Russian / Ukranian Combat Tactics

[John]

Unless Russia threatens Kiev, there will be no peace deal and war will continue. So, once donbass is taken, what do they do next?

Ukraine has shown that they don't care about their people or cities being destroyed. So, what will bring them to table apart from threat to Kiev? Will Russia come back for Kiev?

Will Russia go for Odessa? since it is mainly Russian speaking but probably very entrenched like mariupol by now.

I believe giving EU membership and some kinda of security guarantee will be enough to get Ukraine’s approval if status quo is maintained. But I think main obstacle would be Putin, he wants a victory even on paper he can showcase and that will play out in coming weeks.

[Vayutuvan]

The CO knows many of the tanks are not battle worthy. If his crews abandon tanks, he might be able to show it as loss due to enemy action
(because he didn't get air support, or infantry did not arrive to cover them for AGTMs etc), rather than admit it was poor maintenance.

Are Russian rank and file that traiterous? Rodina comes first. At least in all the Tom Clancy stuff I have read.

[bala]

This tussle is not for the faint heart, Ukr is being sacrificed in bits and pieces. It is about two strong willed opponents not Ukr vs Rus but Nato backer vs Rus. IMO Russia will survive even without Putin and the resolve will be strong since the alternate is gloomy. A Rus with so many nuclear weapons is not going away, I would say tis impossible. Rus is used to having heavy losses but in the end they will prevail. After getting gyan from Military types, Rus is going for entire Ukr in pieces and parts until it is satisfied with no Nato on its border. Odessa is another pocket of Ukr forces which Rus will force them to surrender or be completely decimated. Settlement is not an option, currently. The Black Sea is too strategic for Rus.

[Atmavik]

Deans Sir , you have provided valuable insights .. thank you!

[vera_k]

I believe giving EU membership and some kinda of security guarantee will be enough to get Ukraine’s approval if status quo is maintained. But I think main obstacle would be Putin, he wants a victory even on paper he can showcase and that will play out in coming weeks.

Might be some truth to what Putin needs. FWIW, a Russian friend of mine very early on said that this was timed for elections. Well, these elections are in 2024, so long road ahead unless there is some type of breakthrough soon. If this is the case, I'm not sure where Western expectations of a short lived conflict are coming from.

[brar_w]

and parts until it is satisfied with no Nato on its border

It appears increasingly likely (than ever) that to make this a reality Putin may have to invade Finland, and by extension also Sweden (throw Norway in for good measure).

[bala]

Agreed Brar Sahib. I think Finland will be extra cautious, don't know about Sweden/Norway. Poland is on shaky grounds with Rus. Nato cover for Europe looks increasing a facade rather than actual fighting force. Stationing troops costs billions and where would the Euros come up with such cash. Germany has already declared it is going alone with 100 B infusion for its armed forces. France is being threatened by Right-wing politicos like Le Pen (who avowedly are pro Rus). If you think about it, Nato is really UK and US the rest are all ephemeral and fleeting illusions. Putin and Rus know this very well.

[brar_w]

Agreed Brar Sahib. I think Finland will be extra cautious, don't know about Sweden/Norway. Poland is on shaky grounds with Rus. Nato cover for Europe looks increasing a facade rather than actual fighting force. Stationing troops costs billions and where would the Euros come up with such cash. Germany has already declared it is going along with 100 B infusion for its armed forces. France is being threatened by Right-wing politicos like Le Pen (who avowedly are pro Rus). If you think about it, Nato is really UK and US the rest are all ephemeral and fleeting illusions. Putin and Rus know this very well.

Finland is expected to sign the paperwork for NATO in the coming weeks. Not too far fetched to assume it is coordinating with Sweden.Invading Finland would mean a shared border with NATO via Sweden (if it also signs up to join) which then means invading Sweden. That gets them to the border with Norway which is in NATO already so I suppose he would also have to invade Norway.

As far as where would European NATO come up with cash, I guess one could look at their economies (same place where Germany came up with 100B in short term procurement + 2+% GDP on defense commitment). France and UK already are at or above 2%, and Poland and eastern states are there already. Plus now they have 100K US troops stationed in Europe. Add Nukes and MAD and I think they're pretty well able to live up the alliance's Article 5 commitments.

[bala]

I don't have much faith in Article 5 commitments, if you read the fine details you would know.

[brar_w]

I don't have much faith in Article 5 commitments, if you read the fine details you would know.

Ok I’ll go and read it.

[S_Madhukar]

I am still surprised Russia hasn’t done enough in interdicting Western supplies. May be instead of Kiev they should have occupied Lviv? I know it is closer to Poland and will be easier to watch their troop movements but still what was their plan for the rest of the year? Allow weapons to be shipped and used later for CI in the East ? South sea has been reasonably well secured but they have to plug this in the western side now

[brar_w]

I am still surprised Russia hasn’t done enough in interdicting Western supplies. May be instead of Kiev they should have occupied Lviv? I know it is closer to Poland and will be easier to watch their troop movements but still what was their plan for the rest of the year? Allow weapons to be shipped and used later for CI in the East ? South sea has been reasonably well secured but they have to plug this in the western side now

Ukraine is the largest country in Europe after Russia. Western Ukraine shares a 500+ km border with Poland and hundreds of km of additional border with Slovakia, and Romania. There are not enough Russian troops in Ukraine to effectively close all land or river routes (they've removed most if not all of the BTG's around the capital region so this means opening up a new axis with an even larger force than the one that came in from Belarus). A few pages back I had a post about trying to close this via airpower and they would need an order of magnitude higher (if not multiple orders of magnitude higher) number of daily sorties including probably putting up the world's best GMTI and moving target strike capability (which we haven't seen any evidence of so far). ATGM's, Loitering munitions, MANPADS and similar weapons are small enough that they can be moved via smaller vehicles and can bypass established depots altogether. Closing all that down is going to be damn near impossible short of declaring war on NATO and bombing Poland, Slovakia, or Romania (all three have viable routes for these weapons).

[ritesh]

Gurulog, taking into account what is known publicly in this war till now, the performance of russion weapons seems to be below par and underwhelming.

Keeping the above in mind, how do military planners in the country will like to assess our war preparedness and effectiveness? Be it against chyna or bakistan.

[Atmavik]

Gurulog, taking into account what is known publicly in this war till now, the performance of russion weapons seems to be below par and underwhelming.

Keeping the above in mind, how do military planners in the country will like to assess our war preparedness and effectiveness? Be it against chyna or bakistan.

Tin cans are worst Tanks if u can call it a Tank.

Having said that if u are going to stick to Roads and drive thru towns/cities u will be ambushed with Atgm and I don’t think it matters if u r in a T some thing or a leopard, Abrams or Merkava.

Watch this video of a Ukrainian T 64 Ambush a BT 4 Apc

https://youtu.be/seLu9OL_z1w

[John]

I find this video where BTR with its auto cannon taking out two T-72 tanks bit concerning looks like they don’t have much protection in the rear. 30mm APDS is enough to cause a cook off.

https://twitter.com/ralee85/status/1512 ... AXf-LivlIw

Russian navy landing ship using its grad rocket launchers, people have asked earlier how effective WM-18 rocket launchers on our LSTs are gives you some idea

https://twitter.com/ralee85/status/1512 ... AXf-LivlIw

[Pratyush]

This war is making it clear that hard kill active protection systems with the ability to create a hemisphere arround the tank and APC are a must. In addition to the various passive protection systems.

[Deans]

The CO knows many of the tanks are not battle worthy. If his crews abandon tanks, he might be able to show it as loss due to enemy action
(because he didn't get air support, or infantry did not arrive to cover them for AGTMs etc), rather than admit it was poor maintenance.

Are Russian rank and file that traiterous? Rodina comes first. At least in all the Tom Clancy stuff I have read.

I don't believe a Russian serviceman will betray his country. However, they don't see selling some fuel on the side, to be a treasonous activity -
particularly if its fuel allocated to run a tank in peacetime, that you know is not roadworthy and you and the unit will get into trouble if you say so.
The same conscript will probably refuse to give away any info if he is interrogated / bribed, as a POW. The joke in the Russian /Soviet army was that they must be a very rich country, because people stole from the state for 70 years and there are still things left to steal.

On the cause of battlefield losses, obviously its speculation, arising from the unusually large number of abandoned / captured Russian tanks.
In general, Russian officers have less experience than their IA counterparts. An officer in the armored corps does not have much visibility on the status of tanks kept in reserve. He would have rarely interacted with infantry officers, let alone his air force counterparts. He does not know which of his tank crews he can rely on. So its human nature to blame things he has no control over.

[Deans]

Ukraine is the largest country in Europe after Russia. Western Ukraine shares a 500+ km border with Poland and hundreds of km of additional border with Slovakia, and Romania. There are not enough Russian troops in Ukraine to effectively close all land or river routes (they've removed most if not all of the BTG's around the capital region so this means opening up a new axis with an even larger force than the one that came in from Belarus). .

What few people realise is that the length of the front between Russia (and Belarus) and Ukraine, is longer than the frontage over which Operation Barbarossa was mounted in 1941. That invasion needed 3 million men.

[brar_w]

Possible wreckage of a Russian Orion MALE UAV. This is one of the newer systems recently inducted.

https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/15 ... 6050631684

[arvin]

^^^
Wreckage looks unusual.
Electro optics (EO) lens appears to be intact while one of the wings is broken as if trampled upon.
If the wing has hit the ground, EO should have hit earlier and should have been a mess.

[Deans]

^^^^
While the analyst above makes some good points, I think he is misunderstanding the role of the VKS in this conflict. Going by the number of sorties, types of armaments being carried, etc., it seems that the VKS is not trying to establish complete air dominance over Ukraine, but are only providing battlefield air support. In that role, I think they have faired pretty well.

What is concerning for them is the lack of PGMs probably due to corruption again, and sanctions, that's forcing them to fly their Sukhois low with dumb bombs, making them targets for MANPADS.

Corruption in Putin's Russia is widespread and has already destroyed their space program. We may now be seeing the effects of it on their military capabilities as well.

The RuAf main role has always been to support ground forces. The max sorties have been allocated to Close Air support.
Most Squadrons are allotted to armies and operate against targets identified by the Army commander.

Attacks on infrastructure, storage depots etc. are centrally coordinated. That's where the majority of long range munitions /PGMs are being used.

Mobile SAM's of the Ukraine army have not been eliminated and are the threat to high flying aircraft (especially in conjunction with NATO AWACS).
Russia has been managing 300 sorties a day for the past 3 weeks. It seems a low absolute figure, but they have held it steady despite losses and maintenance led grounding, that is inevitable after a certain number of combat sorties. In the last 2 weeks RuAF is believed to have lost just 2 fixed wing aircraft (Oryx has the same figure).

[ks_sachin]

This war is making it clear that hard kill active protection systems with the ability to create a hemisphere arround the tank and APC are a must. In addition to the various passive protection systems.

Also making it clear that the above is virtually impossible to achieve and that Armr and APC / ICV are vulnerable if not employed judiciously and with due care for fundamental combat tactics.

[John]

Russia has been managing 300 sorties a day for the past 3 weeks. It seems a low absolute figure, but they have held it steady despite losses and maintenance led grounding, that is inevitable after a certain number of combat sorties. In the last 2 weeks RuAF is believed to have lost just 2 fixed wing aircraft (Oryx has the same figure).

I believe average sorties was 250 over past two month and that includes I believe stand off attacks. Regardless that seems low when the Russians were focused on all of Ukraine (might be ok if focus is just Donetsk), to put into perspective IAF was doing 100 during for Kargil.

RuAF is also forced to fly low coupled with threat from Ukr air defenses and dumb bombs I believe leads to less missions where it can successfully deliver its payload or hit its target, previously posted video by Cyrano noted the same thing as even Russian PR videos show flankers returning with full load.

As for aviation losses so far there have 19 Fighter AC losses: 9 Su-25, 5 Su-34, 4 Su-30 and 1 Su-35 by Oryx.

[brar_w]

The RuAf main role has always been to support ground forces. The max sorties have been allocated to Close Air support.
Most Squadrons are allotted to armies and operate against targets identified by the Army commander.

With the sortie volume they're putting out (250-300 / day on average), and the # of Russian troops currently on Ukrainian soil, that's about what can be expected (mostly tactical CAS with stand off strike sorties as well). Folks forget that when asking for them to do the impossible like shutting down huge borders, destroy every moving target that looks like a weapons convoy, or pick a fight with NATO.

[Deans]

I believe average sorties was 250 over past two month and that includes I believe stand off attacks. Regardless that seems low when the Russians were focused on all of Ukraine (might be ok if focus is just Donetsk), to put into perspective IAF was doing 100 during for Kargil.

As for aviation losses so far there have 19 Fighter AC losses: 9 Su-25, 5 Su-34, 4 Su-30 and 1 Su-35 by Oryx.

Yes, the average was 200 till around 21st Mar, then increased to 300, for the 250 average. My point was that the tempo has increased despite losses.
15 of the 19 fixed wing losses were in the first 2 weeks. (4 aircraft lost for the last 6000 sorties).
As a comparison, the IAF lost 45 aircraft over 6000 sorties in 1971.
Israeli losses in 1973 were 1 per 100 sorties.

[ShivS]

Are Russian rank and file that traiterous? Rodina comes first. At least in all the Tom Clancy stuff I have read.

I don't believe a Russian serviceman will betray his country. However, they don't see selling some fuel on the side, to be a treasonous activity -
particularly if its fuel allocated to run a tank in peacetime, that you know is not roadworthy and you and the unit will get into trouble if you say so.
The same conscript will probably refuse to give away any info if he is interrogated / bribed, as a POW. The joke in the Russian /Soviet army was that they must be a very rich country, because people stole from the state for 70 years and there are still things left to steal.
.

Ugly, operating in mud is hard. Tanks can get stuck or throw a track if the driver is not adequately trained.As a rule when training is compromised, arduous training or challenging conditions training is skipped.

That said this is the third conflict in recent times, Gulf war, Chechnya and this war when Russian armour has been found wanting. The reasons change but lacklustre performance is constant.

[Atmavik]

^^^ ShivS , we have to replace a lot of these Old T 72s , What should be our plan to replace them now That Arjun project has ended ?

[ShivS]

Not qualified to answer that. Not aware of requirements or options available but Arjun is a non starter.

[John]

I believe average sorties was 250 over past two month and that includes I believe stand off attacks. Regardless that seems low when the Russians were focused on all of Ukraine (might be ok if focus is just Donetsk), to put into perspective IAF was doing 100 during for Kargil.

As for aviation losses so far there have 19 Fighter AC losses: 9 Su-25, 5 Su-34, 4 Su-30 and 1 Su-35 by Oryx.

Yes, the average was 200 till around 21st Mar, then increased to 300, for the 250 average. My point was that the tempo has increased despite losses.
15 of the 19 fixed wing losses were in the first 2 weeks. (4 aircraft lost for the last 6000 sorties).
As a comparison, the IAF lost 45 aircraft over 6000 sorties in 1971.
Israeli losses in 1973 were 1 per 100 sorties.

Regarding your comparison to Yom Kippur and 1971, the AF choose to fly over radar horizon in order to eliminate enemy air defenses and not to mention the large air combats that were witnessed in those conflicts unlike here .


Interestingly RuAF has choosen not to risk its Fighters trying to eliminate all of Ukrainian air defenses in a blitz, I expected 30-40 losses in first few days as they eliminate their S-300s but that hasn’t happened. These are old S-300 and IDF has done pretty good job making even newer ones operated by Syria in effective, I expected the same.

This is a odd decision coupled with current decision to fly most fighters low perhaps it would have made sense if they expected a quick surrender of Ukraine but now it doesn’t. There is some other theories put forth in previous videos on why perhaps, lack of ECM pods and anti radiation missiles ( I don’t believe it).

Currently RuAF hasn’t seem to operate many fight missions outside of the Donetsk. Which will minimize the losses till the Ukr air defenses are moved from Kyiv and Lviv it would interesting to see if they do that and risk them, cat & mouse game.

[Deans]

The average no of sorties was 200 till around 21st Mar, then increased to 300.

15 of the 19 fixed wing losses were in the first 2 weeks. (4 aircraft lost for the last 6000 sorties).
As a comparison, the IAF lost 45 aircraft over 6000 sorties in 1971.
Israeli losses in 1973 were 1 per 100 sorties.

US & Allied losses in Desert storm in 91, were 52 aircraft for 60,000 sorties (excluding sorties over friendly airspace). That was against negligible
enemy airpower and severely degraded SAMs.

[brar_w]

The average no of sorties was 200 till around 21st Mar, then increased to 300.

15 of the 19 fixed wing losses were in the first 2 weeks. (4 aircraft lost for the last 6000 sorties).
As a comparison, the IAF lost 45 aircraft over 6000 sorties in 1971.
Israeli losses in 1973 were 1 per 100 sorties.

US & Allied losses in Desert storm in 91, were 52 aircraft for 60,000 sorties (excluding sorties over friendly airspace). That was against negligible
enemy airpower and severely degraded SAMs.

They did lose 52 fixed winged aircraft including 37 to combat losses (US lost 28 to combat) over 116,000 sorties at an ops tempo that averaged more than 2500 sorties a day over a 42 day air campaign. This is about 10 times the average daily sorties being put up in this war. There was a lot of low level flying and a lot of losses attributed to AAA because of that. The A-10 alone flew more than 8,000 sorties (equivalent to about 25 days worth of sorties the RuAF is putting up here). The air defenses were degraded by the airpower generating the sorties and performing the SEAD and other ground attack missions (they used more than 500 HARM's in the first 24-hours of the air campaign) and initial strikes (including those using fixed and rotary winged aircraft) on command and control, and early warning capability of the Iraqi forces. Another data point worth noting that dates this a bit (we're talking 3 decades ago) is that only 8% of the munitions dropped in Gulf War were precision guided. The percentage of stand off munitions was even lower particularly in the AL variety (very limited CALCM availability and use as opposed to what the Russians can use from Russian territory via its SO missile equipped bomber force). So the losses (as low as they are) need to be balanced with the fact.

[enaiel]

I've always naively believed that infantry were supposed to support the heavy armour in a convoy. But in many videos online in this conflict, I do not see any infantry dismount their APCs to either assist the ambushed armour or even engage the threat. Instead they go round the ambushed armour. In fact, no one engages the threat unless they can engage it while still moving forward. In one video, there was infantry on foot, but even they didn't engage the threat and took a slightly off beaten path to avoid the threat. Is this normal? Can someone please educate me?

[brar_w]

If this stretches beyond another 3-4 weeks, we should begin seeing some heavier and more capable weapons being transferred to Ukraine beyond MANPADS and ATGMs which will still continue to flow. It would be interesting how those are employed and what comes of it.

The AFP and several other reporters have now confirmed that Harpoon missiles are on their way to Ukraine.

[Atmavik]

I've always naively believed that infantry were supposed to support the heavy armour in a convoy. But in many videos online in this conflict, I do not see any infantry dismount their APCs to either assist the ambushed armour or even engage the threat. Instead they go round the ambushed armour. In fact, no one engages the threat unless they can engage it while still moving forward. In one video, there was infantry on foot, but even they didn't engage the threat and took a slightly off beaten path to avoid the threat. Is this normal? Can someone please educate me?

Infantry is supposed to dismount and charge the ambush. the vehicles should exist the kill zone while vehicles in rear should engage the direction of fire. this happens to an extent in this case

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfRcmJTAouM&t=1s

[ks_sachin]

^^^ ShivS , we have to replace a lot of these Old T 72s , What should be our plan to replace them now That Arjun project has ended ?

Plus we may have a diff doctrine when employing armr. Rest assured if you and I know of the T aerie’ vulnerabilities so to does the IA.

[enaiel]

Infantry is supposed to dismount and charge the ambush. the vehicles should exist the kill zone while vehicles in rear should engage the direction of fire. this happens to an extent in this case

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfRcmJTAouM&t=1s

Thanks, the engagement in this video happened exactly as I imagined. But in many videos I did not see it happen, so got very confused.

[John]

By the way I believe anti tank missile that is being fired in the video is Stugna it can be fired remotely and likely the operators are few hundred ft away.

[Atmavik]

By the way I believe anti tank missile that is being fired in the video is Stugna it can be fired remotely and likely the operators are few hundred ft away.

the speed, range and top attack looks like NLAW.

[ks_sachin]

The CO knows many of the tanks are not battle worthy. If his crews abandon tanks, he might be able to show it as loss due to enemy action
(because he didn't get air support, or infantry did not arrive to cover them for AGTMs etc), rather than admit it was poor maintenance.

Are Russian rank and file that traiterous? Rodina comes first. At least in all the Tom Clancy stuff I have read.

When you have a corrupt system right from the Soviet times what do you expect. Not saying that all are corrupt but but the Russian system and Putin's personality driven leadership is not condusive to talent and merit. Everyone will hear what they expect to hear and this perhaps continues from the Societ times.
I would suggest you read about Chernobyl to understand the rot that existed in the Soviet union.

[Mort Walker]

Infantry is supposed to dismount and charge the ambush. the vehicles should exist the kill zone while vehicles in rear should engage the direction of fire. this happens to an extent in this case

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfRcmJTAouM&t=1s

Thanks, the engagement in this video happened exactly as I imagined. But in many videos I did not see it happen, so got very confused.

Russian army is heavy on armored and artillery firepower. They use fire power to clear the path for infantry. A Russian army division will have 3 brigades with two being armored and one infantry. Infantry follows the armor. Other armies like the IA is heavily focused on infantry where it may have 2 infantry brigades and 1 armored brigade.