How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[CAZmaj]

2 hours ago, kraze said:

You'd think the video would first be posted by Ukrainian soldiers and then spread from there finally reaching russian propagandists.

But for some reason it's a russian ministry of "defense" exclusive. Where "Ukrainian" soldiers wear no insignia and speak perfect russian.

I suspect "Ukrainian" soldiers to actually be Russians kneecapping Russian deserters.

[akd]

40 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yes, I didn't think the hit seemed as intended.

The NLAW is a strange missile.  It is always designed to attack at a right angle to its flight path.  At this steep of an angle that would not be ideal at all.

This is one of the major differences between NLAW and Javelin.  Javelin has a traditional warhead in the nose, which means you can fire straight at a target (in LOS Mode).  NLAW's downward directed blast means it is not designed to directly impact anything.

Steve

20m min. distance regardless.

[Kinophile]

Sure, the negotiations are clarifing on the "political" points. But it's the territorial that will matter. Ukraine cannot leave the forced land corridor in existence, it it threatens its own existence.

The only realistically equal basis for negotiations is when Ukraine has 

1. Secured Kiev (defeated both pincer arms)

2. Retaken everything Kherson<-->Mariupol.

Anything less than that is negotiating from a position of weakness - fundamentally, Crimea must NOT be secure.

 

[akd]

24 minutes ago, JonS said:

They do this, or something like it, every year. There are about 200k conscripts, with each serving for 2 years = 100k intake each year. The bigger question is whether they conduct a stop-loss or release /previous/ year's draft on schedule.

They are already talking about not releasing the draft from 1 year ago.  Also, they reduced service to 1 year in 2008, so 100k every 6 months, I think. Of course coercive contracting is definitely a thing.

Edited March 28, 2022 by akd

[The_Capt]

15 minutes ago, JonS said:

They do this, or something like it, every year. There are about 200k conscripts, with each serving for 2 years = 100k intake each year. The bigger question is whether they conduct a stop-loss or release /previous/ year's draft on schedule.

If they do release, then it's going to be ... 2 months? before the new 100k are even moderately useful, meaning a BIG dip in operations between 1 Apr and early-mid June (which, coincidentally means high summer and firm ground)

If they don't release, then it's still early-mid June before the newbies get used, but the dip in ops between now and then will be lower. On the other hand, I imagine that the guys due to be released aren't going to be super happy about being held in uniform for another year. Also makes it even harder to maintain that whole "limited operation" bizzo with the public.

Its not the pulling them from society that I am talking about, one can do that in a gymnasium.  It is gearing them, theatre training, refresher training (stuff like combat first aid, mine threats etc) and rotating them into theatre.  The trying to integrate 100k troops into a fight is not an easy task if you don't want an armed mob with no idea what is going on.  This is one of the biggest logistical challenges a military can take on and so far we have not seen Russian logistics as the high water mark of the science.

It isn't the 100k of fighting age males, even if they are all hardened vets of 2014 or Syria, it is taking a group of former civilians and turning them into a fighting force and then getting them into theatre in organized units/formations and integrating them into current operations, it take months.  Unless the Russians are at the WW1/WW2 model of "here is your weapon, go that way", which then leads to the logistical problem of 100k corpses you need to try and repatriate...or not, just leave them in a hole, great for morale of their families.     

[akd]

3 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

It isn't the 100k of fighting age males, even if they are all hardened vets of 2014 or Syria, it is taking a group of former civilians and turning them into a fighting force and then getting them into theatre in organized units/formations and integrating them into current operations, it take months.  Unless the Russians are at the WW1/WW2 model of "here is your weapon, go that way", which then leads to the logistical problem of 100k corpses you need to try and repatriate...or not, just leave them in a hole, great for morale of their families.     

They are already doing this with all males of fighting age in the DPR.  All of them.  Straight to the front to die with old gear pulled out of storage.  The only thing in the way of this in Russia is legal barriers.

[dan/california]

I think they have some difficulty adjusting to opposition that can shoot back.

[rocketman]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yes, I didn't think the hit seemed as intended.

The NLAW is a strange missile.  It is always designed to attack at a right angle to its flight path.  At this steep of an angle that would not be ideal at all.

This is one of the major differences between NLAW and Javelin.  Javelin has a traditional warhead in the nose, which means you can fire straight at a target (in LOS Mode).  NLAW's downward directed blast means it is not designed to directly impact anything.

Steve

The NLAW has a direct attack mode and according to SAAB ( https://www.saab.com/products/nlaw ) it can be fired from a second story building without problem. Maybe the one fired in the video wasn’t set right.

[The_Capt]

19 minutes ago, akd said:

They are already doing this with all males of fighting age in the DPR.  All of them.  Straight to the front to die with old gear pulled out of storage.  The only thing in the way of this in Russia is legal barriers.

I guess the Ukrainians did the same thing but local area defence with territorial troops who are building on an existing reserve structures, cause you live next door to Russia, is one thing.  Taking what are essentially conscripts and rolling them into an offensive actions in the modern age is insane.  We will be seeing human wave attacks at this rate.

[akd]

5 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I guess the Ukrainians did the same thing but local area defence with territorial troops who are building on an existing reserve structures, cause you live next door to Russia, is one thing.  Taking what are essentially conscripts and rolling them into an offensive actions in the modern age is insane.  We will be seeing human wave attacks at this rate.

Same-ish. Not forced at gunpoint on the Ukrainian side, but that can probably make all the difference in the long run.

[JonS]

40 minutes ago, akd said:

Also, they reduced service to 1 year in 2008, so 100k every 6 months, I think.

Ah, ok. Well, anyway, the point is that they are well used to* and have the infrastructure** for RSOMI-ing*** 100k pers.

 

* in the sense they can do it. I am not in a position to comment on how well, smooth, or pleasant that process

** in the sense that they have /somewhere to put them, whether that's a fixed barracks, tents on a golf course, or a cave complex somewhere in the Urals.

*** not to the degree units rolling in and out of Afghanistan or Iraq over the last 20 years would expect, but they aren't spooling up from a standing start.

Edited March 28, 2022 by JonS

[BeondTheGrave]

16 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I guess the Ukrainians did the same thing but local area defence with territorial troops who are building on an existing reserve structures, cause you live next door to Russia, is one thing.  Taking what are essentially conscripts and rolling them into an offensive actions in the modern age is insane.  We will be seeing human wave attacks at this rate.

TD, I would guess, are taking over more traditional roles in the front lines to free up more regulars for asymmetric actions. You ought to make sure Kyiv, for example, has a strong garrison with established points across the city. Just in case some helo troopers or a fast recon or something slips past your defenses and blitzes for the symbolic victory. Take Ludendorff and Liege for example. Weirder things have happened. So you need guys at checkpoints with AKs. But do you need your front line, active duty, top of the rotation guys holding checkpoints and strong points and doing rear duty? No. So the TD in those cases frees up manpower. 

And then of course the TD can be pressed into combat when the Russians show up and the UA needs more backup. Nothing wrong with people throwing Molotovs from roofs or guys with PKMs hole up in a nice spot with orders to 'kill everyone who comes hither.' And of course promising TD recruits (those who survive the darwinistic nature of warfare) can become good replacements for the regular army. 

_____

Also this whole conversation about the PoW incident seems really uncomfortable to me. I just dont think you can frame by frame analyze a video like that and know one way or another. Zelensky said it was fake (of course he would) the Russians say its real (of course they would) so we should just accept that its currently an active component of the propaganda battle and move forward. We here in our comfy chairs cant solve this, it will have to be investigated and litigated by people on the scene. We dont really gain much by going at it in circles here. 

Edited March 29, 2022 by BeondTheGrave

[JonS]

17 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Taking what are essentially conscripts and rolling them into an offensive actions in the modern age is insane.

To be clear, I don't disagree with this at all. The Russians have managed to get themselves neatly into a savage commanders dilemma in terms of sustaining manpower, with either choice leading to a lower tempo and a less effective force.

[sross112]

It seems the last few days there has been almost no mention of the RuAF. Anyone know if they are flying at all?

For the big picture I'm waiting for the UKR reserves to show up somewhere as it has been mentioned there are substantial numbers of them. Just my opinion and I'd like to hear what others think, but I'm thinking the best move if there is a possibility of a credible attack would be to relieve Mariupol. If not relieved it will eventually fall and that is a big win for Putin's propaganda and lets them have a land bridge as well as the southern and southeastern forces being able to link up and work together against Donetsk. If it can be relieved that is serious mud in Putin's and the RA's eye (not that they aren't nearly blinded by the copious amounts applied there by UKR already). Thoughts?

[danfrodo]

Maybe on the Mariupol front the best move is to try to cut off russians who are concentrated in the area of mariupol, IF there's weak flanks that can be hit.  Then russians have to go into attack to secure their supply lines.  And the lighter UKR forces are best w russian forces trying to attack. 

While we've talked a lot about the end of tanks, I am still thinking UKR folks would like a whole lot more tanks.

[Battlefront.com]

37 minutes ago, rocketman said:

The NLAW has a direct attack mode and according to SAAB ( https://www.saab.com/products/nlaw ) it can be fired from a second story building without problem. Maybe the one fired in the video wasn’t set right.

Not exactly.  It can be fired in a direct attack mode in that it doesn't rely upon the aiming system, but the missile still fires down.  It has no forward explosive capability as far as I know.

The distance between shooter and target matters a lot when you start talking about angle of attack issues.  Firing from a 2nd story window against a tank 400m away will probably work.  Firing from what looks to be a 3rd or even 4th story window against something that's directly below is an entirely different matter.

And if it was fired from the 2nd story, it's unlikely it had armed itself by the time it impacted.  As AKD pointed out it has a minimum range as do most missile systems.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

42 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I guess the Ukrainians did the same thing but local area defence with territorial troops who are building on an existing reserve structures, cause you live next door to Russia, is one thing.  Taking what are essentially conscripts and rolling them into an offensive actions in the modern age is insane.  We will be seeing human wave attacks at this rate.

Aside from the fact that local Ukrainians were volunteering to fight vs. the conscripted DLPR situation, there is the fact that Russia conscripted them to "fight for their homes" then stuck them in trucks and drove them very far away to fight somewhere else.  Take already crappy morale and toss that in... the results will be disappointing to someone (hint, not Ukrainian!).

Steve

[sburke]

4 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Aside from the fact that local Ukrainians were volunteering to fight vs. the conscripted DLPR situation, there is the fact that Russia conscripted them to "fight for their homes" then stuck them in trucks and drove them very far away to fight somewhere else.  Take already crappy morale and toss that in... the results will be disappointing to someone (hint, not Ukrainian!).

Steve

AKD posted this a few hours ago.  Worth looking at again before it recedes any further

 

[Kinophile]

Kherson is the key, I feel.

1. Recapturing it screws with Putin's narrative and, as the only significant city taken so far, would be a huge morale boost to UKR and inversely for RUS forces. 

2. It secures the Dniper, threatens Crimea and the forces attacking Donbass from the South.

3. Mariupol will fall before Kherson can be taken, in theory freeing up that army (or what's left of it) to attack the Donbass. 

4. But attacking Kherson will force that army to support the 49th, operationally nullifying it vis a vis the Donbass.

Issues are -

A. Crimea is relatively close, as a base.

However, the terrain between Kherson & Crimea is quite open, flat and units crossing it are vulnerable to ISR (which functionally means getting snotted from afar).

B. There are plenty of RUS forces and pushing them back consolidates/solidifies their defense, compacting them and giving them good internal lines.

C. Putin cannot lose Kherson. It's a regime-breaking loss.  

[Battlefront.com]

38 minutes ago, JonS said:

Ah, ok. Well, anyway, the point is that they are well used to* and have the infrastructure** for RSOMI-ing*** 100k pers.

Sorta.  They are used to this under routine, peacetime conditions where the outgoing guys vacate the bunks and equipment and there's really no rush to get their game on.  They are also setup to have the conscripts train with and learn from the contract soldiers.

Conditions now are hardly the same.  The two most important points of difference is that the equipment is all gone and so too are the contract soldiers.  So even if the conscripts have a broomstick stand-in for a rifle, who is going to teach them how to use it?  Hell, they probably don't have enough contract soldiers at the bases to keep the rich tradition of brutal hazing going.

Plus, let's keep in mind that the performance from the units in Russia now isn't very good and these are their best contract soldiers.  Even if they somehow manage to pull off training up a new batch of 100,000... it's not likely to be a very useful bunch for this war.

Steve

[akd]

This video:

Two 200s, she says.

Edited March 29, 2022 by akd

[Battlefront.com]

5 minutes ago, sburke said:

AKD posted this a few hours ago.  Worth looking at again before it recedes any further

 

Oh I already saw that and smiled. 

Aside from the obvious issues with these guy specifically, think of the broader implications.  They seem to know (or think they know) how badly the war is going.  They are pretty convinced that they are going to all get killed for nothing.  That attitude is unlikely to be limited to the poor SOBs grabbed from their towns as they were out walking the dog or going to get some groceries. (figuratively speaking as far as I know)

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

6 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Kherson is the key, I feel.

There's a couple of ways to cause Russian forces a lot of angst, but taking Kherson is certainly a big one.  From a propaganda standpoint showing the people celebrating their REAL liberation will be quite something to get out there for people to see.

The base to Crimea isn't as short a you think when you consider the length of travel for supplies to get to the Crimea in the first place.  The majority of Russian military infrastructure is significantly north of there.  Sure, stockpiles were available there at one point, but it's probable the prewar supplies are long since gone.  Now stuff has to be trucked or put on rail from hundreds of KMs away to then probably mostly by boat to Crimea and then from there up to the front.

Plus, once Ukraine gets within artillery range of the choke point that adjoins Crimea to the mainland the forces north are screwed.

Steve

[sburke]

Trying to keep that land bridge means having to hold a 500 km long front.  I just don't see anything in Russia's options that are realistic given their capabilities.  If (when) this Izium offensive fizzles out it will be curious what plan G is. 

 

 

[billbindc]

24 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

There's a couple of ways to cause Russian forces a lot of angst, but taking Kherson is certainly a big one.  From a propaganda standpoint showing the people celebrating their REAL liberation will be quite something to get out there for people to see.

The base to Crimea isn't as short a you think when you consider the length of travel for supplies to get to the Crimea in the first place.  The majority of Russian military infrastructure is significantly north of there.  Sure, stockpiles were available there at one point, but it's probable the prewar supplies are long since gone.  Now stuff has to be trucked or put on rail from hundreds of KMs away to then probably mostly by boat to Crimea and then from there up to the front.

Plus, once Ukraine gets within artillery range of the choke point that adjoins Crimea to the mainland the forces north are screwed.

Steve

Has there been an attempt at damaging the Kerch Bridge yet?