How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[The_MonkeyKing]

19 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

So then ... is this correct interpretation of their significance?
 

 

The fact they are DPICM doesn't matter. The fact that are artillery ammo and there are a lot of them immediately available, that is what matters.

Kofman clearly stated this.on the resent podcasts.

[cesmonkey]

1 minute ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

The fact they are DPICM doesn't matter. The fact that are artillery ammo and there are a lot of them immediately available, that is what matters.

Kofman clearly stated this.on the resent podcasts.

And this FT article says there are a lot of such rounds.
https://www.ft.com/content/f4955a0b-52fd-4f1b-8d69-bb0d4367c1aa
 

Quote

One advantage of cluster munitions is that the US has large supplies it can quickly tap into, with nearly 3m rounds in its inventories, much of them in US and allied bases in Europe.
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/03-21-23_dpicm_letter.pdf

 

[The_Capt]

20 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

So then ... is this correct interpretation of their significance?
 

 

Can’t read it now that Twitter has gone all club house.  I suspect their significance is that the UA will not run out of ammunition for long range fires.  They already have a significant ISR advantage and DPICM are - on paper at least - anywhere from 3-5 times more effect per round shot when compared to dumb artillery rounds.  Or at least they were before modern fire control etc.  The UA has been doing very well with dumb arty and PGM is next level of course.  DPICM is very effective against mech and armor.  It is supposed to be effective against dug in troops but there I am less sure.  The stuff will definitely take out logistics and C2 nodes.

I suspect it will definitely keep things going.  Also no one ever planned to use a lot of DPICM, it was rarely more than about 15% of war stocks during the Cold War.  So if the UA starts using a lot of this in a saturation type approach we in new territory as to what the systems can do.  I personally do not think they are a game changer, they allow the game to continue to be played which is pretty important at this point.  The holy trinity of this war has been indirect fires, ISR and infantry.  So this keeps that first one going. 

[DesertFox]

Wouldn´t have expected that from Erdogan. 

 Erdogan: Ukraine deserves NATO membership.

 

https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1677432588883853312?s=20

[akd]

57 minutes ago, Tenses said:

Were AIM-7 supplied before? I haven't noticed that in previous packages.

There was talk of some ingenious solution to use AIM-7 on Buk SAM launchers.

[Battlefront.com]

20 minutes ago, akd said:

There was talk of some ingenious solution to use AIM-7 on Buk SAM launchers.

Interesting.  The last I heard of AIM-7 was a rumor (never followed up on) that they acquired some around the time of slaughtering the Russian air strike group approaching Kyiv.  It was for this reason some speculated that is what took them out, though we know soon found out it was Patriot.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

54 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Clip from reportedly Russian atillery doing pre-planned mission, but in fact it looks like Russians made their own "death-trench" rigged with explosives to lure Ukrainian soldiers into. They unfortunatelly succeeded.

 

That sucks.  I've been wondering why we haven't heard of something like this given Russia's love of booby traps.  Looks like the trench was mined and artillery was zeroed in to make things even worse.  Notice towards the end a soldier jumps in and immediately, right where he landed, there was an explosion.  The others were also right where the infantry was.

The explosions in the trench are larger than standard AP mines so they are likely some sort of improvised arrangement, such as an AP mine strapped to an AT or mortar round.

Steve

[sburke]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

Meanwhile, we hear of progress in Bakhmut.  Other than attrition does anyone see any kind of operational level success that can be had in the Bakhmut region?  Maybe cut off some RU troops, which is more attrition, of course, but what can really happen in that sector that would change things in a big way?

damn man are you asking the capt to come round and make you stay after class?  How many times has he said it is about messaging?  Losing Bakhmut is a huge blow to Russia from a messaging perspective. 10 months of catastrophic losses, their only claim to success (even if it is a huge stress to call that a success) in a very long time.  Not only that it gives Prig more ammo to throw at the MoD and divisions within the Russian military are a very good thing.

Yeah I'd say it has a lot of significance.  Maybe not in strictly military terms, but war is not defined in strictly military terms.

[Teufel]

2 hours ago, DesertFox said:

Not a single one. CV90 vids a few, but none localized.

 

https://twitter.com/clashreport/status/1677366855810392072?s=20

How about this one?

 

[danfrodo]

8 minutes ago, sburke said:

damn man are you asking the capt to come round and make you stay after class?  How many times has he said it is about messaging? 

c'mon, Sburke,  gimmee a little credit  -- I'm dumb but I aint that dumb - well, ok, close to that dumb but not quite there.  I totally get the propaganda points for taking Bakhmut, that's obvious to everyone here.  I am interested in what operational or other rewards there might be.  Right now I am just seeing the attrition reward since RU feels compelled to hold every inch, especially inches of ground w such propaganda significance.  But is there something else we're missing? 

[cesmonkey]

50 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Interesting.  The last I heard of AIM-7 was a rumor (never followed up on) that they acquired some around the time of slaughtering the Russian air strike group approaching Kyiv.  It was for this reason some speculated that is what took them out, though we know soon found out it was Patriot.

Steve

Here's an article on that from January:
https://defence-blog.com/ukraine-to-integrate-sea-sparrow-missile-into-soviet-era-buk-launchers/

[Battlefront.com]

23 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

c'mon, Sburke,  gimmee a little credit  -- I'm dumb but I aint that dumb - well, ok, close to that dumb but not quite there.  I totally get the propaganda points for taking Bakhmut, that's obvious to everyone here.  I am interested in what operational or other rewards there might be.  Right now I am just seeing the attrition reward since RU feels compelled to hold every inch, especially inches of ground w such propaganda significance.  But is there something else we're missing? 

Besides the major PR hit to Russia's war effort, the RU Nats are going to go ballistic.  On its own it doesn't mean much, but those guys are definitely showing themselves to be a destabilizing factor.  Prig's run to Moscow was in part based on this.  The more things the RU Nats have to be angry about, the better.

Because Russia is well aware of this they are likely to continue diverting resources to Bakhmut to try and keep it.  Every soldier, every round of artillery ammo, every Lancet, etc. that goes there is one that isn't going to the south.  Since Ukraine is largely pushing with existing forces, not its strategic reserve, this creates a disproportional advantage for Ukraine.

And then there is the PR messaging to Ukrainians and the West, not to mention Russia's hedging allies.  This is especially important as the main counter offensive is under scrutiny for taking too long and/or is in trouble.

Steve

[danfrodo]

3 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Besides the major PR hit to Russia's war effort, the RU Nats are going to go ballistic.  On its own it doesn't mean much, but those guys are definitely showing themselves to be a destabilizing factor.  Prig's run to Moscow was in part based on this.  The more things the RU Nats have to be angry about, the better.

Because Russia is well aware of this they are likely to continue diverting resources to Bakhmut to try and keep it.  Every soldier, every round of artillery ammo, every Lancet, etc. that goes there is one that isn't going to the south.  Since Ukraine is largely pushing with existing forces, not its strategic reserve, this creates a disproportional advantage for Ukraine.

And then there is the PR messaging to Ukrainians and the West, not to mention Russia's hedging allies.  This is especially important as the main counter offensive is under scrutiny for taking too long and/or is in trouble.

Steve

Thanks Steve.  That is pretty much all I could come up with, was just wondering if I was missing something bigger.  Sure would like to see 'Girkin & The Patriots' band turn up the volume and undercut Putin some more.

[dan/california]

2 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

Clip from reportedly Russian atillery doing pre-planned mission, but in fact it looks like Russians made their own "death-trench" rigged with explosives to lure Ukrainian soldiers into. They unfortunatelly succeeded.

 

Ugly, but in the long term it will get a lot more Russians killed. It just inclines the Ukrainians to throw enough explosives into every single trench to be very sure, and keep moving. It makes it rather more difficult to surrender. 

[Offshoot]

5 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

In fact, some OSINT source I saw yesterday claimed that Ukraine now has more tanks in service than Russia does.

Bloomberg did an article on arms balance in Ukraine and based it on data from the Kiel Institute, IISS and Oryx - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-05/shift-in-balance-of-arms-in-ukraine-underscored-by-fresh-data?leadSource=reddit_wall

Edited July 8, 2023 by Offshoot

[Kinophile]

5 hours ago, kimbosbread said:

The epic influx from Africa + ME over the next decade as water/food/war issues in those areas continue is going to cause serious political instability in Europe.

I propose that as part of reparations, Russia gets to take the asylum seekers and put them in the far east.

Christ,  why would you inflict Russia on desperate people fleeing starvation, war, environmental destruction and escalating temperatures? 

And why the godawful Far East? 

[Vet 0369]

12 hours ago, kevinkin said:

Redoing backward thinking with some forward thinking:

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-attacks-on-russia-us-army-command-post-vulnerability-2023-7

If the US work force is moving to remote operations, military command does not have to commute to large hubs to get the job done. I think it's about power generation in the field, its storage and reliable comms.

No matter how secure your comms are, or should I say you THINK they are, they still generate a lot of emissions, and can be used to pinpoint your units, command elements, and locations just from the densities of the emissions. Refer to what I said earlier in reference to sabotaging the NPP.

[FancyCat]

 

Quote

A few thoughts on DPICM. Providing cluster munitions to Ukraine, at this stage, could have a significant impact beyond what other capabilities might achieve. Despite the drawbacks, unlocking this stockpile has important implications for the course of Ukraine's offensive. 1/

Ukraine's offensive is limited by the artillery ammunition available. The US, and other countries, provided a significant amount for this operation. Much of this was borrowed from South Korea. Without this ammunition it is difficult to imagine this offensive taking place. 2/

Progress has been slow, difficult, and without sustained breakthroughs thus far. While UA retains the bulk of its combat power, artillery use rate is likely higher than anticipated, especially as the past weeks have seen a largely attritional approach. 3/

Consequently, Ukraine's hardest limit is proably not manpower, or equipment, but arty ammunition. This is foremost about the numbers. Providing DPICM gives access to a sizable stockpile of artillery ammo that can alleviate the time pressure on UA operations. 4/

With DPICM the US is also in a much better position to sustain Ukraine's war effort into next year, which requires significant amounts of artillery ammunition on a monthly basis. While other capabilities may be great to have, providing DPICM may prove more impactful. 5/

While UA retains options, the offensive may culminate whenever the ammunition runs low. Extending that timeline is critical. I wont get into the debate on effectiveness vs the risks, dud rates, etc. My view is these considerations are ultimately best left for Ukraine to weigh.

 

[kevinkin]

1 hour ago, Vet 0369 said:

Refer to what I said earlier in reference to sabotaging the NPP.

Agree. The idea is to make each hub less profitable and with the system being able to heal if distributed nodes are discovered and destroyed. Also, the system might be able to move to new positions quickly. Sort like the Harlem Trotters dribbling routines. Now you see em, now you don't. Not perfect. Just another way to frustrate the enemy. 

Edited July 8, 2023 by kevinkin

[DesertFox]

Black Humour...

 

https://twitter.com/Sputnik_Not/status/1677479985857155072?s=20

[DesertFox]

Well, seems like there needs to be done something...

 

https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1677512839215427584?s=20

[cesmonkey]

This afternoon, there was another short briefing at the Pentagon where Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Dr. Colin Kahl answered a few questions:

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3452000/under-secretary-of-defense-for-policy-dr-colin-kahl-holds-press-briefing/

Here are some quotes:

On Ukraine's counter-offensive:

Quote

But I will say this -- you know, it is slower than we had hoped -- again, Ukrainian officials have said as much -- but the Ukrainians have a lot of combat power left.  And in fact, the majority of their combat power for this fight has not been brought to bear.

Quote

I think the Russians probably were more successful in digging in more deeply than perhaps was fully appreciated.  You know, no plan survives first contact with the enemy.  So, they are moving deliberately against the threat that's there.

On the delivery of cluster munitions:

Quote

On the timing, I'm going to be a little circumspect for operational security reasons.  We have been pretty cautious about talking about specific timelines.  The one thing I will say is they will deliver in a timeframe that is relevant for the counter-offensive.

Quote

All I'm going to say is we have hundreds of thousands that are available at this dud rate, and that we believe the numbers and our ability to flow them into Ukraine will be sufficient to keep them not only in the current fight, but to build this bridge to increased capacity on the 155 unitary rounds.

 

[chrisl]

This is the best one:

Quote

All I'm going to say is we have hundreds of thousands that are available at this dud rate, and that we believe the numbers and our ability to flow them into Ukraine will be sufficient to keep them not only in the current fight, but to build this bridge to increased capacity on the 155 unitary rounds.

I think it translates to "Russia should avoid any concentration of any kind of forces in Ukraine for the next 6 months unless they want to be cluster bombed."

[sburke]

3 minutes ago, chrisl said:

This is the best one:

I think it translates to "Russia should avoid any concentration of any kind of forces in Ukraine for the next 6 months unless they want to be cluster bombed."

translation : Russia is clusterfk'd

[kevinkin]

1 hour ago, chrisl said:

I think it translates to "Russia should avoid any concentration of any kind of forces in Ukraine for the next 6 months unless they want to be cluster bombed."

Just wonder, as these munitions arrive in theater, if the UA will delay releasing their "western" brigades into the fight?  They could be useful in sealing off a break in operations from counterattacks since those will have to come in via open ground. So now maybe the Fall will see mechanized warfare - war of movement - aided by by clusters. They are not a miracle weapon. But the UA is pretty good at husbanding recourses.