How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[The_Capt]

9 hours ago, chrisl said:

Concentration of mass will have to happen more like flash mobs on targets than traditional massing and then moving together.  Bunches of uncrewed vehicles will converge from multiple directions to coordinate attacks on focus points and then disperse just as rapidly.

It will depend on extremely good communication and coordination, with a lot of switching between mission command and detailed command on the fly - something like CM with borg spotting, but with hopefully better AI from units that have broken comms, and keeping your units staying farther apart until they converge.

Not a crazy idea but how do you support this?  Logistics is normally a series of centralized nodes (e.g. Resupply points).  The further one distributes mass the wider the logistics network has to become.  And like everything else if you concentrate logistics you wind up just becoming targets.  We will need to be rethinking a lot of things in this sort of scenario.

[dan/california]

14 minutes ago, RandomCommenter said:

But what do you do when drones go miniature?

A swarm of tiny drones controlling remote artillery with a very long range?

There was a lot of discussion about this a thousand pages ago. My summary, worth what you paid, is two sort of equally matched technically competent militaries in conflict are going to strive to project mostly unmanned ISR bubbles. The highest priority for each side will be whatever they see as the weakest link in the loop between the other sides ISR and fires complexes. If one side wins this contest conclusively, the other side is just a bunch of targets that are running or surrendering if they have any sense. If, and only if, the bubbles defeat each other more or less symmetrically you will get to see how the rest of the opposing forces match up.

This also lays out my optimistic and pessimistic scenarios for the Ukrainian spring offensive, effectively. 

[dan/california]

2 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Not a crazy idea but how do you support this?  Logistics is normally a series of centralized nodes (e.g. Resupply points).  The further one distributes mass the wider the logistics network has to become.  And like everything else if you concentrate logistics you wind up just becoming targets.  We will need to be rethinking a lot of things in this sort of scenario.

A tank that is half as effective, but has a fifth of the logistical burden suddenly becomes a very attractive proposition.

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yeah, flash mob battle is a very good way to think of what is needed.  I've been saying this for sometime now, but maybe not as directly as is needed for this huge change in warfare:

The problem will be the “flash”.  You will need to concentrate faster than an opponent can see and counter-hit, which frankly the laws of physics do not support well.  Artillery simply flies faster than a ground unit can move.

Another option is to stay distributed entirely and rely on corrosive warfare but speed up attrition and precision.

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, chrisl said:

If your EW is good enough you can make your opponent play Iron with multiple players who aren't allowed to talk to each other.

Problem with current EW is it projects a lot of energy into the environment. This basically is the equivalent of the old IR spotlights, so EW, like direct energy weapons essentially become c-fire magnets.  Further as unmanned goes fully autonomous what E are we W-ing?  We can already harden military IT systems from EMP so an autonomous drone that ignores big beams of EM pointed at them is going to happen.  While one can see the EW emitter from space.

EW has become this magic wizards wand in gaming but in reality it has a lot of weaknesses especially in denying large areas.  The RA has been able to establish narrow regions of EW superiority, but how much that cost them is a key question in this war.

[mosuri]

https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-ally-armenia-says-putin-arrested-if-he-visited-country-2023-3?r=US&IR=T

I thought Armenia was pretty much in Russia's vest pocket? Poor Vlad ... everyone turning their backs

 

 

[Jiggathebauce]

2 minutes ago, mosuri said:

https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-ally-armenia-says-putin-arrested-if-he-visited-country-2023-3?r=US&IR=T

I thought Armenia was pretty much in Russia's vest pocket? Poor Vlad ... everyone turning their backs

 

 

Armenia hasnt been happy since at least the time Russia allowed Azerbaijan (supported by Turkey) to take a chunk of their land a few years ago. The CSTO is worthless.

[dan/california]

6 minutes ago, mosuri said:

https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-ally-armenia-says-putin-arrested-if-he-visited-country-2023-3?r=US&IR=T

I thought Armenia was pretty much in Russia's vest pocket? Poor Vlad ... everyone turning their backs

 

 

Worth pointing out this means the Armenian government is 100% certain Putin is going to lose this war. Because otherwise they are all dead men walking. Not saying they know more than anybody else, but they just committed pretty much everything.

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, dan/california said:

Drone defense, drone defense, DRONE DEFENSE! If you don'y have it you simply cannot keep anything resembling a mechanized army in the field. That is a hard enough question. 

The even harder question is when either the U.S. or China puts up a fully militarized version of Starlink. There is no barrier except expense to putting up a Starlink clone with small addition of imaging, and or signals intelligence capability on every satellite. That is off the shelf technology at this point, and no army on earth more complicated than the Taliban could operate under it.

I actually do not know what that looks like.  We have seen lasers and guns being sold as point defence, but they fall into the same trap as EW - blazing away at bird sized UAS is going to get one lit up pretty fast.  Further UAS are going to go more autonomous so zapping them will not get so far.  

My sense is that the best defence against a drone swarm will be another drone swarm.  Then when UGV show up we are going to have the same problem against small kamikaze ground systems that jump out of bushes and strike - a highly mobile and autonomous mine.  Then add the systems with a Javelin mounted and denial ranges get out to some crazy distances.

There is a crowd that are pushing C-unmanned and APS as a way to somehow reset things back to the way they were, the whole “we have been here before with ATGMs” cynicism.  Problem is first, we never really saw the full expression of ATGMs outside of some very early Arab-Israeli wars.  We did not fight the Cold War (outside CM) and really have no reference point for just how much those older systems would have impacted warfare, let alone next gen fire and forget. (Hence why this war it being watched with so much interest)

Second, one has to protect the entire system which for heavy formations can extend back 10s of kms.  Slapping APS and EW dazzlers on all ones tanks is useless if the fuel trucks are naked.  So the bill to shield the entire system drives the costs up dramatically.  To the point that I am not sure it will be viable.  We will end up spending more to protect a tank/AFV/whatever than the platform is worth itself.

Edited March 31, 2023 by The_Capt

[dan/california]

4 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I actually do not know what that looks like.  We have seen lasers and guns being sold as point defence, but they fall into the same trap as EW - blazing away at bird sized UAS is going to get one lit up pretty fast.  Further UAS are going to go more autonomous so zapping them will not get so far.  

My sense is that the best defence against a drone swarm will be another drone swarm.  Then when UGV show up we are going to have the same problem against small kamikaze ground systems that jump out of bushes and strike - a highly mobile and autonomous mine.  Then add the systems with a Javelin mounted and denial ranges get out to some crazy distances.

There is a crowd that are pushing C-unmanned and APS as a way to somehow reset things back to the way they were, the whole “we have been here before with ATGMs” cynicism.  Problem is first, we never really saw the full expression of ATGMs outside of some very early Arab-Israeli wars.  We did not fight the Cold War (outside CM) and really have no reference point for just how much those older systems would have impacted warfare, let alone next gen fire and forget.

Second, one has to protect the entire system which for heavy formations can extend back 10s of kms.  Slapping APS and EW dazzlers on all ones tanks is useless if the fuel trucks are naked.  So the bill to shield the entire system drives the costs up dramatically.  To the point that I am not sure it will be viable.  We will end up spending more to protect a tank/AFV/whatever than the platform is worth itself.

it may be that the cost curve between the drones, and various drone countermeasures is so divergent that the drones just can't BE countered. If that is true all first world militaries need to be rethought form the ground up, and that 100,000 dollar ghillie suit is going to be a thing if it is possible to build one that works.

[akd]

Part 3 of "Battle for the T" (UKR armor counterattacks position that was lost to Russians during night following previously repelled Russian assault):

 

Edited March 31, 2023 by akd

[NamEndedAllen]

Life imitating art, in war time:

"Attention. Air raid alert. Proceed to the nearest shelter," says Hamill over Air Alert, an app linked to Ukraine's air defense system. When the threat has passed, Hamill signs off with "The alert is over. May the Force be with you." 

https://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/23/03/30/0351247/mark-hamill-voices-air-raid-warnings-in-ukraine-as-luke-skywalker

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

The problem will be the “flash”.  You will need to concentrate faster than an opponent can see and counter-hit, which frankly the laws of physics do not support well.  Artillery simply flies faster than a ground unit can move.

I agree that distribution has a large number of headaches and needs for change all on its own.  Coordinating a "flash" requires another even more.  See next point.

I think any sort of massed ground attack will require an equal, if not greater, pre-battle effort to clear the battlespace of enemy sensors ahead of any ground activity.  When the area is largely sanitized, even if temporarily, the distributed forces are activated and deployed.  They hit hard and withdraw when their mission is successful or the enemy reconstitutes its ISR capability.

The effort and specialization for this to be possible is extremely expensive.  It's akin to creating a carrier strike group to take a single beach.  Which means someone is going to have to reinvent how wars are fought, because this sort of thing is not going to win a war like what we have going on in Ukraine.  Think operational and strategic impact, not tactical.

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Another option is to stay distributed entirely and rely on corrosive warfare but speed up attrition and precision.

Yup.  Far more cost effective as well.  However, if you're counting on corrosive warfare to save your country from domination, you had better be prepared to fight for years with all the suffering that goes along with it.  Not really an attractive Plan A for when the poop hits the rotating air mover.

Steve

[kevinkin]

3 hours ago, dan/california said:

Drone defense, drone defense, DRONE DEFENSE!

For now, stay in motion and never stop within range of the enemy's drones. Out range their drones with efficient airframes and longer battery life. Control the forward edge of the battlefield with a minimum of troops specially trained for ISR. ISR on steroids. Design new hardened and networked enabled outposts for these warriors. Outposts on steroids that can be moved intact from place to place. To capture ground, use short concentrated armored strikes at locations that can not fail to work. Escort ISR troops to new forward positions and get out of the way. R&D long term technology solutions since the enemy will adapt. Hunter killer drones, EW drones, drone swarms are all on the table. Reduce the weight of everything - every gram is important. Send commandos behind lines to capture enemy drones and operators. Reverse engineer and understand enemy tactics. Dangerous but worth it.  

Edited March 31, 2023 by kevinkin

[RandomCommenter]

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/03/31/russian-ships-return-to-west-coast-despite-appearing-to-depart-for-africa/

 

Next Nordstream incident in the works?

 

Russian government vessels equipped with technology capable of interfering with subsea cables have returned to the west coast (of Ireland) after appearing to depart towards Africa earlier in the week.

The two Russian flagged ships, the Umka and the Bakhtemir, caused alarm among defence officials late last week when they were spotted engaging in unusual manoeuvrers off the Galway coast, in the vicinity of a newly opened subsea communications cable.

[Haiduk]

46 minutes ago, akd said:

Part 3 of "Battle for the T" (UKR armor counterattacks position that was lost to Russians during night following previously repelled Russian assault):

 

On 3:40 Wagners shot with ATGM "Fagot", but in the same moment tank gunner shot HE in front of the tank and the smoke on the moment hide the tank from field of view of ATGM operator - the missile passed through the tank. Next, the tank approached to distance, where "Fagot" can't be used - less than 70 m.

What surprised me - how Wagners could survive after several almost direct hits in trench area. Of course, they were shell-shocked, but kept opportunity to move and even to throw grenades 

[Beleg85]

54 minutes ago, akd said:

Part 3 of "Battle for the T" (UKR armor counterattacks position that was lost to Russians during night following previously repelled Russian assault):

 

Very interesting video of small unit tactics. Tanks seem to divide, probably trying to use this characteristic enclosed berm (at first I thought it was some kind of ancient structure, but it looks too fresh) as cover, each supressing one Russian-held position, one of them being famous trench. At 4:00 ATGM Fagot is shot but fortunatelly missed. At 10 Russsians desperatelly try to throw something (AT granade?) but miss the machine many meters. They seem to be obliterated by cannon at point-bnlank range. It sucks to be infantry...

Flags at those vehicles are interesting thing to see. Also tanks use cannons to supress infantry even at closest distance rather than MG-s (did anybody even saw in this war tanks shooting their onboard machine guns?). BMP with infantry is somewhere else, perhaps more videos will come of Ukrainian grunts clearening trenches.

[edit: basically crossposted with Haiduk].

Edited March 31, 2023 by Beleg85

[Battlefront.com]

1 minute ago, Haiduk said:

On 3:40 Wagners shot with ATGM "Fagot", but in the same moment tank gunner shot HE in front of the tank and the smoke on the moment hide the tank from field of view of ATGM operator - the missile passed through the tank. Next, the tank approached to distance, where "Fagot" can't be used - less than 70 m.

What surprised me - how Wagners could survive after several almost direct hits in trench area. Of course, they were shell-shocked, but kept opportunity to move and even to throw grenades 

I just got done analyzing this video and sending it to Charles.  I counted 11 rounds from the T-72 after the failed ATGM attack.  About that many before hand, which is a large number of shells!

We will have to wait until Part 4 to see what happens next, but it's unclear what the last shot achieved.  Likely most were wounded or killed, but that's just a guess.

This engagement shows the extreme difficulties of a flat trajectory weapon trying to engage a target that is more-or-less on the same plane.  This is the whole reason why indirect fire weapons were invented.

The failed ATGM attack also shows how incredibly risky this attack was.  It was dumb luck that the tank didn't get destroyed.

Another small detail... one of the Wagnerites threw a smoke grenade to try and mask their position.  It didn't have much effect, but a couple of those and running away at the same time might have been a good idea.

 

 

The attack seemed to start off well, but sitting here safe in my chair I don't think it was very well thought out.  If this was a CM game here's what I would have done...

BMP lay down suppressive fire on the trench.  Not just a few shots, but constant attention.  Tanks 1 and 2 would drive to the treeline as they did, but Tank 2 would have stayed on the near side of the treeline to engage the same trench from "behind" while Tank 1 engaged from the "front".  I'd also have moved a squad of infantry to the treeline behind the tanks.  They would move towards the trench from trees and, at some point, taken over from the tanks.

Steve

[Haiduk]

10 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

did anybody even saw in this war tanks shooting their onboard machine guns?

In previous part ), when the tank chased retreating Wagners ) 

[Battlefront.com]

13 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Very interesting video of small unit tactics. Tanks seem to divide, probably trying to use this characteristic enclosed berm (at first I thought it was some kind of ancient structure, but it looks too fresh)

To me it looks like one of the earlier war attempts to base equipment en mas and protect them from shell fire.  Given where this battle is taking place that would likely have been since the war started as this was not anywhere near the front prior to it.

BTW, where was this Wagner ATGM team during the assault on the trench?  They obviously had one available so why wasn't it providing overwatch as I suggested after we watched Part 1 and Part 2 of this battle?

13 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Flags at those vehicles are interesting thing to see. Also tanks use cannons to supress infantry even at closest distance rather than MG-s (did anybody even saw in this war tanks shooting their onboard machine guns?). BMP with infantry is somewhere else, perhaps more videos will come of Ukrainian grunts clearening trenches.

I noticed the same thing.  I kept looking for puffs of dirt indicating MG fire and I saw none.  Odd.  No idea why the BMP stopped firing.  The trench was obviously the focus of attention for this battle.

Steve

[akd]

39 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Very interesting video of small unit tactics. Tanks seem to divide, probably trying to use this characteristic enclosed berm (at first I thought it was some kind of ancient structure, but it looks too fresh) as cover, each supressing one Russian-held position, one of them being famous trench. At 4:00 ATGM Fagot is shot but fortunatelly missed. At 10 Russsians desperatelly try to throw something (AT granade?) but miss the machine many meters. They seem to be obliterated by cannon at point-bnlank range. It sucks to be infantry...

Flags at those vehicles are interesting thing to see. Also tanks use cannons to supress infantry even at closest distance rather than MG-s (did anybody even saw in this war tanks shooting their onboard machine guns?). BMP with infantry is somewhere else, perhaps more videos will come of Ukrainian grunts clearening trenches.

[edit: basically crossposted with Haiduk].

One other interesting moment: at 6:59 friendly fire of some sort almost hits UKR tank.

Edited March 31, 2023 by akd

[JonS]

5 hours ago, dan/california said:

Bureaucracy is surely the only reason the Pentagon hasn't already done it.

Quick reminder:

"Bureaucracy" produced these:

And

And

 

Meanwhile, lack of bureaucracy produced these

And these

Edited March 31, 2023 by JonS

[Beleg85]

18 minutes ago, akd said:

One other interesting moment: at 6:59 friendly fire of some sort almost hits UKR tank.

Or Russian zeroing mortars on their own position. Doubtful, but still possible- it seems muscovites tried throwing  everything in this fight they have at hand, unsuccessfully. Also trench itself seems rather shallow now, perhaps it was mauled so much in earlier fights.

41 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

In previous part ), when the tank chased retreating Wagners ) 

Just figured out I missed entire 2nd part that was put online several days ago, too many RL duties.

44 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I noticed the same thing.  I kept looking for puffs of dirt indicating MG fire and I saw none.  Odd.  No idea why the BMP stopped firing.  The trench was obviously the focus of attention for this battle.

In CM context this copious use of HE tank rounds we see in this war, while in game environment machine gun fire would be usually enough to suppress, is interesting diference between game engine and reality. I am curious if it goes from lack of situational awarness on real battlefield, durability of these trenches to fire, stress of the crews or just doctrine preferring use of guns that make larger boom. I recall one interview with volunteer from September offensive, who said that "finally, after 25+ shots, tank support we called in managed to silence this foxhole" (not the trench- foxhole with 2 Russians).

 

[dan/california]

3 minutes ago, JonS said:

Quick reminder:

"Bureaucracy" produced these:

And

And

 

Meanwhile, lack of bureaucracy produced these

And these

Fair, but whether or not the F-35 belongs in the winners column is a matter of some debate. Especially at $80 million  per copy.

 

[kevinkin]

A bit more on the cloak and dagger front:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/american-reporter-arrested-russia-suspected-spies-caught-rcna77503