How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[womble]

The Russians claim that their artillery was in a Counterbattery duel, at the beginning of the "minefield crossing debacle". This could well be a true claim, in that UKR CB is, apparently, significantly more capable than RUS. So the duel could largely have involved displacing 10km away from their initial positions, having fired a couple of sticks at the initial crossing attempts and drawn the attention of some GMLRS. Just keeping most of the battery from getting scrapped by displacing in time might count as "performing well" in the current RUS lexicon of excellence.

It was mentioned that the UKR could have done better in the aftermath by maintaining overwatch positions in the treeline, and countered that such "stay-behinds" would rapidly be spotted by RUS drones and chopped up by arty. Surely, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and the UKR overwatch could have been maintained by drones backed up by mortars or artillery or AGL (or some other indirect fire)?

[Centurian52]

2 hours ago, Bearstronaut said:

Wouldn't this be the second largest combat operation in Europe since WW2? The first being the Russian invasion of February 2022.

Geographically it's smaller than Feb 2022. But it might actually be larger going by troop numbers. I don't know exactly how many troops are involved in this operation, but we know that both armies are larger than they were at the start of this war. The Ukrainian army in particular is much larger than it was at the start of this war. The Russian invasion in Feb 2022 supposedly involved 150k-190k Russian troops against about 120k Ukrainian regulars + 100k Ukrainian TD. Currently I understand that the Russian army in Ukraine is about 300k while the Ukrainian army had ballooned to over 700k the last time I got any numbers for them a few months ago (no idea how large the Ukrainian army is right now). So the question of whether this operation is larger than Russia's Feb 2022 operation comes down to what proportion of the Ukrainian Army is participating in the offensive. Considering how many places they are attacking, I'm guessing it's a decent chunk.

[Centurian52]

2 hours ago, sburke said:

just for reference

Submarine Cable Map

As much as I love the discussions, probably the most valuable part of this thread is all the interesting sources that get posted

[pintere]

From the Kyiv Post. Apparently Urozhaine is captured.

"1) The Gains

Ukrainian forces on Tuesday captured the village of Urozhaine in the boundary area between the Zaporizhzhia and Donetsk regions, which brings the total number of deoccupied villages during Ukraine’s summer offensive to eight."

Edited June 14, 2023 by pintere

[kevinkin]

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

probably

It was, is and will continue to be (unfortunately) the largest military operation in Europe since WW2. 

Now let's figure out how to maneuver the enemy out of their trenches and Ukraine as a whole given the limits on military assistance the the UA has to deal with. 

[Fenris]

Precision.  Examples of counter battery work.

 

Edited June 14, 2023 by Fenris

[Harmon Rabb]

MEPs look ahead to next EU summit (europa.eu)

Edited June 14, 2023 by Harmon Rabb

[Fenris]

More precision, evidence is anecdotal at this stage

 

[kevinkin]

47 minutes ago, Fenris said:

Precision.  Examples of counter battery work.

Wow, why bother hiding in tree lines? Might as well spread out, fire and move. Nothing mechanized can survive in broad daylight on a pool table under aerial observation without a tremendous amount of training and communication. I am encouraged by that video more than others. I hope it's reliable. 

[pintere]

Most recent update on the Velyka Novosilka front.

 

 

[chris talpas]

Only covers up to Monday but still a good overview of all the fronts

 

[kevinkin]

56 minutes ago, chris talpas said:

Only covers up to Monday but still a good overview of all the fronts

Thanks for posting that. Keep them coming it you can. 

[Undaunted]

It seems like the failed mine breaching at Orikhiv and Vuhledar had one thing in common: the breaching lane got blocked by someone hitting a mine or get disabled by enemy fire, and then as other vehicles moved to bypass the wreck, they hit more mines, and the carnage grew side way.

If the breaching path could be done in a double-width manner, the problem could be improved, eg. if a vehicle block one lane, then the others could safely bypass it, or have a safe space from which to push the wreck out of the path.  Is such thing feasible/attempted before?

I have no military experience and not familiar with military engineering, so these are just some wild ideas:

1. An extra wide mine plow for the leading tank.

2. A normal-width V shaped plow in front, plus a two-piece plow that branches out at the rear of the tank, for better front-back weight distribution.

3. Two tanks in front, left tank plows to the left, right tank plows to the right, the tanks could be abreast or in echelon.

4. Two tanks with V shaped plow, but since half the mines would be shoved between the two lanes, someone follow up would need to check/clear/mark safe lane change locations.

All follow up vehicles stick to the right lane except when bypassing a wreck.

There are some problems I could think of:

- Such plows would be too heavy for a standard tank.
- It seems mine plows could flip the mines, and maybe plowing a flipped mine again would detonate it?

The_Capt pointed out that when doing mine-breaching, you are supposed to keep going forward (often in a straight line?).  If so, how about making unmanned mine breaching vehicles?  Without a crew, it can be make more compact, meaning more armor/ERAs per volume, or maybe have a flat/boxer engine to make it super low profile.  And no one need to be evacuated when it got hit.

[Harmon Rabb]

More trench clearing footage performed by the 3rd separate assault brigade.

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, panzermartin said:

The commissar comment was totally not for you btw. 

It shouldn't have been directed at anybody.  You came out swinging, took a charge at windmills like Don Quixote, you got rightfully challenged, you flailed about, and have made no progress with your original quest to prove yourself some sort of savoir for a problem that doesn't exist.  it's been an annoying and completely unnecessary distraction from meaningful discussions, so it would be nice if you would just knock it off.

In case you still think you had some cause to accuse people here of being in a copium filled echo chamber, let me break it down for you with an example.

A room full of people are having a debate about weather.  Someone says they should discuss the weather outside.  Factual observations show that it is sunny and dry, but nobody knows the temperature.  There is a discussion about what the temperature might be, so there is a discussion about the time of year, the recent past weather patterns, historical patterns, etc.  The discussion is focused on this aspect because everybody agrees that objectively it is sunny and dry outside.  There is some debate about the temperatures, however the prevailing thinking is that it appears to be very warm.  Debate, predictions, and other things are based on this thinking.

Someone then decides that people aren't questioning things enough.  Maybe it isn't really warm out.  So he takes it upon himself to prove everybody else wrong.  He makes a statement that maybe it isn't warm, but is in fact freezing cold.  No new facts, no new insights, just being contrarian.  The group accepts the challenge and refutes it by debating the statement on its merits.  The contrarian has no counter to this so instead of conceding that he is wrong tries to make it about the group's supposed hostility to new ideas.

This is what you did.  It's only a half step better than what the "whatabout" people do.  They would be more likely to say it's raining or nighttime, but in the end the accusations of "echo chamber" and "hostility to different perspectives" is exactly the same.

Learn from your mistakes and stop digging the hole you made for yourself any deeper than it already is.

Steve

[dan/california]

13 hours ago, Harmon Rabb said:

Medvedev threatening to destroy submarine communications cables like some two bit gangster. I think it was some smart folks on this forum who said this is a realistic option for escalation that Russia still has in this war.

But I suppose if they do carry out this threat, Ukraine will still be blamed, like for the explosion at Kakhovka dam by the Kremlin.

Because what Russia needs is Ukraine getting 500 Abrams, and NATO's air force showing up for a long weekend to shatter what is left of the Russian army. I mean I think that needs to happen, but I really doubt anyone in Russia does. There may be one or two coup plotters who are hoping for the worst possible defeat, but that is about it.

11 hours ago, kevinkin said:

Delicate situation:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/06/14/nato-stoltenberg-ukraine-membership-vilnius-summit/70317400007/?utm_campaign=dfn-ebb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sailthru&SToverlay=2002c2d9-c344-4bbb-8610-e5794efcfa7d4

The NATO chief said the alliance is working on a multi-year package that is likely to be agreed upon at the summit. The support package will help Ukraine meet the organization's standards for membership, he said.

From what I remember, NATO membership requires the new entry not to be in an active war. 

Ukraine has beaten the Russian army to a pulp, from a starting point that is far less than ideal. NATO should be aspiring to THEIR standards.

Sadly I agree that there has to some semblance of peace first.

Edited June 15, 2023 by dan/california

[Battlefront.com]

7 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Ok, trying to sort this out.  So we have a bunch of probes and pokes in the run up.  The RA revealed themselves too early and as a result got hammered…badly by the sound of it (48 guns ?!).  Is this why the RA artillery seems tepid?  Being dead does create significant delays in fire support.

Heh.

In my previous post about the lack of artillery response to the 47th Brigade's breaching op favored "not enough guns".  From what Haiduk posted there could have been 10% losses on top of an inadequate amount of tubes within striking distance.  Maybe not so much because of the physical depletion, but the sense amongst the Russian senior command that it has to take steps to minimize further losses.  Displacement to new positions, withholding fire so as to not attract CB, etc.

What I'm saying is the 10% losses might have had a shock value greater than the actual losses might suggest.  Kinda like someone losing a toe to a lawn mower.  You might still have 9 left and retain the ability to walk, but you might not handle that law mower with the same confidence as before

Steve

[Fenris]

Longer clip of RU reserve/relief/counter-attacking column getting zapped.  Footage is from a phone pointed at the screen, a shorter version of what's on the screen was doing the rounds yesterday.

Looks like mostly mines+arty do the damage but there is a puff of smoke off the the side around the 52 second mark.

 

[danfrodo]

What an interesting few days it's been.  UKR is attacking, but actually seems to be more interested in drawing the rats out of their holes.  RU forces (mostly allegedly) moving up to stop UKR and getting punched hard for it.  RU banging away w arty right into what looks like very well planned, precise CB ambushes up & down the front.  The fervency with which RU is trying to hold the first line makes me wonder how strong the next lines of defense are.  Maybe they spent all their mines up at the very front of their front?

I am particularly interested in the far west, the attacks toward Vasylivka.  There's rumors that UKR is fighting near Verknihia, to the W/SW of Lohove. 

Is RU gonna crack and force wholesale commitment of their southern front reserves?  Or maybe UKR is gonna get stuck because attacking w economy of force (we think)?   I guess we wait, another day we wait, as the fighting gets hotter & hotter.

edit: in video above, I really hope they were hitting RU mines.  That would make my day. 

Edited June 15, 2023 by danfrodo

[sburke]

2 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

What an interesting few days it's been.  UKR is attacking, but actually seems to be more interested in drawing the rats out of their holes.  RU forces (mostly allegedly) moving up to stop UKR and getting punched hard for it.  RU banging away w arty right into what looks like very well planned, precise CB ambushes up & down the front.  The fervency with which RU is trying to hold the first line makes me wonder how strong the next lines of defense are. 

well they are definitely going to be weaker if RA artillery is getting hammered now. 

[JonS]

1 hour ago, Undaunted said:

If the breaching path could be done in a double-width manner, the problem could be improved, eg. if a vehicle block one lane, then the others could safely bypass it, or have a safe space from which to push the wreck out of the path.  Is such thing feasible/attempted before?

Back in the day the British aimed to use Sherman flails in troop-lots. Basically, three tanks flailing adjacent lanes, although each one slightly behind and overlapping the one in front, so echeloned to the left or right. The other two flails in the troop stood by to immediately replace casualties. In the ideal case you'd get a breach some 6m wide.

Also, as the Capt has pointed out and the Ukrainians attempted the other day, generally there will be multiple (at least two) lanes being pushed at the same time, at least 100m apart.

Edited June 15, 2023 by JonS

[Battlefront.com]

OK, Combat Mission analogy time!

How many of you have played a battle as the defender and felt your resources were totally inadequate for the job?  I'm assuming lots of people are raising their hands or grunting agreement. 

There's like the feeling of having to defend a 3km wide frontage with a reinforced platoon, eh?  Even if you have copious amounts of fortifications, you look at the map and think there's no way to ensure overlapping fires everywhere at the same time.  You also don't like to think about your lack of resilience, such as having a single HMG to cover a wide swath of fields or only being able to spare a Squad and some AT Teams as a reaction force.  You do the best you can do with what you have, but you mostly have to hope the enemy screws up.

I love playing these sorts of battles, however I am very well aware that if I don't get lucky a competent opponent is likely going to destroy something of mine at a time and place that I can't do anything about.  The enemy will then breach, and it's probably all over for me as the defender.  And even if I win the battle, I'm likely so depleted that in real life the next attack would finish me off if I wasn't significantly reinforced.

This is how I think the Russians have been feeling about the southern front since the lines firmed up.  It was OK for a long time because Ukraine lacked the resources or motivation to attack.  Now Ukraine has both.  It should be only a matter of time before things get really interesting.

Steve

[kevinkin]

8 minutes ago, dan/california said:

NATO should be aspiring to THEIR standards.

You mean having no air force? Maybe the standards we see in within UA have a lot to do with the lack of standards their enemy has. And that is not to disrespect the small units fighting on the ground for the UA. We are all impressed beyond belief. However, the amount of firepower NATO could bring to bear in a professional manner is orders of magnitude greater than what the UA can provide even with NATO assistance. You can tell, I am Ped off and frustrated. Not at you dan. Playing armchair general is fun in peace time when everything is hypothetical. Every time a post to this forum is made a UA troop is dying within the same timeframe. Maybe not exactly, but you get my point. 

[Grigb]

11 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Heh.

In my previous post about the lack of artillery response to the 47th Brigade's breaching op favored "not enough guns".  From what Haiduk posted there could have been 10% losses on top of an inadequate amount of tubes within striking distance.  Maybe not so much because of the physical depletion, but the sense amongst the Russian senior command that it has to take steps to minimize further losses.  Displacement to new positions, withholding fire so as to not attract CB, etc.

What I'm saying is the 10% losses might have had a shock value greater than the actual losses might suggest.  Kinda like someone losing a toe to a lawn mower.  You might still have 9 left and retain the ability to walk, but you might not handle that law mower with the same confidence as before

Steve

We need to keep in mind that in Soviet/RU practice the overall number of anything is not as important as the number of things that a) works, b) have competent personnel c) have enough supply.

And the RU command has a tendency of grouping working units together and fighting with such groupings. So, while 10% losses may not appear to be significant, they might be terrible if RU lost its finest working arty units. And the shock value would be really terrifying. 

[FancyCat]

Interesting that there's a seemingly a lull, so I think Ukraine will probably strike not in the South, but in the north, to force Russia to run themselves tired travelling to and from hot spots, and opening themselves to being fired on.

Consider if Ukraine uses another portion of its reverses to make a push in the Kharkiv region, not enough for a full breakthrough but enough to force a Russian response, just keep doing over and over till a great opening occurs or Russia runs out of reserves.