How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Kinophile]

 

Interesting:

 

Edited February 26 by Kinophile

[Grigb]

2 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Interesting:

 

They are talking about altitude 9,000-10,000. 

[Rokko]

9 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

 

Interesting:

 

Can someone queue me in on the S-200? I wasn't aware that this was some kind of ultra-long range AD system. Why was it seemingly retired without replacement (for engaging targets at that range) and are there comparable Western systems? What I gathered so far is, that S-200s were apparently used as static emplacements (although apparently not in this case), which presumably made them vulnerable.

[zinz]

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/26/europe/sweden-nato-accession-hungary-intl/index.html

Sweden is finally in NATO 

Edited February 26 by zinz

[danfrodo]

49 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Thanks for this, and as of 2022 I might have agreed with most of this.

But consider the following:

1. The Krynki bridgehead remains after 4+ months, in spite of nonstop attacks by Russian heavy forces + VDV. And that's a zone the Russians can actually supply via a major highway. It's hell for the Uke marines who are there, indeed, but they and their support forces are also giving better than they get, by plastering the RU attacks and LOCs.

2. The further you get down the delta (past the Kherson bridge), the harder it is for the Ivans to deploy and sustain heavy forces -- AFVs, shells, in that boggy, poorly roaded area. I'd actually argue that their logistical challenge out there is WORSE than the Ukrainian one.

At a bare minimum, this zone is flypaper to chew up their best remaining troops (VDV/Spetsnaz) as sustaining mech is going to be a nightmare. Pure Sun Tzu.

3. On the other hand, there's plenty of space in those bayou lands for savvy crack troops to spread out and minimise the damage from glide bombs. Drone airlift/medevac and drone ships can keep Ranger battalions supplied indefinitely; heavy forces, no, but they're not useful here.

The Cossacks invented these tactics hundreds of years ago.

4. The RU aircraft and helos are going to need to make attack runs from the southeast, given that the Western Black Sea is quickly becoming a Ukrainian lake....

5. In spite of being marshlands, Kinburn spit east to Oleshky sands is probably the most essential strategic territory for Ukraine to recover, as the Russians can be expected to build another Sebastopol there in a cease fire situation so as to menace the entire Kherson-Mykolaiv-Odesa portion of Ukraine. I'd actually argue that this is a must have!

Look forward to your reply, as none of the above is going to be easy....

Did LLF get hacked?  The above post is rather ..... positive?  Uncharacteristically positive.  There is a Sun Tzu reference which certainly makes it seem like LLF.  

But seriously, excellent points, LLF.  

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, squatter said:

I feel like the idea of a major UKR operation across the Dniepr river that yourself / the Captain and others are imagining is just fantasy land I'm afraid. 

Sending anything sizeable across is just going to be creating a huge vulnerability for the Ukrainians, and a great opportunity for the Russians. 

You're going to be sending forces into relatively confined bridgeheads of unfortified territory where they will be battered by glide bombs and artillery. The unfortified aspect is particularly important, as we've seen in this war. Losses in the bridgeheads and crossings would be immense.

They'll have to be supplied by boats and pontoons (all of which will be constantly attacked) and after a few firefights local fuel and ammo will be constrained. 

You guys are arguing that UKR should deliberately put itself into the situation from which RUS forces were forced to withdraw from under duress when they were the other side of the river. I think the RUS would lick their lips at this. Wouldn't be surprised this explains why RUS has allowed a small bridgehead to develop already.

Even if there was some kind of breakout, the bigger the breakout, the bigger the strain put on cross-river logistics, the bigger the opportunity for RUS forces to crush/pocket UKR forces. You're imagining UKR amour pontooning across the river, driving 10s of kms into zones of exploitation - they would be absolutely smashed by drones/ATGM/helicopter aviation. Getting supplies up to the front would be a nightmare. 

A sizeable operation across the Dniepr under current conditions is surely a complete fantasy? A catastrophe in the waiting. 

Neither side is going to be able make any further sizeable breakthroughs/maneuvers in the south of Ukraine, unless massive attrition/collapse in the other's ability to field drones/artillery has already occurred. Which isn't looking likely any time soon. 

The only way to end this war is continuing and horrendous grinding attrition to the point one side can no longer continue, or negotiation. 

 

 

 

This kind of demonstrates the "western military thinking box".  In western doctrine when we say "river crossing" it is exactly as you describe - getting heavy and mech across a water obstacle and then sustaining them as they push out and drive the opponent far enough back to build bridging infrastructure up to the point the obstacle is no longer an obstacle...and in this war that approach is pretty much broken.

Russian ISR - even as lower quality as it is - will see pontoons, ribbon bridges and large build up of forces.  They will then lob everything they can at the crossing and any forces in the bridgehead.  Hopeless, impossible...modern technology has made it "impossible".

So what?  Well be something else. Light fast and distributed forces on ATV, motorcycles...hell bicycles.  All armed to the teeth with FPVs and loitering munitions of their own.  All linked into the massive C4ISR architecture.  Only thing missing are UGVs which can reinforce distributed mass.  Then let them loose on the enemy.  Logistics are not zero but they are much lower than AFVs and tanks.   

The real question is can one go this way and sustain firepower?  Are you losing fires for lighter forces?  In the past the answer was unequivocally "yes".  After seeing a video of 5 FPV teams stop a RA tank company, I am no longer so sure.

So a modern Kherson break out could be a bunch of light teams on quads, all with ATGMs and FPV.  The follow up with conventional fires once you push them out of support ranges...however, given RAP rounds and HIMARS, that is a good bubble.  Once you get that in place...then try the heavy/mech stuff.

Will it work.  No idea.  It is taking a raiding force and making it into something else.  But right now it definitely would be worth exploring because that last sentence of yours is not the better option.

 

[evilcommie]

1 hour ago, Rokko said:

Can someone queue me in on the S-200? I wasn't aware that this was some kind of ultra-long range AD system. Why was it seemingly retired without replacement (for engaging targets at that range) and are there comparable Western systems? What I gathered so far is, that S-200s were apparently used as static emplacements (although apparently not in this case), which presumably made them vulnerable.

The Russians replaced their 5v28 missile used in the s-200 missile system with the 9m82 missile from the s-300 family.

The s-200 system was really designed to shoot down large bomber aircraft at very long range.

The 5v28 missile is unwieldy. It weighs almost 8 metric tons , more than the max takeoff weight of a Mig 17 fighter jet and uses some toxic fuel with nitric acid based oxidiser  and also strap on solid fuelled boosters.  I can’t imagine them being easy to maintain and deploy. They probably also take ages to deploy.

There is no western equivalent system. 

 

 

Edited February 26 by evilcommie

[Grigb]

1 hour ago, Kraft said:

The value of Krynki is that it is a very defensable position that funnels russian vehicles either through the few completely straight forest roads where they can bog down or get hit by drones or through the veery long river road, which is exposed and easily observable, leading to quick discovery and annihilation of russian forces.

The top UKR drone commander Magyar and his team defend Krynky. They didn't defend Avdiivka. Patriot or S-200 defended Krynky. They never defended Avdiivka itself.

The UKR command appears to value Krynky substantially more than we do. BTW, Putin personally monitors the Krynky issue. What do the Ukrainian command and Putin know that we don't?

 

[chrisl]

4 hours ago, Grigb said:

RU Nats close to Girkin (including his wife) say it is not true. Lets wait.

He managed to find a window to fall out of?

[Grigb]

Unfortunately, no.

[Grigb]

1 hour ago, Rokko said:

Can someone queue me in on the S-200? I wasn't aware that this was some kind of ultra-long range AD system. Why was it seemingly retired without replacement (for engaging targets at that range) and are there comparable Western systems? What I gathered so far is, that S-200s were apparently used as static emplacements (although apparently not in this case), which presumably made them vulnerable.

Arab-Israeli conflicts and Vietnam demonstrated to Soviet AD generals that AD complexes must be maneuverable. The unwieldiness of the S-200 was regarded as a key drawback. In addition, dealing with the liquid field was painful. So, when S-300 became available, they withdrew S-200.

[Kinophile]

1 hour ago, Grigb said:

They are talking about altitude 9,000-10,000. 

Of the unimproved model, no? 

Edited February 26 by Kinophile

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Kraft said:

Just CasEvac alone requires carrying a wounded soldier under FPV and artillery threat through 1.9kms of marshland, crossing 3 water obstacles that each require a boat and loading and unloading of the wounded. The boat, will either have to be carried too, or stashed somewhere, where it is likely to be hit by drones. 

Or you decide to follow the waterways, which requires only 1  boat but is significantly longer through the twisting river.

All of that has a very finite throughput, putting more than a couple Marines at risk would be a great way to end up with piles of uncollected bodies. There's already enough videos of stretchers getting hit in that bog.

The value of Krynki is that it is a very defensable position that funnels russian vehicles either through the few completely straight forest roads where they can bog down or get hit by drones or through the veery long river road, which is exposed and easily observable, leading to quick discovery and annihilation of russian forces.

Quick note here.  If Ukraine expands the bridgehead even 5km the threat of FPV drones to river crossing decreases dramatically.  Pushing it 20km and it's all but gone.

Bridgeheads, now and as before, are a chicken and egg situation.  You can't expand a bridgehead unless you have a proportionally secure method of crossing the river, but to get a reasonable means of crossing you need to push back the enemy from being able to target it.

Drones make things vastly more complicated for the force trying to cross the river, no doubt, but it doesn't inherently change the basic nature of river crossings.

The usual method is to build up forces on the enemy's side of the river slowly and carefully, then push hard to expand.  Ukraine did that to get Krynky in the first place, so again it's pretty classic stuff so far.

Steve

[Grigb]

Just now, Battlefront.com said:

Quick note here.  If Ukraine expands the bridgehead even 5km the threat of FPV drones to river crossing decreases dramatically.  Pushing it 20km and it's all but gone.

Bridgeheads, now and as before, are a chicken and egg situation.  You can't expand a bridgehead unless you have a proportionally secure method of crossing the river, but to get a reasonable means of crossing you need to push back the enemy from being able to target it.

Drones make things vastly more complicated for the force trying to cross the river, no doubt, but it doesn't inherently change the basic nature of river crossings.

Steve

And If we consider only a few locations, RU drones are not a major issue for Ukraine. That Magyar crew disables 70% of the drones that RU sends to the Krynki area.

UKR has the ability to minimize drone damage for a few crossings.

[Kinophile]

4 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Quick note here.  If Ukraine expands the bridgehead even 5km the threat of FPV drones to river crossing decreases dramatically.  Pushing it 20km and it's all but gone.

Bridgeheads, now and as before, are a chicken and egg situation.  You can't expand a bridgehead unless you have a proportionally secure method of crossing the river, but to get a reasonable means of crossing you need to push back the enemy from being able to target it.

Drones make things vastly more complicated for the force trying to cross the river, no doubt, but it doesn't inherently change the basic nature of river crossings.

The usual method is to build up forces on the enemy's side of the river slowly and carefully, then push hard to expand.  Ukraine did that to get Krynky in the first place, so again it's pretty classic stuff so far.

Steve

Those flying casevac drones would cross the river nicely... 

[Battlefront.com]

39 minutes ago, Grigb said:

The top UKR drone commander Magyar and his team defend Krynky. They didn't defend Avdiivka. Patriot or S-200 defended Krynky. They never defended Avdiivka itself.

The UKR command appears to value Krynky substantially more than we do. BTW, Putin personally monitors the Krynky issue. What do the Ukrainian command and Putin know that we don't?

 

Exactly this.

It is pretty clear that both sides view Krynky as extremely important.  And it's pretty clear why.  As I just illustrated a few pages ago, a fairly moderate sized expansion of Ukraine's bridgehead will produce an outsized negative impact on Russian defenses of the area.  It also offers an operationally important base of operations for cutting off Crimea from the mainland.

This is why Russia invested heavily in trying to wipe out the bridgehead.  However, the terrain there is extremely constricted and therefore there's only so much force that can be employed at any one time.  Making things worse is Ukraine's concentration of artillery and drones in the area.  More fish in the barrel, easier to kill fish.

Given Russia's reliance upon mass, this presents a big problem for it.  Massing is inherently difficult from a logistics standpoint and then is quickly punished by Ukraine's artillery and drones.  This is not just theoretical either, as the repeated disastrous attacks have demonstrated.

It seems Russia has decided all it can do is contain the bridgehead, nothing more than that.  This indicates that Ukraine has an opportunity to expand.

Steve

[Sequoia]

If I may ask, Russia has been going around the world recruiting people as troops and often using them as canon fodder. Ukraine, to its credit (afaik) has not. Is this decision for international public relations, military (such troops are unreliable), economic (we have better uses for the money), or something else?

[Grigb]

20 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Of the unimproved model, no? 

The problem here isn't the missile or its flight characteristics. It's more about targeting.

According to my approximate calculations, following missile launch, A-50 must descend to 3000m to avoid observation by ground radar. Once A-50 is below 3000m, the missile must operate autonomously. Mashovets said that the S-200 missile can utilize A-50 radar tranmission as guidance, but the natural instinct of any RU radar operator is to switch off the radar.So, for reliable success, the missile must be capable of targeting A-50 on its own in the presence of EW while evading RU AD fire.

We're talking about developing an incredibly capable missile in around two years while under RU fire.

They might combine a Western head with an S-200 body. That would be simpler and faster. In addition, they would not require radar since they could send target data straight to the missile via the western data link. Still not ideal: the body is not stealthy, and you must handle liquid fuel not far from the front line. However, that would explain why ambushes are so rare.

[Grigb]

Quick question - do we have topic regarding Israel? I am subscribed to the RU channel of David Gendelman. He writes short but informative posts that clarify some aspects of Israel operation. 

[LongLeftFlank]

12 minutes ago, Sequoia said:

If I may ask, Russia has been going around the world recruiting people as troops and often using them as canon fodder. Ukraine, to its credit (afaik) has not. Is this decision for international public relations, military (such troops are unreliable), economic (we have better uses for the money), or something else?

1.  There are migrants in desperate parts of the world who would man the modern equivalent of Birkenau crematoria blocks if they could wire home 700usd per month.

2.  That said, they can't wire home that monthly pay if they are missing arms, legs or their heads; or if it's simply getting stolen. And word will get around, fast.

3. My personal KPI for Russia running out of mercenary cred, FWIW, is Norks. The Kim dynasty has sent thousands of young men to awful jobs in inclement parts of USSR/Russia (logging camps, mines) to earn money for the glorious Juche state ever since the Gulag tailed off. Their opinion in the matter is not requested.

I suspect there are already some DPKA military specialists working to support the RUAF. When tiny corpses of (underfed) Korean kids start showing up in the storm units, we'll know other options for mercs are running down for Putin Inc.

[LongLeftFlank]

11 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Quick question - do we have topic regarding Israel? I am subscribed to the RU channel of David Gendelman. He writes short but informative posts that clarify some aspects of Israel operation. 

 

Augh!  I love you man, but for the sake of YHVH, don't go there, or at least not on here!!!!

Edited February 26 by LongLeftFlank

[LongLeftFlank]

2 hours ago, danfrodo said:

Did LLF get hacked?  The above post is rather ..... positive?  Uncharacteristically positive.  There is a Sun Tzu reference which certainly makes it seem like LLF.  

But seriously, excellent points, LLF.  

Duuude, this is the LongLeftFlank© gambit I've preached before here; others have too.

As our @The_Capt hath taught us, this is the very thing that the AFU has been doing brilliantly since 23 Feb: set the RU up in no-win situations and then force them to ride the hell ride anyway.

Planting bushels of landmines and lobbing in giant bombs won't help Ivan out of this one. There's just too much squishy ground to cover. Their only possible counter is to feed in equally tough swamp rat infantry, but even after 2 years my read is even VDV just don't have the C4ISR to match the Ukes.

Kinburn spit.

 

...All that said, those Ukrainian forces are going to suffer heavy losses, make no mistake.

Edited February 26 by LongLeftFlank

[kimbosbread]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

This kind of demonstrates the "western military thinking box".  In western doctrine when we say "river crossing" it is exactly as you describe - getting heavy and mech across a water obstacle and then sustaining them…

So what?  Well be something else. Light fast and distributed forces on ATV, motorcycles...hell bicycles.  All armed to the teeth with FPVs and loitering munitions of their own.  All linked into the massive C4ISR architecture. 

A sustained commando raid? Piracy?

Honestly if it isn’t too muddy, ebikes with trailers might be the ideal option. Good speed, good range, low signature,  tiny logistical footprint. The trailer could hold a dozen or two FPV drones, or a mortar/AGL. Not sure how casevac would work though.

[mosuri]

2 hours ago, zinz said:

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/26/europe/sweden-nato-accession-hungary-intl/index.html

Sweden is finally in NATO 

Yes but no but -- Hungarian president still needs to sign, it can take a number of days, and in principle the president can refuse to sign and return the proposal back to the parliament. Unlikely, perhaps, but the fat lady sings only when the instrument is delivered to NATO.

[Kraft]

A new kind of FPV drone. There have been airburst versions, but this one seems to direct its effect in a frontal cone and is triggered manually from a distance.

Since the video has no audio, Ill link reddit

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/s/pw5d85Su3G