How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[The_Capt]

52 minutes ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

Russians managed to lose a significant part of another S-300/400 battery from a GMLRS strike recently. More complacency about western weapons hitting valuable assets again. Why the hell are they not relocating such valuable assets the moment they knew HIMARS could hit them?
 

 

I am not sure how this is Russian "complacency" exactly.  How do we know the first time they knew HIMARS could hit them wasn't when it happened?  Some of these systems have really long ranges and they likely thought that they were out of range of strike.  Or simply got caught out in the open.  Or better yet, it is a sign of really good UA targeting.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

From the map looks like about 2.5kms from Ukrainian border, well within FPV range.  Why send an expensive HIMAR to do the job of about 100k worth of drones.  RA likely thought they were safe in Russia or took a wrong turn.  Of course we are looking at logistical trucks, can’t disperse these like AFVs/IFVs at the best of times.

OK, as I suspected it wasn't GMLRS, though the convoy did seem to be stopped at the time of the attack.  A good preview of what a swarm of UAS can do.

The thing about this is 2.5km has always been within Ukraine's strike range even with Ukrainian systems, therefore the recent Western decisions to loosen restrictions isn't the reason for this strike.  So what is?

I suspect what we're seeing is the result of Russia obligating Ukraine to pay attention to this sector of the front.  Ironically, that's appears to be Russia's primary intention.  Obviously they were ill prepared for the consequences.  Which is why it's sooooo hard not to be critical of the Russian military's seeming inability to do more than smash things.

As for column dispersal, this reminds me of the ones we saw in early 2022 where soldiers take minimal evasive actions (if that), abandon their vehicles, and run away.  Western doctrine teaches that when you're in an ambush you either run towards the enemy or away from him.  You don't sit where you know they've got you dialed in for death

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, FancyCat said:

o.O

 

And while looking at this article, I saw another one of interest:

https://www.kyivpost.com/analysis/33543

Detailed analysis of the coordinated attack on BSF ships and ferries.  The author is one of our own, so I'm biased to believe every word in this article is 100% accurate!

Steve

[ArmouredTopHat]

25 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I am not sure how this is Russian "complacency" exactly.  How do we know the first time they knew HIMARS could hit them wasn't when it happened?  Some of these systems have really long ranges and they likely thought that they were out of range of strike.  Or simply got caught out in the open.  Or better yet, it is a sign of really good UA targeting.

We have not seen GMLRs strike an S-300/400 system in quite some time. The Russians are usually sensible enough to put them well out of reach of that striking potential. (Coupled with the fact that they dont really need to be that close to the front to begin with)

The fact they supposedly lost a system to GMLRs to me suggests they were complement with their placement in Russian territory, and for some reason decided not to move them thereafter despite GMLRS being cleared to operate in Russia. 

Edited June 3 by ArmouredTopHat

[The_Capt]

10 minutes ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

We have not seen GMLRs strike an S-300/400 system in quite some time. The Russians are usually sensible enough to put them well out of reach of that striking potential. (Coupled with the fact that they dont really need to be that close to the front to begin with)

The fact they supposedly lost a system to GMLRs to me suggests they were complement with their placement in Russian territory, and for some reason decided not to move them thereafter despite GMLRS being cleared to operate in Russia. 

Or it was an ATACMs strike, or on the outer edge of GMLRS and the UA did some quick repositioning. I have a serious problem with the “Russia Sux” line of thinking.  It is a lazy heuristic that gets tossed around far too often to explain phenomenon.  Sometimes it may be a simple screw up but Ukrainian targeting has been profoundly improving over the last year, as a bunch of burning scrap metal at very long ranges demonstrates.

Russian complacency is far too convenient in this case with so little actual evidence of what happened. Regardless, the UA spotted and struck a HVT that was likely 10s of kms inside Russia.  They did so before the target could move, so likely first salvo.  Let’s not write the whole thing off to “Russia Sux” just yet.

[The_Capt]

31 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

OK, as I suspected it wasn't GMLRS, though the convoy did seem to be stopped at the time of the attack.  A good preview of what a swarm of UAS can do.

The thing about this is 2.5km has always been within Ukraine's strike range even with Ukrainian systems, therefore the recent Western decisions to loosen restrictions isn't the reason for this strike.  So what is?

I suspect what we're seeing is the result of Russia obligating Ukraine to pay attention to this sector of the front.  Ironically, that's appears to be Russia's primary intention.  Obviously they were ill prepared for the consequences.  Which is why it's sooooo hard not to be critical of the Russian military's seeming inability to do more than smash things.

As for column dispersal, this reminds me of the ones we saw in early 2022 where soldiers take minimal evasive actions (if that), abandon their vehicles, and run away.  Western doctrine teaches that when you're in an ambush you either run towards the enemy or away from him.  You don't sit where you know they've got you dialed in for death

Steve

I don’t know how to disperse when you have FPVs come at you from all directions.  It looks like the pulled into tree lines which is right in line with our own doctrine.  They likely abandoned the vehicles because once illuminated, there was little they could actually do against FPV travelling faster than they can.  Which way is “the enemy” when being hit from all directions?

[ArmouredTopHat]

8 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Or it was an ATACMs strike, or on the outer edge of GMLRS and the UA did some quick repositioning. I have a serious problem with the “Russia Sux” line of thinking.  It is a lazy heuristic that gets tossed around far too often to explain phenomenon.  Sometimes it may be a simple screw up but Ukrainian targeting has been profoundly improving over the last year, as a bunch of burning scrap metal at very long ranges demonstrates.

Russian complacency is far too convenient in this case with so little actual evidence of what happened. Regardless, the UA spotted and struck a HVT that was likely 10s of kms inside Russia.  They did so before the target could move, so likely first salvo.  Let’s not write the whole thing off to “Russia Sux” just yet.

ATACMS is not allowed to strike Russian territory as far as I know.

I am pointing out that this strike is unusual because it is an outlier when it comes to usual placement for Russian S-300 assets, which is normally competent at the very least. Suddenly losing a valuable system such as that from GMLRs represents either a very fortunate turn of events for the Ukrainians or a Russian incompetency, or a mix of both. 

[FancyCat]

Incidentally the Washington post article I recently posted noted that the GMLR being cleared for use wasn’t that big a deal cause Russian EW was rendering it ineffective…..welp, no one told the S-400 that. Yep, ATACMS are prohibited still, I assume cause a missile launch looks like a missile launch? 

tbf I saw a video of a set of Ukrainian trucks bunched up together, getting taken out by FPVs, dispersal is a universal pain. 

[dan/california]

27 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Incidentally the Washington post article I recently posted noted that the GMLR being cleared for use wasn’t that big a deal cause Russian EW was rendering it ineffective…..welp, no one told the S-400 that. Yep, ATACMS are prohibited still, I assume cause a missile launch looks like a missile launch? 

tbf I saw a video of a set of Ukrainian trucks bunched up together, getting taken out by FPVs, dispersal is a universal pain. 

 

7 hours ago, cesmonkey said:

Russian telegrammer Two Majors on the Zaporizhzhia front on the dangers of Ukrainian drones:
https://t.me/dva_majors/44195
 

 

Yes, but as the Two majors eloquently informed us, dying is a bigger one. One of the overriding lessons of this war is that you can disperse or you can die. It is going to take a total rethink of military doctrine to work thru that. Starting with the elimination of the word  and concept convoy.

BTW whoever is writing that is disturbingly competent and needs to get on the GUR's list.

[paxromana]

16 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Yes, but as the Two majors eloquently informed us, dying is a bigger one. One of the overriding lessons of this war is that you can disperse or you can die. It is going to take a total rethink of military doctrine to work thru that. Starting with the elimination of the word  and concept convoy.

BTW whoever is writing that is disturbingly competent and needs to get on the GUR's list.

Probably no need ... if they survive long enough (unlikely) they'll never be promoted since it's obvious they are competent. And the littlest dictator can't risk having competent officers!

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I don’t know how to disperse when you have FPVs come at you from all directions.  It looks like the pulled into tree lines which is right in line with our own doctrine.  They likely abandoned the vehicles because once illuminated, there was little they could actually do against FPV travelling faster than they can.  Which way is “the enemy” when being hit from all directions?

It is very obvious that all of those FPVs weren't in the air at once.  Had that been the case the vehicles would have been picked off while on the road.  Instead they had time to drive and park.  They could have instead driven forward towards their objective (and likely been struck along the way) or driven back the way they came (and possibly gotten out of range before being struck).

I do not view this attack as a "swarm", but "waves".  In our recent (and past) conversations comparing FPVs to artillery, time to target is definitely an artillery advantage.  On the flip side, 2-3 minutes for flight time of a shell that can't be redirected means a well disciplined group of truck drivers could get out of the kill zone if they tried.

Another benefit of artillery is large area cluster munitions.  One popped at the center of the convoy likely would have rendered the whole column damaged to some extent.  Can't do that with FPVs (yet).

The solution to this FPV limitation is a true "swarm" where a sufficient number of drones are simultaneously in the air or close enough.  That way nobody can move faster than the strike packages can.

Steve

[dan/california]

6 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

It is very obvious that all of those FPVs weren't in the air at once.  Had that been the case the vehicles would have been picked off while on the road.  Instead they had time to drive and park.  They could have instead driven forward towards their objective (and likely been struck along the way) or driven back the way they came (and possibly gotten out of range before being struck).

I do not view this attack as a "swarm", but "waves".  In our recent (and past) conversations comparing FPVs to artillery, time to target is definitely an artillery advantage.  On the flip side, 2-3 minutes for flight time of a shell that can't be redirected means a well disciplined group of truck drivers could get out of the kill zone if they tried.

Another benefit of artillery is large area cluster munitions.  One popped at the center of the convoy likely would have rendered the whole column damaged to some extent.  Can't do that with FPVs (yet).

The solution to this FPV limitation is a true "swarm" where a sufficient number of drones are simultaneously in the air or close enough.  That way nobody can move faster than the strike packages can.

Steve

I have several questions/suppositions. Was the control signal from those drones being relayed thru the same recon drone doing the spotting? Was every one of those hits done by the same drone pilot? So his crew had a dozen drones line up for hm to use as fast as he could switch the frequencies? Was there an orbit of drones ready to use,or did they all have fly from the Ukrainian lines after the convoy was spotted?

[The_Capt]

27 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

It is very obvious that all of those FPVs weren't in the air at once.  Had that been the case the vehicles would have been picked off while on the road.  Instead they had time to drive and park.  They could have instead driven forward towards their objective (and likely been struck along the way) or driven back the way they came (and possibly gotten out of range before being struck).

They really don't need to be.  Even a few minutes apart and that column was screwed.  Trying to turn 15-20 trucks around to go back the way they came, while getting hit every 2-3 minutes is a recipe for disaster.  No one trains their logistics drivers to do formation manoeuvres, so if one were to try that you would likely wind up with vehicle pile ups.  Pushing through makes the most sense but see: FPVs.  As soon as trucks start getting hit, scared drivers are going to bail and run away.  And a decent ambush is going to try and hem in the column by hitting lead vehicles.

What this looks like is an old air attack drill, pull off under trees and try to disperse. Which results in getting plinked by FPVs one at a time.

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

ATACMS is not allowed to strike Russian territory as far as I know.

I am pointing out that this strike is unusual because it is an outlier when it comes to usual placement for Russian S-300 assets, which is normally competent at the very least. Suddenly losing a valuable system such as that from GMLRs represents either a very fortunate turn of events for the Ukrainians or a Russian incompetency, or a mix of both. 

I think that we will hear about ATACMs release authorities well after they are actually being employed. For a target as high value as this one it may have well gotten release authority.  But we might not know the full story until much later.

[FancyCat]

3 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I think that we will hear about ATACMs release authorities well after they are actually being employed. For a target as high value as this one it may have well gotten release authority.  But we might not know the full story until much later.

What have you done with The_Capt? No concerns over nuclear escalation?

I kid, but from this interview from 3 days ago between VOA and a deputy of the National Security Council, seems pretty clear cut, ATACMS are not allowed to be used in Russian territory. The carve out for ATACMS separate from long range strikes indicates that it's use in short range or long range strikes in Russian territory is forbidden.

Quote

VOA: Does it apply only to the Kharkiv region?  CARPENTER: This applies to counter-fire capabilities that are deployed just across the border. It does not apply to ATACMS or long-range strikes. This is meant to enable Ukrainians to defend themselves against what would otherwise be a Russian sanctuary across the border.

https://www.voanews.com/a/white-house-q-a-us-policy-evolves-with-threats-against-ukraine/7638583.html

 

[kimbosbread]

31 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

They really don't need to be.  Even a few minutes apart and that column was screwed.  Trying to turn 15-20 trucks around to go back the way they came, while getting hit every 2-3 minutes is a recipe for disaster.  No one trains their logistics drivers to do formation manoeuvres, so if one were to try that you would likely wind up with vehicle pile ups.

Yeah, traffic jams of big vehicles are exponentially worse.

Even if the column had some traffic cops with it to help direct things, that’s not going to do much on a small road narrower than the length of a truck, while under attack!

[The_Capt]

19 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

What have you done with The_Capt? No concerns over nuclear escalation?

I kid, but from this interview from 3 days ago between VOA and a deputy of the National Security Council, seems pretty clear cut, ATACMS are not allowed to be used in Russian territory. The carve out for ATACMS separate from long range strikes indicates that it's use in short range or long range strikes in Russian territory is forbidden.

https://www.voanews.com/a/white-house-q-a-us-policy-evolves-with-threats-against-ukraine/7638583.html

 

This may shock and amaze you but this is not a binary thing. HVTs just outside of GMLRS range are probably going to have to go through a different authorization process than other strikes but still have an approval process. All strikes into Russia will likely be heavily vetted. This will all be part of a pretty robust ROE regime if the UA wants to use US weapons.  

And another shock...maybe everything happening does not show up on the news.  

Any and all strikes on Russian nuclear architecture will be very much off the table because the grown ups are not stupid.

Of course I have concerns about nuclear escalation...and so should you.

[danfrodo]

8 hours ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

2)Culturally low value of human life - I think that the evidence of this war in particular strongly supports the thesis, that Russians culturally assign low value to human life, which includes their own. It has long been a subject of jokes that Russians use human life as a disposable asset in lieu of machines * but I was not sure if it has any relation to reality. Well, it has.  A hypothesis suggests itself, that the Russian life feels so unpleasant and dangerous, that they are not willing to expend much effort to keep it. To a psychologist trained in the West, they probably exhibit symptoms of a depression.

I would again suggest that while RU culture, generally, devalues the lives of others, I am quite sure that individuals value their own life just as much as anyone else.  I suspect what we see are men trapped by circumstance, seeing no way out, and hoping they are in the small percentile that survive or receive a wound that will take time to heal but not be too debilitating.  

This reminds me of what germans said about RU soldiers in WW2 -- they don't value life like the west, they are impervious to cold and suffering, etc.  What germans were seeing was the apathy of those trapped by circumstance and misinterpreting it as giving life no value -- did the germans not understand that the russians were not going to complain to their captors, and why would the captors care anyway?  US did same with japanese early on, believing they had magical jungle fighting powers despite none of them ever seeing a jungle until 1941, and believing they could live on tiny amounts of rice and be fit and happy (totally untrue, of course).

Edited June 3 by danfrodo

[ArmouredTopHat]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

I would again suggest that while RU culture, generally, devalues the lives of others, I am quite sure that individuals value their own life just as much as anyone else.  I suspect what we see are men trapped by circumstance, seeing no way out, and hoping they are in the small percentile that survive or receive a wound that will take time to heal but not be too debilitating.  

This reminds me of what germans said about RU soldiers in WW2 -- they don't value life like the west, they are impervious to cold and suffering, etc.  What germans were seeing was the apathy of those trapped by circumstance and misinterpreting it as giving life no value -- did the germans not understand that the russians were not going to complain to their captors, and why would the captors care anyway?

This actually brings an interesting point up. The Soviets during WW2 had at least a counterpoint to their soldiers suffering greatly, namely that they were quite honestly in a fight to the death. Many of said soldiers had seen their homes occupied and horrible abuses suffered to the people who were left behind, to say the least of the general death, misery and displacement even before death squads arrived. There was a wide and pretty profound desire amongst Soviet soldiers not only to fight and stop this but to also gain revenge, especially as they retook lands and discovered the true extent of what had been happening. That undoubtedly helped with their overall willingness to put up with a lot of hardship: there was no other choice. Fight or die. 

Compared to today? Putin can call this an existential war all he likes, and while some might buy the whole nazis in Ukraine propaganda that permeates media channels. But at the end of the day everyone knows that Russia is really not in a life or death situation (Putin is probably though). No one is going to invade their actual sovereign territory with the intention of permanent occupation. One wonders just how much patience the even heavily censored Russian people have for what is in effect a offensive war of conquest against a country that plenty of Russians have personal connections or family in. Already heard some pretty depressing cases where families have one relation in the AFU and others in the RGF. 

Outside of that, they have been told since day one that the Ukrainians will 'collapse any moment now' and that just one final push is all that is needed. Based on how soldiers reacted to that attitude during the first world war, there is a breaking point that might be reached sooner than expected when the bubble of lies finally bursts. Its not going to be pretty when it does.

Further to this, the Russians talk up a lot about their 'Slavic stoicism' compared to others and how it will win them the war, while completing ignoring that the Ukrainians are quite literally of the same heritage. They certainly suffered just as much during the second world war as anyone else in the Soviet union, and their capacity for resilience has been clearly demonstrated by this point in this current conflict. The Russian propaganda also seems to conveniently ignore that they were very much at their limit in 1945 in terms of manpower and cracks were really starting to show. (Average rifle division strength at that point was getting shockingly poor) The same propaganda seems to forget that Russia today is not at all like the soviet union was and probably has a far poorer ability to endure this conflict. 

Edited June 3 by ArmouredTopHat

[FancyCat]

 

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/06/03/on-a-train-in-southern-russia-fatigued-soldiers-see-no-end-in-sight-to-war-a85283

 

[The_Capt]

49 minutes ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

This actually brings an interesting point up. The Soviets during WW2 had at least a counterpoint to their soldiers suffering greatly, namely that they were quite honestly in a fight to the death. Many of said soldiers had seen their homes occupied and horrible abuses suffered to the people who were left behind, to say the least of the general death, misery and displacement even before death squads arrived. There was a wide and pretty profound desire amongst Soviet soldiers not only to fight and stop this but to also gain revenge, especially as they retook lands and discovered the true extent of what had been happening. That undoubtedly helped with their overall willingness to put up with a lot of hardship: there was no other choice. Fight or die. 

Compared to today? Putin can call this an existential war all he likes, and while some might buy the whole nazis in Ukraine propaganda that permeates media channels. But at the end of the day everyone knows that Russia is really not in a life or death situation (Putin is probably though). No one is going to invade their actual sovereign territory with the intention of permanent occupation. One wonders just how much patience the even heavily censored Russian people have for what is in effect a offensive war of conquest against a country that plenty of Russians have personal connections or family in. Already heard some pretty depressing cases where families have one relation in the AFU and others in the RGF. 

Outside of that, they have been told since day one that the Ukrainians will 'collapse any moment now' and that just one final push is all that is needed. Based on how soldiers reacted to that attitude during the first world war, there is a breaking point that might be reached sooner than expected when the bubble of lies finally bursts. Its not going to be pretty when it does.

Further to this, the Russians talk up a lot about their 'Slavic stoicism' compared to others and how it will win them the war, while completing ignoring that the Ukrainians are quite literally of the same heritage. They certainly suffered just as much during the second world war as anyone else in the Soviet union, and their capacity for resilience has been clearly demonstrated by this point in this current conflict. The Russian propaganda also seems to conveniently ignore that they were very much at their limit in 1945 in terms of manpower and cracks were really starting to show. (Average rifle division strength at that point was getting shockingly poor) The same propaganda seems to forget that Russia today is not at all like the soviet union was and probably has a far poorer ability to endure this conflict. 

Now there could be something to this line.  Putin has played up heritage and Russian history a lot.  The reality is that Russia for the average Russia was not great place to live.  The rich, and Moscow were doing fine for the most part but the rest of the nation was kinda backward and economically lagging (to be polite).  Putin was banging on the history drum pretty hard - he even thought it would be a good idea in that stupid Carelson interview.

So maybe the logic here is to give disenfranchised people something to fight for.  A vision of a Russia which was still “great”.  It explains that video we saw of the Russian officer telling his men that “they will be remembered”.  This is not an existential war, it is a crusade (which is often framed similarly).  A crusade to push back the west and retake Russia identity.  That is some powerful stuff.  Unfortunately it also boxes this thing up further as the only way for Russians to walk away is to reject Putin’s version of Russian identity.  Which could mean walking away from it entirely.  The man is playing chicken with his whole society.

[Battlefront.com]

40 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

 

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/06/03/on-a-train-in-southern-russia-fatigued-soldiers-see-no-end-in-sight-to-war-a85283

 

That's a good read.  One of the ways Russia is keeping up its manpower is barely patching up the wounded and sending them back to the front.  WW2 style.

Steve

[Carolus]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

That's a good read.  One of the ways Russia is keeping up its manpower is barely patching up the wounded and sending them back to the front.  WW2 style.

Steve

But what use is a wounded man who gets sent back to combat?

If we try not to follow the "Russia sux" line of thinking, what sense does it make except kicking the can of mobilisation of another man slightly further down the road?

The last posts spoke of Russian resilience, but if the authorities go to such lengths just to keep the numbers on paper high, there must be something that worries them more.

Because having a wounded man who might feel pain on every step and jump he needs to make over the fields part of an operation would just severely degrade the performance of the entire squad, unless that performance is just playing bullet sponge. It's not someone who can concentrate and improvise or be fast on his feet and do all the other things necessary in a high pressure environment.

Is it something the RA would do if their "30.000 men per month" mobilisation was going smoothly and sustainably?

No sane Western military would do that, unless some cut-off and encircled unit was fighting for its life.

Edited June 3 by Carolus

[danfrodo]

12 minutes ago, Carolus said:

No sane Western military would do that, unless some cut-off and encircled unit was fighting for its life.

You have answered your own question.  RU does send it's wounded back, it just needs meat to throw at UKR defenders.  And once in the system it's easy to just finish grinding them up.  We know an RU tactic is to send some 'lesser' soldiers forward to get UKR to open fire, thereby helping the following groups while the 1st group is generally slaughtered.

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, Carolus said:

But what use is a wounded man who gets sent back to combat?

If we try not to follow the "Russia sux" line of thinking, what sense does it make except kicking the can of mobilisation of another man slightly further down the road?

The last posts spoke of Russian resilience, but if the authorities go to such lengths just to keep the numbers on paper high, there must be something that worries them more.

Because having a wounded man who might feel pain on every step and jump he needs to make over the fields part of an operation would just severely degrade the performance of the entire squad, unless that performance is just playing bullet sponge. It's not someone who can concentrate and improvise or be fast on his feet and do all the other things necessary in a high pressure environment.

No sane Western military would do that, unless some cut-off and encircled unit was fighting for its life.

It's been a while since we've discussed Russia's manpower regeneration, however I don't think their basic strategy has changed even if emphasis here or there has.

It has been clear since 2022 that Putin is deathly afraid of doing another mobilization.  Therefore, any and all tricks to avoid it are being used, such as:

1.  High pressure "recruiting" tactics, including threats and deceit of the biannual moblized

2.  Prisoners

3.  Foreign mercenaries

4.  Financial incentives for volunteers to step forward

5.  Indefinite retention of the original mobilization (well, their survivors anyway)

6.  Maybe still some kidnapping in the Donbas, but I've not heard anything about that for a year

and finally:

7.  Not providing or honoring wound discharge papers

Steve