How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[BeondTheGrave]

4 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

It is Warsaw-pact equipment. I don't have an idea of the computer software which comes with the Abrams tank. Is it of the same standard as the US uses? Recently Australia updated their Abrams to the M1A2 SEPv3 Abrams. On the outside it looks like the same tank. It is to integrate common tactics as I understand it. Not much point in purchasing it if the model is designed to operate in concert with the latest wizardry modern technology produces. Ok you donate a $4.5 million tank to Ukraine what is the point if they treat it like it was a T72 tank? Who knows the ranging equipment is designed to operate from behind the horizon? To use this suggested tactic, needs training otherwise no point to supply. 

Not sure as to what Australia just got, but historically Australian models of Abrams have been the export model. Biggest change here is the lack of DU inserts in the armor, which reduces overall protection. Also no DU ammunition either (obv). Not much else was removed tho AFAIK. Australia is a bit of a unique case in that the close alliance between the US and Aus has led to a lot of technological exchange between the two, the recent sub deal being an example of that. But DU is DU and is a bit more sensitive. The only tech I would think would be removed from the Abrams was kit that the Australian MoD preferred to have built domestically for whatever reason. 

The reason why ex-Soviet gear is being sent first and foremost is exactly what you say. Ukraine doesnt (probably) have time to run a bunch of crews through tank school to get this or that system into the field. Better to send them gear they already have trained crews who can operate than teach them both new systems and new tactics. Spot on there. 

The issue with this is that most NATO held Soviet stocks are getting pretty long in the tooth. Virtually all of NATO has been working for decades to upgrade to either German or American standards. If you want to buy Leos or Abrams why keep upgrading your T-72Ms? You dont. In fact you try to sell or scrap what you dont need to cut costs. All that means NATO stocks of Soviet equipment are old and are a finite resource. At some point NATO is going to run short on stuff Ukraine needs. Given the proliferation of 155mm arty deals I suspect in some areas this is already happening. Which means Ukraine has to bite the bullet, train up on NATO kit, and begin figuring out how its going to work all of it into their doctrine and front line tactics. Not an easy task, but it probably also means some chunk of this equipment will just be used like it was Soviet gear. 

The Leo 1 deal is a slight complication in all this in that Germany doesn't want to send Leo anythings to Ukraine. This deal wasn't their idea and they dont like it. Leo1s were just what Rhinemetall thought theyd get away with. Germany could surely do better than some old Leo1(A5s?) if it really wanted to. But for politics sake this is what is proposed. It has little to do with doctrine, or what the Ukrainians would best benefit from, or how relevant the Leo1 is on the modern battlefield. Its first and foremost a political issue. But one which all NATO countries are dealing with. What Ukraine needs are M1A2s with the DU insert and DU ammo. But how is Australia going to react if Ukraine gets toys even they cant have? These kinds of arms deals are like walking into a minefield totally blind. No idea what the ramifications will be.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, akd said:

More open-source analysis of Russian armed forces casualties:

https://zona-media.translate.goog/article/2022/04/25/bodycount?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Really good analysis of the known dead.  The most interesting piece of their report is that 17% of the identified dead were officers.  That's a ridiculously high proportion.  Should be more like 5% as an average unless HQ units are getting hit far more than regular grunt units.  Which is not likely.  Some quick math shows that the verifiable 1700 KIA should be more like 4500 KIA.

This seems to indicate that Russia is taking more effort to obscure enlisted deaths than officers.  Maybe because it is easier to hide enlisted?  Probably.

Steve

[sross112]

8 minutes ago, BeondTheGrave said:

But how is Australia going to react if Ukraine gets toys even they cant have? These kinds of arms deals are like walking into a minefield totally blind. No idea what the ramifications will be.

I don't understand this policy. Why wouldn't the US provide Australia with the good stuff? They've been one of our staunchest allies for a very long time. It's not like they will use them to invade anyone. I understand when Saudi Arabia is buying them and could be used against Israel or something, but Ukraine has a pretty arguable case as to why they need the good stuff and it's not like Russia is our friend. Poland too should get the good stuff. 

My argument would be if the UK decided they weren't going to build their own model anymore and wanted to use Abrams, wouldn't we sell them the top notch stuff? Why should it be any different with the countries that are first in line to contain the red menace? 

23 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

They could use 3 Abrams Platoons instead of the standard 4 if they wanted to and that wouldn't be problematic.  Perhaps not optimal, but I don't think detrimental.

Steve

 Well sure it would be ok to only use 3 platoons if they are only planning on mauling a Russian division, but if they are going to polish off a CAA they will probably need 4.  

[Battlefront.com]

15 minutes ago, sross112 said:

I wondered that too when I was looking up those brigade structures. Their 2 active brigades, the 1st and 17th, have wikipedia entries but I can't find any other information to confirm. The 1st shows 3 tank bn's and the 17th shows 3 tank and 1 inf bn. It is possible wikipedia is wrong and the 1st tank has an inf bn as well but I can't seem to confirm or deny it.

I'm assuming they are following the Soviet/Russian model here.  Each Mech Brigade has its own organic Tank Battalion. to be used for routine fighting.  Tank Brigades exist to provide a concentrated punch or counter punch in support of the Mech Brigades.  Therefore, infantry is not needed with the Tank Brigades as much, if at all.

Steve

[sross112]

So Moldova. Does anyone know if the consensus there would be to be part of Romania again? I know they are primarily Romanian speakers, but that doesn't necessarily mean they want to be part of Romania. If they do this would be the perfect time to use Putin's tactics against him. Hold a referendum, join with Romania and be instantly protected by NATO.

I've wondered about Kaliningrad as well. Will they really want to remain part of Russia as the sanction effects get worse and worse? 

Opportunities to reverse engineer his politik.

Edited April 26, 2022 by sross112

[Battlefront.com]

Good discussion with Kofman from a couple of days ago:

Reinforces a lot of what we've been talking about here, including that this offensive is Russia's last go.

One thing that Kofman points out, a couple of times, is that Russia's forces are still at peacetime strength and that Russia can not change that without a general mobilization.  Which means every casualty has to be made up with some form of trickery or bribery to get people to sign up.

Half way through he is asked how he thinks the war will end and he's having the same problems we have here.  There isn't any good answer so he lays out some possibilities and leaves it at that.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Really good footage, despite the stupid transition effects.  Very high res.

This Twitter feed has a lot of good footage of burnt up Russian stuff, quite a bit I haven't seen so far:

 

[dan/california]

We are setting you up with nuclear submarines, which are THE crown jewels. I am fairly certain you can have the DU inserts and ammo if you ask. What the green orientated bits of your own political system thinks about it is a different question, and your own problem. My opinion is that the only thing worse than cleaning up after a tank battle you won, is being one of the carbonized stains being cleaned up when the other side wins.

[dan/california]

In this case I think the stains burned away by the time it got done melting...

[dan/california]

Ukr and or Nato intelligence seems to be even deeper inside Russian operations in Kherson than they are everywhere else.

[Battlefront.com]

Ukrainian platoon sized formation on the move, hesitating when they hear a helicopter.  Notice two soldiers have MANPADs on their shoulders in case they see a chance to hit it:

 

[Fenris]

45 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Ukr and or Nato intelligence seems to be even deeper inside Russian operations in Kherson than they are everywhere else.

It would not surprise me in the slightest if this conflict is being used as real world conditions training for just about every intel analyst who can get their eyes on their respective forces/allies intel feeds.

[Battlefront.com]

This hopefully turns out to be true:

 

[Fenris]

I don't know how to post the whole thread, has details relating to Dan's post a couple above this one of action around Kherson.

https://twitter.com/CanadianUkrain1/status/1518809782441947138

Here's the first post

 

[Fenris]

Another map following the progress of the war that I was directed to today (seems to be a few days behind)

https://widgets.scribblemaps.com/sm/?d&z&l&mt&gc&mv&id=091194

Edited April 26, 2022 by Fenris

[Taranis]

28 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

This hopefully turns out to be true:

 

Awesome  and it would be good if his little buddies from the 64th brigade joined him in POW

[womble]

5 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

They need something which can knock out Russian equipment without occurring significant losses themselves.

The only equipment a Leo1 can't knock out is a T-72 in frontal aspect, but:

Javelin

NLAW

Stugna-P

Artillery

They have such things and are not requesting the Leos for that purpose. Because they are self-evidently not stupid.

[Fernando]

The New Yoork Times has interviewed Gerhard Schröder. Unfortunately it is behind a paywall. Is there a way to read it for free?

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/23/world/europe/schroder-germany-russia-gas-ukraine-war-energy.html

Edited April 26, 2022 by Fernando

[JonS]

My understanding of the AU Abrams is that the ones they have in AU are pretty great, but basically Koalas. I.e, they are not to be shot at, and not to be taken out of the country. The intent is that if/when push comes to shove, AU Army will send a brigades worth of personnel - including trained, disciplined and motivated tank crews who really know how to squeeze the juice out of an M1 - and US will provide a bdes-worth of you-beaut kit.

For training purposes, in AU, DU inserts and silver bullets are largely irrelevant.

Edited April 26, 2022 by JonS

[Sarjen]

9 minutes ago, Fernando said:

The New Yoork Times has interviewed Gerhard Schröder. Unfortunately it is behind a paywall. Is there a way to read it for free?

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/23/world/europe/schroder-germany-russia-gas-ukraine-war-energy.html

Try web.Archive.org

https://web.archive.org/web/20220424084107/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/23/world/europe/schroder-germany-russia-gas-ukraine-war-energy.html

 

[chuckdyke]

18 minutes ago, womble said:

The only equipment a Leo1 can't knock out is a T-72 in frontal aspect, but:

Javelin

NLAW

Stugna-P

Artillery

They have such things and are not requesting the Leos for that purpose. Because they are self-evidently not stupid.

In other words a Leo1 is a solution to a non-existent problem. What is going to be a problem is logistics of too many diverse types of equipment for a campaign. Now they are getting British, French and US 155 mm then you need to maintain them. Caterpillar Bulldozers were a nightmare enough replacing Komatsu let alone modern army equipment in wartime. 

[JonS]

6 hours ago, MikeyD said:

About Leopard 1. If you think of it as NOT AT TANK it could be of some utility. The trouble would come from trying to use it as a modern MBT.

So, that's fine, in principle. Except that's not how people actually think. "It looks like a duck, therefore it's a duck" is how people actually think. Or, to be slightly more generous, "ok, as a tanker I can accept that you'd be better off in an M1A2SEPxyzMod28rel3. However, as an infantryman I can assure you that you are far better off in that than me over here in my cotton shirt. Now, put on your big boy pants and go deal with that problem for us."

Don't believe me? See: US SP TD Bns in WWII, and how they were (mis)employed, for an obvious example.

Edited April 26, 2022 by JonS

[chuckdyke]

6 minutes ago, JonS said:

Don't believe me? See: US SP TD Bns in WWII, and how they were (mis)employed, for an obvious example.

Yes, and the introduction of the MBT was the solution. 

[Taranis]

Clashes in Rubizhne and Popasna of Luhansk region, Russian troops failing to advance

 

Germany to authorise tank deliveries to Ukraine: government sources

 

Germany to allow delivery of tanks to Ukraine
Germany will authorize the delivery of Gepard-type tanks to Ukraine, a government source announced on Tuesday. The details, and in particular the number of tanks, specialized in anti-aircraft defense, must be revealed during the day by the Minister of Defense, Christine Lambrecht, during a meeting on the American military base of Ramstein, in Germany, at the invitation from his American counterpart, according to this source. These vehicles would come from the stocks of the German defense industry.

This announcement constitutes a major turning point in the cautious policy followed so far by Berlin in its military support for kyiv.

Source : Le Monde


Le Monde talk about Gepard. I don't know if it's a confusion with Leopard or if it's add to the Leopard

[Huba]

Transnistria update: