How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

3 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Point taken!  To rephrase, if I were the defender I would presume they'd try again and therefore as an attacker I'd presume the defender would be looking for me.

Based on the PMPs at the two sites they do seem to have had enough to bridge the river twice.

Monday Morning Quarterbacking this...

They should have had at least two bridging locations planned.  They should have started by using a swimming location to get some heavy stuff over, but for the most part put a lot of infantry ashore on the other side.  Any concentrations of enemy to be dealt with with specifically assigned artillery and air (which theoretically Russia could commit).  I'd also be interdicting the heck out of the defender's local LOCs.

After expanding an infantry bridgehead out far enough to create enough space to operate in and to push the enemy beyond easy drone range, then and only then would I put in my two bridges.  And I'd do it simultaneously and at night as much as possible.  Even using artificial light would be better than doing it in broad daylight.  Smoke and other things that were mentioned by the Ukrainian engineer would need to be going non-stop during the daylight.

Once the bridges were in place I'd have put no more than 2 vehicles on the bridge at any one time.  The ingress vehicles would be sent one at a time and egress would be dispersed far and wide to join the infantry.  If a vehicle came to a stop at any time the entire operation would halt in place.  I would not let them bunch up.

The bridgehead would need to expand and keep moving so it couldn't be smashed with artillery.

In the event both bridges were trashed, then I would just have my cut off forces sit in place and try to resupply them across the river by boat at night.  That could be done for quite a while in order to buy time to figure out how to evacuate them.  I would not try to rebridge in the same spot any time soon.

I'm not saying I think this would work, but it would have had a lot better chance than than what the Russians obviously did!

Steve

One of the overwhelming Russian failures throughout this entire war is a complete inability to operate with any dispersal to speak of. My interpretation of this massive and ongoing failing is that nothing happens outside of the LOS of a company grade officer. As soon as the company commander is out of sight any real work halts, and the looting and drinking start, if there is anything to loot or drink. I am open to other interpretations of this demonstrated failing. But the lessons don't get much sharper than a stiff rain of 152/155, and the Russians are still exhibiting zero learning.

[Suleyman]

51 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Actually, I think most of those vehicles were actively attempting to cross, were destroyed, then towed to where we see them now.

What this indicates is that they tried to cross in continuous columns.  This is not necessarily a bad idea as it means you get a LOT more stuff over a LOT quicker, but you have to be pretty sure that you're not about to get hit with artillery.  This gets back to Russia not operating as if Ukraine knew where they were and would plaster them with artillery.

If they had crossed the way they should have, there would only be maybe 3-6 wrecks in total, not 70.

Steve

Makes more sense. Very foolish that they didn’t expect arty, going off the pics it’s confirmed 70 vehicles huh? I bet a lot of the infantry scrambled into the river and the others dispersed into the woods.

 

[danfrodo]

10 minutes ago, dan/california said:

One of the overwhelming Russian failures throughout this entire war is a complete inability to operate with any dispersal to speak of. My interpretation of this massive and ongoing failing is that nothing happens outside of the LOS of a company grade officer. As soon as the company commander is out of sight any real work halts, and the looting and drinking start, if there is anything to loot or drink. I am open to other interpretations of this demonstrated failing. But the lessons don't get much sharper than a stiff rain of 152/155, and the Russians are still exhibiting zero learning.

I still hold to my belief the west needs to send more support Russia.  We should be airlifting the supplies that Russian troops most desire. 

Specifically, as alluded to by DanCA above, we should put a dozen cases of vodka at each potential bridging site.  Problem solved. 

[dan/california]

I have been convinced forever that that a ground launched Hellfire/Brimstone system would be a very useful thing. I guess the the Israeli Spike is similar. Really hoping this makes it into the next game.

[asurob]

https://news.sky.com/story/as-boris-johnson-heads-to-finland-what-will-it-mean-if-the-finns-join-nato-12610045

Finland's prime minister and president have said the historically neutral country, which fought the Soviets in WWII and lost, must seek membership of the defensive pact. 

 

Let me be the first to congratulate Vlad Putin on rescuing NATO from the dustbin of history.  Actions, meet consequences.  I expect Sweden to follow soon.

[Combatintman]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Point taken!  To rephrase, if I were the defender I would presume they'd try again and therefore as an attacker I'd presume the defender would be looking for me.

Based on the PMPs at the two sites they do seem to have had enough to bridge the river twice.

Monday Morning Quarterbacking this...

They should have had at least two bridging locations planned.  They should have started by using a swimming location to get some heavy stuff over, but for the most part put a lot of infantry ashore on the other side.  Any concentrations of enemy to be dealt with with specifically assigned artillery and air (which theoretically Russia could commit).  I'd also be interdicting the heck out of the defender's local LOCs.

After expanding an infantry bridgehead out far enough to create enough space to operate in and to push the enemy beyond easy drone range, then and only then would I put in my two bridges.  And I'd do it simultaneously and at night as much as possible.  Even using artificial light would be better than doing it in broad daylight.  Smoke and other things that were mentioned by the Ukrainian engineer would need to be going non-stop during the daylight.

Once the bridges were in place I'd have put no more than 2 vehicles on the bridge at any one time.  The ingress vehicles would be sent one at a time and egress would be dispersed far and wide to join the infantry.  If a vehicle came to a stop at any time the entire operation would halt in place.  I would not let them bunch up.

The bridgehead would need to expand and keep moving so it couldn't be smashed with artillery.

In the event both bridges were trashed, then I would just have my cut off forces sit in place and try to resupply them across the river by boat at night.  That could be done for quite a while in order to buy time to figure out how to evacuate them.  I would not try to rebridge in the same spot any time soon.

I'm not saying I think this would work, but it would have had a lot better chance than than what the Russians obviously did!

Steve

Or something resembling this ...

old school ...

New fangled school, albeit this diagram talks about support to a counterattack ... 

Narrative regarding the 'new' way of river xing ...

A hasty attack across a water obstacle from the march is conducted to maintain the high tempo of the advance, seize bridgeheads, rapidly develop the opposite shore or secure an assembly area for an upcoming operation.  Water crossings differ by season and weather.  In the winter, crossing depends on the strength and stability of the ice.  In the spring, there is drifting ice and flooding.  In the summer and fall, TO&E and attached crossing equipment can be used.  If the water obstacle is less than 5 meters deep, and the river banks are bottom are suitable, tanks can snorkel across.  Crossing on a wide front at a quick tempo using a forward detachment or advanced guard is preferred.  The crossing plan designates the crossing sector, the departure area, the attack crossing line (1-2 kilometers from the water's edge), the troop embarkation or cargo loading area (5-6 kilometers from the water's edge) and the tank sealing area for snorkeling (also 5-6 kilometers from the water's edge). Air defense assets will cover the crossing and preparation areas.  If possible, an air assault may conduct a landing to seize the far shore.  A deliberate attack will normally involve far more artillery and aviation preparation and may involve an attack from the march through friendly forces in contact with the enemy.  Smoke, air defense and counterbattery efforts will be particularly crucial.

Source:  FMSO The Russian Way of War.

Although particularly crucial in the last sentence appears somewhat tautological perhaps it was necessary - in this instance it seems that all three were absent.  Perhaps Russian progress in tactical acumen versus the first week of the 'special operation' is that at least they remembered to rock up for a gap crossing operation with bridging kit .... crawl, walk run etc 

[billbindc]

 

And again?

[Harmon Rabb]

38 minutes ago, asurob said:

https://news.sky.com/story/as-boris-johnson-heads-to-finland-what-will-it-mean-if-the-finns-join-nato-12610045

Finland's prime minister and president have said the historically neutral country, which fought the Soviets in WWII and lost, must seek membership of the defensive pact. 

 

Let me be the first to congratulate Vlad Putin on rescuing NATO from the dustbin of history.  Actions, meet consequences.  I expect Sweden to follow soon.

[womble]

Someone mentioned in passing upthread that the theatre commander has been removed. Is that Aleksandr Dvornikov, the guy that "took over" after the pullback from Kyiv? Cos my Google-fu can't find any reference to such a change in command structure... It'd be a Big Thing, I reckon, if that butcher was gotten rid of.

[kraze]

1 hour ago, Lethaface said:

Thanks for your response. I think it's fair to say that developments in Ukraine will eventually lead to 'healing', maybe not in a similar way compared to Germany post WW2, but conceptually with the same end result.
Many other other (Western) countries are undergoing a similar process, for example in NL the history of the 'special operations' in Indonesia.

In turn imo this also offers a theoretical perspective for the same process in Russia, although it will require a different (form) of government.

The difference is that for a Ukrainian realizing that his dead relative was responsible for a re-occupation of Ukraine, resulting in millions being sent to far east to die in slavery, as well as occupying other European countries - also because parents of that relative were either killed or "subdued" during the genocide of 1932-1933, which resulted in him growing up traumatized - is one thing.

It's hard to excuse because to Ukraine it resulted in massive tragedy and suffering, paid in blood still.

To russian occupying, looting and raping half of Europe is an achievement. This has nothing to do with governments. Their empire was big. For a lack of any real achievements, especially now, it is the only thing they could truly be proud of. They started big wars, they basically had whole China as a vassal.

So imagine how it felt to a russian, as he was sitting in his wooden toilet in his dirty yard, reading Pravda articles about yet another russian "achievement" like massacres in Cambodia - and how it feels to him now in that very same wooden toilet when he reads about how his borders shrink.

What can he be proud of?

Edited May 12, 2022 by kraze

[TheVulture]

14 minutes ago, womble said:

Someone mentioned in passing upthread that the theatre commander has been removed. Is that Aleksandr Dvornikov, the guy that "took over" after the pullback from Kyiv? Cos my Google-fu can't find any reference to such a change in command structure... It'd be a Big Thing, I reckon, if that butcher was gotten rid of.

No, it was Gerasimov who was rumored to have been sacked after returning from Izyum, where he'd been sent to personally oversee the offensive.

[Haiduk]

3 hours ago, dan/california said:

Opposite to my visual impression, thank you sorting that.

Siverskyi Donets current is directed eastward to Russia, where it flows into Don

[akd]

Ukrainian local counterattack in Azovstahl:

 

[Haiduk]

2 hours ago, Harmon Rabb said:

Anyone here heard anything about this? The last time people on Twitter started talking the possibility of the Admiral Makarov taking a hit while in the Black Sea, it turned out to be false.

The first source of this information is Serhiy Bratchuk - speaker of Odesa civil-miitary administration. But there is no official confirmation from OC "South" or General Staff for now

Edited May 12, 2022 by Haiduk

[Vacillator]

6 minutes ago, akd said:

Ukrainian local counterattack in Azovstahl:

 

Total respect for the guys in Azovstal, how they keep going I don't know.  Hope they are getting supplied somehow but don't want any details.

[Aragorn2002]

5 minutes ago, Vacillator said:

Total respect for the guys in Azovstal, how they keep going I don't know.  Hope they are getting supplied somehow but don't want any details.

Heroes in the true sense of the word.

[Haiduk]

Another video of Bilohorivka bridge (some distinguish from other similar) from 58th mot.inf. brigade. Looks like they and elements of 17th tank brigade engaged Russians here

 

[Harmon Rabb]

7 minutes ago, Vacillator said:

Total respect for the guys in Azovstal, how they keep going I don't know.  Hope they are getting supplied somehow but don't want any details.

When this war is over Ukrainians will remember this battle like Americans remember the Alamo or Greeks remember the battle of Thermopylae.

[Cederic]

18 hours ago, chrisl said:

Unless you're Oryx and have to try to ID them all.

The latest narrative (which I'm mentioning as I've seen in two places now today, both UK centric sites) is that Oryx is wrong. The claims articulated are general naysaying about the site, a suggestion that photographs are used multiple times as evidence for multiple vehicles, a lack of verification/rigour and "you can see it's Ukrainian camo".

What I didn't get from either detractor were links to any evidence to support the claims, so (since Oryx links all the photographs, making his counts transparent and open to challenge) I'm going to continue to treat the Oryx site as a useful and reliable source.

It does make me wonder if Russia's started to get worried about the visible and available evidence of the losses they're trying to hide from their own people.

[JonS]

1 hour ago, Combatintman said:

Old school ...

aka SOSRA

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/call/call_01-19_ch4.htm

(Generally considered to be for manmade obstacles like a minefield, but applies equally well to a river, albeit with very different specialist eqpt.)

[BlackMoria]

35 minutes ago, Cederic said:

The latest narrative (which I'm mentioning as I've seen in two places now today, both UK centric sites) is that Oryx is wrong. The claims articulated are general naysaying about the site, a suggestion that photographs are used multiple times as evidence for multiple vehicles, a lack of verification/rigour and "you can see it's Ukrainian camo".

What I didn't get from either detractor were links to any evidence to support the claims, so (since Oryx links all the photographs, making his counts transparent and open to challenge) I'm going to continue to treat the Oryx site as a useful and reliable source.

It does make me wonder if Russia's started to get worried about the visible and available evidence of the losses they're trying to hide from their own people.

My suspicion is the detractors are Russian trolls or people with jealousy issues.  

[The_Capt]

46 minutes ago, Cederic said:

The latest narrative (which I'm mentioning as I've seen in two places now today, both UK centric sites) is that Oryx is wrong. The claims articulated are general naysaying about the site, a suggestion that photographs are used multiple times as evidence for multiple vehicles, a lack of verification/rigour and "you can see it's Ukrainian camo".

What I didn't get from either detractor were links to any evidence to support the claims, so (since Oryx links all the photographs, making his counts transparent and open to challenge) I'm going to continue to treat the Oryx site as a useful and reliable source.

It does make me wonder if Russia's started to get worried about the visible and available evidence of the losses they're trying to hide from their own people.

I have no doubt there are errors at Oryx.  Over 3500 Russian vehicles to date will very likely mean that there are some mistakes and double accounting.  But, having watched them from the beginning there numbers have consistently matched western intelligence assessments (when released).  They are below UA estimates and well above Russian ones and tend to land pretty much on or near the mark of both UK and US assessments, particularly as to overall percentage of forces lost.  I was tracking Oryx to assess the RA losses at about 20% before the Donbas, and sure enough a few days later the mainstream news released the same number. 

If you dig into the photos most are indisputable, and many from the same social media feeds we are seeing.  Based on the sorts of losses the Russians had on that river crossing, I suspect Oryx does not need to make stuff up, it is all over the freakin internet.

If someone had a better site, let’s use it; however, I can only really trust what has been accurate to date and Oryx has been.

[SeinfeldRules]

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1524826166107987970?s=20&t=QrZXb3nVRSckbuOXwMItpw

Video from the attempted river crossing, apparently taken before they had the second bridge in the water.

Edited May 12, 2022 by SeinfeldRules

[Haiduk]

@SeinfeldRules

You asked about video, where crews near the guns could be seen during counter-battery fire. Here Russian Nona-K mortar-howitzer in Pytomnyk village, Kharkiv oblast, liberated two fays ago. Looks like crew had seen a drone above of them and abandoned position before impacts. Looks like 120 mm mortar hit their position

 

[SeinfeldRules]

Thanks! I very seen several videos now where the crew immediately takes cover after firing, it seems to have become a standard procedure for artillery crew instead of moving the howitzer.