How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[The_Capt]

14 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Another example of why Russia is in trouble... 35th Marine Brigade is apparently the unit that liberated Makarivka.  This is not one of the new brigades, yet it is a lead element in this counter offensive.  Think about what it means that Ukraine can make as much progress as it is with a fairly minimal injection of fresh forces and then think about what will happen when the main weight is committed.

For example, in just this one video I see 8 captured Russians.  I've seen many others with similar and smaller counts.  This bolsters Ukrainian accounts that the Russians are taking heavy losses.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarRoom/comments/148bkif/pows_meanwhile_in_one_of_the_directions_the_fund/

Steve

Hey look minefield breach lanes that worked.  And again, no RA artillery.

[Maciej Zwolinski]

4 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Not surprisingly western gear is also big, hot and visible so one needs to establish conditions before one can really get mileage from it.

Exactly. The biggest problem with that action is that they used some new, fancy, expensive Western stuff and lost it in exactly the same way they would have lost some cheaper, Soviet made stuff. 

This is something that playing Combat Mission taught me. As soon as I put points into expensive and fancy stuff, I either lose it immediately and give points to the enemy, or I have to hide it for most of the game to avoid losing it and giving points to the enemy. Frankly, I stopped buying expensive and fancy stuff if I can avoid it at all. 

[Haiduk]

 

[acrashb]

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

but that's not the point of "stopping power". 

[...]

Thanks for the clarification; I thought you meant it as most do: bigger diameter, more stopping.  Terminal ballistics is more complicated than that.

[Kinophile]

55 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

This single action has really been beat to death.  It looks like a Cbt Tm breach (still does not look like a major assault to me as there was a single lane and no explosives).  It runs into an attack helicopter/ATGMs and then loses vehicles to mines in the extraction.

And still after all the videos, I have yet to see a significant RA artillery/indirect fire response countering the minefield breach.  Everyone is too busy freaking out on the fact that western gear is allergic to explosives as Russian stuff; however, the lack of RA indirect fire support is far more interesting.

If RA artillery capability has been, or is being eroded then the impact on their defence is going to be significant.  We may also see a slower more infantry-based offence from Ukraine.  Not surprisingly western gear is also big, hot and visible so one needs to establish conditions before one can really get mileage from it.

It was the first thing I noted,  the lack of arty over watch. 

But if the RUS arty is dying why go at infantry pace? Wouldnt that just give them time and breathing room? If the arty is suppressed,  local C&C is disjointed and minefield breaches are happening as trained,  then that feels like breakout is just ahead. 

Plus,  we're past Day 5 and there's definitely sounds of cracking and breaking. 

What UKR does to those commuted RUS reserves will be interesting - destroy them in direct battle?  Or hold,  and strike somewhere else,  extremely heavily. 

Cripes, breaking out North of Donetsk is on the cards. 

Edited June 13, 2023 by Kinophile

[The_Capt]

4 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

But if the RUS arty is dying why go at infantry pace? Wouldnt that just give them time and breathing room? If the arty is suppressed,  local C&C is disjointed and minefield breaches are happening as trained,  then that feels like breakout is just ahead. 

I am not sure we have solved for ATGMs and ISR.  I mean if one can do break through and out in heavy mech, definitely go for it.  But this mess in the minefield was likely caused by an AH and maybe ATGM teams (in that one video the Bradley was shooting at something in the treeline).  Now if one can get a bunch of light infantry onto the other side of an obstacle, your opponent does not have effective artillery - one leg of the modern tripod out - then you can do corrosive until collapse and then go all heavy mech to exploit…theoretically.

That, or take out RA ISR but that is really hard with UAS.

[panzermartin]

50 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

And still after all the videos, I have yet to see a significant RA artillery/indirect fire response countering the minefield breach.  Everyone is too busy freaking out on the fact that western gear is allergic to explosives as Russian stuff; however, the lack of RA indirect fire support is far more interesting

Sometimes I'm surprised by the amount of copium in this forum. First we didn't even accept the authenticity of the photos published(!)Then came the videos. Then we supposed that the lack of indirect fire is an indication of insufficient artillery coverage by the RU (despite there videos and photos of the same sector with 1. Leopards slaloming between 152mm explosions and 2. Myriads of dense craters in the aftermath photos , only artillery could have caused.) 

Then we said, ruskies have nothing else to show for days, apart from this column. They probably suck again in all other areas. But after a week of fighting, we are thrilled with the liberation of one small village with small RU forward guard in the buffer zone, that is filmed in the usual multi - cam hollywood quality. Truth remains russians wiped out a big unit, with very pricey and rare toys and the RU did this with relative ease and no significant documented losses. Shooting vikhrs from a safe distance like it was Apaches shooting T-72s in Medina Ridge. For a start they seem to have at least figured out how to use their gunships, they deserve this minimum credit I guess. 

 

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

13 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I am not sure we have solved for ATGMs and ISR.  I mean if one can do break through and out in heavy mech, definitely go for it.  But this mess in the minefield was likely caused by an AH and maybe ATGM teams (in that one video the Bradley was shooting at something in the treeline).  Now if one can get a bunch of light infantry onto the other side of an obstacle, your opponent does not have effective artillery - one leg of the modern tripod out - then you can do corrosive until collapse and then go all heavy mech to exploit…theoretically.

That, or take out RA ISR but that is really hard with UAS.

Agreed that slow and steady is the right approach for Ukraine as long as they are within the enemy's prepared positions.  Save the cowboy "yeeeeeeeha!" stuff for when they've cleared the lines.

Ukraine also shouldn't assume that Russian artillery is absent or ineffective.  Could be that they put their stuff very far back and can't effectively support the most forward areas, instead planning on hitting advances that approach their main defensive lines.

Another possible indication that Russian artillery is absent... I just saw two videos posted where Lancets are hitting relatively "unimportant" Ukrainian targets.  In one case it was a Humvee, in another case it was some infantry in the trees.  Both actions were within small arms range of their lines, not something way deep in the rear.  Yes, this is anecdotal information and that means we can't draw definitive conclusions from it alone.  That said, it does seem odd that Russia would be wasting Lancets on routine targets that could easily be engaged by artillery.  Lancets should be out hunting for higher value targets in places that artillery can't effectively operate.

Steve

[Haiduk]

Press-secreter of General Staff claimed UKR troops for yesterday advanced on 500 - 1000 m on Berdiansk direction, but without clarification where exactly. There are just rumors, Russians have problems near Polohy, this town is on Berdiansk direction

[Battlefront.com]

9 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

Sometimes I'm surprised by the amount of copium in this forum. First we didn't even accept the authenticity of the photos published(!)Then came the videos.

That's really uncalled for and inaccurate.  I don't think a single person here called the information fake.  I challenge you to point to even one post, which even then wouldn't prove your point.  Twitter comments, on the other hand, definitely show the usual "everything Russia puts out is fake, especially if it looks bad for Ukraine".

9 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

Then we supposed that the lack of indirect fire is an indication of insufficient artillery coverage by the RU (despite there videos and photos of the same sector with 1. Leopards slaloming between 152mm explosions and 2. Myriads of dense craters in the aftermath photos , only artillery could have caused.) 

I have seen no evidence that these columns were hit by artillery.  And anyway, nobody is saying that Russia has NO artillery in use.  What is being said is that they should have a TON of artillery in action.  Yet there isn't evidence of it.

As for the "myriad" of dense craters, you are aware that this has been a contested "gray zone" for almost a year and there's been plenty of artillery used during that time, right?

9 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

Then we said, ruskies have nothing else to show for days, apart from this column. They probably suck again in all other areas. But after a week of fighting, we are thrilled with the liberation of one small village with small RU forward guard in the buffer zone, that is filmed in the usual multi - cam hollywood quality. Truth remains russians wiped out a big unit, with very pricey and rare toys and the RU did this with relative ease and no significant documented losses. Shooting vikhrs from a safe distance like it was Apaches shooting T-72s in Medina Ridge. For a start they seem to have at least figured out how to use their gunships, they deserve this minimum credit I guess.

Yeah, well, this isn't even remotely accurate.  But I understand this is your standard contrarian point of view, which often puts you out of step with the evidence right in front of you.  I really don't think you're in that strong a position to cast judgement on others when your track record is quite spotty.

Steve

[Chibot Mk IX]

17 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

The one in on the "left" in the documentation images of the Leo and Brad destruction?  Clearly this was a second attempt at a lane and the second driver drove around the destroyed vehicles from the first attempt.  It is far better to take a second pass over the same lane and deviate only when necessary.  The reason is that mine plowing is inexact, so it is better to make multiple passes over the same lane than separate lanes with only one pass.

Steve

Oh, no. 

DesertFox asked a similar question below, but his expression was much clearer than mine.

5 hours ago, DesertFox said:

Thanks that helps with understanding. However, what I totally don't get is, why on earth the Btl. CO decided 2 times to have his Btl. move transverse in front of enemy lines. Big NO NO and I guess he, if at present still in charge, would have had a small "discussion" with Brig. CO about that. Well maybe we learn over time why this Btl. acted as it did. 

 

 

 

Yes, it gets me puzzled.

 

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, panzermartin said:

RU (despite there videos and photos of the same sector with 1. Leopards slaloming between 152mm explosions and 2. Myriads of dense craters in the aftermath photos , only artillery could have caused.) 

Ok, you are going to have to post some proof of this - I have not seen effective massed fires on an obstacle yet.  The craters in the videos/pics I have seen are not fresh, nor concentrated.  Most of those vehicles are showing clear signs of minestrike (blown tracks) and relatively few casualties.   I watched a 4 min video of UA troops in the middle of a minefield that they took ATGM hits - so RA overwatch - as they de-bused and were extracting and not a single RA indirect fire round came in.  That is way too long.

This is not "copium" it is professional assessment that I am not seeing effective RA concentration of fires on an obstacle, which is pretty fundamental.  This on top of continuous reports of dwindling artillery rounds per day during the winter offensive, along with gun losses and reports from the Russian side of lacking fire support and dwindling ammo.

If "copium" means "seeing what is in front of you and not what you are afraid of" then guilty as charged.

[panzermartin]

29 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

That's really uncalled for and inaccurate.  I don't think a single person here called the information fake.  I challenge you to point to even one post, which even then wouldn't prove your point.  Twitter comments, on the other hand, definitely show the usual "everything Russia puts out is fake, especially if it looks bad for Ukraine".

I have seen no evidence that these columns were hit by artillery.  And anyway, nobody is saying that Russia has NO artillery in use.  What is being said is that they should have a TON of artillery in action.  Yet there isn't evidence of it.

As for the "myriad" of dense craters, you are aware that this has been a contested "gray zone" for almost a year and there's been plenty of artillery used during that time, right?

Yeah, well, this isn't even remotely accurate.  But I understand this is your standard contrarian point of view, which often puts you out of step with the evidence right in front of you.  I really don't think you're in that strong a position to cast judgement on others when your track record is quite spotty.

Steve

In all respect, you yourself among others objected the claims of posters here that photos were fake, like:
   

As for the artillery, I don't object that it could be from previous strikes but we still have some footage as the battle was unfolding. Plus it makes sense that they had enough firepower to halt the advance with mines, helicopters atgms etc and artillery remained largely in reserve, possibly not positioned to counter probing attacks and stay protected for the later stages. But it seems a premature conclusion that there is a lack of indirect RU fire, from a couple of short videos. 

Lastly, I'm not here to judge others. I think I made an observation on the way we process info, that probably every outsider that's not passionate about one side or the other, would find obvious. 

 

Edited June 13, 2023 by panzermartin

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, Chibot Mk IX said:

Oh, no. 

DesertFox asked a similar question below, but his expression was much clearer than mine.

 

 

 

Yes, it gets me puzzled.

 

Hmm, really weird and likely a rookie mistake.  So the two lane breach for a Cbt Team makes a lot of sense.  Looks like one lane stalled and the commander tried to swing assets to that lane down a cleared lateral road and got really bogged down, that UA left breach is a total mess.  The only way this makes sense is that contact with the RA was light...and then it wasn't.

First rule of being in a minefield - drive straight at the other side.

[Maciej Zwolinski]

10 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Hmm, really weird and likely a rookie mistake.  So the two lane breach for a Cbt Team makes a lot of sense.  Looks like one lane stalled and the commander tried to swing assets to that lane down a cleared lateral road and got really bogged down, that UA left breach is a total mess.  The only way this makes sense is that contact with the RA was light...and then it wasn't.

First rule of being in a minefield - drive straight at the other side.

How about the team on the left lane lost all mine ploughs and tried to join the team doing the right lane breach?

 

 

PS. Left and right described from the perspective of the direction of movement, i.e. as if standing on the top of the picture facing down.

Edited June 13, 2023 by Maciej Zwolinski
your left, my left

[cesmonkey]

Girkin had a long two-post update this morning answering the question:
https://t.me/strelkovii/5399

Quote

Question:

"How, in general terms, do you predict the development of events at the front in the summer and autumn of this year? Will Ukraine agree to a truce if its offensive is repulsed? Will there be a new mobilization?"

Overall, he was not particularly optimistic on the outlook for Russia.

If the fighting in eastern Zaporizhia is, as described, a see-saw battle at the moment, I hope it least gives the opportunity for the Ukrainians to attrit their forces faster, so that they can achieve their breakthrough.

https://t.me/ZA_FROHT/18453

Quote

The village of Makarovka changed hands three times yesterday. As of this morning, the village was controlled by Russian fighters, who managed to counterattack and again knock the enemy out of the village. Now it is in the gray zone, our troops hold positions on high ground above the village.

 

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, panzermartin said:

Plus it makes sense that they had enough firepower to halt the advance with mines, helicopters atgms etc and artillery remained largely in reserve, possibly not positioned to counter probing attacks and stay protected for the later stages. But it seems a premature conclusion that there is a lack of indirect RU fire from a couple of short videos. 

Ya, that is not how it works.  Once you have an entire enemy Cbt Tm in a minefield, one does not hold back...you try and kill the entire thing.  The only sense in "holding back" is if one is 1) short on resources or 2) very concerned about c-bty.  Yes one can draw some pretty good conclusions from a major obstacle not being covered by indirect fire...in fact it would be a intel indicator that staff are looking for.  Now why that fire did not come could also be a result of poor ISR and fires integration which we have also heard rumors.

What I see are the majority of kills as mobility and a direct result (hell we have one on vide) of mine strike due to a lot of weird shuffling going on because my bet is the AH hit the breaching systems.  I do not see catastrophic results of effective indirect fire support.  Now maybe some video will come out that counters that but this is all reinforcing the RA artillery issues we have been hearing about for months.

This entire affair has the hallmarks of a UA sh*tshow, hence why in my original posts I mention the "Devil's OODA Loop" but what is missing from the RA to turn it into a full blown massacre is potentially telling.  Minefields are largely useless unless they are effectively covered by effective fires and, at least here, that appears to be missing. 

[Kinophile]

Could easily be lead driver/team error,  not a directed command. A screwed up radio,  garbled transmission and the pressure to move, dont stop, could lead to a simple directional mistake. 

Attempts to correct that could further confuse if commands don't match or are lagging movement. 

On set, with actors/BG in cars,  if there's someone doing something wrong I'll stop the entire operation, cut Camera right then and there,  run over personally and correct them,  make sure they do understand and have a lower AD monitor them.  That's the safe and right way. Works every time. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast. 

Under threat, with fires coming in and everyone hyped up and energized, that driver/team leader mistake will be much harder to immediately correct and stopping the column is,  Ho Boi.

You can do it,  but it's probably better to keep moving, even if trans verse,  because (1) stopping everyone costs Time & Momentum,  and (2) starting up again costs more Time & Momentum. Better to adjust on the move, even if there's the real danger of compounding an error. 

Lesser of two weevils and all that. 

 

Edited June 13, 2023 by Kinophile

[Harmon Rabb]

I would say that vatnik war propaganda is getting increasingly bizarre.

But the truth is between Ukrainians creating super soldiers in biolabs and using witchcraft, vatnik war propaganda was bizarre from the very beginning.

Edited June 13, 2023 by Harmon Rabb

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

How about the team on the left line they lost all mine ploughs and tried to join the team doing the right lane breach?

Ya could be.  I mean "DO NOT TRY AND MANOUVRE IN A MINEFIELD" is pretty much tattooed on the inside of my skull, and I think the UA just highlighted why in this instance.

In the other videos of the US leopards though, we can clearly see successful mined area breaches - it is why those tanks are staying on the dirt tracks and not in fancy formations.  In fact in this failed one, I think they almost made it, but bad happens...trick is to not make it worse.  In this case we see bad decisions leading to more bad decisions - a Devil's OODA loop.  Now the to the CO in charge these may have all seemed like good decisions at the time, but clearly things spiraled...happens all the time.

[DesertFox]

6 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

How about the team on the left lane lost all mine ploughs and tried to join the team doing the right lane breach?

 

 

PS. Left and right described from the perspective of the direction of movement, i.e. as if standing on the top of the picture facing down.

That's the pic I still doubt is legit, which means I think it is fake and the later published vid isn't able to convince me. We have 2 disabled ARVs in front of the left lane and 1 disabled ARV in front of the right lane. If the pic is legit it would mean that minefield never got breached at al at this spot and the Btl. CO decided to breach the minefield at another place. If so, with which equipment did he do that after losing 3 ARVs?

As you see, either something doesn't fit or we (or only me) are still missing important information to reconstruct what happened there.

[panzermartin]

11 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Ok, you are going to have to post some proof of this - I have not seen effective massed fires on an obstacle yet.  The craters in the videos/pics I have seen are not fresh, nor concentrated.  Most of those vehicles are showing clear signs of minestrike (blown tracks) and relatively few casualties.   I watched a 4 min video of UA troops in the middle of a minefield that they took ATGM hits - so RA overwatch - as they de-bused and were extracting and not a single RA indirect fire round came in.  That is way too long.

This is not "copium" it is professional assessment that I am not seeing effective RA concentration of fires on an obstacle, which is pretty fundamental.  This on top of continuous reports of dwindling artillery rounds per day during the winter offensive, along with gun losses and reports from the Russian side of lacking fire support and dwindling ammo.

If "copium" means "seeing what is in front of you and not what you are afraid of" then guilty as charged.

The observation could probably be correct, I will provide the first video we saw here that it had definitely at least sparse heavy shelling when I find it. 

It's the conclusion one could object. Here some russian "copium" points 

1.Of course we are not talking about Bakhmut right now, it's a very large defense line that's spanning across all the south. One would expect the defender to not being able to cover all lengths and depths of this, even if it had thousands of tubes. 

2. It was a probing, first contact away from the main defense lines of RU. 

3. Artillery of the sector could be  positioned deeper to avoid detection or getting wasted before the main weight of UA offensive force is committed. Or even deeper , if there is a fear of arty units being overrun from fast moving UA advanced elements. 

4. It was deemed that the minefield, the atgms(?) and the gunships were enough to stop this armored column. And it probably proved correct. 

 I agree that given the russian artillery mentality it might seem strange they didn't resort to panicky massed volleys like we are used to see all the time. We can't exclude they have indeed lost/worn out a lot of tubes/shells in the last year, but before that there other explanations worth examining...

 

 

[keas66]

There does not seem to be a way to  avoid seeing quotes from users I have blocked  . "mentions" does not seem to do it ?

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, panzermartin said:

The observation could probably be correct, I will provide the first video we saw here that it had definitely at least sparse heavy shelling when I find it. 

It's the conclusion one could object. Here some russian "copium" points 

1.Of course we are not talking about Bakhmut right now, it's a very large defense line that's spanning across all the south. One would expect the defender to not being able to cover all lengths and depths of this, even if it had thousands of tubes. 

2. It was a probing, first contact away from the main defense lines of RU. 

3. Artillery of the sector could be  positioned deeper to avoid detection or getting wasted before the main weight of UA offensive force is committed. Or even deeper , if there is a fear of arty units being overrun from fast moving UA advanced elements. 

4. It was deemed that the minefield, the atgms(?) and the gunships were enough to stop this armored column. And it probably proved correct. 

 I agree that given the russian artillery mentality it might seem strange they didn't resort to panicky massed volleys like we are used to see all the time. We can't exclude they have indeed lost/worn out a lot of tubes/shells in the last year, but before that there other explanations worth examining...

 

 

 

You see how easy that was?  You have a bunch of possible indicators of the RA problem right there.  Artillery density is too light.  They kept it back because they know the line is too long so maybe they have gone with hardpoints.  Maybe the guns are wearing out and ammo is becoming an issue (lots of reports out of the Winter offensive on artillery issues).  None of these are "copium", they are viable answers to why we are not seeing guns in the initial contact videos...and none of them are good news for the RA.  Artillery is a critical component of this war and if the RA is running out or unable to concentrate it, at least not initially, well that is something to keep an eye out for.

Either way, this is not a doctrinal defence in the least.  Gun coverage is normally assigned directly to obstacles and is one of the first thing one sees in a breaching operations...it is why all them there tanks and stuff are made of metal.  Now will we see it deeper?  Well if we do then we know we are into the MDA of the RA. If we do not then there is something very bad happening to RA artillery support.

As to point #4 - I do not see a crafty RA master plan here, lets not go the other way - which has also been a cognitive disease in this war.  A sparsely defended initial line where an AH/ATGM crews got lucky and a UA fumble is not a reason to start thinking the RA is the master of the battlefield either.  If that entire Cbt Team got wiped out, bodies everwhere...(you know, kinda like all those RA offensives we saw for months?) then I would be far more concerned. 

Edited June 13, 2023 by The_Capt

[DesertFox]

to fight another day...

 

https://twitter.com/Tendar/status/1668627977213726721?s=20

https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1668623359301783553?s=20

Edited June 13, 2023 by DesertFox