast and hard with APCs (interesting they call them M113s, yet they were YPR-765).  The flanking forces weren't able to make progress, which meant the assault platoons were on their own.  After causing significant casualties and confusion amongst the enemy, Wagner defenders began to act instead of just react.  They also had superior numbers and used them fairly effectively.

Azov was ordered to pull out.  The two platoons weren't in close contact and so weren't able to directly support each other.  One managed to retreat fairly easily, the second one continually found themselves cut off and under attack from multiple angles.  The first platoon tried to establish contact with the cut off platoon, but they went to the wrong location due to bad communications.  They found they got themselves into a bad situation and narrowly missed getting their "M113" RPG'd.  They retreated back the way they came.

The cut off platoon spent significant time fighting in place, trying to move, etc.  They finally got a tank to provide some supporting fire, but still not enough to get them out safely.  The platoon (which really seems to have been about 2 small squads to start with) moves out in 2s and 3s.  They managed to make it out with most of their men, but one heavily wounded stayed behind and blew himself up with a grenade (presumably in the face of Wagner soldiers).

Back with their own guys they were to be relieved by a neighboring unit which sent in a MT-LB to pick them up, but it got blown up by an ATGM on the way out.  All of the Azov guys were fine because they were riding on top, but the MT-LB crew was killed.

 

Playing CM armchair general here, it seems like the Azov guys went in too boldly.  Perhaps not following the plan?  Not sure about that, but it did sound like they decided to drive in at top speed and take the positions by storm instead of making sure their flanks were secure. They had some idea of what was around them, but not enough.  And enough time went by that the Wagner forces were able to bring up reinforcements.

Yet another lesson that charging into an urban environment with a small force isn't a good idea.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, kevinkin said:

The developers took a short but hard hit after the sinking of the Moskva. But a tongue in cheek explanation got to the heart of the matter:

"Command, by default (ie. stock DB values) represents Russian systems (and all other systems) as they are meant to be used, by trained crews employing them according to their design doctrine. Not long ago a US general remarked that "Russian hardware works pretty well..... when used by Ukrainians"."

I wonder if there weren't unknown soft factors, would there be any wars fought? It would all come down to math and physics and the ability to innovate and then outproduce your enemy. If DeepMind were allowed to tackle a wargame, which one? I would start relatively simple but with FOW. 

This is the whole war in a nutshell.  At the highest level people like Kofman expected the Russians could, by and large, fight as well as their propaganda says they could.  They looked at specs and presumed them to be largely reliable.  They did not look deeply enough at the details enough to know that wasn't the case.  Therefore, when these over estimated capabilities were put to the test, they failed. Not just here and there, but almost universally across the board.  Which underscores how important it is to properly assess the tactical level capabilities

Unfortunately, this sort of thinking makes its way into simulations.  Units are viewed as equipment with soft things that can be squished.  The reality is if the Human element is not able to use the equipment properly, it doesn't really matter what the specs say it can do... it won't do the job it was intended to perform.

A perfect example of this was when ISIS swept into Iraq and the Iraqi Army's Abrams, that everybody was counting on to do their job, were abandoned without firing a shot in some cases.  I remember one case where an entire Iraqi battalion (IIRC) surrendered instead of fighting, and ISIS murdered them all.  Which means if you set up a simulation that assumed the Iraqi Abrams and infantry would do their jobs, the feedback from the battle will be wildly wrong.

This is why Combat Mission focuses so heavily on "soft factors".  Every CM player knows there is a huge difference between a largely Conscript force and one that is largely Veteran.  There's multiplying effects when MGs, tanks, mortars, rifleman, etc. are all operated poorly, just like there are multiplying effects when they are all operated correctly.  That is far more important than getting the penetration value or armor rating of this or that exactly correct.  Again, whether a tank is correctly modeled or not means nothing if the crew is 500m and running.

Over the many years of discussions here I've seen countless examples of people claiming "your game sucks" because it didn't reproduce something they thought should happen.  Often it is because they completely over/under estimate the value of a particular tank in a particular situation, but sometimes it comes down to incorrectly using Experience.  Like always putting Waffen SS at "Elite" and Soviets at "Conscript" for late war battles then concluding CM is "broken" because the Soviets are so easily beaten.  That sort of thing.

Steve

[chuckdyke]

Yes, I see often conscripts manning JS2 tanks. Also, for the German salespitch for the Tiger was but the crew survived numerous engagements for the last six months. The German doctrine I assume was different from the Soviets although the two tank types are similar.

[Battlefront.com]

4 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Yes, I see often conscripts manning JS2 tanks. Also, for the German salespitch for the Tiger was but the crew survived numerous engagements for the last six months. The German doctrine I assume was different from the Soviets although the two tank types are similar.

Well, that and the Tigers were often broken down and so it's much harder to lose a crew when the vehicle isn't even at the front

Steve

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, Battlefront.com said:

Well, that and the Tigers were often broken down

Anschluss of Austria resulted in 30% attrition of mobile units. I think it is a good figure for the war and includes Tigers and Panthers. Joking apart Michael Wittman lost a few tanks but he survived but didn't survive his last engagement. Crew Morale for this vehicle was high because of the survival factor.

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Anschluss of Austria resulted in 30% attrition of mobile units. I think it is a good figure for the war and includes Tigers and Panthers. Joking apart Michael Wittman lost a few tanks but he survived but didn't survive his last engagement. Crew Morale for this vehicle was high because of the survival factor.

Yup, and there were equivalents with all the Allied forces as well, including crews that were in far less protected vehicles and survived to the end of the war despite losing their mounts more than once.  Lots of factors go into this, but crew quality is chief among them.  Problem for the Russians in this war is they seem to be bad at just about everything across the board, with examples being more exceptions than rules.  And even then, we're not quite sure how good those exceptions are as they are more often than not going up against Ukrainian forces that aren't as good or well equipped.  Always easier to be the toughest guy on the block than the toughest guy in the city.

Steve

[JonS]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Units are viewed as equipment with soft things that can be squished.  The reality is if the Human element is not able to use the equipment properly, it doesn't really matter what the specs say it can do... it won't do the job it was intended to perform.

Which is a point The Capt and I have been hammering repeatedly. Giving the Ukrainians shiny uber kit but not allowing them the time to fully train on it - on an individual, platoon, sub unit, unit, and combined arms team, in that order - is a waste of time, personnel and all that shiny uber kit.

[JonS]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

interesting they call them M113s, yet they were YPR-765

Honestly, soldiers really aren't trainspotters. If it's a box with tracks and a ramp at the back ... that's a '113.

This is the flipside of that old "every gun is an '88, and every tank is a Tiger" thing.

[chuckdyke]

7 minutes ago, JonS said:

Giving the Ukrainians shiny uber kit but not allowing them the time to fully train on it

I bet they don't tell us everything. We see the puppet play but we know nothing about the puppeteer. From the Indonesian Wajang Kulit or Shadow Play.

Edited January 28, 2023 by chuckdyke

[JonS]

I don't think the Indos are providing training, or equipment, to the Ukrainians.

Edited January 28, 2023 by JonS

[Butschi]

15 hours ago, JonS said:

If Ukr chooses to use them, fine, I guess. I think it's a dumb idea given the other toys they have available, but whatever. However that doesn't create ANY obligation on other nations to turn their backs on commitments they've made.

Indeed. Breaking these commitments would just play into the hands of all the autocrats out there: "Look at them and their precious values. They themselves stick to them only as long as it is convenient for them!".

[Butschi]

1 hour ago, chuckdyke said:

I bet they don't tell us everything. We see the puppet play but we know nothing about the puppeteer. From the Indonesian Wajang Kulit or Shadow Play.

Maybe, maybe not. I'm a bit suspicious of this narrative. Sometimes a bad idea is just a bad idea and not a sign of a hidden master plan.

[Artkin]

2 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Indeed. Breaking these commitments would just play into the hands of all the autocrats out there: "Look at them and their precious values. They themselves stick to them only as long as it is convenient for them!".

I guess having unexploded ordinance on your soil is the problem. I wouldnt call AT mines safe but I think I would feel more comfortable working on them than smaller mines (Unless I was seriously suited up... and then still.....)

[poesel]

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Playing CM armchair general here, it seems like the Azov guys went in too boldly.  Perhaps not following the plan?  Not sure about that, but it did sound like they decided to drive in at top speed and take the positions by storm instead of making sure their flanks were secure. They had some idea of what was around them, but not enough.  And enough time went by that the Wagner forces were able to bring up reinforcements.

I blame this on the briefing texts. These are often misleading. A common occurrence.

 

[Endyamon]

Interesting part (for me) starts at 18:00

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, Butschi said:

Indeed. Breaking these commitments would just play into the hands of all the autocrats out there: "Look at them and their precious values. They themselves stick to them only as long as it is convenient for them!".

Yes, when a Russian fakes surrender to blow himself up with a grenade, then it's a war crime, but when a Ukrainian does it, he's a hero...

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, Bulletpoint said:

es, when a Russian fakes surrender to blow himself up with a grenade, then it's a war crime, but when a Ukrainian does it, he's a hero...

I think there is only one war criminal and that is the guy who starts it. Pointing fingers just to make war acceptable somehow is losing one's focus.

[Zeleban]

22 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

but when a Ukrainian does it, he's a hero...

 

Do you have information about similar situations?

[Der Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, poesel said:

I blame this on the briefing texts. These are often misleading. A common occurrence.

 

Mission time limit was probably 1-2 hours or so. 

[Maciej Zwolinski]

6 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

That was an excellent video.  A very good example of how an apparent quick success can quickly turn into a prolonged disaster.  Here's what I got out of this video...

The description reads uncannily like "Blackhawk down" minus helicopters