How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[DesertFox]

News on the possible Merkava deal

 

 

[keas66]

This sounds interesting if true . Always  been interested in the Merks

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

12 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

Thats why I advise to judge his output on the merit of its quality. Every online figure on twitter or youtube has to. They all are after earning money with their accounts. Hence all of them have an agenda, this way or the other.

Absolutely.

One thing to mention, though is, that this particular guy (Chuck Pfarrer) has been following this war in detail since it started.  At the very least it means he is not a "Johnny Come Lately" type.  I don't follow him because, as noted above, he sometimes gets a little enthusiastic about Ukraine's successes.  However, he's not a nobody even if his military background isn't particularly applicable to strategic analysis.

Steve

 

[DesertFox]

1 minute ago, Battlefront.com said:

However, he's not a nobody even if his military background isn't particularly applicable to strategic analysis.

Correct. We have already seen other higher ranked ex-military figures been completely off or following an agenda. MacGregor or the german ex-General Vad to name only a few. This is also a war about dominance in the information space.

[dan/california]

2 hours ago, kevinkin said:

Fixed winged vs Choppers:

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/attack-helicopter-crews-explain-why-an-attack-helicopter-if-properly-flown-would-defeat-most-fighter-airplanes-in-1v1-air-combat/

I remember this article from a few years ago:

In 1978/79 US Army and US Air Force conducted a joint experiment called Joint Countering Attack Helicopter (J-CATCH). J-CATCH focused on dissimilar air combat between jet fighters and attack helicopters. To the surprise of many involved in the program, the helicopters proved extremely dangerous to the fighters when they were properly employed, racking up a 5-to-1 kill ratio over the fighters when fighting at close ranges with guns.

Typical helicopter turn rates are 30 to 40 degrees per second, three times that of the fighter, even at high g, so the fighter will find the helicopters weapons always engaging it during any serious contest. If the helicopter gun and missiles were selected for anti-aircraft (like the 30mm guns on the Mi-24 and KA-50/51), the results are that the attack helicopter becomes like a rapidly mobile SAM site, a very dangerous target.’

All the evidence n this war is if the missile gets a lock, the helicopter dies. The things that matter are at what range and elevation can an F-16 spot the helicopter vs what range and elevation Russian missiles, whether SAMs or air launched can range the F-16. If F-16s with AMRAAM can engage without to much risk of missiles coming back the other way the helicopters would just stop flying. If they can't it wouldn't move the needle much. The relevant information is probably classified. And of course it is influenced by the model of F-16 in question, and the EW being employed by both sides.

Edit: and the model of the AAMRAM.

37 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

Here:

Hes no noname. Ex Seal Team Six Squad Leader. But remaining skeptical until confirmed by other sources is always advisable.

 

 

Pfarrer's brand is wild eyed optimism, if he had been mostly correct about the course of the war we would be discussing the Ukrainian siege of Sebastopol this morning. 

Edited June 18, 2023 by dan/california

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, womble said:

I'm a bit puzzled as to why these four things will be true. Surely the liberated areas won't be so huge relative to the already-defended lands that moving the AD and CB umbrellas forward (judiciously, once the superior CB of the UKR has whittled the Russian artillery down to local ineffectiveness) to cover the crunchies' advanced positions, will they?

Maintaining artillery superiority is another reason for a broad advance. If you generate a salient, you have to put your CB assets into the salient to be able to reach the enemy's batteries that are "in front" of the projection in your lines, which brings your long-ranged CB assets into range of shorter-ranged enemy fires to the sides of the pocket. Which is obviously suboptimal. So you need a broad, uniform front of advance, so that the enemy is always "in front" of you, not to the sides. Patton would have a fit.

Adding to what others have said about that article...

I also don't understand how the front moving southward causes Ukraine any particular problem.  Much of Ukraine's most deadly artillery and CB assets are self propelled, so relocating it isn't a big deal.  We are also talking about relatively short distances from the starting line to Russia's main defensive line AND it is likely to move slowly.  Having Ukraine's artillery and logistics keep up with a Kharkiv style breakthrough, on the other hand, is definitely going to cause some stress.  Fortunately, if that happens they will most likely be brushing up against hastily positioned crap forces with a minimum of support, so there is that to add to the mix.

I think the deciding factor here is Russia's ability to keep its soldiers in good defensive positions and willing to shoot back.  I do not think the average Russian unit is going to do well with withdrawal under pressure.  They will more likely resort to running on foot (as we have seen a few examples of) leaving equipment and ammo behind.  There's only so many times this can happen before Russia's primary defensive capabilities are small arms.

Steve

[Bearstronaut]

32 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

FFS how many of these guys have come out of the woodwork in the last 18 months?  1) his claimed experience is impossible to verify because - classified. 2) what in the hell does a Seal Team Six NCO know about high intensity peer-conventional conflict(?), and 3) if he was what he says he was, and is still hooked into western intel...he should know better than posting updates based on that, on freakin Twitter.

Claiming SF gets a lot of views but it that experience has little to do with the actual war unless they have served forward in Ukraine...and they cannot talk about it if they have.  I have watched a lot of guys with SF patches pretending thy know what they are talking about...and they do not.  Even the trail of former Generals are often off the mark because this war is so far outside the experience of any western military since Korea.  At this point all we can do is make best guesses by applying basic military assessments.  I have seen so much weird in this war that I feel completely lost at times.

He was a SEAL officer back the 80s who got out as an O3 and then became a screenwriter. A somewhat successful screenwriter it seems.

[chrisl]

44 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

A few days ago we had a discussion where we were looking for documentation of Russians saying the Cope Cages were intended to defend against Javelins.  Looks like we have it!

I personally think the Cope Cages (this type, not the sort of flimsy ones at the start of the war) have a decent chance of minimizing the damage from a Javelin if it hits the cage.  The problem for Russia is that the chances of that happening are not all that good. 

The relationship of the shooter to the tank, both in terms of range and angle, has a major influence as to where the Javelin strikes.  The cage, at best, protects the tank from a very limited subset of possibilities.  In one scenario (a perpendicular overshoot) the cage could actually "catch" what would otherwise have been a miss.

Javelins aim for center mass in part because they have a +/- error of something like a meter.  Which means, various factors can contribute to the missile not hitting center mass, which is the only thing the Cope Cage can even hope to intercept.  If the tank is moving towards the shooter it's more likely to hit the back of the tank than the turret, for example.

Also, although Javelins do come down at a steep angle they don't come straight down.  I expect most strikes would still wind up impacting the turret, especially if the shooter is perpendicular to the tank.

Steve

With HEAT, and probably especially with tandem charges, the cope cage can improve penetration.  The charge needs some distance to get the optimal stream for penetration and tank rounds are too short for that.  The cage triggers the round at a better distance and the tandem charge probably pokes a hole for the main charge to shoot a stream of hot metal through.

[kevinkin]

18 minutes ago, dan/california said:

All the evidence n this war is if the missile gets a lock, the helicopter dies.

That goes without saying. The devil is in the details. Fixed wing altitude vs finding the chopper in the clutter long enough to get a lock. Plus all the other things you mentioned like EW and setting up a SAM safe corridor for the choppers to work in. Using the fixed wings to strike bases would be more efficient. There is not a lot (any) new information on this. Maybe the USAF gave up on the idea. But the UA could come up with their own tactics when they receive F16s 

Edited June 18, 2023 by kevinkin

[Battlefront.com]

23 minutes ago, chrisl said:

With HEAT, and probably especially with tandem charges, the cope cage can improve penetration.  The charge needs some distance to get the optimal stream for penetration and tank rounds are too short for that.  The cage triggers the round at a better distance and the tandem charge probably pokes a hole for the main charge to shoot a stream of hot metal through.

There is a magic number for standoff distance being helpful or harmful.  I expect that the Cope Cage is more helpful than harmful.  Especially if the turret top is covered in ERA, because now that's 3 layers of defense for a 2 warehead threat.

What I didn't add to my Cope Cage diatribe is that anything on top of the turret is going to be lost, taking the tank out of action at the very least.  If a hatch is open, could be just as deadly as if the turret took a direct hit as Soviet designed tanks have plenty of ammo for cooking off.

To summarize my thoughts... it's not a totally stupid idea, but it definitely doesn't show any signs of being an effective way of defeating Javelins.  It also does ABSOLUTELY F'ALL against an NLAW or TOW-2B style top attack weapon.

Steve

[dan/california]

44 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

News on the possible Merkava deal

 

 

If they are going to irritate the Russian's this much they might as well start selling the Ukrainians everything. I mean there is a LONG list of Israeli stuff the Ukrainians would like to have, starting with a quarter of the rather large stockpile of Spike missiles held by various European countries.

Assuming this isn't vaporware do we have any idea of the actual plan? Are the Merkavas going straight to Ukraine? Or is Poland going to take the Merkavas and send Ukraine some vast percentage of what they have in inventory. The Poles do have a whole new army on order after all.

[The_Capt]

51 minutes ago, Bearstronaut said:

He was a SEAL officer back the 80s who got out as an O3 and then became a screenwriter. A somewhat successful screenwriter it seems.

Did said retired SEAL 03/screenwriter ever attend a war college?  Did he serve in a JTF HQ in a conventional peer war?  Does he have a PHD in defence sciences?  Military history?  Did he ever serve in a J2 shop?

This is the problem with people throwing quals around online…most people reading those quals have no context for them.  Right now the only people in the west with insider knowledge of this war cannot talk about it (but gawd I hope they are writing stuff down). 

Online one need only go “Insert SF quals” and suddenly they are a credible source followed by thousands.  And then there are the qualified people who are full of it.  Col Macgregor is very highly qualified - the guy is a SAMS grad no less - and he has been repeatedly shown as completely wrong so many times I do not think anyone is counting anymore.

My point being is that it does not matter one whit if this guy is who he says he is, because that “is” does not make him able to provide credible assessment and analysis.  Now maybe he got that map from someone else (no refs and citations tell me he never went to war college) but as a credible source I am pretty doubtful and it would matter if he was the guy that shot OBL in the head.  

The people who can make  more accurate assessments are in boring jobs and have resumes that will never be turned into a screenplay.  Take a look at Perun, the guy is not always 100% but he has never really gone into his background - my bet is defence scientist or institutional policy type.  But his stuff is generally solid.  It is likely built on years of boring office jobs in defence acquisition or force development, not “Delta Ranger Seal”!

 

Edited June 18, 2023 by The_Capt

[Bearstronaut]

11 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Did said retired SEAL 03/screenwriter ever attend a war college?  Did he serve in a JTF HQ in a conventional peer war?  Does he have a PHD in defence sciences?  Military history?  Did he ever serve in a J2 shop?

This is the problem with people throwing quals around online…most people reading those quals have no context for them.  Right now the only people in the west with insider knowledge of this war cannot talk about it (but gawd I hope they are writing stuff down). 

Online one need only go “Insert SF quals” and suddenly they are a credible source followed by thousands.  And then there are the qualified people who are full of it.  Col Macgregor is very highly qualified - the guy is a SAMS grad no less - and he has been repeatedly shown as completely wrong so many times I do not think anyone is counting anymore.

My point being is that it does not matter one whit if this guy is who he says he is, because that “is” does not make him able to provide credible assessment and analysis.  Now maybe he got that map from someone else (no refs and citations tell me he never went to war college) but as a credible source I am pretty doubtful and it would matter if he was the guy that shot OBL in the head.  

The people who can make  more accurate assessments are in boring jobs and have resumes that will never be turned into a screenplay.  Take a look at Perun, the guy is not always 100% but he has never really gone into his background - my bet is defence scientist or institutional policy type.  But his stuff is generally solid.  It is likely built on years of boring office jobs in defence acquisition or force development, not “Delta Ranger Seal”!

 

I mean I agree with you. I’m just pointing out to that he did in fact serve as a SEAL officer. I’m an intelligence professional myself so it irks me when people say “oh I was an infantry officer in the Cold War so let me tell you about your job.” 

[billbindc]

1 hour ago, DesertFox said:

Here:

Hes no noname. Ex Seal Team Six Squad Leader. But remaining skeptical until confirmed by other sources is always advisable.

 

 

Pfarrer is a crank. 

[Vanir Ausf B]

[Grigb]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

A few days ago we had a discussion where we were looking for documentation of Russians saying the Cope Cages were intended to defend against Javelins.  Looks like we have it!

We have everything. This is where it all began two years ago:

Anti-missile "visor": T-72B3 with new protection spotted near Rostov

However, as the military department [RU MOD] stated to "RG" [RU Newspaper], the design is intended to enhance protection against anti-tank missiles and ammunition of a new generation. As previously stated, contemporary ATGMs, such as the American Javelin, are being designed with the anticipation that the missile will strike the most vulnerable portions of armored vehicles. One of these locations is the tank turret's top projection.

 

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I personally think the Cope Cages (this type, not the sort of flimsy ones at the start of the war) have a decent chance of minimizing the damage from a Javelin if it hits the cage.

This, in my opinion, is nothing more than a morale booster and a corruption scheme. It is beneficial to the morale of cannon fodder if they think they are adequately protected. Even better if it generates revenue for everyone involved. Russian generals and crony manufactures are... well, Russian.

 

[Yet]

6 hours ago, The_Capt said:

That is ridiculous.  They are the point they need to bubble wrap a tank and build a barn roof on top of it.

you mean this. Ru might need it, but Ukr got it.

 

 

[Grigb]

3 hours ago, DesertFox said:

Here:

Hes no noname. Ex Seal Team Six Squad Leader. But remaining skeptical until confirmed by other sources is always advisable.

 

 

I have no data to support this map. And I look at a lot of sources from both sides.

[Grigb]

I did not manage to finish current Mashovets posts. So, for now I would like to post summary for 17-18 of June

Quote

In conclusion...

So, while the enemy command has begun to increase its efforts in the Tokmak direction, the majority of its reserves are still not participating in this process.
When reports begin to reference the 5th separate tank brigade (STB), 57th, 64th, and 69th SMRBr more frequently, it may be argued that "it has begun," and the situation for the enemy starts to become dangerous on an operational scale.

This has not yet been observed...

 

[DesertFox]

How to demilitarize a T-55 - Orc style

 

 

[DesertFox]

2 hours ago, dan/california said:

If they are going to irritate the Russian's this much they might as well start selling the Ukrainians everything. I mean there is a LONG list of Israeli stuff the Ukrainians would like to have, starting with a quarter of the rather large stockpile of Spike missiles held by various European countries.

Assuming this isn't vaporware do we have any idea of the actual plan? Are the Merkavas going straight to Ukraine? Or is Poland going to take the Merkavas and send Ukraine some vast percentage of what they have in inventory. The Poles do have a whole new army on order after all.

My bet would be there is only talk between Poland and Israel. Poland takes the 200 Merkavas and sents 200 tanks out of their arsenal to Ukraine. I don't see Israel allowing Ukraine to use Merkavas. However we will know for sure once the deal is fixed.

[Battlefront.com]

58 minutes ago, Grigb said:

This, in my opinion, is nothing more than a morale booster and a corruption scheme. It is beneficial to the morale of cannon fodder if they think they are adequately protected. Even better if it generates revenue for everyone involved. Russian generals and crony manufactures are... well, Russian.

For sure that is what it is.  The theoretical positives of the Cope Cage are all outweighed by practical negatives/neutrals.  A typical tank would probably have just as much chance of survival through a slightly off target Javelin than survival because of the Cope Cage.

Thanks for reminding us all that Cope Cages existed before the 2022 invasion.  It is not surprising, really, as Ukraine already had Javelins and Russia already planned on invading.

Steve

[Grigb]

Details of Pyatikhatka assault:

Quote

We shall not give the enemy gift by telling objective miscalculations in defensive organization. However, we will state that the AFU most likely picked the least fortified location in defensive and engineering-defensive terms, allowing them to penetrate our defense line 2.5 kilometers deep from the LBS [Front line]. They employed the UR-77 to clear the path for the tanks to assault.

If, in the south Donetsk direction, certain settlements changed hands up to five times during the fighting for Makarovka, Storozhevoye, and Novodonetsky, and the UKR were significantly damaged [Claim], we have to say that the UKR seized Pyatikhatki quite easily. "Well, so what, the Pyatikhatki don't have a particularly important tactical value - we'll capture it back..." someone will surely reply. (I regularly hear such speeches). It would be excellent to retake it, but in terms of tactical significance, it's worth remembering that this is the route to Vasilevka and the direction of Kamenka, which allows the enemy to launch a flank attack on our troops in this area.

Another comment

Quote

In general, the AFU took advantage of the consolidation of success on the Vremyevsky ledge [Berdyanks Direction] (the capture of Makarovka, Levadne, and Novodarovka) and were able to rotate some of the damaged equipment and wounded infantry, who received the majority of our forces' resistance when advancing through Lobkove, which, as we recall, is also located in the lowlands...

I'd want to elaborate on what my colleague mentioned. The enemy used the M58 "Mine Clearing Line Charge" (MICLIC) mine clearance equipment given by the US instead of the UR-77 for clearing mines and creating routes in our defense. And the information concerning the frequent change of control over settlements like Makarivka, for example, does not entirely match reality. According to those who took part in the fight against the enemy's advance - following our withdrawal, we counterattacked against the enemy's effort to push into Staromayorske, throwing the AFU back to Makarivka, which many interpreted as restoring our control over the settlement. [simply put RU statements about RU counter-attacks that frequently push UKR out of settlements is often usual RU BS] 

 

[Kinophile]

Chuck PfaffarfaferrENOUGHWithTheFs has been posting since the start. Hes certainly pro-UKR and not dumb, but absolutely has a cheerleader mind rather than an analytic one. He has many times overexaggerated UKR small tactical successes into supposedly operational impacts. 

He's kinda the mirror opposite of the Russian copium bloggers ("Everything is fine")  where his line is "Everything Is About To Change!".

He's a decent guy, isn't a liar but is bit of a wind bag and must be confirmed by two other sources to be considered accurate. By then of course, the moment is past and he's onto the Next Big Development.

Excitable.

 

Edited June 18, 2023 by Kinophile

[Battlefront.com]

10 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

How to demilitarize a T-55 - Orc style

 

 

Really dumb execution of a mediocre concept.  They would have had better results if they just left the VBIED in hidden in a town they were about to lose and then detonate it when the Ukrainians overran it.

Steve