OT: Putin's War in Ukraine

[swaghauler]

So Putin invaded the Ukraine today and we did nothing, but now... China has jets invading Taiwan's airspace. We have a treaty with them and they do make like 95% of the World's computer chips.

[swaghauler]

My fellow Americans...

PACK YOUR S**T! We're headed to Ukraine! The President of Ukraine just announced that they are giving anybody who wants one, an AK! Full auto too!
whoohoo!

[Tegyrius]

It'll go well with the spam cans of Ukrainian surplus 5.45 that I bought when they were under a hundred bucks each. I'll bet they'd like 'em back now. :/

- C.

[Targan]

My fellow Americans...

PACK YOUR S**T! We're headed to Ukraine! The President of Ukraine just announced that they are giving anybody who wants one, an AK! Full auto too!
whoohoo!

Twenty years and several motorcycle accidents ago I would still have been keen. Sadly this Aussie's most useful combat role these days would be as a sand bag.

[Raellus]

It's sad to see speculation from months and even years ago becoming present-day reality.

I really hope that China does not conclude from the way that Russia's Ukraine invasion is going down (and NATO's response, so far) that it is time to "liberate" Taiwan.

The Wall Street Journal claims that Russia and China "now hold a stronger hand in confronting the West than during the Cold War".

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-crisis-kicks-off-new-superpower-struggle-among-u-s-russia-and-china-11645629753?st=9xerapmgzs8pqvc&mod=WSJACQ_US_RussiaUkraine_OPW&fbclid=IwAR1rLSqKNa-nz_8pMSrLFAtpu2E90XJLdou631stM5v0wyUI_WTVxjrT8eM

-

[Nowhere Man 1966]

My fellow Americans...

PACK YOUR S**T! We're headed to Ukraine! The President of Ukraine just announced that they are giving anybody who wants one, an AK! Full auto too!
whoohoo!

I saw that too, I prefer a Henry Rifle, or replica of one) that was used in the Civil War, or Steve McQueen's "Mare's Leg," but....

There is one You-Tuber I enjoy, Sergei of the Ushanka Show about him growing up in the USSR. He's Ukrainian and thought that Putin would back down. I just knew Putin was going to do it, maybe it is my pessimistic side, knowledge of history or just gut feeling but this time I hate being correct.

[Raellus]

This Ukrainian armed forces recruitment commercial, released in 2014, is super powerful, and seemingly prescient.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOCbW1hc6Ng

-

[swaghauler]

So now Putin has put his nuclear forces on alert. Three days into the conflict and Russia is already threatening nuclear war... over the West rendering aid to Ukraine. The standing consensus among both NATO and the hobbyists who were following the news feeds is that Russia can sustain this tempo of operations for 7 days. IF the fight stretches out to 10 days, the Russians will lose the initiative due to a lack of fuel and ammo.

[Raellus]

It seems that Putin might have backed himself into a corner. Scarily, a cornered dictator is often the most dangerous kind...

-

[Targan]

It seems that Putin might have backed himself into a corner. Scarily, a cornered dictator is often the most dangerous kind...

-

I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility that he could be removed by the Russian security services or the military. Personal loyalty only goes so far, particularly if the mood of the Russian populace continues to turn against the current course of action.

[swaghauler]

I'll call it now. IF Russia occupies Ukraine, we will see movement against Georgia as a non-aligned country next. It's apparent to me that Appeasement is not going to work when you hear Putin say that it was a mistake to disband the old Warsaw Pact. He is "old guard" KGB and thinks as they taught him to think.

I think we (NATO) should have countries like Poland, the Baltic States, the Czech Republic, and Bulgaria dust off that old PACT equipment and give it to Ukraine. They have the numbers (240K) to fight but really lack equipment. Giving them the PACT equipment means NATO doesn't have to risk troops training the Ukrainians on new equipment. The US then digs into its HUGE stockpile of surplus and gives back our former PACT NATO members newer equipment to replace their PACT stuff.

For example, Poland just bought 250 M1 Abrams because Germany is having kittens about her buying Leopard 2a4s. So we have Poland ship their 400 T72s and 300 T91 TWARDY tanks to Ukraine and replace them with M1 Abrams either directly in kind or in some ratio (like 2 T72s for 1 M1). Then we have Poland give her MIG 29s to Ukraine and we replace those with our older F15s (which we, in turn, replace with F15ex models).

This way we can support Ukraine without spilling NATO blood and the risk of escalation on our part.

[.45cultist]

I'll call it now. IF Russia occupies Ukraine, we will see movement against Georgia as a non-aligned country next. It's apparent to me that Appeasement is not going to work when you hear Putin say that it was a mistake to disband the old Warsaw Pact. He is "old guard" KGB and thinks as they taught him to think.

I think we (NATO) should have countries like Poland, the Baltic States, the Czech Republic, and Bulgaria dust off that old PACT equipment and give it to Ukraine. They have the numbers (240K) to fight but really lack equipment. Giving them the PACT equipment means NATO doesn't have to risk troops training the Ukrainians on new equipment. The US then digs into its HUGE stockpile of surplus and gives back our former PACT NATO members newer equipment to replace their PACT stuff.

For example, Poland just bought 250 M1 Abrams because Germany is having kittens about her buying Leopard 2a4s. So we have Poland ship their 400 T72s and 300 T91 TWARDY tanks to Ukraine and replace them with M1 Abrams either directly in kind or in some ratio (like 2 T72s for 1 M1). Then we have Poland give her MIG 29s to Ukraine and we replace those with our older F15s (which we, in turn, replace with F15ex models).

This way we can support Ukraine without spilling NATO blood and the risk of escalation on our part.

I was also integrating T54/55 western upgrade like Isreal has done. Adding a 105MM, western diesel and powertrain. I also added M60A3's from NATO stocks for reserve fomations.

[Mahatatain]

This Ukrainian armed forces recruitment commercial, released in 2014, is super powerful, and seemingly prescient.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOCbW1hc6Ng

-
Very powerful. Thanks for sharing.

[shrike6]

Interesting article
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2022/02/can-ukraine-really-use-donated-fighter-jets-depends/362505/

[Ursus Maior]

IF Russia occupies Ukraine, we will see movement against Georgia as a non-aligned country next. It's apparent to me that Appeasement is not going to work when you hear Putin say that it was a mistake to disband the old Warsaw Pact. He is "old guard" KGB and thinks as they taught him to think.
I'm not sure if Russia could afford going anywhere once they would have one this war. Right now, the Russian ruble has dropped below 1 cent ($ or €) and Russia is not building new smart weapons, since they need imports from the EU for that.

Also, I'd not exactly call Putin old guard KGB, he's basically the last generation of career officers, who made it into a professional career while the USSR still existed. He was never as reliable as the old school leaders of the KGB or USSR used to be. He seems to have self-radicalized during the pandemic, too, so what we're missing from him is reliability and trustworthiness, which existed between top-level officials during the 1970s and 1980s.

For example, Poland just bought 250 M1 Abrams because Germany is having kittens about her buying Leopard 2a4s. So we have Poland ship their 400 T72s and 300 T91 TWARDY tanks to Ukraine and replace them with M1 Abrams either directly in kind or in some ratio (like 2 T72s for 1 M1). Then we have Poland give her MIG 29s to Ukraine and we replace those with our older F15s (which we, in turn, replace with F15ex models).

This way we can support Ukraine without spilling NATO blood and the risk of escalation on our part.
There are basically no Leopard 2A4s left for anyone to buy and no one in NATO would want to. The A4 model is a 30 year old piece of equipment and badly out of date: The gun is too short, armor to low and optics/sensors badly out of date. Buying the latest model, the A7 generation (different iterations available) is expensive, however. The same goes for buying old F-15s. That's not what Poland needs, those birds are old and obsolescent. I think Poland will go for the F-35 as is Germany now after it's surprisingly decisive course change this weekend: There will be a €100 billion fund for the Bundeswehr this year as well as a a true funding North of 2 % BIP in every future year. Currently, that would mean a defense budget approaching or beyond of €80 billion per year for Germany, or about 25 % more than Russia lately spent, but without nuclear forces to pay for as well as no cheap conscripted soldiers (as of today, who knows what 2022 will hold).

However, neither the 250 M1 Abrams nor airplanes will be available for Poland immediately, let alone integrated into the armed force. The same can be said for Bulgaria, who was a mentioned second candidate for a fighter swap scheme with Ukraine.

However, everything not immediately available to Ukraine and accessible without long transition and training periods, won't help Ukrainians win the war. This war is entering a new phase today, as Russia is shelling Kharkiv heavily - one might speak of an early 'Grosny' treatment - and approaching Kiev with a 40 km long column of mechanized forces including logistical elements. The battle for Kyiv will decide the next phase of the war and might decide the whole war indeed, since Russia could install a puppet regime in conquered Kyiv and keep pushing into the rest of Ukraine after that. Should Ukrainian forces loose their C³ facilities and or political leadership sitting in Kyiv, this would be a huge blow to the country's fight to remain independent and sovereign.

That being said, I do not see a way, where this war can be won by Ukraine without considerably more aid by Western nations, including direct support by NATO and/or EU troops. This would up the ante, however, as Russian troops could, and indeed likely would, be fired upon by Western troops and vice versa. As everyone can imagine, this could spill over into Belarus and later NATO partners, such as Poland, the Baltic nations, Romania as well as others, too.

[OmahaJason]

Poland, Belarus, and Slovakia are waiting for Ukrainian pilots to pick up 70 fighter planes, and since those countries still have stocks of Russian-made planes, they should be able to go into action without a ton of training needed.

By this morning, those planes may already be in Ukraine.

[Raellus]

Poland, Belarus, and Slovakia are waiting for Ukrainian pilots to pick up 70 fighter planes, and since those countries still have stocks of Russian-made planes, they should be able to go into action without a ton of training needed.

By this morning, those planes may already be in Ukraine.

This is one rumor I hate to debunk.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44501/reports-that-ukraine-is-about-to-get-70-donated-fighter-jets-dont-add-up

Hopefully, it's just the number (70) that is incorrect, not the entire story, and Ukraine still ends up getting some replacement combat aircraft from its former Pact neighbors.

Viva the Ghost of Kiev!

-

[OmahaJason]

I meant Bulgaria, not Belarus.

I read a seperate report that Slovakian pilots have cross-trained on F16's so they have 20-odd Mig-29's they are not using.

Recently, U.S. defense officials reported that Russia does not have air superiority over Ukraine, which suggests they are holding back, or have suffered outsized losses. In any case, there is little time to waste, because a no-fly zone is a non-starter.

[Raellus]

Again, I wish it were otherwise, but it looks like all that talk about rearming the Ukrainian air force was just that- talk.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44514/su-27-returning-from-romania-will-likely-be-last-fighter-ukraine-will-get-for-some-time

:(

-

[swaghauler]

I'm not sure if Russia could afford going anywhere once they would have one this war. Right now, the Russian ruble has dropped below 1 cent ($ or €) and Russia is not building new smart weapons, since they need imports from the EU for that.

Also, I'd not exactly call Putin old guard KGB, he's basically the last generation of career officers, who made it into a professional career while the USSR still existed. He was never as reliable as the old school leaders of the KGB or USSR used to be. He seems to have self-radicalized during the pandemic, too, so what we're missing from him is reliability and trustworthiness, which existed between top-level officials during the 1970s and 1980s.


The flaw in that logic is that oil is traded in DOLLARS. While the PEOPLE of Russia are suffering as a result of sanctions, Putin (and his oil companies) is dealing in US dollars because Biden hasn't even enacted the oil embargo against Russia yet. And people accused Trump of being a Russian puppet. I can say in Biden's defense that he probably doesn't understand what's really happening. My father had dementia the last year before he died and his confusion would be extreme on occasion. Joe reminds me more of my father every day.

[swaghauler]

There are basically no Leopard 2A4s left for anyone to buy and no one in NATO would want to. The A4 model is a 30 year old piece of equipment and badly out of date: The gun is too short, armor to low and optics/sensors badly out of date. Buying the latest model, the A7 generation (different iterations available) is expensive, however. The same goes for buying old F-15s. That's not what Poland needs, those birds are old and obsolescent. I think Poland will go for the F-35 as is Germany now after it's surprisingly decisive course change this weekend: There will be a €100 billion fund for the Bundeswehr this year as well as a a true funding North of 2 % BIP in every future year. Currently, that would mean a defense budget approaching or beyond of €80 billion per year for Germany, or about 25 % more than Russia lately spent, but without nuclear forces to pay for as well as no cheap conscripted soldiers (as of today, who knows what 2022 will hold).

However, neither the 250 M1 Abrams nor airplanes will be available for Poland immediately, let alone integrated into the armed force. The same can be said for Bulgaria, who was a mentioned second candidate for a fighter swap scheme with Ukraine.


That's not true either. Germany HAS A4s and A5s in their mothballs inventory and Poland was trying to buy them but Germany is saving money by upgrading the older A4s & A5s to the new A7 standard. This resulted in Poland not being able to buy the cheaper A4s and A5s (of which she has over 100 each) so she started upgrading them with Rhinemetal's help. But the US approved the sale of 250 M1A3 SEP tanks in January. So Poland now plans on buying up to 500 M1A3 SEPS which cost almost the same as upgrading their Leopard 2s to the new PL standard they developed with Rhinemetal. The suggested plan with Ukraine was to have Poland give them her 338 T72s and her 232 Twardy tanks and the US will replace those tanks with surplus M1A2 (not the new SEPs, just surplus A2s). The rumor was we would give Poland 350 M1s and she would ship her PACT tanks to the border.

The other deal (which may yet go through) has Poland giving Ukraine 24 MIG 29s and we immediately transfer 24 F15 Strike Eagles to Poland (from the UK) to complement her F35s. The F15 Strike Eagle is NOT obsolete and the US still spends more than 100 million per plane to buy newer Strike Eagles even now. They are important to the new "distributed lethality" concept that the Navy introduced and the Air Force seems to have adopted as well. The F35 flies ahead with 2 AA missiles (for self-defense), 2 anti-radar missiles, and 2 air-to-ground missiles (or 4 if Hellfires are carried instead of Mavericks) on board. It then acts as a scout/spotter for the F15s (which carry 12 missiles each) who act as "missile trucks," firing their missiles which are then directed to the target by the F35. This high-low system is the Air Force's new doctrine.

The idea for giving the indicated systems to Ukraine is that they won't need to be trained on those systems because they already use them. The US would then bring in the new systems to the NATO members as "payment" for their sacrifice of equipment while simultaneously upgrading their capabilities so we don't have to keep our troops in harm's way.

I disagree with your assessment of Ukraine's chances because she currently has more than 240K people "under arms." That's quantitatively a match for Russia's (mostly conscripted) forces... especially IF this turns into an Insurgency. Putin cannot simply burn Kyiv to the ground as he did with Grozny in 2000. That will only harden the Ukrainian's hearts and turn the West farther against him.

What Ukraine NEEDS is arms, ammo, and food... which is flowing in now. I still believe if the Ukrainians can hold on for 10 days, they can really hurt Putin's chances of victory. And I'm basing that on OUR (the US Army's) logistics consumption on the offensive. The Russians have a smaller "logistics tail" than we do and are using far more rockets and artillery than we would. Contrary to popular opinion, morale and logistics win wars [at the strategic level], not just firepower.

[swaghauler]

Again, I wish it were otherwise, but it looks like all that talk about rearming the Ukrainian air force was just that- talk.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44514/su-27-returning-from-romania-will-likely-be-last-fighter-ukraine-will-get-for-some-time

:(

-

It definitely looks like politics is getting in the way. Both Slovakia and Bulgaria are saying "no joy" to the aircraft swap. That 70 jet total was something that was supposed to include a US-brokered swap of MIG 29s and SU-27s from elsewhere. Maybe Africa or Indonesia? Who knows? I cannot even keep track of who our allies are these days!

[Targan]

What Ukraine NEEDS is arms, ammo, and food... which is flowing in now. I still believe if the Ukrainians can hold on for 10 days, they can really hurt Putin's chances of victory. And I'm basing that on OUR (the US Army's) logistics consumption on the offensive. The Russians have a smaller "logistics tail" than we do and are using far more rockets and artillery than we would. Contrary to popular opinion, morale and logistics win wars [at the strategic level], not just firepower.

That's been my assessment in recent days too. The Russians have struggled with their logistics only a couple of days into this. If they can't achieve at least some of their objectives by day 10, they're going to be in a lot of trouble. Somebody in the Russian government or security services may even decide to put a stop to this with the application of some 9mm medicine.

[Mahatatain]

Is anyone else surprised by how poor the Russian troops have performed? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that they are doing badly, but I thought that even without their heavy artillery they would make quicker progress than they have. Has the average Russian infantryman been proved to not be as capable as we expected them to be?

[kato13]

Is anyone else surprised by how poor the Russian troops have performed? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that they are doing badly, but I thought that even without their heavy artillery they would make quicker progress than they have. Has the average Russian infantryman been proved to not be as capable as we expected them to be?

I think that in addition to the myriad of logistical and command issues without motivation, and with literal kinship, there is going to be casual sabotage.

Oh we left our engines running overnight to keep warm.

Hmmm fork in a road and we aren't sure without signs. Let's go towards the sunrise (East) as that is a good marker.

I'll just nudge that to be a bit short of the target. If anyone asks I thought we had a tail wind.

[swaghauler]

Is anyone else surprised by how poor the Russian troops have performed? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that they are doing badly, but I thought that even without their heavy artillery they would make quicker progress than they have. Has the average Russian infantryman been proved to not be as capable as we expected them to be?

People don't realize that Ukraine had 240k people under arms and almost 1500 MBTs. The initial Russian assault was about 50k troops and 600 of their 1300 MBTs. They also failed to gain air superiority, a big mistske in my opinion.

The Russian advance was about as far a an AFV like those could go on a single tank of gas while fighting... so a "tactical pause" was inevitable for logistics reasons. The real issue is the ambushing of supply convoys as Russian logistics is simply not as efficient as Western logistics.

[swaghauler]

IF you are planning an occupation for "peacekeeping" reasons, looting is a bad idea. It makes the locals hate you even more.

https://youtu.be/OoM5yx1IVFY

[swaghauler]

I think that in addition to the myriad of logistical and command issues without motivation, and with literal kinship, there is going to be casual sabotage.

Oh we left our engines running overnight to keep warm.

Hmmm fork in a road and we aren't sure without signs. Let's go towards the sunrise (East) as that is a good marker.

I'll just nudge that to be a bit short of the target. If anyone asks I thought we had a tail wind.

It doesn't help that they are unwilling conscripts. I remember Uncle Sam ALWAYS throwing the "YOU VOLUNTEERED FOR THIS!" mantra in our faces. Those poor Russian troops didn't even get that option.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

I think that in addition to the myriad of logistical and command issues without motivation, and with literal kinship, there is going to be casual sabotage.

Oh we left our engines running overnight to keep warm.

Hmmm fork in a road and we aren't sure without signs. Let's go towards the sunrise (East) as that is a good marker.

I'll just nudge that to be a bit short of the target. If anyone asks I thought we had a tail wind.

They're willfully using grid-square removers on civilian centers, I doubt there's much "literal kinship" happening.

[kato13]

They're willfully using grid-square removers on civilian centers, I doubt there's much "literal kinship" happening.


I am not saying everyone but if 10% are lackadaisical or outright disruptive, it hurts the plan.

[Raellus]

One thing that I've found really curious about the video clips of shot-up Russian vehicle columns circulating widely is the lack of bodies on the scene. I'll post the link when I have a chance to find it, but there's one where a guy walks through a column of at least a dozen gutted Russian APCs and trucks and there's not a body visible in any frame. There's another clip showing Ukrainian troops rummaging through four or five shot-up Tigr LAV 4x4s and, again, there are no bodies, blood pools, or anything suggesting human casualties in sight.

This is very different than the "Highway of Death" images broadcast from Kuwait, 1991, where images of carbonized corpses abounded (a bit of a PR issue for the military back then, IIRC).

Either the Ukrainians are really good at sanitizing the scene, or the majority of the Russian crews abandoned their vehicles before the "ambush", or at the first sign of trouble.

In the Ukraine-Russia conflict, the Russians had 1300 MBTs staged and may have less than 500 left after just 1 WEEK of fighting. The Ukrainian Army had 1500 MBTs and are down around the same strength. That a loss of over 100 tanks a day. This rate of loss would literally WIPE OUT the armored forces of 9 out of 10 Armed Forces on the planet. The losses in Aircraft are even more significant. Ukraine is down to about a dozen operational jets in a week.

Source, please?

Assuming the above figures are accurate, I wonder how many of those losses are hard kills and how many are attrition due to mechanical break-down (i.e. how many of those losses are not recoverable v how many are).

-

[unipus]

I'm assuming that low morale within the Russian ranks, and possibly even a hesitancy at command levels, is playing a major factor.

Unlike in, say, Iraq, it doesn't seem like there was any major effort to psych up the troops to go do their illegal war. The result seems to be that, far from feeling urraaaaaah about it, they are more than happy to find any excuse not to fight.

(It is however increasingly a myth that all/most Russian troops are conscripts. They've had a hybrid conscript/contract structure for years now, and it's been revised significantly again within the last decade)

I'm not calling any victors at this point, though. It took the US three weeks to take Baghdad, after all. Some people have been eager to say that the failure to take Kyiv in five days means the war is lost, and I just don't think that's remotely true. Or that taking Kyiv means the situation necessarily changes dramatically, anyway.

On the operational level, though, some stuff just doesn't make sense from my Western eyes. The real lack of attempt to secure air superiority, for instance. I know Russia probably has a shortage of precision weapons and might be concerned about their ability to replace them. But this aspect still puzzles me. My best guess is either they were concerned they'd take excessive losses, or they just simply absolutely lack the thinking/capability. Integration between the forces certainly isn't up to US levels, but this seems like barely even trying.

It also seems likely that even if/when the conventional phase of this war is over, many Ukrainians are now fully invested in defending their country, and a long insurgency could most definitely follow. It's a big country, it's well armed (and only getting more so), and you need morale to police an insurgency as well.

[.45cultist]

I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility that he could be removed by the Russian security services or the military. Personal loyalty only goes so far, particularly if the mood of the Russian populace continues to turn against the current course of action.

In the old USSR, leaders "got the flu", Soviet flu came in two strains, 9X18MM or cyanide.

[Bestbrian]

It also seems likely that even if/when the conventional phase of this war is over, many Ukrainians are now fully invested in defending their country, and a long insurgency could most definitely follow. It's a big country, it's well armed (and only getting more so), and you need morale to police an insurgency as well.

This. Anyway you slice it, this looks like the most enduring outcome. The Russians have bought themselves a long term occupation in a radicalized and hostile country the size of France with an aggrieved neighbor in Poland that is more than willing to throw gas on the fire. The only strategic outcome that makes sense (keep in mind, btw, that none of this makes sense) is that the two client states are enlarged at Ukraine's expense, and a puppet regime is emplaced to govern a rump Ukraine according to orders from Moscow; there's no way to achieve those goals that doesn't entail suppressing an insurgency/civil war. Good luck, Ivan.

[Heffe]

Just to throw some thoughts out there for discussion:

1. I'm really curious to see what the analysis will look like on Ukraine's stellar propaganda looks like. So far they've been crushing it with almost all discussion online heavily favoring them, even despite Russia's best efforts to stop it.

2. On that same note, this is the first major war where everyone and their mother had cell phones with video capability. I'm curious to know how all of the abundance of footage has helped shape perception around the world. Will people be more adverse to getting into wars in the future based on this? Or even just the near future?

3. I'm still concerned that the worst may yet be to come. While we all sound aligned on Russia's performance so far, it definitely seems like they've avoided using their strategic assets and have been attempting to catch Ukraine intact (probably in order to set up a client state). As the Russians become mired down, will Putin escalate further than he already has in order to continue making forward progress?

[unipus]

When he starts vocalizing those thoughts is when you have to hope someone else nearby is willing to take action.

I will agree that Ukraine's propaganda has been outstanding. I assume they're getting the full support of... well, basically the entire world.

Russian propaganda seems very suppressed, to the point that if they're even claiming tactical victories, I'm not hearing about it. And other than a small number of people (of questionable critical thinking capacity) repeating the "but... Ukrainian Nazis!" line, I don't see signs of anyone really buying any of it.

[Raellus]

The Russians have bought themselves a long term occupation in a radicalized and hostile country the size of France with an aggrieved neighbor in Poland that is more than willing to throw gas on the fire. The only strategic outcome that makes sense (keep in mind, btw, that none of this makes sense) is that the two client states are enlarged at Ukraine's expense, and a puppet regime is emplaced to govern a rump Ukraine according to orders from Moscow; there's no way to achieve those goals that doesn't entail suppressing an insurgency/civil war. Good luck, Ivan.

Agreed. Russia will most likely defeat Ukraine's conventional forces, seize the capital, and install a puppet government. It's probably only a matter of time. As you pointed out, however, after that, Putin will almost certainly be saddled with an anti-Russian insurgency that could drag on for months, if not years.

What then? This could play out in a number of ways. Here are a few.

A. Putin declares victory before Ukraine is decisively defeated, and withdraws Russian troops from all but the disputed eastern regions. "Mission accomplished!" Putin crows, "That was the plan all along." He saves some face, and staunches the bleeding. Ukraine is weakened; NATO is put on notice. Russia has a small buffer (the Donbass) and a greatly weakened neighbor that has been intimidated to the point where it will no longer seek NATO membership.

B. The war drags on and on, from a largely conventional conflict, to a low intensity insurgency. Russia continues to bleed, militarily and economically. These losses become unsustainable.

C. Fed up with B, the Russian military ousts Putin in a coup.

D. Fed up with B, ordinary Russians launch a popular uprising (a la Maidan, 2014) and oust Putin.

E. Putin sees the writing on the wall. Before either C or D can transpire, he escalates the war (perhaps by attacking the Baltics), and draws NATO into a wider conflict which he frames as an existential struggle for Russia's very survival.

---

I don't think this will play out the way Putin hoped (a quick victory, regime change, and a puppet, buffer state Ukraine). Given Ukraine's courage and tenacity- which I think came as quite a surprise to Putin- and materiel support to Ukraine from the West- the best that he can hope for now is probably Option A (in part- I don't think Ukraine will ever be cowed, after the heart they've shown). I'm kind of surprised that Putin hasn't already declared victory and begun the withdrawal. If he hasn't already, very soon he'll pass the point of no return and become locked in to a potentially much longer, much more costly struggle for control of Ukraine. After that, Option B is inevitable, and Options C, D, and E all become more likely endgames.

-

[Targan]

Where does Ukraine's application for EU membership fit in?

[Raellus]

Where does Ukraine's application for EU membership fit in?

From what I've read, it could take years to be accepted, if at all. Apparently, Ukraine's high level of corruption is a sticking point for numerous EU nations. The Russian invasion considerably complicates matters further.

-

[swaghauler]

One thing that I've found really curious about the video clips of shot-up Russian vehicle columns circulating widely is the lack of bodies on the scene. I'll post the link when I have a chance to find it, but there's one where a guy walks through a column of at least a dozen gutted Russian APCs and trucks and there's not a body visible in any frame. There's another clip showing Ukrainian troops rummaging through four or five shot-up Tigr LAV 4x4s and, again, there are no bodies, blood pools, or anything suggesting human casualties in sight.

This is very different than the "Highway of Death" images broadcast from Kuwait, 1991, where images of carbonized corpses abounded (a bit of a PR issue for the military back then, IIRC).

Either the Ukrainians are really good at sanitizing the scene, or the majority of the Russian crews abandoned their vehicles before the "ambush", or at the first sign of trouble.



Source, please?

Assuming the above figures are accurate, I wonder how many of those losses are hard kills and how many are attrition due to mechanical break-down (i.e. how many of those losses are not recoverable v how many are).

-

Sources...

DW News

Funker Tactical = who actually uploaded the pictures of that Ukrainian convoy which was smoked by Russian helos. That Kah-52 Alligator that got shot down was hit by a dual barreled 23mm mounted on a 5-Ton truck. I guess it came in too low. The pilot put it down and just walked away like a boss.

Radio Free America = The looting video came from them.

Some pictures from VOX News

The statement from Ukraine's security minister at the EU or UN emergency meeting where HE CLAIMED 600+ tanks destroyed. Most of the good video shots are being reused by every major network. How accurate these reports are is still in question.

My guess is that Ukraine's losses are "hard losses" mostly inflicted by bombing, helos, and the destruction of munitions depots.

The posted thermobaric explosion of the ammo depot outside Kyiv/Kiev reportedly claimed 100 AFVs that were rearming. I would guess that's accurate. It was a huge explosion and afterward, you can hear the "crackle" of munitions lighting off.

The Russian losses appear to be mostly mechanical issues OR running out of fuel. These are occurring mainly in the North where the conscript units are massed. As you already stated, the troops just up and abandon their equipment when the fuel and ammo are gone. The Ukrainian troops there are attacking the convoys from Belarus and the tanks are older T72s. Those troops have very poor discipline and some funny incidents have occurred... like a farmer stealing an unattended AFV with his tractor as the driver runs up and tries to stop him. And I thought the kids in Somalia were bad!

https://youtu.be/FHkST5SdS98

Sadly this is also where that young Ukrainian Engineer sacrificed himself to blow up that bridge to Kyiv. That probably slowed up the Russians too.

As far as I can tell, the Donetsk region seems to be suffering hard losses. That is where the Ukrainians are using those Turkish drones to designate for laser-guided munitions to the front and rear of a convoy where they stop it by destroying those vehicles. The Artillery then opens up on the remaining trapped vehicles, destroying them. I have seen a video of one column destroyed this way with the bodies under brown tarps. The other video is off a bunch of Hinds strafing a Russian column with rockets and missiles. Sadly, there are videos of the Ukrainians getting pasted here as badly as the Russians are. I think the difference here is that the Russian troops are blooded veterans working with the rebels from the area. They seem to have T80s and T90s... And of course, Kah-52 helo gunships.

The Crimea where the Russian Amphibs landed has those upgraded T55s that the Russian Marines use rolling across the country. Ukraine met them with T64s but the Russians seemed to have prevailed. The Russians are in pretty complete control in the South.

[swaghauler]

I'm assuming that low morale within the Russian ranks, and possibly even a hesitancy at command levels, is playing a major factor.

Unlike in, say, Iraq, it doesn't seem like there was any major effort to psych up the troops to go do their illegal war. The result seems to be that, far from feeling urraaaaaah about it, they are more than happy to find any excuse not to fight.

(It is however increasingly a myth that all/most Russian troops are conscripts. They've had a hybrid conscript/contract structure for years now, and it's been revised significantly again within the last decade)

I'm not calling any victors at this point, though. It took the US three weeks to take Baghdad, after all. Some people have been eager to say that the failure to take Kyiv in five days means the war is lost, and I just don't think that's remotely true. Or that taking Kyiv means the situation necessarily changes dramatically, anyway.

On the operational level, though, some stuff just doesn't make sense from my Western eyes. The real lack of attempt to secure air superiority, for instance. I know Russia probably has a shortage of precision weapons and might be concerned about their ability to replace them. But this aspect still puzzles me. My best guess is either they were concerned they'd take excessive losses, or they just simply absolutely lack the thinking/capability. Integration between the forces certainly isn't up to US levels, but this seems like barely even trying.

It also seems likely that even if/when the conventional phase of this war is over, many Ukrainians are now fully invested in defending their country, and a long insurgency could most definitely follow. It's a big country, it's well armed (and only getting more so), and you need morale to police an insurgency as well.

Combat Air CONTROL (CAC) is problematic for the Russians. Without the equivalent of an AWACS over the battlefield, directing the fighters where to go is very difficult. You cannot have an effective CAP (Combat Air Patrol) without the CAC directing things. The Russians have ONE AWACS per THEATER (6 planes total) and are probably afraid of losing the only one they have in the Black sea area. Their ships CAN direct aircraft but the range of ground-based radar makes CAC problematic. In addition, they failed to suppress the Ukraine's SAM defenses in the North and West, making overflights there dangerous. Add to that the sheer number of MANPADS the West gave Ukraine, and we can see why the skies are still contested.

Another thing I have noticed about some of the footage is just how "inaccurate" some of the cruise and ballistic missiles are. In some instances, missing their target by half a block. I wonder IF we might be screwing with their GLASNOSK/GPS system...

[swaghauler]

Cappy's take!

https://youtu.be/K5BAZ2bBUzM

[OmahaJason]

Norway is sending 2,000 anti-tank missles to Ukraine, while the U.S. is sending "hundreds" of stinger missles, and Ukraine is taking possesion of more Turkish drones capable of making airstrikes.

[Ursus Maior]

Again, I wish it were otherwise, but it looks like all that talk about rearming the Ukrainian air force was just that- talk.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44514/su-27-returning-from-romania-will-likely-be-last-fighter-ukraine-will-get-for-some-time

:(

-

The Polish government denied that these planes will be delivered or flown out of Poland. But their wording was very sketchy, leaving room for interpretation that these planes might be re-routed or taken via trailer to Ukraine.

Not sure, what will come of this.:wtf:

[pmulcahy11b]

Is there a GoFundMe or something like that for the troops in the Ukraine?

See, I feel a little guilty. I ordered three T-Shirts from an outfit in Kyiv (ClothingMonster.com -- their shirts are great) about two weeks ago. Given what's going on there, I didn't think I'd ever get them, and I was fine with that.

But last night I got a package with the three shirts in the mail. And I'm thinking -- three quality shirts and international shipping -- that could have paid for a box of ammo. Any the Ukrainians are critically short on everything.

So I wonder, is there somewhere reputable where I can give to the cause?

[pmulcahy11b]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/neutral-finland-sweden-warm-to-idea-of-nato-membership/ar-AAUxI92?ocid=uxbndlbing

Sweden and Finland are seriously considering NATO membership, and NATO seems to be receptive.

Putin has already warned Finland about joining NATO.

Is Finland Putin's next target? I don't think he has the troops or equipment to keep Ukraine nailed down and attack Finland, but I wouldn't put it past Putin to call for mass conscription and start pulling crappy old equipment out of storage.

[unipus]

It sure hasn't gone well for them in the past, and I don't see the advanced technology and high morale that Finland has now making that any easier.

Worth noting that there have been huge overhauls to the structure and doctrine of the Russian military over the past 10-15 years. It's quite possible we're seeing a lot of friction from that, of an army or just its officers who maybe haven't quite grasped the changes.

In particular, there was a disastrous attempt to privatize many of the Army's logistics services, which was aborted only a few years ago. I would not be surprised if lingering fallout from that, or organizational self-sabotage from within by invested parties, was behind a lot of the problems the Russians have had with fuel and maintenance particularly.

[unipus]

Combat Air CONTROL (CAC) is problematic for the Russians. Without the equivalent of an AWACS over the battlefield, directing the fighters where to go is very difficult. You cannot have an effective CAP (Combat Air Patrol) without the CAC directing things. The Russians have ONE AWACS per THEATER (6 planes total) and are probably afraid of losing the only one they have in the Black sea area. Their ships CAN direct aircraft but the range of ground-based radar makes CAC problematic. In addition, they failed to suppress the Ukraine's SAM defenses in the North and West, making overflights there dangerous. Add to that the sheer number of MANPADS the West gave Ukraine, and we can see why the skies are still contested.

Another thing I have noticed about some of the footage is just how "inaccurate" some of the cruise and ballistic missiles are. In some instances, missing their target by half a block. I wonder IF we might be screwing with their GLASNOSK/GPS system...

All of these things are exactly the things that don't make sense to me. Sure, you don't want to risk your AWACS planes. But is there some better time to use them than during a war? Is there some better time for DEAD operations than before you try to do airborne landings over enemy territory?

And maybe they're just experimenting with how effective some of these weapons can be under circumstances, but it's documented that the Russians don't believe GPS/GLONASS will be available in the event of a war anyway, so much of their approach has been designed around simply not relying on it at all. A ballistic missile doesn't need it, anyway.

[swaghauler]

All of these things are exactly the things that don't make sense to me. Sure, you don't want to risk your AWACS planes. But is there some better time to use them than during a war? Is there some better time for DEAD operations than before you try to do airborne landings over enemy territory?

And maybe they're just experimenting with how effective some of these weapons can be under circumstances, but it's documented that the Russians don't believe GPS/GLONASS will be available in the event of a war anyway, so much of their approach has been designed around simply not relying on it at all. A ballistic missile doesn't need it, anyway.

Russia's perspective is different from ours (the West's). She is not "casualty adverse" like we are. Putin WILL sacrifice thousands of conscripts and Cold War equipment to exhaust an enemy's newest tech. However, when it comes to hard to replace tech like Russia's AWACS, he will hoard it until the point where he simply cannot do without it anymore.

[swaghauler]

Well, I wonder if the President of Belarus who showed that Top Secret map with all the planned Russian moves... INCLUDING THE INVASION OF MOLDOVA, is still on Putin's Christmas list?

[swaghauler]

All of the news outlets are wondering what Putin is going to do with Kiyv. He is going to do EXACTLY what he did to Grozny in the Second Chechen War and Aleppo in Syria! Surround the city and shell it into oblivion with artillery. You can see the movements occurring right now on the conflict map. The media are claiming that "Putin suddenly went crazy," but this is a cold, calculated move. Not an act of passion. As Jen Psaki pointed out, the last time Putin invaded Ukraine (the Crimea) Biden was Vice President and oil was over $100 a barrel. Is it a coincidence that Russia gets aggressive when oil prices soar? I don't think that's a coincidence.

It also appears that casualties on both sides are actually lighter than was earlier claimed. I STILL remember Ukraine's representative at the UN saying "HUNDREDS of our tanks have been destroyed..." when it appears that the total is around 200. A far cry from nearly a thousand claimed earlier. Although I do wonder how many of those were replaced by abandoned or stolen Russian equipment?

[unipus]

I mostly don't think it's a coincidence that Putin took a break from aggressive moves during Trump's term... the getting was too good at too low a price, don't rock the boat.

[swaghauler]

I mostly don't think it's a coincidence that Putin took a break from aggressive moves during Trump's term... the getting was too good at too low a price, don't rock the boat.

Unlikely. Under Trump, oil prices fell to $50 a barrel. 52% of Russia's economy is oil and natural gas. Putin did not have the financial resources to invade Ukraine. Under Biden, US gas and oil production was slashed. I watched oil climb to $100 a barrel and gas in PA go from $2.30 per gallon under Trump to $4 a gallon under Biden.

In addition, Biden just projects weakness. Trump did not. In fact, Putin would have tip-toed around Trump knowing that pushing Trump's ego could result in a war.

Just look at Kim in NK for an example of this. The rhetoric began to spiral UNTIL... Beijing summoned Kim to China and most likely threatened to withdraw their support IF he started a war with the US... since that would have sabotaged China's 10 to 15 year plan to match the US military in the Pacific.

[OmahaJason]

Unlikely. Under Trump, oil prices fell to $50 a barrel. 52% of Russia's economy is oil and natural gas. Putin did not have the financial resources to invade Ukraine. Under Biden, US gas and oil production was slashed. I watched oil climb to $100 a barrel and gas in PA go from $2.30 per gallon under Trump to $4 a gallon under Biden.

In addition, Biden just projects weakness. Trump did not. In fact, Putin would have tip-toed around Trump knowing that pushing Trump's ego could result in a war.

Just look at Kim in NK for an example of this. The rhetoric began to spiral UNTIL... Beijing summoned Kim to China and most likely threatened to withdraw their support IF he started a war with the US... since that would have sabotaged China's 10 to 15 year plan to match the US military in the Pacific.

Trump withheld $400 milliom in military aid to Ukraine, and weskened NATO by threatening to withdraw.

By my reckoning, Biden has increased our national security by strengthening ties with NATO.

[Raellus]

It can be hard not to weigh in here re US politics vis-a-vis recent developments in Ukraine but, in keeping with our forum guidelines, let's all try to keep this discussion apolitical.

Discussion of military matters pertaining to Ukraine, and/or Putin's villainy are totally in bounds, but arguments about which former and/or current US president is more to blame for this state of affairs is a can of worms we really don't need to open.

Thanks for being cool, everyone.

The Mod Team

-

[unipus]

Roger that. I'll just say I don't think it's coincidental in terms of timing, but also in how it mostly seems to be going, especially with regards to how unified the West now is in response. Putin may have expected differently in terms of comparison with, say, Obama and Merkel, but if that's what he was counting on then it seems like a significant miscalculation at best.

Meanwhile, the situation for your typical Russian citizen is getting very bad, though. Reports from the ground there about the repressive measures sound like they're getting pretty terrible. I have some friends there as well as some who are currently abroad and can't access their money, don't really want to go home but aren't sure if they might be expelled, and soon may not even be able to fly (at least within/over/to-from the US, presumably other countries as well).

There is always collateral damage in war but this economic aspect is much more far-reaching than at any time in the past. I can only hope that (a) the economic pressure keeps working but (b) we don't end up in a new red scare.

[Raellus]

All of these things are exactly the things that don't make sense to me. Sure, you don't want to risk your AWACS planes. But is there some better time to use them than during a war? Is there some better time for DEAD operations than before you try to do airborne landings over enemy territory?

And maybe they're just experimenting with how effective some of these weapons can be under circumstances, but it's documented that the Russians don't believe GPS/GLONASS will be available in the event of a war anyway, so much of their approach has been designed around simply not relying on it at all. A ballistic missile doesn't need it, anyway.

The Russians might be trying out cheaper (in terms of sustainable aircraft losses) alternatives.

I posted the article in the Out of Mothballs thread, but Warzone (the Drive) reported that Russia might plan to use its fleet of AN-2 biplane transports as unmanned drones to trick the Ukrainians into revealing their air defense positions*. I suppose this gambit could also include provoking the Ukrainians into scrambling some of their last available fighter aircraft. Perhaps this tactic will obviate the need for AWACS.

*On a historical note, the Israelis Pioneered (pun intended) this tactic quite successfully against Syrian SAM sites in the Beqaa Valley during their 1982 invasion of Lebanon.

-

[bash]

With regards to the apparent performance of Russia's military in this invasion I think some points get glossed over too readily.


Russia's annual military expenditures come to $50-60b per year for an active duty force of a little over a million. That's only about $61k spent per active duty service member.
Combined arms operations are difficult in general. Jets move faster than APCs and don't get stuck in mud. AFVs can easily outrun their supply trains.
Maintaining equipment is expensive and time consuming. It's also something that needs to be ingrained in a military's culture. It's not a bolt-on after the fact feature.
Likewise logistics is hard. Like maintenance it's expensive and cultural. It's also not a bolt-on feature after the fact.
Russia, back through the late USSR, has famous amounts of graft throughout the ranks.


So an army that doesn't have a strong cultural of logistics, equipment maintenance, or even accurate accounting is going to be clown shoes against a peer force. It really looks like they've only made the progress they have through superior numbers and even then that's been limited by logistics and maintenance.

I don't think there's some grand strategy of throwing conscripts out as the top of the spear or something. I think it's more their army inherited the worst of the Soviet system. Everyone from the NCOs up through the general staff have been fudging readiness numbers for decades. Blowing up irregular forces in Syria and war criming through Chechnya and Georgia has given the general staff a serious overestimate of their abilities.

[Jason]

There are reports of senior Russian military commanders being KIA in Ukraine as they moved closer to the frontlines in order break the logjam and get their ground troops moving.

[pmulcahy11b]

I was listening to GEN (Ret) Wesley Clark, a former commander of NATO, on CNN the other day. (Yes, I know what some of you think of CNN; let's not go into that right now.) He said that while the troops and equipment are enough to make a wreck of Ukraine right now, to properly subjugate Ukraine, Russia would need on the order of 800,000 troops with attendant armor and vehicle to move the supply chain, and enough aircraft to gain air superiority over Ukraine.

The Russians don't have this right now. Mass conscription would be necessary, and the first task of the new troops would be to get currently POS vehicles running. While training for combat.

However, the invasion of Ukraine is going badly for the Russians. Even Russian commanders (secretly) acknowledge that they are overwhelmed at how badly the campaign is going. The war is also very unpopular in Russia herself, and conscription is going to go over like a lead balloon. You'll need loyal troops to provide armed guards over the conscripts to make sure they don't desert, and in general start a reign of terror over the conscripts.

You're also going to have a situation like in the 1960s-70s in the US, where conscripts "burn their draft cards" and generally don't show up when they are conscripted. They'll join the antiwar effort instead. Where they will be arrested, and then conscripted. There will be press gangs roaming Russia.

It's going to be a mess.

[Louied]

I was listening to GEN (Ret) Wesley Clark, a former commander of NATO, on CNN the other day. (Yes, I know what some of you think of CNN; let's not go into that right now.) He said that while the troops and equipment are enough to make a wreck of Ukraine right now, to properly subjugate Ukraine, Russia would need on the order of 800,000 troops with attendant armor and vehicle to move the supply chain, and enough aircraft to gain air superiority over Ukraine.

The Russians don't have this right now. Mass conscription would be necessary, and the first task of the new troops would be to get currently POS vehicles running. While training for combat.

However, the invasion of Ukraine is going badly for the Russians. Even Russian commanders (secretly) acknowledge that they are overwhelmed at how badly the campaign is going. The war is also very unpopular in Russia herself, and conscription is going to go over like a lead balloon. You'll need loyal troops to provide armed guards over the conscripts to make sure they don't desert, and in general start a reign of terror over the conscripts.

You're also going to have a situation like in the 1960s-70s in the US, where conscripts "burn their draft cards" and generally don't show up when they are conscripted. They'll join the antiwar effort instead. Where they will be arrested, and then conscripted. There will be press gangs roaming Russia.

It's going to be a mess.

Excellent observations Paul! I guess the question now is does Putin look to save face and take over the two eastern regions and make Ukraine say "uncle" then withdraw and start a huge revamp of its forces? Strategy wise I would think (at I could be completely wrong) that was the best option. Then tag team with China as they make a move somewhere. Though I have a feeling China is taking some hard lessons from this themselves.

[Raellus]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60602936

-

[swaghauler]

Excellent observations Paul! I guess the question now is does Putin look to save face and take over the two eastern regions and make Ukraine say "uncle" then withdraw and start a huge revamp of its forces? Strategy wise I would think (at I could be completely wrong) that was the best option. Then tag team with China as they make a move somewhere. Though I have a feeling China is taking some hard lessons from this themselves.

My concern is that Russia will decide that the city of Kyiv is "too tough a nut to crack" with infantry and pull a Grozny in the circa 2000 Second Chechen War. He's already moving in the rockets and tube "grid square removers" (I love that term by the way) and attempting to surround the city and force capitulation. IF he decides to pull a Grozny, then he will move in the thermobaric weapons, and everyone in Kyiv will get a free cremation on Russia. My hope is that his advisors can talk him out of it based on the political and economic repercussions for doing so.

[swaghauler]

I was listening to GEN (Ret) Wesley Clark, a former commander of NATO, on CNN the other day. (Yes, I know what some of you think of CNN; let's not go into that right now.) He said that while the troops and equipment are enough to make a wreck of Ukraine right now, to properly subjugate Ukraine, Russia would need on the order of 800,000 troops with attendant armor and vehicle to move the supply chain, and enough aircraft to gain air superiority over Ukraine.

The Russians don't have this right now. Mass conscription would be necessary, and the first task of the new troops would be to get currently POS vehicles running. While training for combat.

However, the invasion of Ukraine is going badly for the Russians. Even Russian commanders (secretly) acknowledge that they are overwhelmed at how badly the campaign is going. The war is also very unpopular in Russia herself, and conscription is going to go over like a lead balloon. You'll need loyal troops to provide armed guards over the conscripts to make sure they don't desert, and in general start a reign of terror over the conscripts.

You're also going to have a situation like in the 1960s-70s in the US, where conscripts "burn their draft cards" and generally don't show up when they are conscripted. They'll join the antiwar effort instead. Where they will be arrested, and then conscripted. There will be press gangs roaming Russia.

It's going to be a mess.

As far as I know, Russia has universal conscription. Every male serves from 18 to 20 and then goes into the equivalent of America's IRR (inactive ready reserve). That means every Russian male is going to "get a taste of Hell." I just don't know how a sustained occupation would be affordable to Russia's military. I'm not even sure the US could do it now with our debt load.

[unipus]

As I've stated in other threads, your information on this is out of date.

There is still conscription, but it is now on a one year term (although many conscripts enter with at least some training in militarily useful experience already, due to "patriotic training" that has no real Western equivalent). Since 2016, conscripts have the option to instead sign on immediately to a two (maybe three?) year volunteer contract, which offers better pay and preferential treatment.

At least on paper, most of these conscripts serve in support roles, while combat roles are comprised primarily of voluntary contract soldiers.

In any case, conscripts make up only about a third of manpower. However, the inequalities in pay, status, and authority between contract and conscript soldiers has been a noted point of friction and low morale even within any given unit, and it's likely we're seeing that here.

(A specific case: Conscripts are not legally allowed to serve outside of Russia. In this particular case, many conscripts had their status nonvoluntarily changed to contract prior to the invasion in order to get around this law -- certainly this is probably another sore point for morale.)

[Jason]

Blinken has green-lit the transfer of Polish fighters to Ukraine, which suggests we have reassured them of back-stopping thier loss. This does not mean any such transfer is iminent, but surely closer than it was a week ago on initial reports.

An unknown number of foriegn volunteers have entered Ukraine, which has lifted visa requirements. Ukraine suggests volunteers have fatigues and cold-weather gear.

Putin is reported to be deploying 1,000 mercenaries to Ukraine, but those reports are unconfirmed.

Big questions. Would Putin leverage captured foriegn fighters from NATO member nations to expand the war?

Will NATO allow Ukrainian fighter jets to rearm amd refuel at bases outside Ukraine?

Both scenarios seem unlikely right now, but things may be much more desperate by next week.

[Bestbrian]

Blinken has green-lit the transfer of Polish fighters to Ukraine, which suggests we have reassured them of back-stopping thier loss. This does not mean any such transfer is iminent, but surely closer than it was a week ago on initial reports.

An unknown number of foriegn volunteers have entered Ukraine, which has lifted visa requirements. Ukraine suggests volunteers have fatigues and cold-weather gear.

Putin is reported to be deploying 1,000 mercenaries to Ukraine, but those reports are unconfirmed.

Big questions. Would Putin leverage captured foriegn fighters from NATO member nations to expand the war?

Will NATO allow Ukrainian fighter jets to rearm amd refuel at bases outside Ukraine?

Both scenarios seem unlikely right now, but things may be much more desperate by next week.

No to both. Putin isn't going to be looking to expand the war anywhere, since he can barely handle the one he has. What he most definitely will do is utilize captured foreign fighters for propaganda purposes as proof of the western conspiracy against Russia that was the supposed pretext for the Ukrainian invasion in the first place. Allowing Ukrainian aircraft to arm/refuel at NATO airbases and then return is effectively allowing them to fly sorties which is an overt act of aggression and would certainly be construed as a NATO attack upon Russia.

As an aside, Russia has already stated that foreign fighters in Ukraine would be treated as criminals and not afforded protections due to combatants, so these folks better plan on taking that into account.

[Raellus]

Putin is reported to be deploying 1,000 mercenaries to Ukraine, but those reports are unconfirmed.

Is that Wagner Group? If so, that "company" is essentially just a front for Spetsnaz (the name and PMC designation is a weak attempt at plausible deniability).

Big questions. Would Putin leverage captured foriegn fighters from NATO member nations to expand the war?

He could, but it would be a fairly weak pretext. I agree with BestBrian's assessment.

Will NATO allow Ukrainian fighter jets to rearm amd refuel at bases outside Ukraine?

Not anytime soon, if ever. Doing so would give Russia a much stronger pretext for expanding the war.

What I'm wondering right now is what impact the refugee crisis (1.5m and counting) is going to have on EU/NATO calculus, both short and long term. Could a continuing flood of Ukrainian DPs force NATO to intervene militarily? It's unlikely, but what could happen if refugee support systems start to buckle? In the long term, if/when Russia conquers Ukraine, millions of Ukrainian refugees residing in multiple countries right next door could help sustain a very lengthy insurgency. This could cause all sorts of political and diplomatic issues between Russia and the host countries which could, again, lead to an expansion of the war.

-

[Bestbrian]

What I'm wondering right now is what impact the refugee crisis (1.5m and counting) is going to have on EU/NATO calculus, both short and long term. Could a continuing flood of Ukrainian DPs force NATO to intervene militarily? It's unlikely, but what could happen if refugee support systems start to buckle? In the long term, if/when Russia conquers Ukraine, millions of Ukrainian refugees residing in multiple countries right next door could help sustain a very lengthy insurgency. This could cause all sorts of political and diplomatic issues between Russia and the host countries which could, again, lead to an expansion of the war.

-

This is going to turn into a very active and very large insurgency actively supported by the world community and led by an extremely ticked off diaspora. I'm curious to see to what extent this spreads to Belarus. The ruling party there is only in power at the point of Russian bayonets. I could very well see a Belarus insurgency springing up (actively armed and supported by the one in Ukraine).

[Raellus]

Video circulating online today shows civilian vehicles- buses, cargo and tanker trucks, even sedans- spray-painted with Z recognition markings on Russian flatbed train cars in transit to Ukraine.

Several years ago, in the In Defense of the Red Army thread, someone pointed out that one of the Cold War Soviet army's most significant but little publicized weaknesses was its relative paucity of transport vehicles. Apparently, the post-1945 Soviet military-industrial complex learned nothing from the important role that Lend-Lease materiel played in defeating the German ground forces during WW2, and the Russian military has since inherited that gap in logistical thinking.

-

[swaghauler]

Using the typical off-the-shelf Quadcopter as an armed drone. One has to wonder how many of these the Ukrainians have now?

https://youtu.be/Q3KkEMxA4EQ


By the way, I HIGHLY RECOMMEND Funker Tactical 530.

Swag

[swaghauler]

Here is a good analysis of Russia's logistical issues.

https://youtu.be/b4wRdoWpw0w

[Raellus]

The Russians are bringing back the armored train.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44620/a-russian-armored-train-has-joined-the-invasion-of-ukraine

Speaking of recommendations, you may have noticed that I post a lot of articles from Warzone on The Drive. It's pretty much my go-to for contemporary military-related news. If you haven't already, check it out.

-

[Stackmouse]

Russian strategic culture - Why Russia does things the way it does?
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvonRMSuFpw)

Presentation by Martti J. Kari, a retired intelligence colonel of the Finnish Defense Forces (03DEC18). The presentation is in Finnish, but there is English caption in the video. I recommend this to everyone who wants to see the broader cultural background of the Russian way of doing things. Col (ret) Kari has a deep understanding of the Russian way.

[Ursus Maior]

Is there a GoFundMe or something like that for the troops in the Ukraine?
I don't know of crowd funding, but a couple of ammo companies have been donating a couple of million rounds, this article made news: https://www.businessinsider.com/arizona-ammunition-company-one-million-bullets-ukraine-army-2022-3

Maybe such a thing could be organized the easiest way by contacting such a firm and asking them about "care packages"? I don't know, never thought about this kind of stuff.

[Ursus Maior]

As far as I know, Russia has universal conscription. Every male serves from 18 to 20 and then goes into the equivalent of America's IRR (inactive ready reserve). That means every Russian male is going to "get a taste of Hell." I just don't know how a sustained occupation would be affordable to Russia's military. I'm not even sure the US could do it now with our debt load.

That's not how it works in Russian real life. Only about half of the men available serve each year, often voluntarily, since serving as a conscript seems to enhance the chances to get an apartment funded by social welfare. Also, while the US has individual ready reserve and the Russians have something similar, they encounter problems known to me as a German from 1990s and 2000s Bundeswehr: activating reservists is expansive and thus avoided in huge numbers. It also disrupts the economy, though that might be less of an issue, once sanctions kick in and do their from work.

I absolutely agree on the idea of the Russian army - today and historically - sucking as an army of occupation. It's a vastly different job and Ukraine is a country of over 40 million people, nearly all of them, as of now, hostile to Russia.

However, comparing Russia's expenditures on the armed forces with that of Western nations is a folly. Yes, their spending was only USD 43.2 billion in 2020, down from USD 46.4 billion in 2019. However, Russia buys most of it's equipment internally and has comparatively very low costs for personnel. Also, in Ruble, the spending actually rose from 3 trillion to 3.09 trillion between 2019 and 2020, and then to 3.2 trillion in 2021.

This means, Russia can do much more with its funds than e. g. Germany, which spent the comparable sum of €46.93 billion in 2021. All in all, however, the allies of NATO outspend Russia by far, of course. This doesn't mean, though, Russia cannot create a bit of a mixed pickle on NATO's Eastern flank for some time.

[Raellus]

Poland looks to be exchanging its MiG-29s with the US, for American-built replacement fighters. This opens the door for the US to transfer said ex-Polish MiGs to Ukraine.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44644/poland-agrees-to-turn-over-its-mig-29s-to-the-u-s-after-which-they-could-head-to-ukraine

It's a bit of a pass-the-buck move by Poland, but given their geo-political and military position in Europe, I can respect it.

Is this a red line for Putin? We shall see.

-

[swaghauler]

This is just so Twilight2000 I just had to show it. When the conscript Russians run out of fuel, they simply abandon their AFVs and just run off. Only in Twilight2000 would I have imagined seeing things like this...

https://youtu.be/KOo3U32-J_g


Swag.

[swaghauler]

Cappy is still evaluating the Russian's performance here.

https://youtu.be/FDKH_FxFdrw

[swaghauler]

The Russians are bringing back the armored train.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44620/a-russian-armored-train-has-joined-the-invasion-of-ukraine

Speaking of recommendations, you may have noticed that I post a lot of articles from Warzone on The Drive. It's pretty much my go-to for contemporary military-related news. If you haven't already, check it out.

-

Actually, according to people in open source info forums, they apparently used one or both of the armored trains in Grozny too. I heard they are often used to haul Thermobaric missiles as well as larger artillery "stores" like 140mm rocket reloads. I guess they were a much-needed resource there during the siege of Grozny. Of course, Chechnya has rail lines to Russia so they were able to move in by rail. Ukraine severed her rail lines before the invasion started. That might have thrown the Russians off their game a bit too.

[swaghauler]

That's not how it works in Russian real life. Only about half of the men available serve each year, often voluntarily, since serving as a conscript seems to enhance the chances to get an apartment funded by social welfare. Also, while the US has individual ready reserve and the Russians have something similar, they encounter problems known to me as a German from 1990s and 2000s Bundeswehr: activating reservists is expansive and thus avoided in huge numbers. It also disrupts the economy, though that might be less of an issue, once sanctions kick in and do their from work.

I absolutely agree on the idea of the Russian army - today and historically - sucking as an army of occupation. It's a vastly different job and Ukraine is a country of over 40 million people, nearly all of them, as of now, hostile to Russia.

However, comparing Russia's expenditures on the armed forces with that of Western nations is a folly. Yes, their spending was only USD 43.2 billion in 2020, down from USD 46.4 billion in 2019. However, Russia buys most of it's equipment internally and has comparatively very low costs for personnel. Also, in Ruble, the spending actually rose from 3 trillion to 3.09 trillion between 2019 and 2020, and then to 3.2 trillion in 2021.

This means, Russia can do much more with its funds than e. g. Germany, which spent the comparable sum of €46.93 billion in 2021. All in all, however, the allies of NATO outspend Russia by far, of course. This doesn't mean, though, Russia cannot create a bit of a mixed pickle on NATO's Eastern flank for some time.

You still have to feed and cloth those conscripts and that costs money. According to Sub Brief, Cappy, and a few other YouTubers known for detailed open-source intel, Putin did do a "clemency recruitment drive" just prior to Ukraine, taking prisoners into the army in exchange for clemency. I'm guessing that these would be the majority of deserters and we know they are there because they were being interviewed after being captured by Ukraine. In some cases, they had only about a week of training before deploying.

IF all of that is true, it gives a whole new meaning to the term "canon fodder."

[kato13]

Poland looks to be exchanging its MiG-29s with the US, for American-built replacement fighters. This opens the door for the US to transfer said ex-Polish MiGs to Ukraine.
-


Probably not going to happen

Pentagon response to Poland's proposal on jets: "We will continue to consult with Poland and our other NATO allies about this issue and the difficult logistical challenges it presents, but we do not believe Poland’s proposal is a tenable one.”

-Pentagon spokesman John Kirby

[Jason]

Poland says they are ready to send the 28, Mig-29's to a U.S. base in Germany.

There are reports that Russian has lost a ship.

There are reports that a second Russian General has been KIA.

[swaghauler]

Probably not going to happen

Pentagon response to Poland's proposal on jets: "We will continue to consult with Poland and our other NATO allies about this issue and the difficult logistical challenges it presents, but we do not believe Poland’s proposal is a tenable one.”

-Pentagon spokesman John Kirby

https://youtu.be/K6uA6a9jgjs

Biden is simply dragging his feet. We have 600+ F16s in inventory. We can give Poland 28 of them.

Biden did finally ban imports of Russian oil today. We are supposedly being told to expect $7 per gallon by next month since the current administration won't lift their ban on drilling in the national forests.

[swaghauler]

Poland says they are ready to send the 28, Mig-29's to a U.S. base in Germany.

There are reports that Russian has lost a ship.

There are reports that a second Russian General has been KIA.

That Russian ship was sunk off of Crimea. Open Source Intelligence posted a Google satellite photo of it.

[Jason]

https://youtu.be/K6uA6a9jgjs

Biden is simply dragging his feet. We have 600+ F16s in inventory. We can give Poland 28 of them.

Biden did finally ban imports of Russian oil today. We are supposedly being told to expect $7 per gallon by next month since the current administration won't lift their ban on drilling in the national forests.

The oil companies are banking record profits while gouging consumers. This is about greed.

[bash]

https://youtu.be/K6uA6a9jgjs

Biden is simply dragging his feet. We have 600+ F16s in inventory. We can give Poland 28 of them.

Biden did finally ban imports of Russian oil today. We are supposedly being told to expect $7 per gallon by next month since the current administration won't lift their ban on drilling in the national forests.

Having vehicles in inventory and having effective vehicles are not the same thing. Russia is giving the world an object lesson in this concept. If Poland gives Ukraine two dozen Migs and associated spares, compatible weapon systems, and the rest of those planes' support they need the same number of F-16s. They'd also need training for pilots and ground crews for the entirely new planes and weapon systems. Poland giving up planes is basically them taking a combat-ready squadron offline for months if not years. These aren't Hummers.

Oil companies in the US already under utilize their existing leases for drilling on federal land. More leases aren't going to reduce the price at the pump for gasoline. Opening federal land to drilling (or any land) requires the attendant infrastructure to store and move that oil. So even if oil companies got a bunch of new federal drilling leases tomorrow they wouldn't get significant amounts of oil into the market for years.

[swaghauler]

Having vehicles in inventory and having effective vehicles are not the same thing. Russia is giving the world an object lesson in this concept. If Poland gives Ukraine two dozen Migs and associated spares, compatible weapon systems, and the rest of those planes' support they need the same number of F-16s. They'd also need training for pilots and ground crews for the entirely new planes and weapon systems. Poland giving up planes is basically them taking a combat-ready squadron offline for months if not years. These aren't Hummers.


Except that Poland has already TRAINED on F16s and F35s and would need to upgrade her fleet anyway because the MIG 29s all exceed half their airframes' service lives. Why not do it now while the doing is good?

[swaghauler]

Oil companies in the US already under utilize their existing leases for drilling on federal land. More leases aren't going to reduce the price at the pump for gasoline. Opening federal land to drilling (or any land) requires the attendant infrastructure to store and move that oil. So even if oil companies got a bunch of new federal drilling leases tomorrow they wouldn't get significant amounts of oil into the market for years.

Except that Biden did ban drilling in the Allegheny National Forest by banning Fracking and doubling lease fees after he promised the unions he wouldn't. Without Fracking, shale oils cannot be exploited. This cut production in the Forest down to 10k barrels a day from 30K + and idled 1200 wells overnight. As a result, 58K PA workers lost their good-paying jobs when this happened and DON'T TELL ME I DON'T KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT because yours truly was one of them. I used to haul well casings to the rigs in the Forest and now get to haul steel for peanuts compared to oilfield pay. Now, PA power companies are forced to IMPORT natural gas to make electricity because the Forest is no longer supplying it.

[Raellus]

Guys, I really don't want to lock this thread. Please keep it apolitical and on-topic. The thread OP is about the war in Ukraine.

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=2961

-

[Raellus]

This story's been a rollercoaster from the start. The Pentagon has apparently shot down Poland's plan for a third-party transfer of its MiG-29s to Ukraine.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44675/u-s-says-it-will-not-support-high-risk-transfer-of-polish-mig-29s-to-ukraine

I'm not sure how much good two dozen MiGs would have done the UAF, militarily speaking, but it would have signaled the strength of NATO's support for Ukraine, and likely boosted morale there.

CNN reports that the White House has suggested that Putin might be prepared to use chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine. It's not clear what evidence this warning is based on, other than some unsupported allegations Putin supposedly made that the US was developing bio-weapons in Ukraine. To be fair, he has a well-established pattern of accusing his opponents, falsely, of things that he's about to do himself. Frankly, I don't see Russian use of chemical or biological weapons at this point in the war as likely, but I certainly wouldn't put it past Putin. He's seen Assad get away with it in Syria, and remain in power, so perhaps he's calculated that he can get away with it too. Considering the intensifying economic sanctions against Russia, he might believe he has nothing more to lose.

Finally, I've been a Sebastian Junger fan since A Perfect Storm. His book, War, which follows a platoon of the 173rd ABCT during its deployment in the Korengal Valley is a powerful portrait of men at war (the companion documentary film, Restrepo, is very good too). He recently penned a brief essay for Vanity Fair in which he asserts that Ukraine can win this war because has the three things that an underdog needs in order to defeat a more powerful foreign aggressor.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/03/can-ukrainian-freedom-fighters-stand-up-to-the-russian-military

Slava Ukraini!

-

[Bestbrian]

Putin directed the Russian military to employ 16000 "volunteers" from the Middle East (Syria). This underscores that the Russian army has poor training/morale/leadership and is unprepared for urban combat operations, not to mention that the national leadership is casualty adverse. Vlad: Go Home.

[swaghauler]

Here is a pretty good review by Sandboxx on the Russian Air war...

https://youtu.be/eXFDc-44YeE

[chico20854]

Here is a pretty good review by Sandboxx on the Russian Air war...

https://youtu.be/eXFDc-44YeE

And there's this piece from last week (https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/rusi-defence-systems/russian-air-force-actually-incapable-complex-air-operations) on the capabilities (or lack thereof) displayed by the Russian Air Force.

[Matt W]

Putin claims that Ukraine gave Russia no choice. Invasion had to happen in order to protect the Russian state and citizens.

AFAIK, this is almost true. At least in a very cynical way.

Let me explain.

1. Russia is a petro-state. Its only real money-maker is pulling hydrocarbons out of the ground and selling the stuff to Europe.

2. A major Russian pipeline to Europe goes through Ukraine and the Ukrainians used to charge a large fee to allow this transit. So, the Russians stopped using it and have built new pipelines (and are trying to build even more). However, if Russian troops take control of this pipeline, Putin gets a much simpler/cheaper solution than building a NEW pipeline (Nordstream 2 will be eye-wateringly expensive)

3. MASSIVE oil and gas deposits have recently been discovered off the coast of Ukraine. If these were to be exploited... there would be no need for Europe to buy Russian oil. Russia would soon be bankrupt. However, Russia now has troops on most of the relevant shorelines...

4. Crimea gets 85% of its fresh water from one specific Ukrainian river. Or rather... it used to. Ukraine built a dam in revenge for the Russian takeover of Crimea. Crimea has water rationing - but its economy is being destroyed. However, Russian troops have now reached that dam...

5. Before the invasion, there was only one land-based link between Russia and Crimea. And that's a single bridge that could be easily destroyed. Of course, this is assuming that it doesn't fall down without anyone's help. (seismic activity and shoddy Russian construction are not a good combination). Russian troops have now linked Crimea with Mother Russia.

6. Putin is greedy but he's not stupid. It is quite possible that the Invasion was intended to protect the Russian hydrocarbon industry. So, if we're optimistic, it may be that Putin could be content with:
a) keeping Ukraine out of the oil and gas business,
b) seizing road and rail links to Crimea,
c) re-opening the old pipelines.

Anything else would be "nice to have" but those 3 things would protect the Russian economy and safeguard the vast wealth of Putin and the other kleptocratic Oligarchs. Oh, and the Russian citizens in Crimea (including sailors in one of the Russian Navy's two warmwater ports) wouldn't inconveniently die of thirst.

[Vespers War]

I'd missed seeing this thread until today, so I'm catching up a bit and commenting on things that I think aren't duplicating anyone else's comments.

Actually, according to people in open source info forums, they apparently used one or both of the armored trains in Grozny too. I heard they are often used to haul Thermobaric missiles as well as larger artillery "stores" like 140mm rocket reloads. I guess they were a much-needed resource there during the siege of Grozny. Of course, Chechnya has rail lines to Russia so they were able to move in by rail. Ukraine severed her rail lines before the invasion started. That might have thrown the Russians off their game a bit too.

The two armored trains were both used in Grozny, and at least one was used in Georgia as well. Amur and Baikal may have been activated because of drone strikes on conventional rail transport; since Russian logistics are more rail-dependent than many other countries, the armored trains might have been called up because of their anti-air artillery and protection against light weaponry. The imagery I've seen is pretty grainy, but it looks like the electronic warfare cars have been removed from the trains, and they have just the locomotives, anti-air cars, and flatbeds for transport. That's a lot simpler and more cargo-oriented than the earlier configurations that included jammer cars and passenger cars for desantniki.

That Russian ship was sunk off of Crimea. Open Source Intelligence posted a Google satellite photo of it.

And apparently it was sunk by a truck. A BM-21 Grad was pre-ranged on a set of coordinates and a pair of speedboats lured the Vasily Bykov onto those coordinates.


One thing I've noticed with the armor in particular is that Russia's including some seriously old equipment in the invasion. There have been some T-90A, but also T-72A and T-72B, and no signs that I've seen of T-72B3M or T-90M - they're sending tanks with no ERA or with Kontakt-1 or Kontakt-5, but nothing that would be equipped with Relikt. I'm not sure what that means (if anything), but it struck me as odd.

[CraigD6er]

Whilst I like armoured trains, I wonder if these may prove vulnerable in a country that has by no means been pacified?

I too wondered at the lack of much modern kit in the Russian front line. We see a lot of light vehicles, Tigr's etc, and slightly older MBT's. I wonder if the better kit is being held back. Let the Ukrainians use up their stocks of ATGW's on the older kit and even on some conscripts 'accidentally' deployed forward, then roll in with the better units once the defenders are worn down. Of course that falls apart when the west, and even neutral nations, keep topping up the defenders stocks with modern and it appears very effective weapons.

[Nowhere Man 1966]

Putin directed the Russian military to employ 16000 "volunteers" from the Middle East (Syria). This underscores that the Russian army has poor training/morale/leadership and is unprepared for urban combat operations, not to mention that the national leadership is casualty adverse. Vlad: Go Home.

I'm beginning to think that Russia would lose a war against the PA, OH and/or WV National Guard(s)

[swaghauler]

Whilst I like armoured trains, I wonder if these may prove vulnerable in a country that has by no means been pacified?

I too wondered at the lack of much modern kit in the Russian front line. We see a lot of light vehicles, Tigr's etc, and slightly older MBT's. I wonder if the better kit is being held back. Let the Ukrainians use up their stocks of ATGW's on the older kit and even on some conscripts 'accidentally' deployed forward, then roll in with the better units once the defenders are worn down. Of course that falls apart when the west, and even neutral nations, keep topping up the defenders stocks with modern and it appears very effective weapons.

They ARE using the modern stuff with veteran troops in the South and West and those guys are doing moderately well. The issue is that even the newest Russian equipment is underperforming. Combine that with Russia's apparent lack of C3, and you have a recipe for disaster. Modern SU fighters are being shot down because Russia appears to be afraid to put their AWACS in the air (they are sitting in Belarus right now) forcing those fighters to fly low in order to acquire targets. Putin may also be holding back his best equipment in case of a NATO intervention but I think what we are seeing is the ACTUAL PERFORMANCE of the Russian army on whole.

In the 80s and 90s, we (the US Army) were tasked with being able to "Shoot, Move, & Communicate simultaneously" on demand. It took us MANY years of training to figure that third ability out. Russia seems to be still operating on a Cold War standard. I guess something had to give in the budget and new tanks and jets can be sold abroad. We now know that Kontakt and Relikt and SHORTA systems are completely WORTHLESS against NATO missiles and that many units are equipped with reactive armor "bags" or panels stuffed with egg crates or foam (indicating a budgetary issue). The cage armor (developed in the 2nd Chechen War) is useless against JAVELIN and Ukrainian fighters have flown explosive-laden drones right under the cage into the commander's hatch cover (which causes the tank to "pop its top").

In addition, Ukraine has not only utilized the intelligence they are getting from open Russian comms, but they are also concentrating their attacks on the Russian convoys, destroying Russian resupply. A Russian tank without fuel is just a target. We may also be seeing a STRATEGIC LOGISTICS issue. Airliners landing at Moscow airport are being denied jet fuel. Cars, trucks, and buses are being requisitioned. This speaks to Russia not having enough logistics left to keep a fully functioning army on the move. BUT... this is just "phase I" of the operation. The coming "counter-insurgency operation" in Ukraine will have to be massive. I wonder what Putin is thinking now? Will we see his "shirt allergy" reemerge as he tries to play tough?

Anyways LASER PIG the YouTuber has a funny video on Ukraine right now. Enjoy!

https://youtu.be/ZPBU_MX1fYE

Swag

[swaghauler]

I'm beginning to think that Russia would lose a war against the PA, OH and/or WV National Guard(s)

I think so too. I ran training ranges with the 99th ARCOM and those boys can shoot. Hell, in PA, the first day of buck season is a school holiday. It is said that there are 2 MILLION hunters in the woods on the opening day of deer season. In addition, most of those Reserve and NG units have worked together for YEARS! They are NOT a bunch of conscripts with a year's experience or training.

Also, many Reserve units have members that do the same jobs in the civilian world (ie Transport units with CDL truckers in them, Medical units populated by nurses and X-ray techs, Construction units with welders, ironworkers, etc... in them). This gives US reserve units a knowledge base that they would never receive from straight military service.

[Vespers War]

They ARE using the modern stuff with veteran troops in the South and West and those guys are doing moderately well. The issue is that even the newest Russian equipment is underperforming. Combine that with Russia's apparent lack of C3, and you have a recipe for disaster. Modern SU fighters are being shot down because Russia appears to be afraid to put their AWACS in the air (they are sitting in Belarus right now) forcing those fighters to fly low in order to acquire targets. Putin may also be holding back his best equipment in case of a NATO intervention but I think what we are seeing is the ACTUAL PERFORMANCE of the Russian army on whole.

Playing devil's advocate, Russia only has something like 6 AWACS-equivalents, so they're far more valuable than the Sukhoi aircraft; on the other hand, if this isn't when you're going to risk them to make your air forces more effective, then when?

In the 80s and 90s, we (the US Army) were tasked with being able to "Shoot, Move, & Communicate simultaneously" on demand. It took us MANY years of training to figure that third ability out. Russia seems to be still operating on a Cold War standard. I guess something had to give in the budget and new tanks and jets can be sold abroad. We now know that Kontakt and Relikt and SHORTA systems are completely WORTHLESS against NATO missiles and that many units are equipped with reactive armor "bags" or panels stuffed with egg crates or foam (indicating a budgetary issue). The cage armor (developed in the 2nd Chechen War) is useless against JAVELIN and Ukrainian fighters have flown explosive-laden drones right under the cage into the commander's hatch cover (which causes the tank to "pop its top").

It looks like Kontakt might still be useful against older/lighter stuff - Kontakt-5 was surviving TOW hits in previous wars, and RPGs and (older) LAWs are probably still mostly ineffective. It's almost useless against top-attack missiles, though, and those are becoming more and more common.

I haven't seen any examples of Relikt in the conflict, but it's probably going to have similar issues with top-attack. Maybe they're being used in the south and I just haven't seen pictures of them, but so far the armor I've seen has either had Kontakt or no ERA.

I also haven't seen Arena (probably because it's incompatible with ERA), but Arena can't engage Javelin anyway because of its maximum elevation angle.

Shtora has been mostly useless for a while, and the cage armor does very little against tandem-charge warheads.

The bags and foam were explained to me as the holding system for an ERA application, which seems like an odd system to me, but I don't have direct experience with them. The number that are empty makes me agree that it looks like a budgetary issue (which really shouldn't be surprising - Russia's GDP is often somewhat less than that of the State of New York).

In addition, Ukraine has not only utilized the intelligence they are getting from open Russian comms, but they are also concentrating their attacks on the Russian convoys, destroying Russian resupply. A Russian tank without fuel is just a target. We may also be seeing a STRATEGIC LOGISTICS issue. Airliners landing at Moscow airport are being denied jet fuel. Cars, trucks, and buses are being requisitioned. This speaks to Russia not having enough logistics left to keep a fully functioning army on the move. BUT... this is just "phase I" of the operation. The coming "counter-insurgency operation" in Ukraine will have to be massive. I wonder what Putin is thinking now? Will we see his "shirt allergy" reemerge as he tries to play tough?

Anyways LASER PIG the YouTuber has a funny video on Ukraine right now. Enjoy!

https://youtu.be/ZPBU_MX1fYE

Swag

Road logistics has always been a shortcoming of the Russian system. One estimate I saw was that their road resupply range was only around 90 miles from their supply depot, and they were heavily reliant on rail.

As far as COIN goes, Russia just flat doesn't have the number of soldiers needed. To hold all of Ukraine, following the rule of thumb that you need approximately 1 counter-insurgent per 20 inhabitants, they'd need over 2.2 million soldiers to occupy Ukraine. Their entire active army is just over 1 million on paper, and only around 3 million including all their reserve forces. Even if they got assistance from secessionist forces in Donbas and whatever Syrian troops Assad wants somewhere far away from him, I don't think they can get anywhere near the needed numbers. They might be able to split the country and hold part of it, but even that would be difficult.

[Nowhere Man 1966]

I think so too. I ran training ranges with the 99th ARCOM and those boys can shoot. Hell, in PA, the first day of buck season is a school holiday. It is said that there are 2 MILLION hunters in the woods on the opening day of deer season. In addition, most of those Reserve and NG units have worked together for YEARS! They are NOT a bunch of conscripts with a year's experience or training.

Also, many Reserve units have members that do the same jobs in the civilian world (ie Transport units with CDL truckers in them, Medical units populated by nurses and X-ray techs, Construction units with welders, ironworkers, etc... in them). This gives US reserve units a knowledge base that they would never receive from straight military service.

99th ARCOM, you must be near Pittsburgh. I'm from there and still live somewhat close, 50 miles WSW of Pittsburgh in Ohio on the river in between Steubenville and Wheeling, WV. I remember one time I was behind a Deuce and a Half where a couple of folding tables fell out. I went on the street, picked them up and Mom and I drove to the command center. I went to the front door and got a Colonial, Captain and Sergeant help me take them into the building. They thanked me for returning the tables.

[bash]

It looks like Kontakt might still be useful against older/lighter stuff - Kontakt-5 was surviving TOW hits in previous wars, and RPGs and (older) LAWs are probably still mostly ineffective. It's almost useless against top-attack missiles, though, and those are becoming more and more common.


Even if NATO is just dumping old LAWs on Ukraine, their tactics of going after relatively soft trucks and APCs seem to be having great effect. Save the Javelins for tanks but target everything else with LAWs and guns. The front lines are burning supplies every minute so even just slowing resupply convoys is helpful for Ukraine.

For their firepower Russian forces seem to have a very steep loss of strength gradient. Their lack of air superiority means their power looks like it drops off pretty significantly from behind their front lines and well traveled corridors. They do not have a secure rear area inside Ukraine anywhere but the south.

So long as the Ukrainians can keep resupplied around and behind the Russian lines, Russian advances will be very expensive. Full occupation will be even more expensive.

[swaghauler]

It seems that the Russian Oligarchs are beginning to target Putin

https://youtu.be/QTQ4O4_a_Mo

Swag

[swaghauler]

99th ARCOM, you must be near Pittsburgh. I'm from there and still live somewhat close, 50 miles WSW of Pittsburgh in Ohio on the river in between Steubenville and Wheeling, WV. I remember one time I was behind a Deuce and a Half where a couple of folding tables fell out. I went on the street, picked them up and Mom and I drove to the command center. I went to the front door and got a Colonial, Captain and Sergeant help me take them into the building. They thanked me for returning the tables.

I live 100 miles north of Pittsburgh and 40 miles south of the North Shore (Lake Erie). The 99th ARCOM stretches from southern New York down to northern West Virginia and was attached to the First Army.

[swaghauler]

A panel discussion on the Operations In Ukraine by the Modern War Institute:

https://youtu.be/zXEvbVoDiU0

Swag

[pmulcahy11b]

The sad thing is, regardless of what happens, from a decades-long insurgency to a NATO intervention (I think a no-fly zone is going to happen, regardless of Biden's words to the contrary) -- the sad thing is that Ukraine is going to be a mass of rubble for decades, dependent on outside help.

[Targan]

The sad thing is, regardless of what happens, from a decades-long insurgency to a NATO intervention (I think a no-fly zone is going to happen, regardless of Biden's words to the contrary) -- the sad thing is that Ukraine is going to be a mass of rubble for decades, dependent on outside help.

If Ukraine is admitted to the EU there will be a flood of recovery funds pouring in. It'll be a reconstruction bonanza. Nothing will bring back those killed and Russia's reputation will be in ruins for a decade or more, but if there's an intervention and the Russians are kicked out, there might be some good fortune in Ukraine's future.

[Jason]

Ukraine is already suggesting they get at least get a portion of the $400 billion in frozen Russian assets to rebuild.

[pmulcahy11b]

Ukraine is already suggesting they get at least get a portion of the $400 billion in frozen Russian assets to rebuild.

That would be justice.

[Jason]

Russia denies it, but multiple outlets are reporting that Russia has approached China for spare aircraft parts. The U.S. has warned that any country trying to evade Russian sanctions will pay a price.

China is paying lip service to Russia, but notably is NOT propping up the Rubble in relation to the Yuan, and several Chinese companies have stopped doing business in Russia. There are whispers of Russia trying to get China to move on Taiwan to take pressure off the Ukrainian war.

A third Russian general in reported to have been KIA in Ukraine.

[Jason]

Some Americans, including at least one former member of Congress are busy selling the Russian-led narrative that the U.S. has numerous secret bio-weapons labs in Ukraine. It is suspected by our intel community that Russia is using this narrative to cover their own planned use of bio-weapons, which they can then blame on 'breached' U.S. bio-labs.

[Raellus]

A video of Ukrainian soldiers being trained on how to operate Polish-donated RPG-76 Komar LAWs.

https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1502616426783416320

Of all the LAWs, this one looks the sketchiest, but one would no doubt encounter it in a Poland-based T2k campaign.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-76_Komar

-

[Bestbrian]

Some Americans, including at least one former member of Congress are busy selling the Russian-led narrative that the U.S. has numerous secret bio-weapons labs in Ukraine. It is suspected by our intel community that Russia is using this narrative to cover their own planned use of bio-weapons, which they can then blame on 'breached' U.S. bio-labs.

Putin needs to fabricate reasons for a larger war that he can sell at home. Remember, he denied that he was doing anything other than "exercises", and then invaded to "assist and protect" the two client states in the Donbas. That's not a good enough reason to explain a ruinously expensive and expansive invasion. Manufacturing fake WMD threats might be one way to try to sell this entirely unnecessary and ridiculous enterprise, and maybe gives him an accomplishment that allows him to declare victory and go home.

[Raellus]

Putin needs to fabricate reasons for a larger war that he can sell at home. Remember, he denied that he was doing anything other than "exercises", and then invaded to "assist and protect" the two client states in the Donbas. That's not a good enough reason to explain a ruinously expensive and expansive invasion. Manufacturing fake WMD threats might be one way to try to sell this entirely unnecessary and ridiculous enterprise, and maybe gives him an accomplishment that allows him to declare victory and go home.

Precisely. I hope that's his motive, rather than pre-justifying future use of Russian chemical or bio weapons against Ukrainian forces.

-

[Vespers War]

A video of Ukrainian soldiers being trained on how to operate Polish-donated RPG-76 Komar LAWs.

https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1502616426783416320

Of all the LAWs, this one looks the sketchiest, but one would no doubt encounter it in a Poland-based T2k campaign.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-76_Komar

-

It's not going to be do much of anything against a tank unless it gets really lucky and hits a vision block or something, but for APCs and minimally armored or unarmored vehicles (like all those logistics convoys), a light disposable single-shot rocket launcher that can be fired from enclosed areas isn't the worst thing to have.

[swaghauler]

It's not going to be do much of anything against a tank unless it gets really lucky and hits a vision block or something, but for APCs and minimally armored or unarmored vehicles (like all those logistics convoys), a light disposable single-shot rocket launcher that can be fired from enclosed areas isn't the worst thing to have.

I agree. They serve a very valuable role as a "bunker buster" or light AFV killer.
That's why the 66mm LAW made a return to the battlefield in Afghanistan. It was a COMPACT (fits across a soldier's shoulders on top of a patrol or assault pack), LIGHTWEIGHT, and effective bunker buster.

[swaghauler]

Cappy at Task & Purpose tries to get a look at the Russian perspective.

https://youtu.be/Igq2fqa7RY4

Swag

[Bestbrian]

It's not going to be do much of anything against a tank unless it gets really lucky and hits a vision block or something, but for APCs and minimally armored or unarmored vehicles (like all those logistics convoys), a light disposable single-shot rocket launcher that can be fired from enclosed areas isn't the worst thing to have.

Looks like the Ukrainians are going after the Russian where they're weakest: soft-skinned vehicles (they never did have enough jeeps/trucks/tankers). Theses would be perfect against those targets.

[swaghauler]

The US-made "loitering munition" known as the switchblade, which was introduced to much controversy during the Arab Spring era is going to be headed to Ukraine. America's "slaughterbots" are autonomous and can be programmed with a type of facial recognition software that allows them to discriminate friendly vehicles from the enemy by flags, markings, and camo. They can also be manually flown to a target. These are designed as a "swarming munition."

https://youtu.be/h5TTaNpQuWI


Swag

[Vespers War]

Regarding the Switchblade, I saw 100 were included in the most recent assistance package, but I haven't seen whether they're the 300 or 600 (the latter is quite a bit larger). Other items include 8,000 Stingers; 6,000 AT-4; 2,000 Javelin; 1,000 LAW; 25,000 each of body armor and helmets; and miscellaneous small arms plus more than 20 million rounds of ammunition.

[Tegyrius]

I don't know how many Javelins are in current NATO inventory, but when I see thousands being shipped out, that feels not-insignificant. Has anyone seen any info on Raytheon (or other defense manufacturers) scoring any contracts to replenish depleted stocks?

- C.

[Jason]

I don't know how many Javelins are in current NATO inventory, but when I see thousands being shipped out, that feels not-insignificant. Has anyone seen any info on Raytheon (or other defense manufacturers) scoring any contracts to replenish depleted stocks?

- C.

IDK NATO inventory levels, but about 45,000 Javelin missles (of all types) have been produced.

Javelin missle use by Ukraine is outstripping production, but that is not a huge suprise as it looks like Ukrainian soldiers are scoring kills on MBT's.

I don't think we will see any immediate need to ramp up Javelin production, unless the war expands.

[bash]

Something I've been surprised about is it doesn't look like Russia has much in the way of MALE UCAVs. They've got recon UAVs but all the information on Russian UCAVs I can find is is they're in prototype or testing phases with nothing really deployed. I may have missed something, I'd never looked into their UCAVs before so I may have definitely missed something.

Ukraine seems to have been making great use of the Turkish TB2 even in an environment without air superiority.

[bash]

Regarding the Switchblade, I saw 100 were included in the most recent assistance package, but I haven't seen whether they're the 300 or 600 (the latter is quite a bit larger). Other items include 8,000 Stingers; 6,000 AT-4; 2,000 Javelin; 1,000 LAW; 25,000 each of body armor and helmets; and miscellaneous small arms plus more than 20 million rounds of ammunition.

I thought I had seen a thing claiming the Switchblades were 300 models but I can't find where I read it. If I understand right the 300 is about equivalent to a 40mm grenade while the 600 is closer to a Javelin in damage output.

[Raellus]

Ukraine seems to have been making great use of the Turkish TB2 even in an environment without air superiority.

This article from yesterday sheds light on the surprising success of the the TB2 and how tactics for its use have evolved since the early days of the invasion.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-middle-east-africa-libya-europe-ecb9e820ea4bddb4464d7e8cb40e82fc

-

[Vespers War]

I don't know how many Javelins are in current NATO inventory, but when I see thousands being shipped out, that feels not-insignificant. Has anyone seen any info on Raytheon (or other defense manufacturers) scoring any contracts to replenish depleted stocks?

- C.

The last domestic production contract I'm aware of was issued in 2019 for 2,100 Javelin-F to be produced over 4 years. There have been a handful of international orders as well. The last capacity estimate I saw from the Army was that with current tooling and an increase in staffing, up to 6500 missiles could be produced in a year. As mentioned, tens of thousands of Javelins have been produced, and I'd expect to see more contracts to upgrade older missiles to the newer standards first, over increased production of entirely new missiles.

[Vespers War]

I thought I had seen a thing claiming the Switchblades were 300 models but I can't find where I read it. If I understand right the 300 is about equivalent to a 40mm grenade while the 600 is closer to a Javelin in damage output.

Yeah, Switchblade 300 is a 6 pound drone with 10 minutes of endurance and a 10 kilometer control range, with a blast roughly equal to a 40mm grenade. Switchblade 600 is 50 pounds with up to 80 kilometer range (if all its loiter time is used on linear flight), and the warhead might actually be from a Javelin missile based on one of AeroVironment's PR bits.

[kato13]

AeroVironment_Switchblade

Figured I would save a few google searches.

[Raellus]

Ukrainian women are badass.

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/19/1087712539/ukrainian-women-are-volunteering-to-fight-and-history-shows-they-always-have?utm_campaign=npr&utm_medium=social&utm_term=nprnews&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR12yM3bS2kCAIJ_SQeILp_kRLenFo6wUm67ghIEx itZLUuC7urBdc63qG4

And I'm not sure how much 9mm semi-automatic "folding carbines" are going to help the Ukrainians, but I suppose every little bit counts.

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/2022-03-18/american-gunmakers-help-ukrainians-fight-back-against-putin-5392390.html

-

[bash]

Ukrainian women are badass.

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/19/1087712539/ukrainian-women-are-volunteering-to-fight-and-history-shows-they-always-have?utm_campaign=npr&utm_medium=social&utm_term=nprnews&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR12yM3bS2kCAIJ_SQeILp_kRLenFo6wUm67ghIEx itZLUuC7urBdc63qG4

And I'm not sure how much 9mm semi-automatic "folding carbines" are going to help the Ukrainians, but I suppose every little bit counts.

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/2022-03-18/american-gunmakers-help-ukrainians-fight-back-against-putin-5392390.html

-

With the longer barrel on those carbines the effective range likely approaches a hundred yards. Not the worst for insurgent attacks on rear forces. Being foldable they can be hidden more easily in closets and attics than an AK pattern rifle. Definitely a "every little bit helps" weapon rather than something you're going to arm front line or even militia forces with.

[Bestbrian]

Lt. Chornoval is badass. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/19/world/europe/kyiv-ukraine-russia-war.html

[Raellus]

I think a couple of the points made in this article might have been overstated*, but, overall, I agree with the author's assessment.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44592/russia-has-already-lost

I'm interested in your thoughts.

*For example, I still think that Putin could stop the offensive now, negotiate to keep a few key territorial gains (Donbass and a land corridor to Crimea), and then convincingly make the argument to the Russian people that the war was a success (controlling the media will help with that).

-

[Vespers War]

Not thoughts about the linked article, but one thing that's come up in discussions I've been having elsewhere is that Russia's active protection systems are turning out to be largely ineffective against modern anti-tank missiles because their maximum elevation means they can't engage a pop-up top-attack missile like Javelin or Spike. None of them - not Drozd, Drozd-2, Arena, Arena-M, or Afghanit - can elevate much beyond 20 degrees. Afghanit can only engage with smoke dischargers, and none of the others can do anything. This is where Trophy ends up having an advantage because it can elevate almost to vertical.

The Russian APS systems would still be useful against the older systems being sent like LAW or AT-4, but their ERA packages can also defeat those lighter warheads, even one as light as Kontakt-1. Since Russian defensive systems generally don't work well together (I think Afghanit/Malachit are the only APS and ERA that can be on the same vehicle at the same time), the older APS may be virtually worthless on heavy armored vehicles (e.g. tanks) these days. Anything they can protect against, ERA can also protect against for similar weight, less power draw, and generally better odds against the first strike (possibly worse against follow-up attacks depending on the attacker's accuracy).

IFVs with APS systems would be useful because IFV-mounted ERA tends to be very unfriendly to dismounted troops, and soldiers are trying to use the lighter rockets against them when possible, but other than the BMP-3M and Kurganets (neither of which are in serial production AFAIK), I don't think Russia has IFVs with APS.

[swaghauler]

They just did an interview with the Canadian Sniper whom the Russians claimed to have killed in Kyiv.

[swaghauler]

Not thoughts about the linked article, but one thing that's come up in discussions I've been having elsewhere is that Russia's active protection systems are turning out to be largely ineffective against modern anti-tank missiles because their maximum elevation means they can't engage a pop-up top-attack missile like Javelin or Spike. None of them - not Drozd, Drozd-2, Arena, Arena-M, or Afghanit - can elevate much beyond 20 degrees. Afghanit can only engage with smoke dischargers, and none of the others can do anything. This is where Trophy ends up having an advantage because it can elevate almost to vertical.

The Russian APS systems would still be useful against the older systems being sent like LAW or AT-4, but their ERA packages can also defeat those lighter warheads, even one as light as Kontakt-1. Since Russian defensive systems generally don't work well together (I think Afghanit/Malachit are the only APS and ERA that can be on the same vehicle at the same time), the older APS may be virtually worthless on heavy armored vehicles (e.g. tanks) these days. Anything they can protect against, ERA can also protect against for similar weight, less power draw, and generally better odds against the first strike (possibly worse against follow-up attacks depending on the attacker's accuracy).

IFVs with APS systems would be useful because IFV-mounted ERA tends to be very unfriendly to dismounted troops, and soldiers are trying to use the lighter rockets against them when possible, but other than the BMP-3M and Kurganets (neither of which are in serial production AFAIK), I don't think Russia has IFVs with APS.

Time to go back to the old tried and true method of hanging short lengths of track links and spare road wheels off of the hull. Uparmored and suspension spares all rolled into one!:D

[kato13]

Related to what Rae said, I don't think Ukraine or the West is going to accept territorial loss.

I am thinking this is going to move into a new phase where Ukraine is going to need to dislodge entrenched Russian (I almost typed Soviet lol) troops whom have their backs against their own border.

I can't really see how the West can give Ukraine an advantage tech wise. They will need Artillery and Airstrikes to dislodge them. Our current assistance IMO mostly helps on easy strikes against moving targets and logistical elements out alone.

What are we looking at? Guided shells? Counter battery radars? Anything like the Dome system would be vulnerable to HARM type weapons correct? Drones would be useful, but will have serious attrition rates and would probably be vulnerable to jamming (we wont share our most jam resistant ones).

What would you give the Ukrainian in this new phase?

[Vespers War]

Jokingly, I'd give them Trophy now that their tank corps has grown over the course of the war by virtue of capturing more tanks than they lost.

More seriously, I believe I read somewhere that Israel nixed transferring Iron Dome technology to Ukraine, and I presume they'd do the same with Trophy.

Some things I'd provide:
shore-based anti-ship missile batteries*
more drones**
as many LAW and AT-4 as they want***
technical and planning assistance blowing up rail lines connecting Russia to Ukraine****

*Denying Russia free transit of waters they view as theirs will both infuriate them and greatly reduce the value they get from having annexed Crimea. The Ukrainian Navy cannot stand up to the Russian Navy in a fight, but denying Russia large areas of the Black Sea will be useful.

**Even if they're not the most current models, existing recon drones and loitering munitions give Ukraine better tactical awareness and the ability to deny easy movement by Russian forces.

***These systems are no longer effective against tanks, but against anything lighter, or against bunkers or soldiers in regular buildings, they are still effective. Blowing up logistics convoys will still be a good way to weaken Russian forces.

****Russia is still heavily rail-dependent for logistics. They ship things to forward depots by rail and generally only use road transport for the military equivalent of "last mile" delivery. No trains, no supplies.

Dislodging Russian forces won't be pretty. If they have to be evicted by force, it's going to probably involve street-to-street clearing operations in the urban areas. Tactically, stuff that an individual soldier can hump is going to be critical. Strategically, denying logistical capabilities by rail or sea are the main areas where I'd go for supplying them with non-man-portable systems.

[Tegyrius]

What would you give the Ukrainian in this new phase?

Assistance for managing their displaced population in the western half of the country. Everyone's gonna want to go home, but "home" isn't there any more for a lot of them, and it'll be a matter of years before reconstruction really is a thing. The sooner everyone who's displaced can be resettled, find permanent housing, start contributing to the economy again, get their kids back into school, and re-establish themselves with social/tribal connections to new communities, the sooner Ukraine's long-term economic and political prospects improve.

- C.

[Raellus]

What would you give the Ukrainian in this new phase?

NODs. Ukraine doesn't have many. They've been using the CLU units from Javelin systems for night vision, to good effect. Luckily, Russian troops aren't very well-equipped with NODs either.

Some sort of western MLRS system. Something that can shoot-and-scoot, and fire a number of different rocket payloads. Imagine what a barrage of rockets dropping anti-armor submunitions on that miles-long Russian convoy outside of Kiev would do.

If Ukraine is ever going to take back territory currently held by Russian and/or Russian-backed forces, its going to need more artillery, more tactical airpower, and more AFVs. Despite the widespread reports of the demise of the MBT, troops are going to find it hard to make gains on the ground without supporting armor.

-

[kato13]

Zelenskyy says there will be no retaking of Crimea by force. Ukrainians are sick of war and destruction. This isn’t a hoorah war; it’s a national tragedy.

I expected this but not before negations started. Crimea was Russian until 1954 when clerically it made sense to move it to the Ukrainian Socialist Republic, so insurgency would be a nightmare. Donbass is going to be the final sticky wicket. Maybe some movement on borders or some land for cash (if Russia pays damages, which I expect would only be if Putin was gone and they want sanctions lifted.)

[Spartan-117]

What would you give the Ukrainian in this new phase?

I'd give them:

120mm mortars - Easier to manage logistics for than a howitzer battery. Pound those dug in Russian troops!

MOAR Drones - They are already using them to good effect. Again, jet aircraft need a shitload of logistics and when they go down, they take the pilot with them, unless recovered successfully. 1-2 million for a Bayraktar beats 24.8 million for a Mig-29.

MOAR things that need the /Guided qualification - Javelin, NLAW,
Stingers, etc. I'd like to see some cheap, medium ranged SAMs for them. Buying older Soviet systems like the SA-6 and such would be a good option. Shore based ASMs would be useful here. I think some of the nordic countries have relatively portable coastal defense Hellfire systems that would be very useful.

If this all seems like war on the cheap - it is. As Teg pointed out, Ukraine needs to be purposeful about reconstruction and preserving funds for that should be a priority.

Also - 2-6 training camps either in or outside of Ukraine. Have the Ukranian's rotate out company/battalion level units for training when/where possible. My understanding is that manpower isn't an issue - they are engaged in a national level mobilization of every military aged male. Training should be a priority - their performance to date shows impact of Operation ORBITAL and the like.

[Vespers War]

I'd give them:

120mm mortars - Easier to manage logistics for than a howitzer battery. Pound those dug in Russian troops!

MOAR Drones - They are already using them to good effect. Again, jet aircraft need a shitload of logistics and when they go down, they take the pilot with them, unless recovered successfully. 1-2 million for a Bayraktar beats 24.8 million for a Mig-29.

MOAR things that need the /Guided qualification - Javelin, NLAW,
Stingers, etc. I'd like to see some cheap, medium ranged SAMs for them. Buying older Soviet systems like the SA-6 and such would be a good option. Shore based ASMs would be useful here. I think some of the nordic countries have relatively portable coastal defense Hellfire systems that would be very useful.

If this all seems like war on the cheap - it is. As Teg pointed out, Ukraine needs to be purposeful about reconstruction and preserving funds for that should be a priority.

Also - 2-6 training camps either in or outside of Ukraine. Have the Ukranian's rotate out company/battalion level units for training when/where possible. My understanding is that manpower isn't an issue - they are engaged in a national level mobilization of every military aged male. Training should be a priority - their performance to date shows impact of Operation ORBITAL and the like.

Naval Hellfire is relatively short-ranged (~10 kilometers). Sisu, Scania, and Tatra have all made truck-based launchers for the RBS 15 missile (300+ kilometers depending on variant). "Both" might be acceptable here, since it layers defenses with different ranges for different purposes, although I believe Naval Hellfire is adapted from Longbow Hellfire, the newest examples of which date to 2005 and are going to age out of their certified lifespan soon.

[Targan]

What would you give the Ukrainian in this new phase?

How about what they gave up in return for the Budapest Memorandum, which Putin has gleefully wiped his arse with?

I kid of course, but that whole turn of events means that no nuke-possessing nation will willingly give up its nukes voluntarily EVER again. The lesson is clear - hold onto your nukes, and you won't get invaded. And I say that as someone who really doesn't like nukes.

[swaghauler]

Naval Hellfire is relatively short-ranged (~10 kilometers). Sisu, Scania, and Tatra have all made truck-based launchers for the RBS 15 missile (300+ kilometers depending on variant). "Both" might be acceptable here, since it layers defenses with different ranges for different purposes, although I believe Naval Hellfire is adapted from Longbow Hellfire, the newest examples of which date to 2005 and are going to age out of their certified lifespan soon.

The US Navy has more than a few Penguin Missiles. Give those to the Ukrainians.

What NATO should be doing is gathering up all of their older PACT equipment and giving it to both Ukraine AND Moldova. The US, Germany, and the UK could then transfer older equipment to the NATO allies who transferred equipment to "toughen up" their defensive posture. For instance, give Poland 250 M1 Abrams for her T72s and upgraded Twardy MBTs and have her transfer those PACT tanks to Russia (so they can abandon them in Ukraine?) & Moldova. Have her transfer her nearly 200 Leopard 2A4s to Slovakia, the Czechs, and Slovenia along with Canada's leopards and surplus from Germany's mothballed tanks so each one of those countries can have a mechanized division or two with COMMON EQUIPMENT. Give Poland an additional 200 M1s for those Leopards. This would bring Poland up to 450 M1s immediately with the 250 M1a3 SLEPS she already bought coming in as soon as they were ready. That would give Poland a STRONG Mechanized presence along the border. Having all those countries mentioned above transfer their T72s to Ukraine and Moldova would give them around 500 T72s and 130 upgraded Polish Twardy Tanks.

The US should give the Baltic States her old M60A3s in mothballs as well as M114 [155mm] Towed Howitzers and M102 [105mm] Towed Howitzers. Give them M113s as well. We will not deploy the M60s again and they are at least a match for a T72. We should have enough running surplus left to give the Baltic States each THREE Mechanized Brigades plus spares and training tanks. These NATO members currently have ZERO armor.

I'd give Romania the remaining M48A3s from the Marines as other NATO countries in the Balkans also operate that tank and resupply could then be regionalized in the event of a conflict. The Marine M48A3s also have wider tracks (for sand) and would be a better "fit" for Romania's mountainous terrain. Romania could then give her T55s to the African Union (the largest user of T55s) in exchange for BM-21 Rocket Launchers, which Ukraine could use more of. We can then give Romania M109s to bring her artillery power up.

For aircraft, give Poland's Migs to Ukraine NOW, and give her F16s in exchange. Joe has this wrong, the US has more than 800 F16s. Let's get Poland "upgraded" NOW, using this event to get everyone flying similar equipment. She can even give her Helos to Ukraine and we will replace them with Blackhawks, Chinooks, and Apaches since the US is planning to upgrade those forces anyway.
In fact, we should go father...

We have roughly 120 flight-worthy F4s that we convert to drones and Germany and England have almost the same number of Tornadoes between them. Let's get these out to the Baltic States (which have no functional air forces). Forty F4s and Forty Tornadoes aren't that impressive a force, but they are SOMETHING. Alternately, we could sell those aircraft to Africa or Asia and put F16s into the Baltic States' hands. We should buff up the Baltic States so they can at least make the Russians pay for any ground taken.

Let's upgrade our NATO members to send a message to Russia that the US is willing to go all-in on supporting ANY NATO member who is threatened.

[kato13]

As we all love maps.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPELjq1X0AUqnwZ?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

(too large to embed)

[Raellus]

The US Navy has more than a few Penguin Missiles. Give those to the Ukrainians.

Are they shore-launched versions? AFAIK, if Ukraine has any navy at all left, it would take some doing to mount Penguins on essentially Warsaw Pact vessels. I imagine it would also be very tricky to rig UAF planes to launch Penguin (on the avionics-weapon targeting links side of things). The simplest, most practical platform ATM would, I imagine, be a land-based mobile launch system.

It makes a lot of sense to offload former Pact members' Pact-based heavy weaponry and aircraft and replace it with western stuff. A sticking point may be who foots the bill for it all. Western stuff is more expensive to purchase and maintain. What needs to happen (and we're starting to see a bit of it already) is that all NATO member nations' defense spending needs to pick up.

Re equipping the Baltic States' air forces with F-4s and other older models, it'll still take a couple of years to train up pilots and, by the time they're ready, those aircraft will be even further out of date. I'd love to see a deal between the Baltics and Sweden for Grippens. Not only is it a newer, arguably more capable (and probably cheaper) alternative, it would bind Sweden closer to NATO.

-

[chico20854]

I'd love to see a deal between the Baltics and Sweden for Grippens. Not only is it a newer, arguably more capable (and probably cheaper) alternative, it would bind Sweden closer to NATO.
-

Two thoughts on the Swede's current level of involvement!

1) Poland and Sweden seem to have reached some level of agreement regarding ELINT coverage of the war. Over the past several weeks the Swedish Air Force has, according to flight tracking websites, been flying ELINT missions over the Baltic west of the Baltic states. In the last week or so those flights have shifted to over eastern Poland, where they are flying alongside American and British RC-135s, NATO E-3s and Italian ELINT aircraft. I haven't done any reading as to if anything has been announced, but since they have their transponders on obviously they don't object to the whole world knowing. (The tactical aircraft, on the other hand, do not have theirs on... usually).

2) During the Cold War Sweden maintained stocks of Viggen fighter-bombers at northeastern Swedish airfields in a pretty much ready to fly condition. These aircraft were earmarked for the Finnish Air Force, which the Russians limited the number (and quality) of airframes they could possess.

I would not be surprised if Sweden and Finland, one or both, are NATO members in 18 months. The timing seems tricky to me... on the one hand, no better time than the present when public opinion is very pro-NATO and the Russian military is so tied down in Ukraine that there are likely to be few serious repurcussions from Putin. On the other hand, things are not going well for Putin and I fear the escalation he may resort to if he feels even more backed into a corner.

Just my amateur rambling thoughts...

[Vespers War]

Are they shore-launched versions? AFAIK, if Ukraine has any navy at all left, it would take some doing to mount Penguins on essentially Warsaw Pact vessels. I imagine it would also be very tricky to rig UAF planes to launch Penguin (on the avionics-weapon targeting links side of things). The simplest, most practical platform ATM would, I imagine, be a land-based mobile launch system.

It makes a lot of sense to offload former Pact members' Pact-based heavy weaponry and aircraft and replace it with western stuff. A sticking point may be who foots the bill for it all. Western stuff is more expensive to purchase and maintain. What needs to happen (and we're starting to see a bit of it already) is that all NATO member nations' defense spending needs to pick up.

Re equipping the Baltic States' air forces with F-4s and other older models, it'll still take a couple of years to train up pilots and, by the time they're ready, those aircraft will be even further out of date. I'd love to see a deal between the Baltics and Sweden for Grippens. Not only is it a newer, arguably more capable (and probably cheaper) alternative, it would bind Sweden closer to NATO.

-

Ukraine had virtually no navy to begin with - their largest combat vessel was a single 257 ton Matka-class missile boat (captured by Russia).

Re: Gripens, they're actually fairly expensive. Back in December as part of a pitch to India, Saab revealed that the bid price to Finland for 64 Gripen E was 125 million Euros each with a weapons package, or 101.6 million Euros for just the airplanes (the pitch was to show that Gripen was half the price India was paying for Rafale). Maybe some of the older C and D models could be leased from Sweden as they get more E, like what the Czechs and Hungarians have done, but if they're going for a complete switch from WP to Western aircraft, the F-16 is far more likely to have surplus aircraft become available, given that more than 4,600 of the Falcon have been manufactured to less than 300 of the Gripen.

[Raellus]

@Vespers: I misspoke (or mis-typed, rather). I meant to write that the Gripen would probably be cheaper to maintain and fly (than older US models like the F-4 Phantom). That was just an educated guess, though, and I very well could be wrong. Do you know off hand if a newer build F-16 is cheaper, off-the-shelf, and to fly and maintain, than a current model Gripen? I guess I fell for the Saab marketing that the Gripen is a low-cost alternative to NATO's Gen 4 offerings. :o

Another thing the Gripen has going for it is it's ability to operate dispersed from conventional airbases and take off from and land on roads. It's also designed to be serviced by conscripts. Add all of that to a closer working relationship with Sweden, and I think it might be worth it to the Baltics to pay a little more (and NATO to subsidize the whole deal).

@Chico: I agree. Sweden and Finland have been toying with the idea of NATO membership for close to a decade now (IIRC, Russia's takeover of the Crimea in 2014 and cyber attacks on the Baltic States shortly thereafter were catalysts). If they don't join NATO now, when, if ever, will they? Actually, it makes sense to wait a bit until things cool off a bit, at this point. If Putin thinks the west is piling on, it may push him to take more drastic action.

-

[swaghauler]

Cappy has just posted an update on Ukraine.

https://youtu.be/REBRCVqnbiA

Swag

[swaghauler]

@Vespers: I misspoke (or mis-typed, rather). I meant to write that the Gripen would probably be cheaper to maintain and fly (than older US models like the F-4 Phantom). That was just an educated guess, though, and I very well could be wrong. Do you know off hand if a newer build F-16 is cheaper, off-the-shelf, and to fly and maintain, than a current model Gripen? I guess I fell for the Saab marketing that the Gripen is a low-cost alternative to NATO's Gen 4 offerings. :o

Another thing the Gripen has going for it is it's ability to operate dispersed from conventional airbases and take off from and land on roads. It's also designed to be serviced by conscripts. Add all of that to a closer working relationship with Sweden, and I think it might be worth it to the Baltics to pay a little more (and NATO to subsidize the whole deal).

-

No, it's not cheaper. The reason is an odd one though. The F16 is cheaper to maintain and fly (in dollars per flight hour) for the exact same reason the Cessna 182 is the most economical general aviation plane to own. There have been SO MANY F16s produced (over 1,000) for such a long period of time that maintenance costs have been pared down to the bone, even on newly manufactured parts. The Gripen and Viggen were made in MUCH SMALLER NUMBERS and do not have the ubiquitous support that the F16 has. Thus, their cost per flight hour is higher. In addition, the Grippen has VERY "short" legs... even shorter than the F16 (which is no champ in this area either). To some countries (like Canada), that IS an issue which must be considered. For example, the Canadians DON'T want to build airfields in the Arctic to support short-ranged fighters. That's why the F18 beat out the F16 for Canadian service.

[swaghauler]

Here's a video on the Bayractar Drone System.

https://youtu.be/Wn_wuD6bf5o


Swag

[swaghauler]

Are they shore-launched versions? AFAIK, if Ukraine has any navy at all left, it would take some doing to mount Penguins on essentially Warsaw Pact vessels. I imagine it would also be very tricky to rig UAF planes to launch Penguin (on the avionics-weapon targeting links side of things). The simplest, most practical platform ATM would, I imagine, be a land-based mobile launch system.

It makes a lot of sense to offload former Pact members' Pact-based heavy weaponry and aircraft and replace it with western stuff. A sticking point may be who foots the bill for it all. Western stuff is more expensive to purchase and maintain. What needs to happen (and we're starting to see a bit of it already) is that all NATO member nations' defense spending needs to pick up.

Re equipping the Baltic States' air forces with F-4s and other older models, it'll still take a couple of years to train up pilots and, by the time they're ready, those aircraft will be even further out of date. I'd love to see a deal between the Baltics and Sweden for Grippens. Not only is it a newer, arguably more capable (and probably cheaper) alternative, it would bind Sweden closer to NATO.

-

The Penguin comes with an "off the self" launcher CLU (command launch unit) and the whole thing CAN be mounted on a 5-Ton truck. NATO can already do this. Send in the nearly expired older Penguins and buy newer more capable ones. The 24km range when ground launched makes for a good "intermediate range" weapon that's deployable from small boats.

[chico20854]

The Penguin comes with an "off the self" launcher CLU (command launch unit) and the whole thing CAN be mounted on a 5-Ton truck. NATO can already do this. Send in the nearly expired older Penguins and buy newer more capable ones. The 24km range when ground launched makes for a good "intermediate range" weapon that's deployable from small boats.

There are also the truck-mounted Harpoon ASMs that the Danish Navy operated from the mid-80s until 2004 or so. I wonder what happened to those! The Taiwanese requested a couple batteries of them last year, which the US deferred.

[Vespers War]

There are also the truck-mounted Harpoon ASMs that the Danish Navy operated from the mid-80s until 2004 or so. I wonder what happened to those! The Taiwanese requested a couple batteries of them last year, which the US deferred.

"A couple batteries" for Taiwan being 100 trucks carrying 400 missiles (plus another 25 radar trucks). The deferment was postponing delivery from 2024 to 2025.

[Raellus]

This article includes a very T2k photo of a BMP-1 painted in the colors of the Unified German military.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45027/ukraine-situation-report-czech-republic-to-transfer-56-upgraded-bmp-1-armored-vehicles-to-ukraine

Interestingly,

"The German government's approval of the transfer of the 56 Pbv-501s to Ukraine reportedly came after an earlier request from Czech authorities was denied. The need for authorities in Germany to authorize the deal at all is a product of the original sale of these Soviet-era vehicles, which it had inherited from the defunct East German military, to Sweden. The Swedish government had then sold them to the Czech Republic."

-

[pmulcahy11b]

This article includes a very T2k photo of a BMP-1 painted in the colors of the Unified German military.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45027/ukraine-situation-report-czech-republic-to-transfer-56-upgraded-bmp-1-armored-vehicles-to-ukraine

Interestingly,

"The German government's approval of the transfer of the 56 Pbv-501s to Ukraine reportedly came after an earlier request from Czech authorities was denied. The need for authorities in Germany to authorize the deal at all is a product of the original sale of these Soviet-era vehicles, which it had inherited from the defunct East German military, to Sweden. The Swedish government had then sold them to the Czech Republic."

-

For some reason, what shocked me the most in this article is that they had to do asbestos remediation on those BMPs! How many East German vets are wondering why they can hardly breathe anymore?

[Ramjam]

Just read a interesting post on the BBC News website about the Russian 331st Guards Parachute Regt and the amount of losses they have taken.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60946340

The interesting bit is right at the end where they list the names and ranks.
That is a lot of officers killed and also a lot of senior NCOs.
Out of those listed I would say its around 50%.
Now is that a example of leading from the front or are the Ukrainians targeting unit leadership to make the Privates run?

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Not sure how to embed it but I just caught a short video of Russian troops being abandoned; drone footage shows a bunch of guys running after the last truck seen leaving wherever they were holed up.

"Удачи, вы сами по себе."

https://nz.news.yahoo.com/russian-army-abandoning-soldiers-ukraine-drone-footage-072747190.html

[chico20854]

Ok, here's my amateur interpretation of where things currently stand:

The Russian Army is in some state of partial collapse, having abandoned the attack of Kiev and failing to make substantive advances ont he ground in weeks. Stockpiles of precision guided munitions have been largely depleted, the Ural tank plant has stopped production and the 135,000 conscripts called up last week will take months to be trained and formed into effective combat units. Nontraditional sources of reinforcements (Wagner group mercs, 16,000 Syrian veterans and various Chechen private armies) are unlikely to arrive in sufficient mass and be able to integrate effectively into the Russian armed forces to effect the outcome. Byelorussian units are unlikely to intervene on Russia's behalf. The Russian military itself is scraping the bottom to the barrel for combat troops, having denuded the Pacific Fleet of Marines, for example.

The Ukrainians are likely to follow/drive the Russians back to the Byelorussian border in the north. Mariupol is probably lost, the Russians control about 85% of it. The Russian units retreating from the Kiev front are likely to be re-commited in the Donbas region, or at least allow a shuffle of uncommited units (if any exist) to the Donbas. The Russian hope is that the influx of troops there will shore up the front line enough to resist the coming Ukrainian counterattack. To limit the scope of the counterattack the Russians are trying to tie down as many Ukrainian troops as they can in other areas, launching diversionary attacks in Odessa and Kharkov to prevent the Ukrainian command from stripping those areas of troops to reinforce the counterattack.

Russian control of occupied areas is tenuous, with repeated anti-occupation protests in the only city they have occupied, Kherson. The Russians lack sufficient troops to secure these areas, and attempts to recruit local sympathizers to assume administrative duties has failed as heavy-handed kidnappings of local government officials feeds civilian resistance. Russian attacks on semi-beseiged cities and civilian facilities (shelters, schools, hospitals, apartment buildings) is intended to terrorize the Ukrainain population and destroy civilian morale, creating pressure on the Ukrainian government to sue for peace.

The Ukrainian military is still smaller and limited in its abilities, although with very high morale. Allied aid has allowed them to prevail in the defensive battles and the government has a deep potential manpower pool. (They are currently only calling up veterans with combat experience since 2014, although accepting volunteers with less experience). The amount of training required for the Ukrainians to be outfitted with advanced non-Soviet equipment will be prohibitive - Stinger missiles can be used effectively with a few days of instruction, Patriots will require months of training, and NATO has largely retired the masses of equipment required for Ukraine to hastily form combined arms mechanized units.

Going forward, on the battlefield my personal estimation is that the Russians will struggle to make any further territorial gains. The level of additional troops and their effectiveness that can be thrown in Donbas will effect how successful the Ukrainians are in recapturing that territory, although the Ukrainian drive will be largely of a light infantry/partisan nature, infiltrating behind Russian combat units and cutting them and their supporting logistic coumns to pieces in small packets. The Russians will continue to use whatever long-range munitions they have left to attack targets throughout the depth of Ukraine, but those attacks will continue to have little strategic effect other than unifying Ukrainians in the will to fight and keeping Western publics pressuring their governments to continue supporting Ukraine (hence Zelensky's address to parlianments around the world and Grammy awards message).

Which brings us to where the war goes strategically going forward. I'm confident that the only meeting Putin will accept with Zelensky is to accept Zelensky's surrender. Not going to happen. The Russian propaganda machine has already recast the war goals from demilitarization and denazifaction of Ukraine - regime change - down to expansion of the separatist puppet states. The possibility of continued failue by the Russian military on the ground puts even this objective in doubt. The Ukrainians soon will be able go to the peace talks offering recognition of Russian control of Crimea and Donbas and a pledge to memorialize NATO non-membership and probably get Russian acceptance. (By the way, regime change in Moscow in the short term is probably not going to happen... the oligarchs are able to hide their money from Western sanctions, the urban middle class is fleeing and too small to effect a change and the 50% of the population in the regions and rural areas are too willing consumers of state propaganda to rise up against Putin. Now, in a year or two when the defeated Army is back home, please see 1905 and 1917!) Zelensky has to choose how to move forward in war termination... 1) seek a more or less immediate ceasefire, accepting the loss of territory in Crimea and Donbas, ending the bloodshed and leaving open a "frozen conflict" like the ones in South Osetia, Transdnistr and Nagorno-Karabakh, or 2) take the risk that the Russian miltiary collapse will continue and his forces will be able retake not only the territory they lost in the last 2 months but also the Donbas separatist regions without provoking a Russian escalation.

Fairly high-level and simplified, but that's where I think things stand now! I'm happy to hear your thoughts!

[Raellus]

Astute analysis, Chico- spot on, IMHO.

I don't think that Ukraine is going to be able to retake the Donbass (militarily, at least). The Ukrainian armed forces have excelled in defensive ops, but offense requires a lot more training, C2, and heavy weapons. The tables will turn if/when Ukraine attempts a strategic counteroffensive. Russian troops have failed pretty spectacularly in offensive ops, but again, defense is simpler, and their backs will be up against home soil (increasing motivation and easing logistics issues). The Russians also have solid local support in the de-facto separatist-controlled regions.

It's hard to see Zelensky accepting permanent loss of regions of eastern Ukraine, especially in light of recent evidence of large-scale Russian war crimes, but there's probably not much he can do to stop it. He might be willing to cede Crimea at the negotiating table, but that's a fait accompli, but that's not likely to restore the status quo ante bellum. I don't see Putin as willing to give up anyterritory firmly under Russian control, so yeah, a frozen conflict seems the most likely outcome at this point.

The fates of Donbass and Mariupol might depend on which leader, Putin or Zelensky lasts longer. In that contest, the ruthless autocrat has the advantage.

-

[kato13]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPi7zvlXIAMf3dj?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Again too big to embed

[Raellus]

Cool find, Kato. Just wish the city names were easier to read.

Re the article linked below, it must be frustrating for Russian soldiers to be facing off against fresh waves of Russian-made (or designed, at least) AFVs. If Moscow only knew then (back in the 1970s & '80s) what it knows now...

:D

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45078/ukraine-situation-report-donated-czech-t-72-tanks-bmp-1-armored-vehicles-headed-to-ukraine

I hope this deal doesn't get blocked like the 3rd party MiG-29 transfer.

-

[Vespers War]

Cool find, Kato. Just wish the city names were easier to read.

Re the article linked below, it must be frustrating for Russian soldiers to be facing off against fresh waves of Russian-made (or designed, at least) AFVs. If Moscow only knew then (back in the 1970s & '80s) what it knows now...

:D

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45078/ukraine-situation-report-donated-czech-t-72-tanks-bmp-1-armored-vehicles-headed-to-ukraine

I hope this deal doesn't get blocked like the 3rd party MiG-29 transfer.

-

The way some of the Czech articles were phrased, it sounded like the vehicles have already been moved. The tanks, unfortunately, are "monkey model" T-72M1, the export version of the T-72A, which is hideously outdated. It's understandable that the Czechs wouldn't transfer any of their 30 T-72M4CZ that have been modernized (they have ~80-90 T-72M1 that weren't modernized), but the T-72M1 is basically a deathtrap on the modern battlefield. They're best used as either training vehicles or parts donors for Ukraine's modernized T-72 tanks. The BMP-1 will probably enter service as quickly as Ukraine can check them and replace any Czech language markers with Ukrainian ones, because Ukraine uses literally hundreds of BMP-1 in their military.

[kato13]

Cool find, Kato. Just wish the city names were easier to read.
-
The creator also has the Kharkiv-Donbas Strategic Front where the names are clearer.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPou3yHXEAECCXz?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Here is the latest largest picture
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPouUCxWUAAKiZ9?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Source
https://twitter.com/JominiW/
Not normally a twitter fan but information is information.

[pmulcahy11b]

When this is over, Ukraine is going to need something like the Marshall Plan after World War 2. I heard a report on NewsNation that it will take more than $1 trillion to rebuild Ukraine.

[kato13]

Regarding the Switchblade, I saw 100 were included in the most recent assistance package, but I haven't seen whether they're the 300 or 600 (the latter is quite a bit larger).

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-04/u-s-switchblade-drones-for-ukraine-will-include-tank-killers

Switchblade 600s have entered the fray.

[Raellus]

It'll be interesting to see what effect Switchblade- especially the anti-armor version- has on the conflict. I hope it's not too little, too late.

One way that T2k discussion on this forum has proved particularly prescient is evidenced by the improvised "special armor" increasingly seen fitted to Russian soft-skinned vehicles on the Ukraine battlefield.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45108/russias-increasingly-bizarre-artisanal-armor-looks-more-mad-max-than-major-power

I thought the MTLB engine hood mounted to the truck was particularly interesting. In my PotV PbP campaign, the crew used a similar trick to give the Wisla Krolowa river tug's bridge some protection against small arms fire.

-

[Vespers War]

It'll be interesting to see what effect Switchblade- especially the anti-armor version- has on the conflict. I hope it's not too little, too late.

One way that T2k discussion on this forum has proved particularly prescient is evidenced by the improvised "special armor" increasingly seen fitted to Russian soft-skinned vehicles on the Ukraine battlefield.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45108/russias-increasingly-bizarre-artisanal-armor-looks-more-mad-max-than-major-power

I thought the MTLB engine hood mounted to the truck was particularly interesting. In my PotV PbP campaign, the crew used a similar trick to give the Wisla Krolowa river tug's bridge some protection against small arms fire.

-

On another forum, I've referred to that as "psychosomatic armor" - it makes the driver feel better about his chances, but it doesn't really do much against a dedicated opposition.

[swaghauler]

Cappy is giving us an update;



https://youtu.be/OZUMJ_T1YBI

Swag

[Raellus]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45170/ukraine-situation-report-leopard-tanks-could-arrive-in-six-weeks-with-germanys-approval

What are the odds that this goes through? I doubt it'll happen, but I hope it does.

-

[pmulcahy11b]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45170/ukraine-situation-report-leopard-tanks-could-arrive-in-six-weeks-with-germanys-approval

What are the odds that this goes through? I doubt it'll happen, but I hope it does.

-

Goose eggs, for the reasons given in the article, and since Germany hasn't seen fit to contribute anything useful to the Ukraine effort besides attaboys.

[kcdusk]

So Russia is withdrawing forces east. But looks like mounting a new attack in the south, with forces cueing up again along highways.

I wonder if their tactics will be different this time, if they learnt anything from the resistance they received from their initial thrusts. Or if it will just be the same grinding advance.

[pmulcahy11b]

So Russia is withdrawing forces east. But looks like mounting a new attack in the south, with forces cueing up again along highways.

I wonder if their tactics will be different this time, if they learnt anything from the resistance they received from their initial thrusts. Or if it will just be the same grinding advance.

It does seem that the Russians don't learn from their mistakes, doesn't it?

[Raellus]

I wonder if their tactics will be different this time, if they learnt anything from the resistance they received from their initial thrusts. Or if it will just be the same grinding advance.

One of the big reasons for the failure of the first phase of the Russians' offensive (around Kiev) was that their tanks were operating in wooded and/or urban areas, were Ukrainian infantry armed with ATGMs and RPGs could effectively use ambush and hit-and-run tactics. Russian tactics don't necessarily need to change for them to have success in the east. The terrain there is much more open. The landscape is much more conducive to massed tank formations and artillery fires operating at range, negating many of the advantages that Ukrainian forces had during the Kiev campaign. The Russians will also have much shorter supply lines in the Donbass (and more local support). This article does a good job of explaining this in a bit more detail:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45183/ukraine-is-in-critical-need-of-more-tanks-to-face-down-russian-armor-on-the-open-plains-of-donbas

In more positive news,

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-slovakia-donating-mig-29-fighters-is-fine-by-the-u-s

I wonder why Slovakia's MiGs are OK, but Poland's were too risky to transfer.
:confused:

-

[pmulcahy11b]

One of the big reasons for the failure of the first phase of the Russians' offensive (around Kiev) was that their tanks were operating in wooded and/or urban areas, were Ukrainian infantry armed with ATGMs and RPGs could effectively use ambush and hit-and-run tactics.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45183/ukraine-is-in-critical-need-of-more-tanks-to-face-down-russian-armor-on-the-open-plains-of-donbas


-

We used to do that at all the units I was stationed at -- get the tanks to follow us into the woods, where they couldn't turn their turrets without being blocked with a tree and the TC had to pop up in his hatch to use the commander's machinegun. He usually died fast and we could pelt the tanks as much as we wanted with AT-4s and ATGMs. One brave soul even snuck to the rear quarter of an M1, climbed up on the engine deck without the crew noticing, and set a (simulated) thermite grenade on top of the engine deck. The M1 was called by the referees a total loss.

[pmulcahy11b]

I wonder why Slovakia's MiGs are OK, but Poland's were too risky to transfer.
:confused:

-

Maybe the Polish wanted too much in return -- much more than simply F-16s, but something else that was not advertised. The Slovakians may have given NATO a better deal.

[Top-Break]

Putin's current strategy may go something like this.

1. Take hammer.

2. Bash objective with hammer.

3a. If objective breaks, move on to next objective.

3b. If hammer breaks, put in requisition for a larger hammer.

Repeat until all objectives have been broken, or the supply of hammers has been exhausted.

Putin ran short of hammers trying to take Kyiv, so he's taking his remaining hammers east where he intends to whale away at the Ukrainians in the Donbas and along the Azov coast.

[Tegyrius]

I wonder why Slovakia's MiGs are OK, but Poland's were too risky to transfer.
:confused:-

The political difference seems to be a direct transfer versus the US acting as a passthrough.

There may also be technology transfer issues. I seem to recall another War Zone article stating that Poland's MiGs have received some upgrades not present in the Slovakian fleet.

- C.

[Targan]

For the Ukrainians to manage to sink a Russian cruiser, that's quite an achievement. Fair to say that would be the most expensive individual piece of hardware the Russians have lost as a result of Putin's current folly?

[kato13]

For the Ukrainians to manage to sink a Russian cruiser, that's quite an achievement. Fair to say that would be the most expensive individual piece of hardware the Russians have lost as a result of Putin's current folly?

I work with marketing teams all the time and the timing of the announcement of this stamp and the sinking, is more than you can ask for. I hope they sell 10s of millions of those stamps.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FQP_z0FXEBIIYr4?format=jpg&name=small


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FQQxu92XMA4Rpjk?format=jpg&name=900x900


Edit the website is overloaded and they would not be available yet but giving them a link. http://pm.ukrposhta.ua/nishop.php (Ukrainian postal service)

edit 2 removed ?? from sinking. Russia admitted it.

[Bestbrian]

I work with marketing teams all the time and the timing of the announcement of this stamp and the sinking?? is more than you can ask for. I hope they sell 10s of millions of those stamps.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FQP_z0FXEBIIYr4?format=jpg&name=small


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FQQxu92XMA4Rpjk?format=jpg&name=900x900

That's gold, Jerry! GOLD!

[Raellus]

Here's what's in the latest US military aid package for Ukraine:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/heres-exactly-whats-in-the-800-million-u-s-military-aid-package-to-ukraine

-

[pmulcahy11b]

It's been confirmed on the major news channels (even Fox) -- The Moskva has sunk!

Most of crew had gotten off before it sunk.

Now, which do you believe:
1) A spontaneous fire broke out aboard her
2) The Ukrainians fired two antiship missiles at her
3) Two missiles hit her, which are what caused the fire in the first place.

[Raellus]

The irony.

I think 2 & 3 most likely.

This brief AP article provides a little history about the Moskva.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-warship-moskva-e71316da36c77396ebd50470e2519982

I always thought the Slava class cruisers were the most attractive warships in the Soviet navy. Their cruise missile tubes were intimidating.

-

[shrike6]

It's been confirmed on the major news channels (even Fox) -- The Moskva has sunk!

Most of crew had gotten off before it sunk.

Now, which do you believe:
1) A spontaneous fire broke out aboard her
2) The Ukrainians fired two antiship missiles at her
3) Two missiles hit her, which are what caused the fire in the first place.

I'd like to think 2 and 3 happened but the experts on the news tend to think 1. We'll see which it is.

[kcdusk]

From Russias point of view, neither option is good.
1. Yes, our crew is so incompetent we started a fire on board that was so bad, we sunk; or
2. Yes, Ukraine sunk her with an anti-ship missile.

I don't know which scenario is more damaging to admit too.

[kato13]

Russian TV seems to be blaming Kyiv for the sinking of the Moskva and are calling it a Casus Belli for expanding attacks on Kyiv and railways.

https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1514766062771875851

The story of an accidental explosion appears to have unraveled.

[Targan]

The most dangerous times in the conflict are now approaching. And by that I mean that Putin's plans have gone so very, very off-the-rails that circumstances have now almost certainly moved outside the branching tree of possible outcomes that he had prepared for. He may have the kind of mind that can step back and start planning calmly for the new reality he finds himself in. Or he may start to act more like a caged animal that's paranoid and irrational.

I think the only really smart thing he's done in recent times is put the entire conflict under the operational command of a highly efficient, ruthless killer of a general officer. Smart in terms of having some hope of salvaging the situation on the ground. Perhaps not so smart in that the man he's put in charge has shown no hesitation in Syria to utilise indiscriminate slaughter of civilians on a really large scale, including the use of chemical weapons.

There is probably some red line that NATO and/or the US will regard as the point at which direct intervention is necessary. I could be wrong. I don't think it's anywhere near the point that Russian nukes will start popping off, but I could be wrong about that too.

[Bestbrian]

The most dangerous times in the conflict are now approaching. And by that I mean that Putin's plans have gone so very, very off-the-rails that circumstances have now almost certainly moved outside the branching tree of possible outcomes that he had prepared for. He may have the kind of mind that can step back and start planning calmly for the new reality he finds himself in. Or he may start to act more like a caged animal that's paranoid and irrational.

I think the only really smart thing he's done in recent times is put the entire conflict under the operational command of a highly efficient, ruthless killer of a general officer. Smart in terms of having some hope of salvaging the situation on the ground. Perhaps not so smart in that the man he's put in charge has shown no hesitation in Syria to utilise indiscriminate slaughter of civilians on a really large scale, including the use of chemical weapons.

There is probably some red line that NATO and/or the US will regard as the point at which direct intervention is necessary. I could be wrong. I don't think it's anywhere near the point that Russian nukes will start popping off, but I could be wrong about that too.

Russia utilizing NBC weapons would enrage the world, make things very uncomfortable for the Chinese, and pretty much ensure some degree of direct NATO involvement; I like to think they're not that stupid and/or desperate. Additionally, Russian attacks on military aid to Ukraine, inside the borders of third countries, would likely be considered a breach of Article 5, so, despite Russian diplomatic bluster, I consider it highly unlikely. Putin is looking to move the goalposts and to get some positive momentum so that he can declare victory and go home, and widening the war to include first rank military powers isn't going to help him achieve that. I expect them to concentrate every boot, rifle, and track on just hammering away until they can claim they "liberated" the Donbas.

[Raellus]

One has to to wonder what lessons Putin drew from NATO's lukewarm response to Assad ignoring a declared "red line" and continuing to use chemical weapons against his own people in Syria. What did NATO do? A: Lobbed a dozen or so Tomahawks at an airbase or two. Is Putin going to worry too much about a strong NATO response if he authorizes the use of chemical weapons on Ukrainian trench lines in the Donbass?

-

[kcdusk]

I've given up trying to agree on what line to cross is too far. There have been 3, 4 or 6 or 7 times in this war i've thought, Whooa - too far.

Yet no response from NATO. Because they didn't want to provoke Russia. Which left me thinking there is no line that's too far.

It made me think back to high school and no one wanted to stand up to the yard bully. He's walking around hitting people but no one wanted to stand up to him, least they be hit. Do you know what happened? He kept walking around hitting people! By not doing anything, the worst happened any way!

I'm not in favour of war. But i also think NATO should be doing more. If they won't get involved during the Ukraine invasion, when will they? Poland? Spain?!

[Raellus]

South Korea probably wants to steer well clear of the Ukraine War, but its upgraded T-80Us (sent to the ROK by Russia to pay off Soviet-era debts) would be a welcome addition to Ukraine's MBT force. It's not like the ROK really needs them. Their locally built K1 (mini Abrams) and K2 Black Panthers are highly capable, and they still have quite a few upgraded M48s in reserve.

-

[Drgonzo2011]

I'm not in favour of war. But i also think NATO should be doing more. If they won't get involved during the Ukraine invasion, when will they? Poland? Spain?!
What would you suggest? So far, NATO has figured out a way to keep Ukraine afloat and avoid a direct fight with the Russians, while killing a lot of their men, destroying a lot of their hardware and demonstrating that the Russian military is vastly overrated. Sweden and Finland look set to join NATO, giving the alliance a nice boost and the Germans seem ready to expand the Bundeswher. As an added bonus, China must be seriously questioning their alliance with Russia, feeling much like the Germans did vis-a-vis Italy during World War Two (a nation with a military that looked good on paper, but performed poorly and required constant support). While I won't go so far as to say that the Western policies have been a complete success - the war isn't over yet and the moves in the weeks leading up to the conflict failed to deter the Russians - they have been both measured and effective.

Given the risks from a more direct confrontation and the limited (if any) additional rewards, what would be gained? I'm curious because I hear this frustration from others, but never have gotten a good reply.

[kcdusk]

Given the risks from a more direct confrontation and the limited (if any) additional rewards, what would be gained? I'm curious because I hear this frustration from others, but never have gotten a good reply.

I guess that's why i didn't offer a solution. Its more a feeling of these constant, daily war atrocities in this day and age, feels so wrong. This can't be the lessor of two evils, can it (perhaps it is)?

I agree NATO has done well to impose economic sanctions, and Ukraine has done well to hold its own. Is this because of good management? Was this the plan all along?

Or dumb luck Russia hasn't lived up to expectations?

[Raellus]

I think the sanctions need to be strengthened, or at least tightened up considerably. I've heard that there are multiple loopholes that the Russians are actively exploiting. After the first week of the war, news reports were all like, "The Russian economy is on the verge of collapse!" That was a month ago. In the meantime, it appears that they've figured out how to circumvent some of the sanctions and cope with the economic impact of those that are actually working. So that leverage is apparently not as strong as the media initially reported.

Apart from that, I think the US shouldn't have chickened out on the transfer of Polish MiG-29s. It's not too late, I imagine, to pass them along. They're not going to change the game, but in the absence of a no-fly zone, a few more fighters would help the Ukrainians defend their cities from bombing. Last I heard, the Slovak MiGs are still on the way.

And The Drive recently suggested that the Romanians should give Ukraine their recently grounded fleet of MiG-21s (which are slated to be replaced by second-hand F-16s soon anyway).

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/romania-should-give-the-mig-21-lancers-it-just-grounded-to-ukraine

-

[Targan]

Given the risks from a more direct confrontation and the limited (if any) additional rewards, what would be gained? I'm curious because I hear this frustration from others, but never have gotten a good reply.

I think there is almost zero chance the Russians would launch nukes in response to direct NATO military intervention in Ukraine. I'm not sure what you mean by "additional rewards", but time after time we've seen western nations go into conflicts essentially to enrich themselves while telling the world it was the "right thing to do". Well this time the right thing to do is to stop a totally unjustified invasion and the slaughter of tens of thousands of civilians, and that's the reward.

[pmulcahy11b]

What's a good way to rally the people around you? Go to War!

Unless it goes on too long, gets too expensive, the people at home are tired of being downtrodden...

Regardless of what Putin wants, Putin is not Stalin, or even Khrushchev...

[Raellus]

Putin's done a pretty good job of muzzling dissent at home. Even exiles aren't safe from the long arm of the FSB.

I think we need to look at the lessons of history. Appeasement doesn't work. It only encourages aggression. The world basically turned a blind eye to the Russian seizure of Crimea in 2014. Look where we are now.

The EU/UN/NATO were slow to intervene during the Yugoslav Wars (1991-2001). As a result, tens of thousands of civilians were killed. More were displaced. Ethnic cleansing entered the English lexicon.

When NATO finally did intervene- first, by implementing a no-fly zone, later by conducting airstrikes and putting boots on the ground- the Yugoslav Wars were ended.

Unfortunately, the situation in Ukraine is drastically different.

The elephant in the room today is that none of the afore-mentioned bad actors of the not-so-distant past had a nuclear arsenal. This complicates things immensely. How does one stand up to a nuclear-armed bully without triggering Armageddon?

-

[Targan]

The elephant in the room today is that none of the afore-mentioned bad actors of the not-so-distant past had a nuclear arsenal. This complicates things immensely. How does one stand up to a nuclear-armed bully without triggering Armageddon?

Taking just about any negative action against Russia could trigger a nuclear response. Sanctions could trigger a nuclear response. Sanctions were put in place anyway, because the judgement call was made that Putin/the Russian leadership wouldn't knowingly end their own existence and the existence of viable human civilisation on this planet in response to sanctions.

Well I say that the first genuinely risky breakpoint for the use of Russian nukes would be Russia facing an immediate existential military threat (foreign forces rolling onto Russian territory for instance). The next step down from that would be Putin thinking his own survival was at stake (although I really doubt those around him would be willing to kick off the end of the world just because he might lose his life or his position as Russian dictator-for-life).

I straight-up don't believe that the Russians would knowingly commit mass suicide over their forces being kicked out of a country they're invading. I just don't see it happening. At the VERY least I think there should be a NATO-led no-fly zone enforced over western Ukraine. Yes it absolutely would probably elicit some sort of military response from Russia, but come on. Many of the old guard on this forum literally TRAINED to shoot at the the Russian military back in the day. In my barracks in the 90s we certainly had to know the enemy vehicle recognition posters off by heart. It was all but assumed by most of NATO that a big fight was inevitable, eventually.

All those decades we faced off against the whole of the Soviet Union, ready to roll at any time. Now we're in this bizarre erectile dysfunction-riddled world where we're taking a softly-softly approach against just a fraction of the old USSR, letting Russia dictate to countries we're allied with that they'd better not join NATO or else. Or else what? Say it out loud, Russia. What kind of trippy fever dream reality are we living in where many western conservatives friggin' ADMIRE Vladimir Putin? WTAF? Did someone sneak in during the night and cut the balls off the lot of us without us noticing?

[pmulcahy11b]

What do we do after a single tac nuke strike without it escalating into the Twilight War?

[Raellus]

This article drives how how badly Ukraine needs long-range, mobile, counter-battery fire capability as the war enters its next phase in the Donbass.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraines-ability-to-withstand-russian-artillery-critical-to-fight-for-donbas

Frankly, I think the confirmed 18 towed 155mm guns that the US is giving Ukraine are little moral than a symbolic gesture. NATO should send them MLRS systems and [more] counter-battery radars, STAT.

Once the Russians have seized territory in the east, it's going to be very difficult to drive them out of it. I have to wonder if the Ukrainian flag will ever fly over Mariupol again.

Slava Ukraini!

-

[Vespers War]

I think I mentioned it before, but this article drives how how badly Ukraine Ukraine needs long-range, mobile, counter-battery fire capability.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraines-ability-to-withstand-russian-artillery-critical-to-fight-for-donbas

Frankly, I think the confirmed 18 towed 155mm guns that the US is giving Ukraine are little moral than a symbolic gesture. NATO should send them MLRS systems and [more] counter-battery radars, STAT.

Once the Russians have seized territory, it's going to be very difficult to drive them out of it.

-

The US, UK, and Canada all announced today they're sending additional "heavy artillery" to Ukraine, which I presume will be either 105mm or 155mm based on what each country has in use currently. There were also some AN/TPQ-36 in the last assistance package, and I imagine there'll be more as US troops finish doing train-the-trainer training with Ukrainian forces.

[Raellus]

The US, UK, and Canada all announced today they're sending additional "heavy artillery" to Ukraine, which I presume will be either 105mm or 155mm based on what each country has in use currently. There were also some AN/TPQ-36 in the last assistance package, and I imagine there'll be more as US troops finish doing train-the-trainer training with Ukrainian forces.

That's something, but those are probably towed systems, which are more vulnerable to counter-battery fire than mobile systems. The Soviets have a huge numerical superiority in artillery. The Ukrainians have been so far been quite successful with hit-and-run attacks. SPAAGs or MLRS would lend themselves much better to said tactics than static tube artillery.

-

[Spartan-117]

That's something, but those are probably towed systems, which are more vulnerable to counter-battery fire than mobile systems. The Soviets have a huge numerical superiority in artillery. The Ukrainians have been so far been quite successful with hit-and-run attacks. SPAAGs or MLRS would lend themselves much better to said tactics than static tube artillery.

-

My guess is that there is some consideration being given to the logistics of getting field artillery into theater. M777 is technically an ultralight howitzer, which means more tubes delivered per C17 flight. Once you have the 18 on the ground, you still have 40K rounds to deliver after that, which I suspect, a significant amount of which will probably end up in Ukr SOF hands as IEDs.

[Raellus]

Ukraine's operational MiG-29 fleet has grown, but NOT because its received replacement aircraft.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/no-additional-fighter-jets-havent-been-delivered-to-ukraine

Do you think NATO is covertly sending whole aircraft to Ukraine, but only publicly saying that they're sending spare parts?

-

[Vespers War]

That's something, but those are probably towed systems, which are more vulnerable to counter-battery fire than mobile systems. The Soviets have a huge numerical superiority in artillery. The Ukrainians have been so far been quite successful with hit-and-run attacks. SPAAGs or MLRS would lend themselves much better to said tactics than static tube artillery.

-

Ukraine already has more self-propelled artillery than the United States (over 1000 combined units of Gvozdika, Akatsiya, Giatsint-S, Pion, and Msta-S compared to 850 Paladin), and a little less than half as many MLRS (450+ Grad, ~75 Uragan and 75 Smerch [around 600 launchers total] to 500 HIMARS and ~1000 M270A1 MLRS). It would probably be more helpful to offer replacements to allies that can send Soviet/Russian-caliber weaponry to Ukraine, like Czech Republic sending Dana artillery vehicles and RM-70 rocket launchers, to keep Ukraine's logistics from spiraling out of control with a bunch of incompatible ammunition types.

Other allies might send self-propelled anti-aircraft guns, but the US doesn't really have any. I suppose we could send Avenger, but Ukraine already has Gecko and Gopher in the short-range self-propelled anti-aircraft missile world, along with however many Stormer vehicles the UK ends up sending.

Supplying vehicles ends up raising a number of questions, some of which are likely relatively simple concerns, but some of which could be real problems in the middle of a shooting war:
1. How easy are they to operate by soldiers who aren't literate in English? Can all the labels (and manuals) be easily produced in Ukrainian for use by soldiers literate in that language? This is likely to need specialized translators who know Ukrainian military jargon to ensure ease of understanding.
2. What's the spare parts supply chain look like? Can parts be easily shipped in to Ukraine to maintain these vehicles that likely have no parts commonality with Ukraine's ex-WP supply chain?
3. How long does it take to train mechanics to keep these vehicles running? What effect will the time for that training have on their ability to keep existing forces maintained?
4. As touched on briefly above, what does adding yet another caliber do to supply chain logistics? Their vehicular artillery already uses 120mm, 122mm, 152mm, and 203mm shells. Adding 155mm (and possibly 105mm) increases complexity. This wouldn't be as much of an issue if the 155mm Bohdana had replaced large numbers of the ex-Soviet self-propelled artillery, but only the prototype(s) have been built and still haven't been fully tested. On the MLRS side, they have 122mm, 220mm, and 280mm launchers, while the US uses 227mm and 610mm rockets. Would countries using vehicles with the same caliber of weapons as Ukraine (Poland, Romania, Algeria, India, Bosnia & Herzegovina, etc) be interested in "selling" them to Ukraine to "buy" systems from the United States as a way to both modernize their equipment and supply Ukraine with vehicles they can already arm and maintain?

[kato13]

VW agree with everything you said. However, while I am torn about it, I would love to send them a few HIMARS with the traditional rockets and few ATACMS given what they Ukrainians did with their twice tested Neptun missiles.

Their ability to leverage limited resources for maximum effect makes me want to give them a few tools with better accuracy characteristics for really prime targets.

I am torn because of the political downsides, as the ATACMS could hit really deep into Russia, Would be clearly supplied by NATO (even 155mm shells have deniability due to local production), and could easily (on accident) hit something clearly civilian or culturally important well outside of the borders of the current conflict. EDIT ADD I am hearing that such concerns - Use deep inside Russia, was part of the reason for the delay in sending planes. Imagine if a transferred Polish Mig-29 crashed into the Kremlin

[Targan]

Imagine if a transferred Polish Mig-29 crashed into the Kremlin

Imagine indeed. Thank you for that image. It has greatly lifted my mood.

[kato13]

I agree they deserve it and more, but something like that could trigger an emotional response which leads to article 5, which leads to ???.

[kcdusk]

It might be we have painted ourselves into a corner. And the reason we can't find a solution, now, today. Is because the time for a solution to todays problems was 1, 3, 10 years ago. It could be the time to stand up to a bully was years ago, and we've missed our window.

[Jason]

As part of U.S. next $800 million in military aid to Ukraine we are including 200 M113's.

Battle taxis back in action.

Not really fit for front-line service in 2022, but probably usefull for re-supply and moving troops behind, but near the front lines.

[Raellus]

More military aid for Ukraine. Major highlights include:

CAESAR 155m SPAAGs (France)
T-72 tanks (Poland)
M84 tanks (Slovenia)
PzH2000 SPAAGs (Germany)

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-france-sends-howitzers-polish-tanks-could-follow

I kind of get it, but it still strikes me as strange how sending combat aircraft somehow "crosses a line" (towards escalation), considering how much killing power the above list represents (to say nothing of the thousands of Javelins, NLAWs, Matadors, MANPADS, etc. that the West has already sent Ukraine).

-

[Tegyrius]

I kind of get it, but it still strikes me as strange how sending combat aircraft somehow "crosses a line" (towards escalation), considering how much killing power the above list represents (to say nothing of the thousands of Javelins, NLAWs, Matadors, MANPADS, etc. that the West has already sent Ukraine).

Kind of hard for a Javelin to conduct deep strikes in Russian territory against strategic targets. I think that's one of the concerns.

- C.

[Spartan-117]

Also, 72 more M777 tubes. With the previous 18, that's 5 full artillery battalions. Once delivered, Ukraine will be the 2nd largest user of 155mm M777 ultra light weight howitzers in the world.

[Targan]

Interesting article.

What this old Russian tank tells us about the invasion of Ukraine (https://taskandpurpose.com/analysis/history-russia-tanks-running-out-of-fuel-ukraine/)

[pmulcahy11b]

Interesting article.

What this old Russian tank tells us about the invasion of Ukraine (https://taskandpurpose.com/analysis/history-russia-tanks-running-out-of-fuel-ukraine/)

Well, it does seem to partially explain why Russian supply lines seem to be chronically overextended.

[pmulcahy11b]

Ukraine's operational MiG-29 fleet has grown, but NOT because its received replacement aircraft.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/no-additional-fighter-jets-havent-been-delivered-to-ukraine

Do you think NATO is covertly sending whole aircraft to Ukraine, but only publicly saying that they're sending spare parts?

-

That may be a politically smarter way to send the Ukrainians aircraft...now if they could put some Warthogs and ammo on those trains...

[Raellus]

Kind of hard for a Javelin to conduct deep strikes in Russian territory against strategic targets. I think that's one of the concerns.


Yeah, I get that, but, at this point (Mariupol falling any day now), giving the UAF parts to increase its operational MiG-29 fleet and just giving them more MiG-29s seems like a distinction without difference. The net effect is more or less the same.

The MiG-29 is relatively short-legged; given Russia's advantages in the air, the UAF also has to operate their aircraft from the western margins of the country. As a result, they pose more of a symbolic threat to Russian territory than a practical one. And the donors could make it clear to Kiev that any aircraft are not to be used outside of Ukraine's borders.

Yes, Moscow will cite any aircraft transfer as an escalation but, realistically, what are they likely to do about it? Yes, they could do something rash but, again, at this point, unless the West is willing to essentially cede the eastern (industrial) third of Ukraine to Russia in perpetuity, I think the risk is worth it.

-

[pmulcahy11b]

The MiG-29 is relatively short-legged; given Russia's advantages in the air, the UAF also has to operate their aircraft from the western margins of the country. As a result, they pose more of a symbolic threat to Russian territory than a practical one. And the donors could make it clear to Kiev that any aircraft are not to be used outside of Ukraine's borders.



-

Maybe we should give them Su-27 "parts." They have over twice the operational range, and the Ukrainians did have a few of them until the war. Modify them to carry BLU-109s, and all that massed Russian armor turns into burning hulks after delivering a few of those.

What do you think happened to most of the Republican Guard's armor in OIF?

[kato13]

distinction without difference.

International Law and diplomacy seems based on distinctions. France has not used the word "Genocide" as if they do so they are compelled to act. A prime minister utters a single word and they have to change policy.

The MiG-29 is relatively short-legged

It can reach Moscow. When thinking about this I was amazed I remembered Mathias Rust's name. Add to that the ending of Clancy's Debt of Honor. (A pilot who lost everything he cared about trying to strike a knife into the heart of the enemy).

If we were publicly saying "We gave them these planes" and the next day a "War crime"(from the perspective of the Russians happens) using said planes. They get as riled up as we were on 9/11, who knows what happens next.

[kato13]

Breaking

https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3465606-ukraine-army-destroys-enemy-command-operations-center-eliminates-two-russian-generals.html

The Armed Forces of Ukraine have destroyed a command operations center of the 49th Combined Arms Army of the Russian Armed Forces, eliminating two enemy generals.

Speaking of hitting high priority targets. If this is true I believe Russia has lost as many generals in Ukraine as the US lost in the entire Vietnam conflict (11).

[Targan]

Outstanding!

[Vespers War]

Maybe we should give them Su-27 "parts." They have over twice the operational range, and the Ukrainians did have a few of them until the war. Modify them to carry BLU-109s, and all that massed Russian armor turns into burning hulks after delivering a few of those.

What do you think happened to most of the Republican Guard's armor in OIF?

I don't think Ukraine currently has much need for bunker-busters (the BLU-109's role). If you meant the BLU-108 skeet dispenser, the 155mm artillery could produce a similar effect if provided with SMArt (Suchzünder Munition für die Artillerie 155) or BAE/Nexter BONUS shells, since each of those carry a pair of skeets in a 155mm shell. Australia, Germany, Greece, and Switzerland currently have SMArt while Finland, Norway, Sweden, France, and the United States have BONUS.

[pmulcahy11b]

If you meant the BLU-108 skeet dispenser,

Sorry about the mistake - BLU-108. It's just nastier and more "shock and awe" producing than an artillery barrage.

[kato13]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/26/germany-anti-aircraft-systems-ukraine-defence-military

The German government has announced that it is to send a fleet of around 50 anti-aircraft systems to Ukraine, as it attempts to offset criticism that it has been too slow to provide military equipment to the war-torn country.

Christine Lambrecht, the defence minister, pledged about the Gepard self-propelled anti-aircraft guns, in a speech to the representatives of 40 countries at high-level defence talks hosted by the US air force at its Europe headquarters in Ramstein, south-west Germany.

Not sure if the Gepards have been consistently updated, but back when I paid a lot more attention to this stuff, I considered them the cream of the crop. I will have a lot of interest in the ad hoc units Ukraine will be forced to put together. Pulling this back to being on topic, the mish mash of equipment does have a very T2k feel to it.

[Raellus]

Not sure if the Gepards have been consistently updated, but back when I paid a lot more attention to this stuff, I considered them the cream of the crop. I will have a lot of interest in the ad hoc units Ukraine will be forced to put together. Pulling this back to being on topic, the mish mash of equipment does have a very T2k feel to it.

The Drive reported a couple of days ago that Switzerland has moved to stop the transfer of 35mm ammo for the Gepards, essentially rendering them very expensive decoys. I hope the Swiss change their minds.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-swiss-veto-threatens-delivery-of-german-anti-aircraft-vehicles

-

[Raellus]

Have any of you ever used TOW-armed FAVs in your T2k?

Ukraine essentially is:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukrainian-battle-buggies-are-out-to-kill-russian-tanks

-

[kato13]

25 point summary of the last week. (Includes 10 maps)

https://twitter.com/JominiW/status/1519893783537721346

First map I have seen of the Azovstal Metallurgical Zone
https://twitter.com/JominiW/status/1519893793864101889

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FRe73C-XMAIGdDb?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

[kato13]

The Drive reported a couple of days ago that Switzerland has moved to stop the transfer of 35mm ammo for the Gepards, essentially rendering them very expensive decoys. I hope the Swiss change their minds.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-swiss-veto-threatens-delivery-of-german-anti-aircraft-vehicles

-

I have read that (perhaps lower tech) ammo can come from Poland and Turkey (and perhaps Norway).

https://www.army-technology.com/contractors/ammunition/mesko-sa/
Mesko produces 35x228mm which wiki says the Gepard uses. I have not found the Turkish manufacturer but they are 35mm users and I can see them producing locally.

[shrike6]

I have read that (perhaps lower tech) ammo can come from Poland and Turkey (and perhaps Norway).

https://www.army-technology.com/contractors/ammunition/mesko-sa/
Mesko produces 35x228mm which wiki says the Gepard uses. I have not found the Turkish manufacturer but they are 35mm users and I can see them producing locally.

They might be restricted as well. I'm betting both Poland and Turkey have a licence to produce that ammo. It may restrict who they can sale to as well.

[kato13]

Brazil may be the way around it.

Ammo problem solved? Brazil wants to equip German Gepard tanks for Ukraine with 300,000 rounds

https://www-businessinsider-de.translate.goog/politik/deutschland/munitionsproblem-geloest-brasilien-will-deutsche-gepard-panzer-fuer-ukraine-mit-300-000-schuss-ausstatten/?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc

Also in reading the press related to this they keep referring to "Swiss Made" rounds rather than "Swiss Licensed" rounds. I know reporters don't pay attention to details anymore, but that is a huge difference if that is the case.

[shrike6]

I have read that (perhaps lower tech) ammo can come from Poland and Turkey (and perhaps Norway).

https://www.army-technology.com/contractors/ammunition/mesko-sa/
Mesko produces 35x228mm which wiki says the Gepard uses. I have not found the Turkish manufacturer but they are 35mm users and I can see them producing locally.

I'm betting both Poland and Turkey have a licence to produce that ammo. It may restrict who they can sale to as well.

[chico20854]

One aspect I will be interested to read about in years to come (if/when it is declassified!) will be what is going on with the various fires in Russia over the last week. The chemical plant that produces most of Russia's missile propellant, two military research and development centers, various ammo and fuel dumps close to the Ukrainian border... Russia certainly has underinvested in maintenance and modernization of its facilities, resulting in a great many more fires on a day to day basis than we are used to, but this certainly looks like the work of Ukrainian special operations forces or intelligence agency paramilitaries.

I'll have the popcorn ready!

[Fallenkezef]

One aspect I will be interested to read about in years to come (if/when it is declassified!) will be what is going on with the various fires in Russia over the last week. The chemical plant that produces most of Russia's missile propellant, two military research and development centers, various ammo and fuel dumps close to the Ukrainian border... Russia certainly has underinvested in maintenance and modernization of its facilities, resulting in a great many more fires on a day to day basis than we are used to, but this certainly looks like the work of Ukrainian special operations forces or intelligence agency paramilitaries.

I'll have the popcorn ready!

Or maybe a false flag to justify a state of war to be announced at the big May Moscow parade?

[shrike6]

I have read that (perhaps lower tech) ammo can come from Poland and Turkey (and perhaps Norway).

https://www.army-technology.com/contractors/ammunition/mesko-sa/
Mesko produces 35x228mm which wiki says the Gepard uses. I have not found the Turkish manufacturer but they are 35mm users and I can see them producing locally.

MKE makes the barrels they also happen to make 35mm rounds in their ammunition division.

https://www.mkeusa.com/en-US/catalogue/medium-and-large-calibers/35-mm-msd-020-he-i/64/2130

[Spartan-117]

MKE makes the barrels they also happen to make 35mm rounds in their ammunition division.

https://www.mkeusa.com/en-US/catalogue/medium-and-large-calibers/35-mm-msd-020-he-i/64/2130

Good point. Nothing from the Cold War should present any problems for this endeavor. Design patents in the US are 15 years in length and a quick Google search shows Swiss patents are 20 years: https://www.ige.ch/en/protecting-your-ip/patents

This is not exotic 6.8mm CT ammo. Every shop that can produce it, should. And then send it to Ukraine.

PS: Also, what's the threat here from the Swiss? We won't sell you ammo for 50-ish decades old weapons systems that you shoved in a warehouse years ago?

[Raellus]

One aspect I will be interested to read about in years to come (if/when it is declassified!) will be what is going on with the various fires in Russia over the last week. The chemical plant that produces most of Russia's missile propellant, two military research and development centers, various ammo and fuel dumps close to the Ukrainian border... Russia certainly has underinvested in maintenance and modernization of its facilities, resulting in a great many more fires on a day to day basis than we are used to, but this certainly looks like the work of Ukrainian special operations forces or intelligence agency paramilitaries.

I'll have the popcorn ready!

I have a hunch it's cyber attacks, like Israel's Stuxnet attack on Iran's nuclear "research" centrifuges. I would be surprised if Ukraine hadn't been developing its cyberwarfare capabilities these past few years. Russia has a track record of hacking into Ukraine's power grid. Turnabout is fair play.

-

[Vespers War]

I have read that (perhaps lower tech) ammo can come from Poland and Turkey (and perhaps Norway).

https://www.army-technology.com/contractors/ammunition/mesko-sa/
Mesko produces 35x228mm which wiki says the Gepard uses. I have not found the Turkish manufacturer but they are 35mm users and I can see them producing locally.

Aselsan is a Turkish manufacturer. They make an airburst round with tungsten pellets as the payload. NAMMO also manufactures ammo in 35x228mm, although I'm not sure where, given their multinational nature. And Rheinmetall makes some types of rounds in that caliber. I think Romarm in Romania also manufactures high explosive rounds (and training rounds), but not the more advanced rounds.

[kato13]

Like I needed another reason to support Ukraine. Tapping into my (and perhaps some US policy makers) childhood nostalgia is brilliant.

Recent photos of disabled Russian vehicles in Ukraine

https://video-images.vice.com/articles/62680651448b64009b3c82f5/lede/1650984728997-fqs2ijlxiacmbyy.jpeg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPwrNdFXIAYRIJq?format=jpg&name=900x900

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FQYuJFxXEAM9doU?format=jpg&name=small

[shrike6]

:) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKLC3s30Mw


Admin edit. The need for this video led me to fix video embeds on the site (apparently YouTube changed the code a while back)
REKLC3s30Mw

[Milano]

This is the best picture I have ever seen!

I am printing out a bunch of copies and replacing the photos in my wedding album. Maybe. I was just a kid when my Dad rented Red Dawn from Movies to Go. It may have been the reason why I got into Twilight 2000, or vice versa.

It has been my favorite movie since then, and I am at the least putting this as my screen saver...since my wife would probably eradicate my wedding tackle if I did anything to her album.

[kato13]

Fixed the youtube embed code, so we can see the scene that made us all love this movie. (starts 66 seconds in)

hhvPdG7nYHo?start=66


May the list of names on any future "Freedom Rock" be as short as possible.

[shrike6]

Fixed the youtube embed code, so we can see the scene that made us all love this movie.

hhvPdG7nYHo

Thanks!

[Raellus]

I don't know how they're doing it. I wonder if they really are going to "fight to the end". What end? Will they surrender when their ammo runs out? When their food and water and medical supplies are exhausted?

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukrainian-officers-defiant-dispatch-from-inside-mariupols-besieged-steel-plant

They must realize that there will be no rescue. I suppose their main objective now is to tie down as many Russian forces as possible for as long as possible. Perhaps they're hoping for the kind of immortality won by Sparta's 300 at Thermopylae but, really, how many people are actually willing to go that far and fight to the death?

Whatever happens from this point on, I really admire their bravery and resolve. The Azov Battalion's (now regiment?) political origins and alignment are troubling, to be sure (those, I don't admire), but maybe this ordeal will somehow be redemptive, in that regard.

Do they fight to the death, or surrender with honor? What do you think?

-

[swaghauler]

Those tags showing the "Wolverines" is the tag being used by an American "foreign legion" unit in Ukraine. Operator Starsky (whose video on the dismantling of that Russian drone with the Canon digital camera I posted on this forum) actually mentions them in his video. They are even called that now by the Ukrainian forces. There are actually a fair number of US and Canadian Veterans serving in Ukraine. Most went there saying that they didn't like bullies and some went because they missed war. Some other YouTubers posting Ukraine footage other than Operator Starsky (an actual Ukrainian) are Civ Div and the Funker group.

[swaghauler]

I don't know how they're doing it. I wonder if they really are going to "fight to the end". What end? Will they surrender when their ammo runs out? When their food and water and medical supplies are exhausted?

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukrainian-officers-defiant-dispatch-from-inside-mariupols-besieged-steel-plant

They must realize that there will be no rescue. I suppose their main objective now is to tie down as many Russian forces as possible for as long as possible. Perhaps they're hoping for the kind of immortality won by Sparta's 300 at Thermopylae but, really, how many people are actually willing to go that far and fight to the death?

Whatever happens from this point on, I really admire their bravery and resolve. The Azov Battalion's (now regiment?) political origins and alignment are troubling, to be sure (those, I don't admire), but maybe this ordeal will somehow be redemptive, in that regard.

Do they fight to the death, or surrender with honor? What do you think?

-

What choice do they have? Putin and the Russian Military leaders have been VERY CLEAR about what they are going to do to those fighters. Look at what happened in BUCHA Ukraine when Putin was pushed back from Kyiv.

If your only choice is between being tortured to death and fighting to the death, which would you choose?

Ukraine is CLEARLY winning the STRATEGIC WAR here. When they capture Russian soldiers, the Ukrainians do not torture or abuse them. The prisoners are fed and treated medically. Ukraine then allows them to call family or friends to tell them that the soldier is ok. Also, when the Ukrainian fighters engage the Russian conscripts in battle, if a pause occurs, the Ukrainians will tell the conscripts if they drop their weapons and flee, they will NOT be fired upon. Many Russian conscripts are doing just that.

This allows three things to happen. FIRST (and most importantly) it gives the low-morale Russian conscripts an "out" in a fight. They KNOW they can just flee and the Ukrainians won't shoot them in the back. Every time this happens, those surviving troops tell other Russian conscripts what happened. This causes THAT RESPONSE to spread through the Russian Army like an infection.
SECOND, it allows Ukraine to take possession of desperately needed resources they might have otherwise had to destroy.
THIRD, It shows that despite everything Putin and Russia have done to Ukraine that she retains her civility and dignity. This puts her on the "right side of history" once the war crimes trials begin.

There are outliers but I can understand (if not justify) the motives behind those actions. There are videos showing certain Ukrainian units (mostly in the Donbas) shooting surrendering Russian soldiers in the lower legs. From what I have gathered on the internet (and not from the most reliable sources), this was done in retaliation for Russian abuse of Ukrainian POWs who were returned with broken legs and injuries consistent with beatings. There is also a practical (if barbaric) reason for this... the now-wounded Russian conscript cannot be returned to the lines. It does violate the Geneva and Hague conventions but so does shooting civilians in the head.

[swaghauler]

Here is Operator Starsky explaining the concept of Russian Peace.

https://youtu.be/h4WEBwsuQf0


Swag

[Raellus]

What choice do they have? Putin and the Russian Military leaders have been VERY CLEAR about what they are going to do to those fighters. Look at what happened in BUCHA Ukraine when Putin was pushed back from Kyiv.

If your only choice is between being tortured to death and fighting to the death, which would you choose?

I see your point, but you've presented a false dichotomy (die fighting, or surrender and die anyway). Of course, surrender isn't without risk- it's one of the riskiest things a soldier at war can do. However, in this war, there have been documented surrenders of Ukrainian troops without summary executions, and prisoner exchanges. Bucha was very bad, but it was mostly civilians that were killed, not surrendered soldiers. That's not to say that Russian troops can't or won't take their frustrations out on surrendering troops, but such an outcome isn't a given.

That said, for many, "perception is reality", and if the defenders believe they'll be tortured and killed if they surrender, it makes sense that they've decided not to.

-