How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Maciej Zwolinski]

8 minutes ago, billbindc said:

it's that he's contradicting the civilian leadership in a public way that is complicating their job in getting American aid. That's not what his job is and he should be vetting all of his statements through Zelenksy, period and end of story. 

I am not seeing that contradiction actually. Zaluzny in his Economist interview stated the need for more troops, precisely speaking he identified as one of his 5 priorities creation of the ability to train and manage new troops. Nowhere did he contrast that with Zelensky's policy or declared his opposition to some idea of Zelenski.  Similarly Zelensky has never publicly declared he does not want to extend conscription, with which Zaluzny's ideas could be contrasted. As far as I see, the entire perception that Zelenski and Zaluzny are at loggerheads re conscription comes from the commentariat.

It would be different if Zaluzny said something which openly crititcised Zelenski's policy. But I see a different story - each time Zaluzny says pretty much anything, we hear a murmur of commentary: He is criticising Zelenski, he is against Zelenski. This could be Russian dezinformatsia for all we know.

[pintere]

2 hours ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

Hang on, are those posts not a bit contrary to each other? Either the Ukrainians have cut off Russian forces which infiltrated into Avdiivka (in which case Avdieevka is one of the sides of the Kessel), or Avdieevka is being slowly conquered by the Russians. I mean, if Russians are physically in Avdieevka but are cut off they are not doing the conquering, they are doing all-round defence.

There’s no contradiction. Cutting off the infiltrated Russian troops (even wiping them out) wouldn’t change the overall trend. History is full of examples where local tactical victories (which I hope this turns out to be) failed to change the overall course of the battle. 

[Bulletpoint]

10 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

I am not seeing that contradiction actually. Zaluzny in his Economist interview stated the need for more troops, precisely speaking he identified as one of his 5 priorities creation of the ability to train and manage new troops. Nowhere did he contrast that with Zelensky's policy or declared his opposition to some idea of Zelenski.  Similarly Zelensky has never publicly declared he does not want to extend conscription, with which Zaluzny's ideas could be contrasted. As far as I see, the entire perception that Zelenski and Zaluzny are at loggerheads re conscription comes from the commentariat.

It would be different if Zaluzny said something which openly crititcised Zelenski's policy. But I see a different story - each time Zaluzny says pretty much anything, we hear a murmur of commentary: He is criticising Zelenski, he is against Zelenski. This could be Russian dezinformatsia for all we know.

I think the disagreement between them began when the Ukrainian offensive stalled and casualties were piling up. The politician Zelensky likely wanted to continue the offensive, but the military man Zaluzny wanted to call it off. Because he could see that it wouldn't break through, and he didn't want to reinforce failure and sacrifice many troops for basically nothing.

Then later, Zaluzny gave an interview where he said :

“Just like in the first world war we have reached the level of technology that puts us into a stalemate,” he says. The general concludes that it would take a massive technological leap to break the deadlock. “There will most likely be no deep and beautiful breakthrough.”

This went against the message of Zelensky who had kept upbeat and positive that Ukraine could do it. And he has to. Zelensky knows that western backers won't keep funding the war if they start to see it as unwinnable.

Before that interview, we were still arguing here on the forum about whether or not Ukraine's offensive had failed or not. I also remember prominent youtubers claiming that the offensive "had not yet culminated" even even though no real progresss had been made for two weeks.

But after the Zaluzny interview, the narrative changed overnight and most people began openly saying that the offensive had failed.

[Kraft]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

And speaking of Ukrainian success.  If those numbers flying around are even halfway correct, the RA has lost around an entire Bde - maybe up to crippling a Div - on this one little (and operationally insignificant) town over the last 3 months.

The UA could pull out right now and this is a major win.

We should all be hopeful russia manages to scale up their failing, not just in Bakhmut and Avdiivka, the last stronghold in Donetsk, but failing beyond - that will win the war.

Maybe after losing the battle for Avdiivka, they should lose the battle for operationally insignificant Kupyansk, its only 5km until russia can fail there too.

Edited February 5 by Kraft

[The_Capt]

33 minutes ago, Kraft said:

We should all be hopeful russia manages to scale up their failing, not just in Bakhmut and Avdiivka, the last stronghold in Donetsk, but failing beyond - that will win the war.

Maybe after losing the battle for Avdiivka, they should lose the battle for operationally insignificant Kupyansk, its only 5km until russia can fail there too.

I wasn't always a scholarly upstanding military officer - you can lose a street fight pretty quickly by shattering your hands on someone's forehead.

Edited February 5 by The_Capt

[Kraft]

22 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I wasn't always a scholarly upstanding military officer - you can lose a street fight pretty quickly by shattering your hands on someone's forehead.

Being ahead in an oryx excel is only useful if the few Bradleys, Leos,.. that are lost are actually replaced. Russia can replace these losses for another 2-3 years. The toll is paid by the units that have to weather these assaults with rationed shells.

The loss ratio wouldnt be as much in favor were support available that could end up on oryx, while endless mechanized hordes break over trenches held with blood alone. 

I am fairly confident this war will end before one side is reduced to conscripts sharing a rifle and ammo, towns and cities matter, especially if they contest a Region russia wants to claim its own. 

Edited February 5 by Kraft

[kimbosbread]

If Ukraine has enough deep strike drones (and they will), Russia may not have enough fuel to move all those vehicles up. The logistics tail for trucks, tanks etc is massive.

[Vanir Ausf B]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I wasn't always a scholarly upstanding military officer - you can lose a street fight pretty quickly by shattering your hands on someone's forehead.

Now we know why you've been a captain for 20 years.

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, Kraft said:

Being ahead in an oryx excel is only useful if the few Bradleys, Leos,.. that are lost are actually replaced. Russia can replace these losses for another 2-3 years. The toll is paid by the units that have to weather these assaults with rationed shells.

The loss ratio wouldnt be as much in favor were support available that could end up on oryx, while endless mechanized hordes break over trenches held with blood alone. 

I am fairly confident this war will end before one side is reduced to conscripts sharing a rifle and ammo, towns and cities matter, especially if they contest a Region russia wants to claim its own. 

I think this is an extension of the whole Zelensky/Zaluzny thing.  Politically towns and cities matter very much.  Militarily the answer is far less cut and dry. 

Looking on the map:

Adiivka has next to zero operational value.  It is stubborn salient that the RA is breaking a division upon - that is its military value.  If Adiivka falls it means next to nothing unless this is somehow the lynchpin of the entire UA defence in this sector - which we know it is not.  No natural obstacles, no transport infra implications.  Any core resources or communications tech centered on Adiivka?

This whole "not one step back" plays well to the public but in reality land war is a lot of trading ground for options.  And right now the RA is not buying anymore options through this whole exercise. 

"But if we lose it, we will just have to take it back."  Well true, but if the RA breaks another division there, perhaps it might be much easier to take back afterwards?  And frankly this whole sector is an offensive nightmare - you take back Adiivka...so what?  Next stop is an urban hell called Donetsk.  This is a side show the RA is being pushed into politically and blowing itself all to hell over.  So Ukraine should keep it just as long as it keep delivering 10:1 loss ratios for the RA.  After that pull back and find another Bakhmut/Aviidka and let the RA smash itself to pieces.

As to Bradleys and Abrahams - sure keep them coming but they are not what this fight will ride on.  C4ISR, unmanned, infantry and guns - get those right and then if there is room on the plane, load a Bradley.

The RA is not some bottomless behemoth.  It is a mess of a military that is playing chicken with itself.  Eventually it will lose.

[TheVulture]

4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Maybe I'm fixating too much on the two roads. It might be that they can bring in supplies across the fields, too. And withdraw that way also, if need be.

Don't forget that Avdiivka has been on the front line since 2014 (coming up on 10 years), and for two years of active continuous fighting.  There's a good chance that Ukraine has managed to build up some resilience there, and alternative ways of getting supplies in rather than just driving along the road.

Don't forget how long Mariupol managed to hold out for despite being completely surrounded, thanks to a combination of positions solidly fortified for all round defence, well stocked, and the apparent ability of the Ukraine air force to run a surprising number of helicopted resupply and evac missions in and out of the encirclement.

Somewhere that's been on the front line for 10 years has probably had a bit of work done to prepare some solid defensive positions.

[danfrodo]

10 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

And frankly this whole sector is an offensive nightmare - you take back Adiivka...so what?

exactly what I've been wondering.  So a pile of rubble once called Andiivka is lost?  As TheCapt says, it's doesn't give RU any more operational or strategic options.  Putin will act like they just won the war, like w Bakhmut.  Hold it while it makes attritional sense, fall back when that's no longer the case.  

And maybe the f--ing criminals in the US House of Reps could stop doing the bidding of Putin and send the gear that will make a difference.  We all saw Tucker Carlson in Moscow recently.  He was the public voice of these folks.  Tells me a lot.  

EU doing its part.  We need enough GOPers to do the right thing and override the Putin lackies -- there's not many of them.  This could all end if just a small minority of GOP house members did the right thing, right now.  I believe most of them very much want to do the right thing but think they'll be punished for it -- but that's why it's called courage.  The other choice is called cowardice.

[Haiduk]

23 hours ago, poesel said:

Could someone please explain what this Zelenskyy / Zalushny thing is all about? Is that only a political quarrel, and Zelenskyy is trying to get rid of a rival? Or is there some real concern that a general is trying to reach for political power?

 

I afraid, nobody can say real reasons. Zelenskiy said "I'm thinking about rotation of high military command and not only military leaders, we need to give new pulse to leadership of country. We can't despair, can't give up. We should push everybody in one direction". 

The minister of vetaran affairs resigned today.

There are rumors that Zelenskiy is going to substitute also chief of General Staff general-lieutenant Serhiy Shaptala.

But who can sit oт their places? President's Office (Yermak) is allegedly searching candidatures, but... who dares to take huge responsibility on this duty? Rumors say Sysrskiy and Budanov as most loyal to president rejected to be on the place of Zaluzhnyi and even stood for Zaluzhyi has to remain on own duty. But probably Zelenskiy is very dissapointed by summer campaign results and those who planned this operation - both Shaptala and Zaluzhnyi now should be "punished", especially after Zaluzhnyi in straight way told about "dead end" of war, which can be resolved onlt by significant technological superiruty, and criticized political leadership that they didn't do anything to encourage citizens go to army.

Among soldiers Zaluzhnyi also slightly lost own popularity. Despite he continuously talks that stupid Soviet way of army managment and bureaucracy is almost gone, but soldiers say Soveit marasmus in army is growing month by month. Of course this is mostly work of MoD, not of Chief-in-Command or General Staff, but private Mykola see around the same "sovok" and naturaly blame all top-brass including Zaluzhnyi too.

So, if Zaluzhnyi resigned (and this will be terrible mistake of Zelenskiy), I doubt we will see "march on Kyiv". Troops just accepted new chief and will do own work   

 

Edited February 5 by Haiduk

[LongLeftFlank]

3 hours ago, kimbosbread said:

If Ukraine has enough deep strike drones (and they will), Russia may not have enough fuel to move all those vehicles up. The logistics tail for trucks, tanks etc is massive.

That deep strike drone thing cuts both ways of course, albeit with some lag and significant incompetence (to date) on the RU side.

At least until someone can scale down ECM jamming to squad level.

Depending on how 'deep' is deep, the Russian rail net seems like the lowest hanging fruit here. Hit trestles, culverts, etc., hit the stalled trains, hit the Pioneer repair crews, keep doing it. Every damn day.

[Haiduk]

4 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Do we have any idea how many UA troops are actually in that pocket?

Not only in the "pocket", but whole Avdiivka front: 110th mech brigade, 47th mech.brigade, 116 mech.birgade, 53rd mech.brigade, battalion of 63rd mech,brigade, National Guard "Omega" special forces elements, combined police and border guard detachments 

[Haiduk]

36 minutes ago, TheVulture said:

Don't forget how long Mariupol managed to hold out for despite being completely surrounded, thanks to a combination of positions solidly fortified for all round defence,

Alas, Mariupol defence lines out of the city were abandoned almost at once. If not "Azov", which established defense inside the city and cut off panic among 36th marines brigade, which ran to the city from easterm defense line, the city would fall enough quickly. 

[Haiduk]

In the book of S.Shuster "The Showman", author told Zelenskiy has such a feature as carelessness, he has almost full absence of feel of danger. Probably this was one of reasons he didn't want to belive in information about Russian invasion, so Zaluzhnyi (as claimed Shuster) was preparing troops to repelling of aggression almost in secret both from Zelenskiy and from USA. 

This is concerning yesterday visit of Zelenskiy to Robotyne. 

 

 

Edited February 5 by Haiduk

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, alison said:

This has been a dream for decades. I remember reading articles about it during the first round of VR/AR/wearable computing buzz in the 90s. I feel like there have been half a dozen Future Land Force Spectrum Warrior Initiative programs to make it happen, and as far as I know it never has. The last thing I remember was Microsoft pivoting HoloLens to the military. Looking at Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Visual_Augmentation_System) it seems like that one might have actually gotten somewhat of a rollout. Perhaps our active duty or recently-serving members can comment on if it's any good?

I'm skeptical, because this tech has been just around the corner forever, and yet never seems to be worth its literal weight to people who are already lugging a ton of gear around. I'm not a soldier, but I have done a decent amount of long term travel - bike touring, hiking etc - and even though having a permanent HUD is a cool fantasy, in practice just having a cheap and easily-replaceable phone was good enough. The times you really need hands focused on what's right in front of you, you generally need your full field of vision too. The times a fully networked computer would add context to what you are seeing - when you're in a position to contemplate that extra data - then you also have time to take a glance at a device on your wrist or in your pocket or attached to the rest of your gear.

I don't think the barrier is that the technology isn't there yet, I think it's more that humans have discovered that integrating a "second brain" works more smoothly when it's a discrete tool that can be held in our hands and manipulated with our fingers, then tucked away while we focus on something else. The best thing about modern networking technologies is that the front line soldiers can do exactly that, while all the data is still being collected and fed back to the command post where dedicated specialists can apply further analysis.

Looking at what we can see from what's happening in Ukraine, the modern feedback loop appears to be faster than it was in the days of human scouts and radio signals, but the overall flow of collecting, filtering and distributing information seems largely unchanged. I am not sure if it will ever become efficient to issue devices that multiplex a dozen inputs to a single soldier when they - quite literally - have an army to lean on.

Of course, the sci-fi nerd in me would love to be proven wrong.

Yeah, the Stryker Warrior (IIRC that was the last name the HUD/net centric system was called) pushed the tech too hard for the day.  The HUD displays for Stryker Commanders was trialed in Iraq and quickly flunked out of school.  Tech simply needs to get better before it is viable.  And we're getting close to being there.

Having it be used by drone pilots and intel experts going along for the "ride"?  For sure this is already proving to be quite practical and important.

I see VR type stuff being extended to UGVs.  Having used VR quite a bit recently I have to say it's massively applicable and completely within today's tech.

But having it be a general purpose frontline tool for mundane combat tasks?  Yeah, I agree it's going to be a while before that's possible.

Steve

[The_Capt]

59 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Not only in the "pocket", but whole Avdiivka front: 110th mech brigade, 47th mech.brigade, 116 mech.birgade, 53rd mech.brigade, battalion of 63rd mech,brigade, National Guard "Omega" special forces elements, combined police and border guard detachments 

Ok, that is the entire sector.  But how many at risk in that salient?  I doubt the UA have an entire division in that small salient.

[Haiduk]

Feb 3, UKR HIMARS strike on restorant "Adriatic" in occupied Lysychanksk killed minister of emergncy of LNR lt.colonel Aleksei Potelishchenko (during ATO/OOS he was deputy of chief of the staff of LNR tank battalion).

Together with him were killed several local city council deputies, servicemen of procecution office and police as weel as collaborationists. They gathered to celebrate a birthday of restorant owner and LNR deputy Ivan Zhushma. 

Also a traitor was killed - former policeman, who fled to Dnipro at the start of teh war, than deserted from service, returned to Lysuchansk and betrayed many locals, who had relatives in Ukrainain army or police.

Total 28 dead after the strike (including 9 women and 1 girl - collaborationists came to celebtation with families), 10 wounded.

Russian propaganda, of course showed this as a strike on bakery, where civilians gathered to buy a bread.

The "bakery" before

  

And after the strike

Killed minister

Edited February 5 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

2 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Ok, that is the entire sector.  But how many at risk in that salient?  I doubt the UA have an entire division in that small salient.

110th - full, 47th and 116th - partially. Also some minor units.

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Maybe I'm fixating too much on the two roads. It might be that they can bring in supplies across the fields, too. And withdraw that way also, if need be.

For sure Ukraine's front could collapse and give Russia a big win.  However, history doesn't favor this theory becoming reality. 

Ukraine has been in this situation MANY times (Bakhmut for one) and Russia has been unable to close the escape routes fast enough to trap large numbers of Ukrainians.  Hell, Russia wasn't able to do this in Debaltseve in 2015!  The only time they got a significant number of prisoners was Mariupol and that was because the defenders chose to fight in place rather than retreat when they had the chance.  And we know how that turned out... it cost Russia loads more casualties to get to the end of that battle.

Steve

[David Jaros]

Let is go

[Bulletpoint]

37 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

For sure Ukraine's front could collapse and give Russia a big win.  However, history doesn't favor this theory becoming reality. 

Ukraine has been in this situation MANY times (Bakhmut for one) and Russia has been unable to close the escape routes fast enough to trap large numbers of Ukrainians.  Hell, Russia wasn't able to do this in Debaltseve in 2015!  The only time they got a significant number of prisoners was Mariupol and that was because the defenders chose to fight in place rather than retreat when they had the chance.  And we know how that turned out... it cost Russia loads more casualties to get to the end of that battle.

Steve

The pincers of the pocket are now approximately 5 Km apart. How close would they need to get before you would consider the pocket in real danger of encirclement? Not arguing here, just curious.

[The_Capt]

1 minute ago, Bulletpoint said:

The pincers of the pocket are now approximately 5 Km apart. How close would they need to get before you would consider the pocket in real danger of encirclement? Not arguing here, just curious.

Under normal circumstances a 5km gap is already encircled, based weapons ranges.  I suspect those red swaths on the map are in fact blotches and the RA does not have firepower dominance of that 5km gap.

[Battlefront.com]

17 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

The pincers of the pocket are now approximately 5 Km apart. How close would they need to get before you would consider the pocket in real danger of encirclement? Not arguing here, just curious.

You're confusing encircled with closed.  Encircled is a really dangerous situation that is on the way to being closed.  Closed means the encirclement is complete to the extent nothing within can escape in a coherent way.  Avdiivka is encircled, but the pocket is still open.

The pocket is definitely in real danger of being closed.  It could close at any time.  However, I stand by what I said before which is Russia has had a really difficult time closing pockets with Ukrainian forces still inside in significant numbers.  To be fair, Ukraine has also had no luck closing pockets either.

So, what I'm pushing back on is your examination of this situation without putting it into the context of previous ones.  That isn't to say Avdiivka will be safely evacuated as in the past, just that there's reason to suspect it will not more than reason to suspect it will.

Similarly, the past shows us that Ukraine has very little chance of holding onto Avdiivka.  Similar situations like this have required Ukraine to cede ground to Russia.

Let's also not forget that if Russia closes the pocket that isn't the end of the battle unless Ukraine's forces trapped within surrender.  That is unlikely, which means Russia will have to continue bleeding itself to take a nearly pointless patch of ground.

Steve