How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

The Russians are literally using people and armored vehicles like ammunition. I would really rather use drones for that purpose.

[ArmouredTopHat]

 

16 minutes ago, sburke said:

you clearly don't get sarcasm or the level of exasperation.  And no one thinks you are financially vested in GD.  You are however heavily emotionally and psychologically invested in tanks.

Yeah I literally sleep with a tank body pillow/s

Jesus all I am saying is that they still likely have a role. 

Edited July 23 by ArmouredTopHat

[ArmouredTopHat]

Unironically funny to see Orban go right to the EU after spending so long ranting about it. 

Edited July 23 by ArmouredTopHat

[Battlefront.com]

35 minutes ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

Jesus all I am saying is that they still likely have a role. 

If that's all you were doing then we wouldn't be having the spats because nobody here has said, or even implied, that thanks have no role to play in today's war in Ukraine.  Not a single person.  So obviously that's not all you are saying.

Steve

[ArmouredTopHat]

Really hope this gets sorted asap

[Fenris]

Couple of interesting tweets - sea drone defence and another small indicator of the strain on RU manpower.

Quote

The crew of a Ukrainian container ship in the Red Sea reportedly destroyed a Houthi naval drone using small arms.

Quote

A Syrian volunteer, Mohammed Mansour, serving in the 488th Motorized Rifle Regiment of the 144th Guards Motor Rifle Division, was sent to Ukraine at the end of June. On July 19, he and 14 other Syrians were ordered to advance but were hit by enemy FPV drones. Mansour was injured and sought evacuation but was told to continue. He eventually left the battlefield on his own and found help with another unit. The use of foreign volunteers in such operations is common, with little accountability for their injuries or deaths. There are also instances of commanders hiding the deaths of foreign volunteers to misuse their salaries. The fate of the other 14 Syrians remains unknown.

[FancyCat]

Kofman spoke at a event, and while i risk certain death by posting some of his quotes, they are important. i won't post the whole thing, unfair to the article writers, but he does caution against U.S reliance on maneuver and targeting targets in the rear. 

Quote

The plentiful social-media videos of Ukrainian drones destroying tanks, for example, give viewers the impression that the units flying the drones are more successful than they actually are, said Michael Kofman, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 

“The problem is that you get into huge issues with sample bias,” said Kofman, speaking at Army Application Laboratory's VERTEX event. “The least successful units are going to show you probably their most successful strikes." 

Meanwhile, Ukraine is increasingly using drones to sow mines and haul supplies, which draws less attention than the flashier strike missions, he said. 

“Defensive mining missions have become one of their primary tasks, very commonly employed with magnetic influence mines,” Kofman said. Units record the mines’ locations, allowing them to disrupt enemy logistics without affecting their own operations. 

“Even the vehicles with good defenses on them can withstand a lot of hits and are still in action a year into the war, and some crews have stopped counting how many [first-person-view] or Lancet hits they even take,” he said. 

Kofman said he had heard from one Bradley crew that their vehicle had sustained more than 20 hits from armed Russian FPV drones.

Kofman also said that if you compare the damage done to the number of drones lost, large drone bombers are among the most effective attack drones Ukraine has. 

Still, Ukraine’s use of drones also comes with trade-offs, Kofman said. For one, drones require more people to operate them than other weapons with similar effects. A team that flies FPV drones might include several soldiers, including an operator, a co-pilot who helps with navigation, a weapons specialist, and a technician.

https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2024/07/us-risks-learning-wrong-lessons-about-ukraines-drones-expert-says/398242/

[ArmouredTopHat]

29 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Kofman spoke at a event, and while i risk certain death by posting some of his quotes, they are important. i won't post the whole thing, unfair to the article writers, but he does caution against U.S reliance on maneuver and targeting targets in the rear. 

https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2024/07/us-risks-learning-wrong-lessons-about-ukraines-drones-expert-says/398242/

This is what I have been trying to point out, though it seems some people here are pretty firmly in the drone supremacy camp, so its brave of you to post it!

The remote mining might just turn out to be even more effective at stalling out attacks as there is really nothing outside of traditional sapping that can be done to prevent it so far, outside of perhaps being less predictable with routes both supply and attack wise. 

Edited July 24 by ArmouredTopHat

[alison]

26 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Still, Ukraine’s use of drones also comes with trade-offs, Kofman said. For one, drones require more people to operate them than other weapons with similar effects. A team that flies FPV drones might include several soldiers, including an operator, a co-pilot who helps with navigation, a weapons specialist, and a technician.

The interesting point for me, as a card-carrying white collar nerd, is that if a certain neighboring country decides to launch an invasion into my home, I might actually be useful working on that drone team whereas - despite being trim, healthy and fairly fit - my 40something year old bike-riding self would be much less useful trying to haul a rifle and an ATGM around the rice paddies or sitting in some internal combustion vehicle I have no idea how to drive or maintain.

For countries that already have conscription in order to prepare their population for potential aggression from the neighbors, and where many of their people go on to become white collar nerds after finishing their mandatory military service, it seems like drone forces unlock a whole new opportunity for an effective reserve, and that's not even to mention the possibilities of autonomous.

[The_Capt]

44 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Kofman spoke at a event, and while i risk certain death by posting some of his quotes, they are important. i won't post the whole thing, unfair to the article writers, but he does caution against U.S reliance on maneuver and targeting targets in the rear. 

https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2024/07/us-risks-learning-wrong-lessons-about-ukraines-drones-expert-says/398242/

That last para really doesn’t make a lot of sense.  What other system can fly a mine behind enemy lines and drop it on enemy LOCs?  Helicopters?  They are smaller crews? As to success rates - he is guessing as much as any of us are.  Neither side has opened their books for detailed statistics analysis, and frankly Russia may never do so.

The main impact of UAS is ISR, we see evidence of this nearly every day since the start of the war.  Strike has been evolving continuously over the course of this war.  All we really have are indirect indicators and a growing volume of pretty stunning video vignettes.  We hear the reports from battlefield commanders, common soldiers etc and fear of drone strikes is pretty much everywhere.  And then there are the battlefield adaptations, the RA did not put barns on their tanks because of “a few sample biased FPV videos”.  We see stats online and some are showing hundreds of strikes per week:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2024/04/24/why-is-russia-losing-the-fpv-drone-war/

This is OSINT so we have to take it with a grain of salt. What we do know is that drones are a dominant theme on these battlefields. If all they are doing is “hauling supplies and laying mines” this would still be enough to shake things up. Add in ISR and strike capability and it becomes obvious we are seeing a disruptive capability emerge.  UAS are a form of tactical air power that we really have not factored into our thinking. It gives tactical units ability to sense and strike at operational ranges. 

Finally, as to survivability. I am sure there are vehicles taking multiple hits and keep rolling.  We have seen some video evidence of this.  But remember most of the systems being employed are homemade.  Commercial systems with RPG warheads guntaped onto them. Almost all the disruption and impact we are seeing are based on ad hoc improvisation of civilian technology. That is what is delivering all this fuss in this war. So before we start cherry picking the data we need to keep this in mind.  What happens when someone puts tandem warheads on these things? Purpose designed EFP? Smart ICM? The drones in this war are essentially someone taping a bunch of hunting rifles together and making a crude machine gun that is crippling the doctrine of the day.

And finally…ok so freaking what? “Drones aren’t all that..” in spite of mounting evidence.  Ok, then why can’t either side get momentum? Why is warfare stuck?  The “they don’t know how” argument was weak to start with and is getting weaker by the day.  We have seen battlefield tactics adaptations that are happening for reasons and no one has provided a coherent theory to explain them. The idea that on an 800km frontage being defended by skeleton force density that both sides have somehow forgotten how to mass forces for a breakthrough is weak.  Hell the minefield excuse is weak as the densities needed to create belts along that entire length outstrip capacity.

So, ok, how does the UA solve for this?

 

Edited July 24 by The_Capt

[The_Capt]

13 minutes ago, alison said:

The interesting point for me, as a card-carrying white collar nerd, is that if a certain neighboring country decides to launch an invasion into my home, I might actually be useful working on that drone team whereas - despite being trim, healthy and fairly fit - my 40something year old bike-riding self would be much less useful trying to haul a rifle and an ATGM around the rice paddies or sitting in some internal combustion vehicle I have no idea how to drive or maintain.

For countries that already have conscription in order to prepare their population for potential aggression from the neighbors, and where many of their people go on to become white collar nerds after finishing their mandatory military service, it seems like drone forces unlock a whole new opportunity for an effective reserve, and that's not even to mention the possibilities of autonomous.

We saw a video of a UA FPV team. 4 man squad - commander, two pilots and an engineer.  They carried dozens of these systems on their backs and were striking targets 5-10 kms in depth from a basement.  I have no idea what “similar effects” Kofman is talking about.  Artillery? NLOS ATGMs maybe (usually a three man crew)?  But these are much more expensive.  Tanks? Tac Avn?  All of these systems have much higher crew and support requirements than four guys in a basement.  And the he mentions the UA is dropping mines…so what else can drop mines 10km deep?  Again, Tac Avn?  Artillery?  

And, I fully agree with you. This is a perfect opportunity to widen force generation bases.

[ArmouredTopHat]

13 minutes ago, alison said:

The interesting point for me, as a card-carrying white collar nerd, is that if a certain neighboring country decides to launch an invasion into my home, I might actually be useful working on that drone team whereas - despite being trim, healthy and fairly fit - my 40something year old bike-riding self would be much less useful trying to haul a rifle and an ATGM around the rice paddies or sitting in some internal combustion vehicle I have no idea how to drive or maintain.

For countries that already have conscription in order to prepare their population for potential aggression from the neighbors, and where many of their people go on to become white collar nerds after finishing their mandatory military service, it seems like drone forces unlock a whole new opportunity for an effective reserve, and that's not even to mention the possibilities of autonomous.

Interestingly enough that we might see this in opposite in Ukraine, with the younger generations being called up to serve in drone units to increase their chance of survival. Ukraine has been pretty keen on preserving its 20 year olds as much as possible and this might be away to leverage that manpower without risking it to a greater extent. 
 

We already see at least one case of this. I do wonder how the average drone operator age is compared to say the average infantrymen. 

[Fenris]

8 hours ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

 

Already mentioned in this post - Perun vid detailing the draw down on RU equipment parks, including a detailed mention of the M-46

 

Well worth the watch.

 

[ArmouredTopHat]

 

[kimbosbread]

9 hours ago, dan/california said:

Speaking of wheat fields, as we look at a  third year of almost static lines, and the fact nobdy is farming anything in the grey zone, will growing undergrowth start to change anything? How much longer will it be before much of the front is waist high brambles, instead something that still looks like farm field, and will this make any difference?

A real asshole would fine the fun invasive species to bring in. My particular favorite is himalayan blackberries, which as far as I can tell are the honey badger of annoying weeds and shrubs.

7 hours ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

Yeah I literally sleep with a tank body pillow/s 

I think that would be a fairly lucrative product, especially sexy panzer in japanese school girl outfit.

3 hours ago, The_Capt said:

That last para really doesn’t make a lot of sense.  What other system can fly a mine behind enemy lines and drop it on enemy LOCs?  Helicopters?  They are smaller crews? As to success rates - he is guessing as much as any of us are.  

Yeah I’m calling bull**** on this too. Just at face value, we can say a drone team is like a mortar or ATGM team, but with more ammunition and 2-10x more range. Vs helos or jets, that’s just taking too many bong hits before breakfast.

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

This is what I have been trying to point out, though it seems some people here are pretty firmly in the drone supremacy camp, so its brave of you to post it!

Argh.  You dance in the shadows with your own strawmen that you have made with loving care.  I am really losing my patience with you.  And unlike others here, I can not put you in an IGNORE list because I have a role as moderator.

I don't know how many times, or how many ways, I and others can put it to you.  Everything on the battlefield is relative.  The TankIsDead crowd here has had no problem, NONE WHATSOEVER, examining the limitations of what drones can do now, what they might be able to do in the future, and the limitations both now and into the future.  I already pointed this out to you once on this very page and yet you persist to mischaracterize why you often find yourself on your own in a debate.

The reality is that you are the one that refuses to acknowledge, or even at times discuss, the weaknesses of your point of view.  You routinely dodge direct challenges to your positions and, as one poster just put it, refuse to listen.  The most salient example of this is anytime we discuss the realities of defense economics.

4 hours ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

The remote mining might just turn out to be even more effective at stalling out attacks as there is really nothing outside of traditional sapping that can be done to prevent it so far, outside of perhaps being less predictable with routes both supply and attack wise. 

At least on this one point you seem to be catching up to where the people you're arguing with here came to a year or two ago.  And how is this being accomplished?  Not by tanks, but by unmanned systems.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, The_Capt said:

That last para really doesn’t make a lot of sense.  What other system can fly a mine behind enemy lines and drop it on enemy LOCs?  Helicopters?  They are smaller crews? As to success rates - he is guessing as much as any of us are.  Neither side has opened their books for detailed statistics analysis, and frankly Russia may never do so.

When I read the Kofman quotes my first thought was "such a shame, I really thought Kofman was starting to get what's going on".

If it wasn't 1:30am, with my wife asleep in the next room, I would have laughed out loud when I saw this:

"Still, Ukraine’s use of drones also comes with trade-offs, Kofman said. For one, drones require more people to operate them than other weapons with similar effects. A team that flies FPV drones might include several soldiers, including an operator, a co-pilot who helps with navigation, a weapons specialist, and a technician. "

This is just unbelievable nonsense.  An FPV team of 3-4 guys operates largely independently, including transportation.  Name me one other system that can put precision pain on the enemy, without any outside assistance, from KMs away with 3-4 guys.  There are none except aircraft, but that's only if you ignore the fact that it takes dozens of personnel per aircraft to make that one shot feasible.

And that's just personnel.  An FPV team can operate out of a field, a bunker, a warehouse, etc.  Aircraft have to operate from expensive and vulnerable fixed facilities.

Unmanned systems have plenty of shortcomings, but their personnel size is definitely not one of them.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

We already see at least one case of this. I do wonder how the average drone operator age is compared to say the average infantrymen. 

We can only guess at it, but anecdotally I would say the average FPV operators are in their 20s whereas the average infantryman seems to be pushing 40, with some units being well above that.

The US military has noted that there is a generational advantage at play.  Even 30 sometimes did not grow up with this sort of tech, 20 somethings have.  It's the same advantage historians bestowed upon the Soviet soldier in winter.  They likely grew up with that sort of thing, Germans likely grew up in cities in much warmer areas.  It's not hard to know who to put money on making it through a tough winter.

Steve

[ArmouredTopHat]

52 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Argh.  You dance in the shadows with your own strawmen that you have made with loving care.  I am really losing my patience with you.  And unlike others here, I can not put you in an IGNORE list because I have a role as moderator.

I don't know how many times, or how many ways, I and others can put it to you.  Everything on the battlefield is relative.  The TankIsDead crowd here has had no problem, NONE WHATSOEVER, examining the limitations of what drones can do now, what they might be able to do in the future, and the limitations both now and into the future.  I already pointed this out to you once on this very page and yet you persist to mischaracterize why you often find yourself on your own in a debate.

The reality is that you are the one that refuses to acknowledge, or even at times discuss, the weaknesses of your point of view.  You routinely dodge direct challenges to your positions and, as one poster just put it, refuse to listen.  The most salient example of this is anytime we discuss the realities of defense economics.

This is a little unfair to say when I have legitimately agreed with you on numerous points prior. I am only guilty of pointing out active developments in tank / armoured vehicle and that I personally believe that concepts such as direct fire or tanks in general remain viable on the battlefield with the appropriate design. Not every battlefield is going to be Ukraine or have its constraints. Every conflict is unique in that respect and there are literally hundreds of factors that contribute to the situation in Ukraine. I personally find the take that 'mechanised warfare is dead' for instance to be a little...bold to say the least. 

Pointing out visual bias when it comes to battlefield performance should not be viewed as a strawmen. I have literally said numerous times that there are clearly some fundamental issues with...lets say the tank as an example in some of its traditional roles and tactical usage. Factors such as design flaws or vulnerability's that further expose said tanks are a worthy thing to point out, as is the fact they could be corrected.

Drones are clearly going to be a major consideration when it comes to protection for vehicles going forward...this I have stated dozens of times by this point. I genuinely do not understand the pushback when I suggest a degree of caution with such takes as 'tank is dead' when we lack full data and are talking about tanks that are in no way shape or form really designed for this sort of environment. The tank has adapted to threats in the past and will likely do so again. This really is not a controversial take when I readily acknowledge that drones are obviously here to stay and be a major battlefield asset.

Either way, I am happy to leave it at that before we indulge in yet another roundabout discussion that gets nowhere that people dont want to see. I am genuinely sorry if you honestly feel so frustrated with debating this stuff, but the reality is that people are not going to reach a consensus on everything when it comes to such complex conundrums. That doesn't mean we cant respect other peoples reasonable viewpoints. It certainly does not warrant the sarcasm and outright ignoring done by some people sprinkled with some curious 'hes gotta be a stooge/paid asset' rubbish that belongs in political debates. It reeks of immaturity which is surprising given the fields some people are in that you would think feature regular debate and disagreement. I absolutely could be dead wrong about my arguments, I will happily say as such should we get some more actual data, widespread conclusions from professionals or see some shifts in army procurement that match what some people have said. I just wish people might realise that they too -could- be wrong. Never hurts to have some introspection. 

Steve, I personally find you very informative and very much value your opinion on matters, even if I dont agree on every point. Things would be boring if we did! Outside of the odd troll or clearly hopeless individuals with pro Russian takes everyone here has the common goal of wanting to see the Russians gone from Ukraine, and everyone here with that desire has valuable inputs and information to that effects. Its why I certainly stuck around. Certainly better than battling the vatniks that infest twitter these days. 



Moving on though....a Russian economist fell out of a window this morning, 
 

 

Edited July 24 by ArmouredTopHat

[Joe982]

8 minutes ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

Moving on though....a Russian economist fell out of a window this morning, 

If we got all the world's economists, and laid them out head to toe around the equator.....this would be a good use for them.

[cesmonkey]

https://t.me/DeepStateUA/19955
 

Quote

The enemy is trying to surround part of the grouping of the Defense Forces near Progress: there is no order to withdraw

We were approached by fighters of the 1st and 3rd battalions of the 31st OMBr, who have been defending the encirclement for the last few days. To the south of Lozuvatskyi, the enemy formed a gorge , through which it is necessary to hold a number of positions to the west of the height of 236.9. Now the Katsapas use the tactic of "wandering gifts" , whose task is to get as close as possible to Ivanovka.

🏚For reference. The operational and tactical situation became critical over the weekend due to the chaotic withdrawal of one of the infantry brigades. 47 OMBr, which came to the rescue, could not restrain the enemy, who was outnumbered. Previously, there was already a crowd of two mouths in the village. The old wolves from the 47th asked to convey a "fervent greeting" to the National Center in the Rivne region.

Soldiers of the 31st OMBr report the risks and possible consequences to the battalion leadership. The latter support them, but the brigade leadership wants the fighters to continue to sit in the circle - to the last soldier. The management of the companies is practically absent , because their commanders are wounded or killed.

We all remember how this sitting at Zenit ended .

We hope that the right decision will be made , which will save human lives for further struggle, and not landing for a couple of hours in tactics.

The enemy is now infiltrating Vovche, in order to resume the assault on the village tomorrow. These actions create a number of additional problems in further defense.

 

[cesmonkey]

 

[holoween]

5 hours ago, The_Capt said:

That last para really doesn’t make a lot of sense.  What other system can fly a mine behind enemy lines and drop it on enemy LOCs?

Artillery.

 

5 hours ago, The_Capt said:

 What happens when someone puts tandem warheads on these things? Purpose designed EFP? Smart ICM? The drones in this war are essentially someone taping a bunch of hunting rifles together and making a crude machine gun that is crippling the doctrine of the day.

You go from 1kg munition to 3kg munition just using the rpg7 tandem warhead. And suddenly your drone sits at 6-8kg rather than 2-3. At that point youre just getting an atgm thats worse in every way but possibly max range and price.

[cesmonkey]

https://t.me/operativnoZSU/152394
 

Quote

The Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Syrskyi gave an interview to The Guardian

Main points:

On F-16 deliveries: "I know when it will happen, but I can't say." Fighters will approach the front line at a distance of up to 40 km so as not to shoot them down.
It is very important that all citizens of Ukraine fulfill their constitutional duty.
Initially, the invasion of the Russian Federation had 100,000 soldiers, now their number has increased to 520,000, and by the end of 2024, 690,000 are planned.
Since 2022, the number of Russian tanks has doubled from 1,700 to 3,500, artillery systems have tripled, and armored personnel carriers have increased from 4,500 to 8,900.
We seek to preserve the lives of our soldiers and do not defend ruins to the death.
We will be able to respond well if the Russians launch a new assault in the south of the Zaporizhzhia region.
We have a plan to return Crimea. It is realistic. Of course, without details, but we will do everything to return to the borders of 1991.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jul/24/i-know-we-will-win-and-how-ukraines-top-general-on-turning-the-tables-against-russia

[Grigb]

10 hours ago, dan/california said:

You just made me want a new modern game even more, and I didn't think that as possible! 

Steve, can we request a  new terrain type for this? 

And it is quite simple to alter CM for the drone reality.

• Observer, Bomber and Off site FPV team drones, as well as on site Jammers are just new options in Support tab
• On site FPV is modified ATGM team.

And basically that's it. Oh, well, you need to put good name - Combat Mission 3: Complex Warfare. Then promote it as the only wargame that accurately simulates modern warfare (all competitors are at least year behind).