(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
Clearly we need to start building An-225's ASAP again so we can put a whole tank platoon on one plane.
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 07:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 05:27 |
|
|
Djarum posted:Every NATO country offloading all of their 30-40 year old kit designed to destroy Soviets while they replacing them is an easy choice for most. that was the craziest part about early pro-russia takes that were certain that russia would outlast western commitment except for that whole part with the whole conflict becoming real time field testing against russia's modern capacity and also making it the cheapest and easiest it has ever been to neutralize their political and military power all at once. like putin made the whole war an absolute fire sale for investments in completely dismantling him
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 08:24
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:DeepState seems to think that some moron posted themselves being shelled as them shelling Russians, and us citing neighboring units as thinking there are no Russians there, so it may be less clear than that, too. The Russians do seem to have a lot of troops there, at any rate. The other map markers have fallen into line behind this theory now too, with many pointing out that rybar only published their map after the mistake was made by Ukrainian mappers. The original source of the footage has deleted it and apologized for the confusion. https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1678890292554997761 The above thread contains some discussion on the issue (although many tweets are deleted). This does highlight the problem with blind map aggregation that's going on. One person makes a mistake and suddenly you've got 7 separate "sources"
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 08:27
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 08:43
|
|
EFFORT-POST ON INFANTRY FIGHTING VEHICLE LESSONS FROM UKRAINE
|
Pablo Bluth posted:As a Brit, my suggestion is that anything Ajax should only be touched with bargepole. And the bargepole to be fired from a Challenger II.  What a waste of money.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 09:23
|
|
|
A shame about the CV90 though, it's not an new design but it's a solid one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 09:47
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:
Changing the make-up of squads and PLTs will only be difficult in official doctrine. Units regularly buttfuck doctrine and organize anyway they see fit. My airborne infantry unit often rolled 12 deep too. 9 light and a heavy weapon team. Mechanized infantry we only kept the driver and gunner in the Bradley, everyone else dismounted to make 3 plussed up squads. As a sapper, we had 2 9-man squads but on missions went as 3 elements: Dismounts, security and IED search/clear. I did a brief stint with an MP company when I was a cadet. They rolled in 10-man squads, 3 fire teams and a squad leader. Being MPs, the teams were pretty drat light on firepower but I definitely liked the options it gave to a PL. I don't believe manning will be an issue if it's to stuff bodies into new toys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 11:24
|
|
Third, crew and passengers
|
Djarum posted:Well the conflict is not winnable by Russia. Once we got out of the first couple of weeks that became abundantly clear. Honestly I don’t think anyone thought that Russia would be not only continuing this foolhardy adventure but escalating it at this point. Every NATO country offloading all of their 30-40 year old kit designed to destroy Soviets while they replacing them is an easy choice for most. Russia is degrading itself from a superpower to arguably a regional power at this point. We have started to see major cracks within their government with the aborted coup. Putin doesn’t have the control he once had nor the influence as evident by the abrupt face turn by Erdogan. Well you didn't define what the win conditions are for Russia, but I can certainly see Putin carrying on like this for a few more years with the goal of keeping the eastern sections of Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 11:53
|
|
|
Tigey posted:Even if they had no actual ability to use them in any way, I imagine they would be of use as a bargaining chip in any negotiations. Yeah, poo poo's expensive and easy to wreck.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 11:54
|
|
|
daslog posted:Well you didn't define what the win conditions are for Russia, but I can certainly see Putin carrying on like this for a few more years with the goal of keeping the eastern sections of Ukraine. At first it was regime change and forcing neutrality (non-achievable since last spring) Then it became "bite out 4 regions and annex" - fumbled and non-achievable since Ukraine retook Kherson Donetsk and Lugansk regions are still not under complete occupation and it seems that Russia does not even hope to complete it militarily
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 13:11
|
|
|
Putin's remaining gamble is that he can outlast western election cycles, wait till support for Ukraine is withdrawn, and then force a relative win. It's not much of a hand but he's playing the cards he's been dealt.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 13:25
|
|
|
Are the Russian people really going to accept a lifestyle like North Korea though? Can this last years more?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 13:36
|
|
|
RBA-Wintrow posted:Are the Russian people really going to accept a lifestyle like North Korea though? Can this last years more? Russia is decades of economic crises away from anything resembling North Korea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 13:39
|
|
|
RBA-Wintrow posted:Are the Russian people really going to accept a lifestyle like North Korea though? Can this last years more? It is not even at Iran level yet and unlikely to happen unless Europe cranks up sanctions several grades more
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 13:42
|
|
|
Well I don’t think that gambit is going to work either. Really Putin is stuck between a rock and a hard place. He can’t achieve the original goal of taking Ukraine. Even the dream of keeping the land bridge is probably a pipe dream now. Russia hasn’t had anything where they can hang their hat on to declare victory and leave outside of the first weeks of the war. His political power is at it’s weakest it has been since he took office. If he withdraws he is effectively ending his reign if not his life. The Russian military is now shown to be weak so not only is Ukraine not going to be willing to settle for peace with anything less than all of their land returned but it is likely ruined the image of Russia’s ability to project power worldwide. Let’s not even consider what will likely become of their arms industry since they have been basically made to look a fool with NATO kit almost old enough to retire. Really we are waiting for the Russian military to collapse and/or Putin to be toppled/disposed. The second doesn’t need the first to happen but if the first does happen the second no doubt will happen as well. I will say a civil war in Russian will no doubt be spicy as it is hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 13:45
|
|
|
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1677747805325017088.html Someone PM'd me a few days ago and asked if I had any thoughts on the thread above. My impression is that the task organization described in post #4 looks like a US battalion's scout platoon. The organization size, number of vehicles, and frontage is very similar. The follow-on assault force seems to be company-sized, though, not battalion-sized, and Ukraine seems to use only indirect fire to suppress the defenders. I would expect the other companies in the battalion to also suppress using direct fire. It's possible that they don't because the distance between front lines is too great: i.e. the grey zone is wider than direct fire can reach.* It's very interesting that tactically, the Ukrainian assault force stays in column rather than moving into wedge or line. That reduces the likelihood of multiple vehicles hitting mines, but also reduces their ability to apply direct fire to the front. In other words, these tactics make it very hard to suppress the enemy with direct fire. I'll note that the Russian tactics amount to, "We should use fires from multiple, different elements, and we should use recon to identify likely assault routes and identify assault forces at least 5km away from the assault point." The most notable thing is that they very directly call out that if they can sever communications between the Ukrainian scouts or assault element and Ukrainian artillery, the assault tends to be called off. I think the tactical solution** is night-time infiltration and sapping operations. From other threads, it sounds like Ukraine is doing this, albeit just before or after dusk, when drones can see mines more easily on thermal cameras. Nighttime, dismounted breaching is slow and will result in heavy casualties among the sappers, but it should let you get actual lanes through the minefields which your mechanized forces can then exploit. * I'll note that if true, this reinforces my earlier posts about the value of longer-ranged, accurate small arms such as the XM7 being rolled out to infantry, scouts, engineers, and special forces. I think it also reinforces the value of newer, larger, more accurate autocannon such as the XM913 being contemplated for the XM30 MICV. ** Remember: tactical solutions to dilemmas almost always involve compromises. Edit: I don't think a civil war in Russia will be hilarious. The country has nuclear weapons. We actually want to get back to equilibrium (i.e. peace) as fast as possible. Ynglaur fucked around with this message at 13:51 on Jul 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 13:49
|
|
|
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1678641333244657664.html It's kinda interesting that the follow on also mentions night time manual mine laying is emphasized by the Russians, just a game of mine laying and mine clearing everyday.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 13:59
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:At first it was regime change and forcing neutrality (non-achievable since last spring) I disagree that the original goal was regime change and neutrality. There wasn't going to be a Ukraine when it was over (except in name, until a sham vote for annexation) and the annexation of what they did control would have included the rest of Ukraine had they controlled it. But yes, the war has been a consistent set of shifting goalposts for the Russian government as they progressively fail to accomplish their goals.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 14:11
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:It's very interesting that tactically, the Ukrainian assault force stays in column rather than moving into wedge or line. That reduces the likelihood of multiple vehicles hitting mines, but also reduces their ability to apply direct fire to the front. Thanks for reviewing that, i didn't know enough to understand if it was reasonably real or not. Would the US Army doctrine simply accept losses to mines in this case to get suppression and Ukraine is just unable to do this due to lack of equipment (2nd part speculative of course)?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 14:24
|
|
|
MikeC posted:Thanks for reviewing that, i didn't know enough to understand if it was reasonably real or not. Would the US Army doctrine simply accept losses to mines in this case to get suppression and Ukraine is just unable to do this due to lack of equipment (2nd part speculative of course)? Well the US Military would have air cover if not outright air superiority to cover their sapper work. As was said before the US would spend days if not weeks hitting a zone with air assets before moving in on the ground. Ukraine just doesn't have the ability to do that. It is why they really need both fixed wing as well as advanced rotary and drone systems in place. Honestly I would be developing a hunter/killer drone against helicopters at this point if it hasn't already been done. A small drone platform with Hellfires or the like would be a VERY devastating system to employ against helicopters. Did Ukraine ever get the line charge systems in any numbers? I know they have used some but it seems like that should be something sent in great numbers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 15:01
|
|
|
Djarum posted:
Russia was in ww1 for 4 years, and Afghanistan for 9 years. They can probably continue to grind and torture their army for a few more years. But if Putin leaves, who knows what will happen. He's 70 years old, so his reign is naturally coming to an end soon anyways. I don't think a Russian civil war would be any more hilarious than this current conflict, which if you squint you eyes, looks like a civil war of the USSR.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 15:56
|
|
|
Chill Monster posted:Russia was in ww1 for 4 years, and Afghanistan for 9 years. They can probably continue to grind and torture their army for a few more years. But if Putin leaves, who knows what will happen. He's 70 years old, so his reign is naturally coming to an end soon anyways. I don't particularly relish the prospect of Russia having a destabilizing Civil War. Every time Russia does it sends Shockwave around the world. But on I'm not sure if any orderly transfer from Putin in any circumstance is even possible. What happens when the boss's seat is open? Probably not good stuff. Honestly despite it all I feel so bad for Russians (and over slavbloc countries) crushed in a vice by their state. I watch a lot of Danil Oran's 1420 and NFKRZ on YouTube to get a sense of how Russians feel (among other Sources) and I really wonder what will happen when people's disaffected apathy actually breaks and what it will turn into.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:11
|
|
|
MikeC posted:Thanks for reviewing that, i didn't know enough to understand if it was reasonably real or not. Would the US Army doctrine simply accept losses to mines in this case to get suppression and Ukraine is just unable to do this due to lack of equipment (2nd part speculative of course)? Even if the US didn't have air support, I think they would conduct breaching operations with more direct fire support from other maneuver companies, would use more smoke, and would conduct the assault at night. Fighting at night is hard and takes a lot of practice. Just having some nightvision goggles isn't enough. Based on anecdotal evidence, I think the Ukrainian SOF does well at night, but their regular forces stick to daylight operations on the offense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:13
|
|
|
Insane to think that Russia has lost over 3x as many troops in this conflict so far than in the entirety of the Afghanistan war.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:18
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Insane to think that Russia has lost over 3x as many troops in this conflict so far than in the entirety of the Afghanistan war. Not to mention Russia didn't fight Afghanistan, the Soviet Union did. With a tremendously larger military available, only a fraction of which was engaged in the fight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:23
|
|
|
Djarum posted:Well I don’t think that gambit is going to work either. putting aside the question of whether the Russians goal was taking Ukraine, I'm curious why you think that Russia holding onto the land bridge is looking like a pipe dream? Shouldn't we wait until the Russian army collapses and is in full retreat to declare the capture of Crimea and the end of the war imminent? **Like to be clear, I don't believe that Ukraine has even encountered this belt of prepared Russian fieldworks and obstacles that protects the corridor outside of this "contact zone" where everything I've seen implies the Ukrainians are having a rough go of things.. It's not clear to me what Ukraine has to hope for going forward in the south at this point. Starsfan fucked around with this message at 16:29 on Jul 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
New Russian Civil War sounds like Clancychat so if you talk about it, you at least should outline the sides.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:34
|
|
|
Chill Monster posted:Russia was in ww1 for 4 years, and Afghanistan for 9 years. They can probably continue to grind and torture their army for a few more years. But if Putin leaves, who knows what will happen. He's 70 years old, so his reign is naturally coming to an end soon anyways. The differences between WW1 and even Afghanistan are night and day to the current conflict. WW1 isn't anywhere near a comparison so I am not even going to bother. With Afghanistan you are looking at massively more loss of blood and treasure. Russia has lost more in the first few months of the war than they did in 9 years in Afghanistan. The bigger issues for them compared to Afghanistan is they were easily able to replace the material losses and they could deal with the loss of manpower as 15k KIA and 54k WIA over 9 years is sustainable. Right now every helicopter, tank, IFV, missile, artillery piece, etc that is destroyed they can't replace. Every soldier killed or wounded is a finite resource that again they can't easily replace. They are already having population problems, much like every other country on the planet right now, taking a massive chunk out of their 18-45 year old male population is going to cripple them for decades to come. You couple that with the economic sanctions already in place and no doubt worse after effects in the coming years and decades the future in Russia looks incredibly bleak. Honestly Russia has another 12-18 months at most of being able to keep this going at any realistic rate. Depending on various scenarios that could easily shrink rapidly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:37
|
|
|
Djarum posted:The differences between WW1 and even Afghanistan are night and day to the current conflict. WW1 isn't anywhere near a comparison so I am not even going to bother. With Afghanistan you are looking at massively more loss of blood and treasure. Russia has lost more in the first few months of the war than they did in 9 years in Afghanistan. The bigger issues for them compared to Afghanistan is they were easily able to replace the material losses and they could deal with the loss of manpower as 15k KIA and 54k WIA over 9 years is sustainable. Right now every helicopter, tank, IFV, missile, artillery piece, etc that is destroyed they can't replace. Every soldier killed or wounded is a finite resource that again they can't easily replace. They are already having population problems, much like every other country on the planet right now, taking a massive chunk out of their 18-45 year old male population is going to cripple them for decades to come. You couple that with the economic sanctions already in place and no doubt worse after effects in the coming years and decades the future in Russia looks incredibly bleak. doesn't Ukraine have all of these same problems as well except to an even greater degree? Well not so much the sanctions granted, although Ukraine didn't have much of a productive economy in the first place (and what they had was concentrated disproportionately in the areas of the country that are now contested or occupied by Russia). Ukraine has the aid faucet I suppose, but it seems like that's becoming much more tenuous lately.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:42
|
|
|
Djarum posted:Honestly Russia has another 12-18 months at most of being able to keep this going at any realistic rate. Depending on various scenarios that could easily shrink rapidly. You think so? Even with a depressed mobilization reserve there is probably about 1 million more they can realistically force into the army gradually through 3-4 waves, which sounds like at least 3-4 years of grindy war until it breaks at the current casualty rate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
I think Djarum's timeline would work if Russia wasn't under Putin. Whatever is going on internally in Russia, I don't think any opposition that actually exists is going to just give up the war immediately. Depending on how bloody minded Putin is and how western support might ebb, though, I'm really loath to make a prediction other than that even if Russia "wins," it loses. It is definitely a weakened state, but that might not be enough for Ukraine to get back what it has lost since 2014.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:55
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:You think so? Even with a depressed mobilization reserve there is probably about 1 million more they can realistically force into the army gradually through 3-4 waves, which sounds like at least 3-4 years of grindy war until it breaks at the current casualty rate. They can keep shoving bodies into uniforms indefinitely, that's not and will not be the limiting factor. Equipment, vehicles, and munitions are the limiting factors wrt actually fighting a war in a way that has a chance of accomplishing something militarily vs just maintaining a stalemate that is too costly for either side to break. it's not as widely reported on, but Russia's munition situation definitely is not infinite (and I don't personally buy, for instance, the MoD assertion that the last 6 months of Russian shell hunger was because wagner was stealing all the shells) and has already been struggling to keep up. I wouldn't hazard a guess personally to the timeline, but yeah on a very fundamental level the current scale and intensity of the war just isn't sustainable for either side without huge external assistance and the mid-long term strategizing on each side has been around outlasting the other by making the conflict too costly to sustain. Russia has banked repeatedly on outside support for Ukraine imminently drying up (which they've been utterly wrong about each time and indeed it only increases each time) because that's the light at the end of the tunnel for them. Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Jul 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:55
|
|
|
Starsfan posted:putting aside the question of whether the Russians goal was taking Ukraine, I'm curious why you think that Russia holding onto the land bridge is looking like a pipe dream? Shouldn't we wait until the Russian army collapses and is in full retreat to declare the capture of Crimea and the end of the war imminent? Well there is no reasonable scenario in which Russia can hold on to the entirety of the land bridge. Ukraine is not going to run out of weapons at any point in the near to mid future. Even if let's say Ukraine decides tomorrow to stop trying to push on the fronts they can easily continue to destroy Russian man and material throughout the region. This is increasingly costly to Russia as every command post, ammo dump, radar site, artillery emplacement, etc is target that is again not easily replaced. On top of that they can't develop the region to allow transport and settlement as it would be an active war zone. At a certain point the costs to Russia just becomes too great and you are unable to enact any returns on the expenditure. Now in reality there is zero chance that the Russia defenses will hold long term. At a certain point there will be a break through, time is on the Ukrainian side here as well. They are not under pressure to make massive gains quickly and it is in their benefit to do it as safely as possible with the least amount of life lost. I think a lot of people were given unrealistic expectations from the last counteroffensive. fatherboxx posted:New Russian Civil War sounds like Clancychat so if you talk about it, you at least should outline the sides. Honestly I don't think we would know who the players involved would be until it would happen. With Putin still around no one is going to even hint at that kind of ambition lest they find themselves by a high-rise window. Like I said before I think if it would happen it would come suddenly and out of nowhere like the coup attempt. You wouldn't see a long bubbling tensions with multiple factions in the open. Most likely things would pop off and you would see people take sides and form up ranks quickly. Talking about the potential of it happening at this point is not Clancychat but ins and outs are basically impossible to predict at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 16:58
|
|
|
Russia is so centralized in Moscow that you won't see a civil war. There will be a power struggle in the capital, but whoever controls it will control the country. They may have less authority over regional governments than Putin did but at the end of the day no one is going to try to make a break for it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 17:08
|
|
|
there's really zero to be gained by wild speculation about some hypothetical russian civil war
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 17:10
|
|
|
Djarum posted:Well there is no reasonable scenario in which Russia can hold on to the entirety of the land bridge. Ukraine is not going to run out of weapons at any point in the near to mid future. Even if let's say Ukraine decides tomorrow to stop trying to push on the fronts they can easily continue to destroy Russian man and material throughout the region. This is increasingly costly to Russia as every command post, ammo dump, radar site, artillery emplacement, etc is target that is again not easily replaced. On top of that they can't develop the region to allow transport and settlement as it would be an active war zone. At a certain point the costs to Russia just becomes too great and you are unable to enact any returns on the expenditure. I don't think this is true. I don't think NATO will want to funnel tons of money and equipment into a forever stalemate that stretches for years, or they'll at least stop providing what's needed for offensive breakthrough attempts if the Ukrainians are repeatedly burning those extra resources on doomed offensives that don't regain any ground. And that's assuming the Z chuds don't make a comeback in the 2024 US elections.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 17:12
|
|
|
Quixzlizx posted:I don't think this is true. I don't think NATO will want to funnel tons of money and equipment into a forever stalemate that stretches for years, or they'll at least stop providing what's needed for offensive breakthrough attempts if the Ukrainians are repeatedly burning those extra resources on doomed offensives that don't regain any ground. buddy we love dumping a generation's of wealth into a decades long quagmire, it's the only thing we know. betting on the US not deciding to spend a decade or more pouring resources into a war is not a smart bet over the last half century. also the presidential election stuff (and tbf pinning your geopolitical ambitions on Trump is not much smarter than the above bet) wouldn't begin to have an impact for 15 more months. the far more likely outcome at that point is just that support will continue quietly than that it will be instantly cut off. Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Jul 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 17:14
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:They can keep shoving bodies into uniforms indefinitely, that's not and will not be the limiting factor. Equipment, vehicles, and munitions are the limiting factors wrt actually fighting a war in a way that has a chance of accomplishing something militarily vs just maintaining a stalemate that is too costly for either side to break. it's not as widely reported on, but Russia's munition situation definitely is not infinite (and I don't personally buy, for instance, the MoD assertion that the last 6 months of Russian shell hunger was because wagner was stealing all the shells) and has already been struggling to keep up. I wouldn't hazard a guess personally to the timeline, but yeah on a very fundamental level the current scale and intensity of the war just isn't sustainable for either side without huge external assistance and the mid-long term strategizing on each side has been around outlasting the other by making the conflict too costly to sustain. Russia has banked repeatedly on outside support for Ukraine imminently drying up (which they've been utterly wrong about each time and indeed it only increases each time) because that's the light at the end of the tunnel for them. Hasn't foreign support for Ukraine effectively dried up tho? There is a severe scarcity of weapons and equipment, not to mention vehicles. Ukraine has no air force to speak of and is down to the last shells that the US has dug out of the basement. Meanwhile, their manpower supply is far, far smaller than Russias to begin with. What is the point at which they negotiate peace?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
Morrow posted:Russia is so centralized in Moscow that you won't see a civil war. There will be a power struggle in the capital, but whoever controls it will control the country. They may have less authority over regional governments than Putin did but at the end of the day no one is going to try to make a break for it. What about Georgia and Chechnya?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 05:27 |
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Hasn't foreign support for Ukraine effectively dried up tho? There is a severe scarcity of weapons and equipment, not to mention vehicles. Ukraine has no air force to speak of and is down to the last shells that the US has dug out of the basement. Meanwhile, their manpower supply is far, far smaller than Russias to begin with. What is the point at which they negotiate peace? This entire post is wrong. A great poster in this thread posts weekly updates of all the equipment that is being sent and planned to be sent to Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2023 17:17
|
|