How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

59 minutes ago, Elmar Bijlsma said:

NEEEEEEERRRRRRRDDDDDSSS!!!!!

I Mean... I don't know what you guys are referencing and I definitely do not have a DVD box set of whatever it might be.

 

 

In other news, I definitely wouldn't be surprised by the Ukr counter attacks in the other sectors. Seen an uptick of videos of RU trenches getting overrun. Which would be a nice background to start of the offensive. Slowly rolling the Russians out of their forward positions, testing the strength of the response. And when time comes, the Russians command will hopefully be suitably lulled into complacency. They won't know it's the real push before the second line gets a hammering. One cann only hope!

Zaporizhzhia certainly not as densely held as I was assuming it would be, if the numbers given above are even halfway accurate. How can anyone look at a map and think "yeah, we'll lightly man this area"?

Because you are out of bodies, the same way the German defensive lines failed in 1943-45.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, ASL Veteran said:

 

That was a great bit of OSINT you shared with us.  Thanks.

Assuming his numbers of repairable tanks are accurate (and they most likely are over counting ones that can be practically repaired) he found:

T-54/55 = 270
T-62 = 560
T-64 = 248
T-72 = 1841
T-80 = 945
T-90 = 50

That's roughly 2/3rds T-72 or better, 1/3rd T-64 or older.  Using his loss rate calculations, and assuming Russia's loss rate remains constant, Russia will run out of the newer tanks in 1.5 years and then about 9 months later exhaust all tanks.

The thing is that we know how this works.  Each time they go looking for old tanks to restore they are going for the easiest to get and restore to working condition.  So far they have been moving out about 120 tanks per month out of storage.  How many of those are successfully transitioned to fully working tanks vs. used for parts is not known, but I bet the number is not insignificant and will trend higher as they have to dig deeper into the remaining stocks.  Still, if we assume 120 tanks successfully refurbished per month, they can theoretically keep up with losses.  Theoretically   As we know, losses are not even and tank refurbishment is likely going at full tilt.  Which could mean a month or two of excessive losses could take several additional months to replace those losses.

Anyway, just some random stuff to think about while we watch the intel leak thing play out.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

OK, as I expected... the leaked documents are legit.  Not only did the Pentagon not immediately say they were fakes, they are now openly stating they are looking for who leaked them.  The theories that this was a deliberate US disinformation campaign is questionable given the scale of what is being released.  The US would not sacrifice its integrity and trust with allies to this degree for something like this.  Especially because Russia probably already has the practical information it needs.

This is really weird though.  It seems that the documents were not hacked off a computer, which means the 8 billion or so suspect pool has been reduced to the few thousand with access to physical documents of this nature.  Further narrowed down to who would have access to the full breadth of the reports (i.e. not some officer working on one area of the world only).  A few hundred might be the size of the suspect pool, or perhaps very low thousands.  It's small enough that the documents released will narrow the pool down to a fairly small number.  And within that, someone is likely to have a suspicion about someone they've interacted with.  An odd offhand comment or two, a generally questionable view of the world, etc.

As for why some racist kid in his mom's basement got the materials... could be that such a twit is harder to trace?  I don't know.  What I do know is if that little scumbag is anywhere within the US or a significant US allied nation... he's not going to stay out of custody for very long.  He'll likely tell investigators everything he knows first shot, which will help narrow down the search for the leak even more.

Fortunately, I think the damage done to the war in Ukraine is likely small.  As I have said, Russia probably already knows what it needs to know.  Having more info might help them confirm things they were not sure of, but so what?  Russia's problem since this war has started is its inability to fight successfully.  Having better intel won't help them fight better.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Fun one from ISW's March 7th report:

Quote

Former Russian proxy commander and prominent critical milblogger Igor Girkin revealed on April 7 that a volunteer battalion that he previously actively promoted is essentially a sham. Girkin posted an angry rant to Telegram on April 7 claiming that the “Nevsky” volunteer battalion that he advertised throughout 2022 has deployed as a “brigade” consisting of three battalions and 1,186 total personnel.[13] A single Russian battalion typically consists of around 800-900 personnel, so Girkin’s remark suggests that ”Nevsky’s” leadership sought to erroneously portray the volunteer battalion as a larger formation by designating it as a brigade. Girkin noted that ”’Nevsky” deployed to the frontline near Avdiivka with the forces of a ”reinforced company” without promised equipment or training and quickly found itself conducting costly assaults.[14] Girkin accused ”Nevsky’s” commander of being more interested in ”political and commercial machinations” and suggested that ”Nevsky” was created for the sole purpose of generating profit.[15] Girkin’s tirade against a formation that he once ardently supported suggests that even volunteer formations held in high regard face corruption and training issues that are endemic to the Russian force generation apparatus. 

Their coverage of the leak was more of a "wait and see" report with some Russian blogger reactions included.  Their take on the bloggers is similar to others we've seen, which is that they really don't know what to make of this either.  But those that were skeptical of Ukraine's ability to punch Russia in the gut this year might be challenged now.

Steve

[kluge]

26 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

As for why some racist kid in his mom's basement got the materials... could be that such a twit is harder to trace?

Easier to trace really. Out of the thousands of users in a public chat server, he was the useful idiot who thought it would be a good idea to republish them.

Unfortunately that also means that the materials were almost certainly passed along multiple times before they reached the kid. It's now a race to find the earlier distribution links before the trail goes cold.

[JonS]

9 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Would you expect to see it in the context of this doc? 

'Pax' or 'Pers' - either would be normal

[Taranis]

10 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I had to remind myself what it actually stands for.  Found one definition "persons approximately".  Military types can tell us if it is a common US term at this level of documentation, as it seems it has its roots in Europe.

Steve

It is also a common term in French Army particularly at low level units (platoons, company etc). It seems its origin came from a reduction of "passenger".

[The_MonkeyKing]

 

More leaks and way wider in scale than just Ukraine.

[Yet]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

OK, as I expected... the leaked documents are legit.  Not only did the Pentagon not immediately say they were fakes, they are now openly stating they are looking for who leaked them.  The theories that this was a deliberate US disinformation campaign is questionable given the scale of what is being released.  The US would not sacrifice its integrity and trust with allies to this degree for something like this.  Especially because Russia probably already has the practical information it needs.

This is really weird though.  It seems that the documents were not hacked off a computer, which means the 8 billion or so suspect pool has been reduced to the few thousand with access to physical documents of this nature.  Further narrowed down to who would have access to the full breadth of the reports (i.e. not some officer working on one area of the world only).  A few hundred might be the size of the suspect pool, or perhaps very low thousands.  It's small enough that the documents released will narrow the pool down to a fairly small number.  And within that, someone is likely to have a suspicion about someone they've interacted with.  An odd offhand comment or two, a generally questionable view of the world, etc.

As for why some racist kid in his mom's basement got the materials... could be that such a twit is harder to trace?  I don't know.  What I do know is if that little scumbag is anywhere within the US or a significant US allied nation... he's not going to stay out of custody for very long.  He'll likely tell investigators everything he knows first shot, which will help narrow down the search for the leak even more.

Fortunately, I think the damage done to the war in Ukraine is likely small.  As I have said, Russia probably already knows what it needs to know.  Having more info might help them confirm things they were not sure of, but so what?  Russia's problem since this war has started is its inability to fight successfully.  Having better intel won't help them fight better.

Steve

still the documents were mingled with even before the obvious change of casualties and losses. 

USA maps would wouldnt show a scale 600miles when the distance is 600km, and the country names were added. I didnt go through all the documents. 

both could be true of course. official documents were leaked 'off the record', they were mingled with and then leaked deliberately on some forum and then mingled with again to make people think that the previous (already altered) numbers were right.

also there might still be the option that the Pentagon is playing the game along 'ow noes! they found fake info, lets investigate!'. 

enough possibilities, but i wouldnt take anything written in these documents for the truth (or right assessment)... (except ofc the nato-member countries, which are quite correctly drawn as to common knowledge).

Edited April 8, 2023 by Yet

[chuckdyke]

Interesting analyzis.

 

[JonS]

I love random collations of generic stock, and animated, footage. It is so very informative.

[Thomm]

26 minutes ago, JonS said:

I love random collations of generic stock, and animated, footage. It is so very informative.

Me too, but only if it has a click-bait front page!

[Holien]

2 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

Interesting analyzis

Before I invest time in this what was interesting? 

[chuckdyke]

2 hours ago, Holien said:

Before I invest time in this what was interesting? 

Perceptions differ. He analyzed the Russian logistics or the lack they have. 

Edited April 8, 2023 by chuckdyke

[Beleg85]

9 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Even with x2 (add mobilized and tossed on frontline), these are very low densities.  Take Zap-Blue.  Double the density to 214 per km.  So chop a third for logistics/support, so 140-150 actual frontline troops (which is generous).  That is a healthy company with no one behind it, nor an ability to rotate out and off the line.  Based on what we have seen troop rotations are likely happening horizontally from loud to quiet sectors, not from front to rear.

This is the Russian problem.  A lot of people are handwringing about “frozen front lines” and Russian defensive belts but that is an enormous frontage to try and defend and nowhere enough troops to do it with.  Russian LOCs are interdict-able - I would be saving a lot of deep strike for that, so as the UA assaults the RA are going to be challenged to c-move (which will be highly visible).  The RA is simply spread too thin and likely does not have the logistics, ISR or C2 to be able to cover those sorts of ranges.  

Do we know desity ratios on Ukrainian side? Perhaps lower desnity per km is simply issue of this war for everyone, created by necessity to scatter more widely against precise fires.

What is interesting is very high number of Russian troops on northern sector (43k according to leaked docs) compared to other fronts. There are mobiks training there ofc, and they may want to shield core Russian regions against Ukrainians (and Kremlin paranoia). Terrain features and logistical net play a role here as well, but it is still high number for relatively less strategically important frontline.

[The_Capt]

7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

That was a great bit of OSINT you shared with us.  Thanks.

Assuming his numbers of repairable tanks are accurate (and they most likely are over counting ones that can be practically repaired) he found:

T-54/55 = 270
T-62 = 560
T-64 = 248
T-72 = 1841
T-80 = 945
T-90 = 50

That's roughly 2/3rds T-72 or better, 1/3rd T-64 or older.  Using his loss rate calculations, and assuming Russia's loss rate remains constant, Russia will run out of the newer tanks in 1.5 years and then about 9 months later exhaust all tanks.

The thing is that we know how this works.  Each time they go looking for old tanks to restore they are going for the easiest to get and restore to working condition.  So far they have been moving out about 120 tanks per month out of storage.  How many of those are successfully transitioned to fully working tanks vs. used for parts is not known, but I bet the number is not insignificant and will trend higher as they have to dig deeper into the remaining stocks.  Still, if we assume 120 tanks successfully refurbished per month, they can theoretically keep up with losses.  Theoretically   As we know, losses are not even and tank refurbishment is likely going at full tilt.  Which could mean a month or two of excessive losses could take several additional months to replace those losses.

Anyway, just some random stuff to think about while we watch the intel leak thing play out.

Steve

It is not the tanks that is going to kill the RA, it is the crews.  They likely only had enough crews for about 2000 tanks (ie those in ready service), with some reserves.  This crews must have been taking horrendous losses in the first year, and the Russian tanks do not look very survivable when hit.  We know some crews got out but a lot of examples of them not.  They do not have a lot of time to train replacements, so they go out poorly trained, make mistakes and become more casualties.  The “so what” is that  the effectiveness of their tank corps overall all is going to drop in a non-linear rate, compared to linear losses.  And then we could talk logistics and maintenance of the force in contact.

[MSBoxer]

9 hours ago, Elmar Bijlsma said:

NEEEEEEERRRRRRRDDDDDSSS!!!!!

I Mean... I don't know what you guys are referencing and I definitely do not have a DVD box set of whatever it might be.

I self-identify as a Browncoat!

[The_Capt]

40 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Do we know desity ratios on Ukrainian side? Perhaps lower desnity per km is simply issue of this war for everyone, created by necessity to scatter more widely against precise fires.

What is interesting is very high number of Russian troops on northern sector (43k according to leaked docs) compared to other fronts. There are mobiks training there ofc, and they may want to shield core Russian regions against Ukrainians (and Kremlin paranoia). Terrain features and logistical net play a role here as well, but it is still high number for relatively less strategically important frontline.

Density on the Ukrainian side are likely lower than the RA but this is apples to race horses.  The UA C4ISR superiority allows it to leave a small trip wire force forward along most of the line because they are pretty much impossible to surprise.  The UA has demonstrated a much more highly mobile force with a rapid C2.  The UA clearly upguns density in areas under assault but in quiet sectors they can sit back and simply wait because they will see (and hit) any RA concentrations well back being fed western ISR feeds - and by now their own architecture is likely pretty robust.

The UA also can move in the backfield better.  We know Russian ISR is challenged the deeper into Ukraine held territory one goes and they lack PGM, so the UA likely has greater freedom of movement for c-moves.  The RA does not have this advantage, so they have to try to push out more density on the line.

So the UA conducting an attack in one area to draw in limited RA resources, forces them to commit, and then attacks in a second area for a break-in/out/through just like they did last fall, makes a lot of sense.  The RA could be surprised and dislocated in that scenario, again repositioning challenged by UA deep strike capability linked to likely the best ISR on the planet right now.

Edited April 8, 2023 by The_Capt

[The_Capt]

3 minutes ago, MSBoxer said:

make that a triple

Gorram forum buttons.

[Beleg85]

Cute funeral for independent journo Vladlen Tatarsky, with Wagner (or "Vagner"...) sledghammer.

 

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Beleg85 said:

Cute funeral for independent journo Vladlen Tatarsky, with Wagner (or "Vagner"...) sledghammer.

 

Well, if all you have to celebrate is violence and cruelty, might as well do it up right!

Steve

[billbindc]

10 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

OK, as I expected... the leaked documents are legit.  Not only did the Pentagon not immediately say they were fakes, they are now openly stating they are looking for who leaked them.  The theories that this was a deliberate US disinformation campaign is questionable given the scale of what is being released.  The US would not sacrifice its integrity and trust with allies to this degree for something like this.  Especially because Russia probably already has the practical information it needs.

This is really weird though.  It seems that the documents were not hacked off a computer, which means the 8 billion or so suspect pool has been reduced to the few thousand with access to physical documents of this nature.  Further narrowed down to who would have access to the full breadth of the reports (i.e. not some officer working on one area of the world only).  A few hundred might be the size of the suspect pool, or perhaps very low thousands.  It's small enough that the documents released will narrow the pool down to a fairly small number.  And within that, someone is likely to have a suspicion about someone they've interacted with.  An odd offhand comment or two, a generally questionable view of the world, etc.

As for why some racist kid in his mom's basement got the materials... could be that such a twit is harder to trace?  I don't know.  What I do know is if that little scumbag is anywhere within the US or a significant US allied nation... he's not going to stay out of custody for very long.  He'll likely tell investigators everything he knows first shot, which will help narrow down the search for the leak even more.

Fortunately, I think the damage done to the war in Ukraine is likely small.  As I have said, Russia probably already knows what it needs to know.  Having more info might help them confirm things they were not sure of, but so what?  Russia's problem since this war has started is its inability to fight successfully.  Having better intel won't help them fight better.

Steve

Seeing more data on this and it’s definitely a real leak with some after the fact doctoring in various versions. It’s *not* so far another Snowden level event despite what some of the more excitable folks in media are saying. It’s not even clear there is much operational value to the leaks for Russia. It will be a hit on Ukrainian trust vis a vis the Pentagon/NATO for now.

I like the theory that there’s an ideologically driven E-5 somewhere in the food chain who let this out to his groyper pals and it got out of hand. The spread of topics and delivery method seems to rule out anything that you could call professional. Of course, the jail time will be.

[DesertFox]

Remember that advanced bioweapon story about Ukraine? Now we have confirmation with Grisha...

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Density on the Ukrainian side are likely lower than the RA but this is apples to race horses.  The UA C4ISR superiority allows it to leave a small trip wire force forward along most of the line because they are pretty much impossible to surprise.  The UA has demonstrated a much more highly mobile force with a rapid C2.  The UA clearly upguns density in areas under assault but in quiet sectors they can sit back and simply wait because they will see (and hit) any RA concentrations well back being fed western ISR feeds - and by now their own architecture is likely pretty robust.

The UA also can move in the backfield better.  We know Russian ISR is challenged the deeper into Ukraine held territory one goes and they lack PGM, so the UA likely has greater freedom of movement for c-moves.  The RA does not have this advantage, so they have to try to push out more density on the line.

So the UA conducting an attack in one area to draw in limited RA resources, forces them to commit, and then attacks in a second area for a break-in/out/through just like they did last fall, makes a lot of sense.  The RA could be surprised and dislocated in that scenario, again repositioning challenged by UA deep strike capability linked to likely the best ISR on the planet right now.

All of this and something else -> quality.  Quality of forces, weaponry, C2, ISR, etc. all matters under all situations, however sometimes it matters more than others.

With CM hats firmly on... you load up a scenario that has the attacker with a small scale mixed Conscript/Green force armed with a smattering of Soviet based weaponry attacking over largely open terrain against a smaller but well entrenched Regular/Veteran force armed to the teeth with NATO weaponry.  If your goal is to win (i.e. not just to have fun), which side would you choose to command?  Does you opinion change depending on how how much ISR is available for one or both sides?

Making assumptions that you folks answered this question the same way I did ("hands down I'd take the defender no matter what ISR picture is), this means not only can Ukraine afford to leave thin forces along large sections of front, they can expect those tripwire forces to largely DEFEAT Russian attacks without much in the way of reinforcements.  In other words, what The_Capt had in mind as a "tripwire" force might actually turn out to be equivalent to a more robustly defended line.
The limitations of a high quality thinly held line are, however, quite real.  10 guys who can take on 100 works great until 5 are casualties and the attacker has another 100 to throw into the battle later in the afternoon.  Fortunately for Ukraine, Russia has shown no signs of using its forces wisely. 

Steve

[sburke]

Russia loses election to three UN bodies over Ukraine (yahoo.com)

 

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — Russia lost elections to three United Nations bodies this week, a sign that opposition to its invasion of Ukraine over a year ago remains strong.

The votes in the 54-member U.N. Economic and Social Council follow approval of six non-binding resolutions against Russia by the 193-member U.N. General Assembly. The latest — on Feb. 23, the eve of the first anniversary of the invasion — called for Moscow to end hostilities and withdraw its forces and was adopted by a vote of 141-7 with 32 abstentions.

In the ECOSOC votes, Russia was overwhelmingly defeated by Romania for a seat on the Commission on the Status of Women. It lost to Estonia to be a member of the executive board of the U.N. children’s agency UNICEF. And it was defeated by Armenia and the Czech Republic in secret ballot votes for membership on the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice.