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?

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

Artillery is the god of war
 

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-zon...ght-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!

-

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.

Stick and Move
 

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.

More MiGs?
 

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

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...red-to-ukraine

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

-

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?

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

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

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

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.

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.

Next Batch
 

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-zon...s-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).

-

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.

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.

Interesting article.

What this old Russian tank tells us about the invasion of Ukraine

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

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

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.

-

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?

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.

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.

Breaking

https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato...-generals.html

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).

Outstanding!

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.

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

Germany to deliver 50 Gepard to Ukraine
 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...fence-military

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.

Swiss Please
 

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-zon...craft-vehicles

-

Battle Buggies
 

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

Ukraine essentially is:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...-russian-tanks

-

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-X...name=4096x4096

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

https://www.army-technology.com/cont...tion/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.

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.trans...n&_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.

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

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?

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

https://www.mkeusa.com/en-US/catalog...0-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?

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.

-

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.