How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

13 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I would not be surprised to see that stuff was preposition in Poland waiting for the bill to pass.  The President does not meet Congressional approval to push US military anywhere and I would be surprised if DoD was not directed to “lean forward”

What is really interesting is the ATACMs.  If the US is releasing the really long range stuff then it is also very likely providing the C4ISR and targeting support to the UA for those systems.  That is an escalation and a very clear signal.  It may also explain the whole “hey Ukraine wanna lay off Russian oil industry” narrative that popped up. I am pretty sure the US is not onboard with those missiles shredding the Russian oil industry.

I am quite sure the ATACMS came with a firm understanding that they would only be used within the 1991 borders of Ukraine. And the simple fact is that Ukraine doesn't NEED them to attack Russian oil infrastructure. For that the drones they are using seem to work just fine, and even ten or twenty of them are cheaper in every sense than an ATACMS. The drones have longer range as well. The ATACMS are far better used on hardened military targets, of which there is no shortage.

There was almost certainly an explicit conversation about the Kerch Bridge , one way or the other.

[The_Capt]

28 minutes ago, dan/california said:

I am quite sure the ATACMS came with a firm understanding that they would only be used within the 1991 borders of Ukraine. And the simple fact is that Ukraine doesn't NEED them to attack Russian oil infrastructure. For that the drones they are using seem to work just fine, and even ten or twenty of them are cheaper in every sense than an ATACMS. The drones have longer range as well. The ATACMS are far better used on hardened military targets, of which there is no shortage.

There was almost certainly an explicit conversation about the Kerch Bridge , one way or the other.

Seriously this Kerch Bridge lust has to stop.  Taking it out will be an annoyance and likely be spun as some sort of humanitarian disaster.  It is not a war winner.

So the primary difference between HIMARs and long range drones is that there is no real defence against HIMARs once fired.  They can try GPS jamming but all those advanced ATACMs come with inertial guidance for the last mile.  If you point an ATAMCs at something it is going to die.  So if the UA were to take 25-50 ATACMs and decide to conduct a strategic strike campaign on the oil and gas infra in range…and then layered drones on top of this…they could severely damage the Russian energy industry.  And do it at a rate that Russia could not keep up with.

My guess is the US sees this as an escalation too far as it may trigger bad things we do not want.  So these systems will likely be pointed at hard military targets…like airfields and C2….maybe rail/tn.  The ‘so what’ is that the US has likely crossed a rubicon of providing targeting support directly into Russia.  They may have before but when those ATACMs start to fly it will be undeniable.

Edit: well that did not take long https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/ukraine-uses-long-range-missiles-secretly-provided-by-u-s-to-hit-russian-held-areas-officials-say-1.6860160

Edited April 24 by The_Capt

[Haiduk]

This night UKR UAVs successfully hit next two oil bases in Smolensk oblast

In Lipetsk oblast, particilarly was struck Novolipestk steelworks plant, producing 18 % of overall Russian steel. This plant also produce many armor steel for military purpose and already was hit several months ago. This time drones destroyed oxigen feeding workshop, which may cause disruping of some technological processes.

[FancyCat]

Would disagree on the bridge as not a war winner, its a highly symbolic target, its destruction would seriously harm the image of the Russian state both domestically and internationally, proponents of Russia needing internal dissent to help conclude the war, the bridge's loss is essential for that internal dissent to increase, irregardless of whatever supply/military value. 

[kimbosbread]

12 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Would disagree on the bridge as not a war winner, its a highly symbolic target, its destruction would seriously harm the image of the Russian state both domestically and internationally, proponents of Russia needing internal dissent to help conclude the war, the bridge's loss is essential for that internal dissent to increase, irregardless of whatever supply/military value. 

It would also force movement on the railroad, and the landing ships, and thus open those up to strikes.

[Haiduk]

Not only ATACAMS.

France will deliver Aster-30 missiles for single SAMP-T complex, recently handed over to Ukriane

 

UK in own aid package will deliver Paveway IV 

... And what also important alot of equipment for State Emergency Service

 

[Haiduk]

Hmmm....

 

[Haiduk]

UKR Su-25 work with Zuni rockets

 

[Haiduk]

Aftermath of M30A1 close hit on Russian S-400 radar

 

Edited April 24 by Haiduk

[The_Capt]

46 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Would disagree on the bridge as not a war winner, its a highly symbolic target, its destruction would seriously harm the image of the Russian state both domestically and internationally, proponents of Russia needing internal dissent to help conclude the war, the bridge's loss is essential for that internal dissent to increase, irregardless of whatever supply/military value. 

That entire theory does not track at all.  The UA already hit that damned bridge and Russia did not buckle.  The idea that if we somehow hit it that it will be the starting gun to internal dissent is the sort of wild theory the critics on the right use against support of Ukraine in this thing.  FFS the UA hit Moscow with long range drones and it did not increase internal dissent.  

Further if the Kerch Bridge is so symbolic that it can topple Russia, then why isn’t the opposite true and it drives support in Russia for this war to all time highs?  I mean if the fate of the Russian people is tied to that bridge Putin should have dropped it himself as a demonstration of just how under siege the greater Russia is by the West.

[The_Capt]

42 minutes ago, kimbosbread said:

It would also force movement on the railroad, and the landing ships, and thus open those up to strikes.

To do what with exactly?  Choke off the Crimea?  Except for that whole strategic corridor problem of course.  Screw that, the Kerch Bridge would soak up a lot of punishment for not enough gain.  Russia’s ability to attack or defend is not dependent on it right now at all.  Maybe if they got bottled up in the Crimea but that would take breaking the defence in the middle which is no small hill to climb.  Nor will Russia fall by some weird symbolism.  

Use the damned missiles to hit strat LOCs, airfields, ports and C2 nodes to erode the Russia ability to prosecute the war directly.  In the business we call it “shaping”.  Then solve for those minefields and regain operational offensive initiative.  The Kerch Bridge does little to support any of that beyond making us feel better.

[A Canadian Cat]

12 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

The Kerch Bridge does little to support any of that beyond making us feel better.

But, but, but I want to feel better :-<

I say use the new ammo and missiles to mess up as many attacks as possible and hit as many logistics and HQ targets as you can find. Rinse and repeat.

[FancyCat]

36 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

That entire theory does not track at all.  The UA already hit that damned bridge and Russia did not buckle.  The idea that if we somehow hit it that it will be the starting gun to internal dissent is the sort of wild theory the critics on the right use against support of Ukraine in this thing.  FFS the UA hit Moscow with long range drones and it did not increase internal dissent.  

Further if the Kerch Bridge is so symbolic that it can topple Russia, then why isn’t the opposite true and it drives support in Russia for this war to all time highs?  I mean if the fate of the Russian people is tied to that bridge Putin should have dropped it himself as a demonstration of just how under siege the greater Russia is by the West.

Hit and its been repaired, im assuming the scenario we are operating on is a hit to the bridge that renders it unrepairable. Drones hitting Moscow has increased internal dissent tho, including hitting gas and oil complexes. I think if we regard the current state of war support for Russia, it is quite high right now. 

Besides, Russian messaging focusing on preventing German supply of missiles does indicate worry about the loss of the bridge. It is a legitimating factor over Crimea and Ukraine. 

[Billy Ringo]

Have a feeling with the significant increase in military hardware rolling into Ukraine---the ****'s about to hit the fan.

 

Good.

[TheVulture]

19 minutes ago, Billy Ringo said:

Have a feeling with the significant increase in military hardware rolling into Ukraine---the ****'s about to hit the fan.

 

Good.

More likely that we're going to get back to the mid-2023 situation where Russia is no longer able to make incremental gains and Ukraine can push them back slightly in a few places. I'm not expecting anything dramatic personally - just a shift in the media narrative which is currently "Russia is slowly grinding Ukraine down".

[dan/california]

8 minutes ago, TheVulture said:

More likely that we're going to get back to the mid-2023 situation where Russia is no longer able to make incremental gains and Ukraine can push them back slightly in a few places. I'm not expecting anything dramatic personally - just a shift in the media narrative which is currently "Russia is slowly grinding Ukraine down".

I agree with this, but whatever Russia is paying to take a square kilometer is about to at least triple. They haven't exactly been getting a bargain rate the last few weeks, so it is about to get TRULY Pricey. Hopefully Ukraine casualties will go down as well.

[dan/california]

3 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Seriously this Kerch Bridge lust has to stop.  Taking it out will be an annoyance and likely be spun as some sort of humanitarian disaster.  It is not a war winner.

So the primary difference between HIMARs and long range drones is that there is no real defence against HIMARs once fired.  They can try GPS jamming but all those advanced ATACMs come with inertial guidance for the last mile.  If you point an ATAMCs at something it is going to die.  So if the UA were to take 25-50 ATACMs and decide to conduct a strategic strike campaign on the oil and gas infra in range…and then layered drones on top of this…they could severely damage the Russian energy industry.  And do it at a rate that Russia could not keep up with.

My guess is the US sees this as an escalation too far as it may trigger bad things we do not want.  So these systems will likely be pointed at hard military targets…like airfields and C2….maybe rail/tn.  The ‘so what’ is that the US has likely crossed a rubicon of providing targeting support directly into Russia.  They may have before but when those ATACMs start to fly it will be undeniable.

Edit: well that did not take long https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/ukraine-uses-long-range-missiles-secretly-provided-by-u-s-to-hit-russian-held-areas-officials-say-1.6860160

I am only slightly guilty of bridge lust, I am simply saying that it gets to stay standing because the U.S. NSC thinks knocking it down will cause more problems than it solves. If they ever change their mind a train full of the appropriate munitions will arrive to announce that decision, followed by some truly excellent video. 

[FancyCat]

So ATACAMS first target was the S-400 complex in Crimea. Guess that answers whether it can intercept it.

[poesel]

It is necessary for Ukraine to attack Kerch Bridge once in a while, so Russia cannot stop wasting resources to protect it. Its high symbolic value forces Russia's hand, no matter what the actual military value is.

[Ultradave]

15 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Sadly, the caveat "for now" has to be kept in mind.

OK, so aid will start flowing to Ukraine on Wednesday of this week.  I've seen some reporting out there claiming the stuff won't get into Ukraine's hands for weeks or months.  Poppycock

There have been a couple of articles in reputable publications lately stating that the DoD has been staging equipment in anticipation of a yes vote, so that delivery can be started immediately. I guess that's one result of the delay in approval. The DoD had a couple or three months to get organized so they are ready to go. 

Dave

[Vacillator]

17 minutes ago, Ultradave said:

they are ready to go

Let's hope so .

Edited April 24 by Vacillator

[The_Capt]

50 minutes ago, poesel said:

It is necessary for Ukraine to attack Kerch Bridge once in a while, so Russia cannot stop wasting resources to protect it. Its high symbolic value forces Russia's hand, no matter what the actual military value is.

I would very much like for the Ukrainian strategic strike campaigns to stop being “symbolic” and start shaping the battle space for re-engaging in offensive operations.  Symbolism is great but destroying Russian abilities to effectively defend an 800km frontage with a highly degraded military are much better.  Further, “symbolism” is not going to keep western support coming…operational gains that push the Russians back will.  The thumbnail sketch plan:

- Re-establish denial of air and ground. 

- Hit the RUAF hard and keep them well back.

- Hit The RA where it hurts…logistics, enablers and C2.  Prioritize artillery and EW.

- Hit the SLOCs.  Hard military targets that move all that hardware and people to the front and then up and down it.

- Solve for offence.  Stop using FPVs defensively now that artillery is showing up and use them offensively en masse.  Saturate bridgeheads and try bounce crossings at scale.

- Re-establish forward momentum and get the RA reacting to them, not the other way around.

- Bite, grab and hold….repeat.  Eventually, if we are lucky, corrosive warfare will work again and the RA will have to re-set like it did in Fall 22.

That is one helluva bill to pay but it is the one in front of the UA and the West to support.

Do not waste limited military high end hardware on “symbols”…use it to kill the Russian war machine.

[kimbosbread]

1 hour ago, FancyCat said:

Besides, Russian messaging focusing on preventing German supply of missiles does indicate worry about the loss of the bridge. It is a legitimating factor over Crimea and Ukraine. 

This does seem like a good reason, unless Russia is playing some form of 5D chess that I cannot comprehend.

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Use the damned missiles to hit strat LOCs, airfields, ports and C2 nodes to erode the Russia ability to prosecute the war directly.

Why not all of the above? There isn’t exactly a giant missile shortage though, just a shortage of missiles we feel like giving to Ukraine.

That said, I do agree that given a finite (but large) supply of missiles, there are better targets until Ukraine is actually in a position to cut the land bridge. Like refineries, oil depots, ports, power plants, factories, locomotives, etc.

[poesel]

27 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I would very much like for the Ukrainian strategic strike campaigns to stop being “symbolic” and

You got me a bit wrong here. The Kerch Bridge is symbolic for the Russians. Any damage to it is highly visible and forces Russia to use assets to deny that to Ukraine. Its a long bridge that can be attacked by air, land & sea. That means a lot of Russian stuff has to be deployed there and not on the front.

That is a non-symbolic win for Ukraine. It is only necessary that the Russians believe Ukraine could attack it.

[kimbosbread]

31 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Solve for offence.  Stop using FPVs defensively now that artillery is showing up and use them offensively en masse.  Saturate bridgeheads and try bounce crossings at scale.

When you say use drones offensively, what are you thinking?

Small groups of infantry moving forward, and deploying the drones like they would, say, a mortar, and attacking positions with them as part of a combined infrantry-drone assault (along a larger front)?