Russian / Ukranian Combat Tactics

[John]

Pgm's or not, they have complete superiority above 10-15K feet, they can literally drop dumb bombs and take out transport, communication and signal nodes.

There is good reason RuAF is still flying low the minute they are above radar horizon they will get shoot at. Only way they do that they need to run more SEAD missions it was big mistake to not spend couple weeks on taking out air defenses before launching an invasion.

They been trying to pay catch up and unable to do that for Ukraine as a whole, so decided to focus on just the east but so far it feels they are still not dedicating enough resources on it. Su-35 on SEAD mission got shot down 2 days ago right near Izyum controlled by Russia.

[Karan M]

TLDR version - the Russian Army feinted towards Kiev and launched heavy probing attacks to panic the Ukrainians to deploy their best and brightest to protect the capital. Meanwhile they devastated Ukrainian infra, prevented the reserves from heading towards Donbass by multiple feints and by focusing on Kiev with a lot of theatrics (40 mile convoy), sieged Mariupol, their primary target and once that was done, they started a withdrawal from Kiev to head towards the Donbass, where the fight will be truly decided, having achieved their aims of wrecking most of Ukrainian heavy armor and maneuver capability and also their fuel stocks. Now the Russians are poised to go all out on the Donbass, which was their aim all along.

Interesting, sorry I haven't watched the full thing, but I have one question: why would you launch 50,000 soldiers and 2,000 tanks on a feint and leave them to suffer major losses?

Watch the video. If you don't then you won't understand. They had to make sure the Ukrainians took them seriously and committed the bulk of their strongest units to defend Kiev. And it's functioned. Western sources admit many units were stripped of their AD, armor assets which were sent to Kiev.

[Karan M]

I would take the whole report with grain of salt I find it funny

Several people have found your posts which have been verging on western propaganda for weeks now even funnier.

People try to justify this as rational move, you could prevented Ukrainians from heading over to Donbass just by holding small # of forces in north and south and attacking the east to start out with on Feb when ground was frozen. The best and brightest have always been in the east & south (inc Odessa) and when Russians attacked Kyiv none of forces dug out to reinforce it.

Right. This is the level of your argumentation. The analyst mentioned the Russians attack Kiev to deliberately seduce the best forces away from Donbass, fix them in place, and committed heavy forces to Kiev to attempt to show a serious attempt (as versus committing the real number of forces required for urban Warfare) and you state they merely wanted to prevent forces from moving over to Donbass as versus fixing them in one place, restricting maneuver and hammering them.

Like it or not Putin was hoping for quick win by capturing Kyiv in 3 days or 14 days whoever you want to believe, with that plan went awry he switched over to second plan.

Kiev to be taken with a fraction of the forces one would commit to a full blown assault for a city of that size. Of course Putin has stayed in power for decades being an idiot who needs John on BRF to tell him basic military strategy. He has no generals for that.

Now you are attacking the east with less forces (demoralized) in spring where traversing the area is next to impossible.

Plus Ukr is now reinforcing their forces in east by moving them from Kyiv and they all have battlefield experience. Why? because north collapsed so fast Ukrainians can now clear the north and get to the east before Russians can get there traveling via Belarus.

Where are these Ukrainian forces and how will they get there when Zelensky has been busy asking for things like tank and armor day in and night out?

If they wanted to hold down the Ukrainians you would have dug in halve your forces and forced them to clear out and inflict some heavy casualties (this might have been the plan but it feel apart?). Instead a rush retreat allowed Ukr forces to ambush the Russians left and right.

A rush retreat to get to point B fastest. And what are these heavy casualties beyond propaganda from Oryx's blog? Why would you dig in half your forces when you need most of them for Donbass now that yiu can move to phase 2 of your plan?

As for Ukrainian losses casualties aside which can be subjective, if you look at oryx data they ended up with more tanks, APC and artillery now thanks to all the Russian equipment they capture. There is also speculation a lot more equipment were captured that Ukrainians are hiding we are seeing Pantsir in Ukranian marking and those weren’t even reported captured before.

As I said earlier the best strategy was attacking the east to start out with all your forces they could have probably captured a good chunk of Donbas in a week (which is much faster than the current eastern offensive which has gone on for a week).

There you go - relying on "oryx's" data, a notable Pro Turkish propagandist who spends time on twitter espousing Pro Turkish propaganda and guys like you brought into it hook line and sinker. Where are those magical Bayraktar anyways? You were busy claiming Russian AD couldn't knock them down and now they seem to be missing in action. How does one capture Donbass in a week given the huge number of Ukrainian forces stationed in the area. Little makes sense in your claims.

[Karan M]

Another analysis from an artillery veteran about the attack on Kiev and what it intended to accomplish.

https://twitter.com/ArmchairW/status/15 ... o7R4w&s=19

Alright team, nightly analysis thread. This time we're revisiting my theory from yesterday about the Russian withdrawal from northern Ukraine.

Yesterday I discussed collusion in negotiations. Today we'll consider the operation as a raid.

Meet the Operational Maneuver Group. https://t.co/1O6R8GE6qc

The OMG (a truly apt acronym) is a divisional or corps-sized armored formation intended as a massive ground raiding force. There is no equivalent in NATO doctrine.

See the WWII raid on Tatsinskaya Airfield by the Soviet 24th Tank Corps. (my note do read this, its not a raid as we think of it, we are talking of an entire significant unit committed to battle and taking losses)

https://t.co/whwyQOg8Vd

An OMG is a separate formation from the conventional Soviet/Russian first, second, third, etc. echelons - intended to penetrate deep, wreak havoc, and then break out or hold on until relieved as the situation demands.

Well, what did the Russians do in northern Ukraine?

They did exactly that, punching deep into enemy territory, drawing off their reserves, and devastating much of the Ukrainian army before withdrawing.

How devastated is the Ukrainian Army in the north right now?

Bad enough that they're using commandeered civilian vehicles to move about in, appear to be almost out of artillery, and were unable to even attempt a pursuit as the Russians withdrew.

The much-hyped Ukrainian SOF were altogether absent during the Russian withdrawal across what looked like extended and vulnerable lines in the northeast, apparently not even reporting the movement.

This suggests they took unsustainable casualties in the area and were withdrawn.

So why'd the Russians leave?

Because the entire operation was probably conceptualized as a -raid-, not a proper offensive to take and hold ground as in the south. They were there to kill people and break things, they did exactly that, and it was time to move on.

This brings me back to negotiations, which I addressed quite heavily yesterday. This withdrawal was probably also necessary to - as the Russians themselves claim - facilitate a negotiated peace.

And this scenario doesn't require Ukrainian collusion.

It doesn't require collusion because it facilitates a decisive Ukrainian military defeat (via the defeat of most of the troops that were wrapped up fighting up north) and the occupation of much of southern Ukraine, which leads naturally to a negotiated peace on Russian terms.

But it also facilitates a negotiated peace, because in order to get a negotiated peace you need someone to negotiate with.

Zelensky has been hiding in a Polish basement for weeks and just today resurfaced in Kiev, so he is now in position to actually sign a peace agreement.

This removes him from the physical custody of NATO and makes it dramatically harder for NATO to lobby him to keep the war going to meet its own goals, which have precious little to do with the long-term wellbeing of Ukrainian citizens.

This theory generally explains the difference in Russian occupation policy between the north (nonexistent) and south (well-developed). It wasn't blundering incompetence, it was the difference between the OMGs conducting raids up north and the main effort to occupy the south.

I'l close on this thought:

War is like magic tricks - you need to look at the hand that's not busy distracting you.

/end

[Karan M]

This is an Australian Army veteran. A lot of the longer term, less hysterical, less tribal perspectives are coming from people who aren't subject to their establishments whims.

https://johnmenadue.com/cameron-leckie- ... t-to-east/

DEFENCE AND SECURITY, POLITICS, TOP 5
The Ukraine – a decisive transfer of the balance of power from west to east
By Cameron Leckie
Mar 30, 2022

Economic connections between US, EU, China, Russia and India.
It seems clear that the Western powers have overestimated the impact that the sanctions would have on Russia.

The 2022 Russo-Ukraine is also a proxy war between Russia and the Western world. We should be prepared for a decisive transfer of the balance of power from West to East…The bulk of the fighting is in the Donbas where there are few or no Western journalists.

Most of the debate and coverage of the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian war in Australia and the Western world is decidedly banal. It is characterised by the simplification of an extremely complex situation to generate a narrative that can be summarised as Putin and Russia are evil and Ukraine is good.

This gross simplification is not helpful in either understanding the causes of the war, the nature of the war, its broader implications and most importantly of all, how it can be ended with the least number of additional deaths and injuries and damage to Ukraine’s infrastructure.

The preponderance of human-interest reporting of the conflict in lieu of coverage of the war itself is illustrative. The heartbreaking examples of families torn asunder along with the brave exploits of Ukrainian soldiers or allegations of war crimes by Russia, whilst important, tends to trigger an emotional response rather than provide an accurate depiction of the course of events.

Partly this is because very few mainstream Western reporters, if any, appear to be located where the bulk of the fighting is, namely in the Donbass and around Mariupol. The resulting vacuum is filled by claims, many unverified and unverifiable, from the Ukrainian side, the aforementioned human-interest stories or the impact of missile strikes in and around the major cities. Truth has long been described as the first casualty of war. It would be unwise to think that this conflict is an exception. We should thus take a healthy dose of scepticism about the media reporting and analysis of the war – from all sides.

A narrative that seems to be gaining traction is that the Russian forces have culminated and Ukraine may actually be winning. This narrative could well be wishful thinking, influenced by the desire for Russia to lose, the overwhelming pro-Ukrainian bias of reporting and analysis and a misunderstanding of Russia’s aims and strategy.

The Russian military is running an ‘economy of effort’ operation. It has effectively fixed in place the garrisons defending Ukraine’s major cities leaving them incapable of supporting the troops in the Donbass. Meanwhile Russia is progressively destroying the military infrastructure of the Ukraine (resupply, maintenance and command and control facilities and weapon systems such as Air Defence, artillery and armoured vehicles) through a combination of air strikes, cruise missiles, rockets and traditional artillery across the breadth and depth of Ukraine. Approximately 60,000 of Ukraine’s best trained and equipped troops are located in the Donbass. It would appear unlikely that this force is capable of anything other than localised tactical level manoeuvre at this point due to a combination of ever dwindling supplies of ammunition, fuel and rations, Russia’s dominance in the air and ground based combat power, and the effects of combat to date.

Despite the alleged incompetence of the handling of the initial stages of the war, the Pentagon assesses that the Russian forces still retain nearly 90% of the initial combat power assigned to the invasion.

With Russian forces on the verge of completing the capture of Mariupol, it will only be a matter of time before the Ukrainian forces in the Donbass are fully encircled and subsequently destroyed or forced to surrender. Whilst there may be many weeks, or even months of fighting ahead, the writing is on the wall that Russia, barring outside intervention (i.e. NATO – which has repeatedly ruled out direct military intervention), will achieve its military objectives.]

The direct Russo-Ukraine conflict is however just one level of this conflict. Ukraine is actually an unfortunate pawn in the much bigger conflict. As long time Russia analyst Gilbert Doctorow notes this is a ‘full-blown proxy war between the United States of America and the Russian Federation, and it is about ending or perpetuating American global hegemony.’ Whilst the war in Ukraine will end sooner or later, the implications at a global scale of this proxy war will be of much greater consequence for a much greater period of time.

The Western response to Russia’s invasion has been to substantially increase its military aid to Ukraine (which is unlikely to change the outcome of the war) and implement economic (and cultural) sanctions of an unprecedented scale and nature on Russia.

This approach is unlikely to work for multiple reasons, the primary one being as I stated in my last article that there ‘are no sanctions that the US or Europe can implement that will not have a greater impact upon those countries than Russia or create further divisions among the Western powers.’

Whilst the sanctions will have a disruptive and negative effect on the Russian economy, they will not be devastating for the simple fact that Russia is too important to the global economy. The initial shock of the sanctions did not cause a collapse of the Russian financial system, nor did it result did not result in a bank run. The Ruble has already regained some of its value versus the US dollar and Russia has (for now) made bond repayments.

Russia is far from being isolated. Whilst a majority of countries voted against Russia at the United Nations General Assembly, of more importance is the countries that are not sanctioning Russia. Outside of the West virtually no country is sanctioning Russia, including the world’s two most populous, China and India with the world’s second and sixth largest economies.

Russia has many willing buyers for its energy, mineral and agricultural produce. For those countries not on Russia’s ‘unfriendly country list’ they will receive preferential deals for exports as already evidenced by the Rupee – Ruble oil mechanism with India and a natural gas and grain deal with Pakistan.

The impact of Western businesses withdrawing from Russia, whilst causing short to medium term disruptions, will in the longer term be managed through an expansion of Russia’s import substitution policies and sourcing goods from other countries. There are already reports that the sale of Chinese mobile phones in Russia have more than doubled whilst the Chinese financial company UnionPay is replacing VISA and Mastercard. The effect of the sanctions policy may very well be the permanent gifting of a market of 140 million people to Chinese and Indian businesses.

Prior to the war commencing many countries, including the United States and in Europe, were facing an inflationary crisis, largely driven by the surging costs of energy. That situation is now much worse. Europe is already suffering energy shortages. Attempts to replace Russian energy will be time consuming and difficult. The Serbian President describes the situation as follows:

‘We cannot just destroy ourselves. If we impose sanctions on Russia in the oil and gas domain, we will destroy ourselves. It’s like shooting yourself in the foot before rushing into a fight.’

The net effect of the sanctions policy for Europe in particular is likely to be structurally higher prices for raw materials (energy, base minerals, fertilisers etc) and precarious supply chains for the foreseeable future. Standards of living will drop and the nascent cost of living protests that are emerging across Europe will likely turn into major domestic political crises.

The sanctions, including the unprecedented freezing of a central banks assets, are also undermining trust in the Western financial system. The trend towards de-dollarisation will rapidly accelerate from here on as countries seek to minimise the risk of trading with the US dollar.

The influence of Western powers is dwindling around the world. The leaders of the UAE and Saudi Arabia have refused to accept calls from President Biden – unthinkable even a few years ago. The recent cancellation of a UK delegation to India and both India and China’s unwillingness to ‘toe’ the Western line towards Russia being other key indicators.

It seems clear that the Western powers have overestimated the impact that the sanctions would have on Russia, had not fully thought through the implications, were unprepared for the consequences and have no feasible way of reversing their actions. Meanwhile the majority of the world’s countries will continue to trade and maintain their relationship with Russia for the simple reason that it is in their interests to do so.

Kishore Mahbubani predicted that it will be an Asian 21st century. Prior to 24 February 2022 the progress of the transition of the balance of power from West to East was progressing as a drawn-out process occurring over a decadal timeframe. However, the Western response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is rapidly accelerating this process – an own goal. There is a good chance that 2022 will in hindsight be viewed as the decisive tipping point. Unfortunately, the penny has not yet dropped with Western governments and their compliant media of what their actions have triggered. Enlightened self-interest suggests that a major change in direction is required in the West, Australia included, to make the best of a bad situation.

Cameron Leckie
Cameron Leckie served as an officer in the Australian Army for 24 years. An agricultural engineer, he is currently a PhD candidate.

[sohamn]

Karan - I don't think its fair to accuse John of western propaganda, I don't think he is doing any propaganda.

Did you see the video of the analysis posted by Lt. Gen Syed Ata Hasnain? It would be clear to you that Russian's had a major failure in their logistical operations which resulted in huge losses and hence the retreat to a region where logistical hurdles won't be a nightmare. No matter where our emotions lie, lets be pragmatic and logical.

Russia committed their best divisions for Kiev, then a huge logistical operation which didn't take off as planned. All these losses for many weeks just for a diversion attack to Donbass?

It will be a difficult war for Russia henceforth as they have lost the element of surprise and momentum. Furthermore, the retreat from Kiev will only accelerate weapons supply from the west and Ukrainian's will resort to a guerrilla style war - and so far what we have seen that Russian armor has no answer to this strategy. I think Putin will look for an exit strategy now after taking Mariupol and Donbass oil fields, after which their would be temporary peace. But long term - holding some of these places would be difficult unless the local population likes the Russian administration.

[Deans]

Some points from the 2 most followed Russian analysts on youtube. (analysis and viewer comments).

Russia does not have the numbers. People expect conscripts and reservists to be called up. Possibly a reported attack on a Russian border post near Belgorod yesterday can be the legal pretext to deploy conscripts to Ukraine.
There's speculation that there's now a single overall theatre commander to coordinate the armies of the Southern, Western and Central military districts, who have so far made uncoordinated attacks.

Russians seem perplexed as to why there was a complete withdrawal from around Kiev, which was the only way they could pin a large Ukrainian force to guard the capital. Every Russian has ancestors who fought in WW2. Back then, when fighting in the Ukraine, any commander who mistook a tactical withdrawal for a 100 km retreat, would be shot (same for not taking your objective just because you suffered 20% casualties).

The upcoming battle for the Donbass will be the critical battle of the war. Russia seems to be planning this more carefully. Ukrainian plan is to hold their positions even at the risk of encirclement, because (like Mariupol) they can hold out for a few weeks and the Russians are too weak to complete an encirclement. Ukrainians are building forces in the Pavlograd-Lozova region and at Zaporozhye to break any encirclement.

Russians have a good idea of which NATO country is supplying what weapons e.g. trainload of T-72 tanks from the Czech republic. One such shipment was claimed to be hit.

Fighting still on in Mariupol. Defenders split in 3 small pockets, the largest is about 4 sq km. Some of the attackers have already been redeployed for the upcoming battle of the Donbass. Significant presence of Chechen fighters on the Russian side.

[Atulya P]

https://youtu.be/TCBigWixkgc

A lively discussion on the war, with points of disagreement between Lt. Gen. Ravi Shankar and Lt. Gen. Satish Dua.

I hear everyone, including both Generals in the talk quoted, expressing the same sentiment that Russia was unable to achieve the war termination objectives within 7 days as they estimated initially. However, I can't find any source of Russia claiming this 7 day target at the start of conflict. I always thought this was an impossible target that West themselves came up with and started beating drums when it wasn't met.

[dnivas]

Karan M,

Great points.

I also want to add one minor detail about Kiev. It's only the western media and some of their barking dogs who keeps saying , the Russians failed on account of not taking Kiev.

It's just a ridiculous proposition

Let's say they had 30-40,000 troops. who the heck expects that number of troops to assault a well barricaded city of 5+ millions citizens . It is exactly stalingrad. How many troops did Paulus have; 330,000 something and he still lost trying to take over a city with just 30,000 civilians remaining.

Like you said and many non partisan observers, the aim was to push in a small force to lock in fresh ukr troops from messing with the cauldrons in the east. The russians took their sweet time slwoly taking over city after city in easter Ukr while the ukra army could not make a move. Somehow our western coconuts here only believe in shock and awe and nothing short of flattening a city counts as a victory. one more month and I believe zelelnky kundiwal will be given the exact same conditions and he will sue for peace and also lose half the country. I cant even imagine the ganshing of the poodle countries then.

You can see the frustration by the western poodles that cannot do anything but just snipe from the border areas. It's pathetic.

Luckily for India we can now visualise what coould happen in a conflict over China or Pukistan. Hopefully we can realise and start working on it stat.

[dnivas]

https://youtu.be/TCBigWixkgc

A lively discussion on the war, with points of disagreement between Lt. Gen. Ravi Shankar and Lt. Gen. Satish Dua.

I hear everyone, including both Generals in the talk quoted, expressing the same sentiment that Russia was unable to achieve the war termination objectives within 7 days as they estimated initially. However, I can't find any source of Russia claiming this 7 day target at the start of conflict. I always thought this was an impossible target that West themselves came up with and started beating drums when it wasn't met.

Exactly, the western media and the useless warmongers from DC said Kiev is gonna fall in x days , or x hours and when that didnt happen. Started saying Russian troops have failed to take over.

Not one MOD live statement on any day has said anything about taking over Kiev or western Ukr and it's just been a total fantasy on TV.

[Manish_Sharma]

Karan - I don't think its fair to accuse John of western propaganda, I don't think he is doing any propaganda.

Big big propaganda, when someone always and always posting news of only one sides losses THAT IS RUSSIA then it can be surmised... big agenda big personal agenda.

I mean a picture was posted of aircraft on fire falling to ground and was falsely presented as Tu-160 White Swan bomber.

Only when Rakesh pointed to the sheer TERMINAL INEXACTITUDE and confession followed that it was actually Ukrainian mig-29 shot down by their own S-300.

Agenda big big huge agenda!!!

[Thakur_B]

Deans, thanks for some of the posts which are enlightening...didn't realize the level of corruption that exists in Russian Army. Whatever the reasons for corruption and ensuring lack of training leading to ill prep, it is the Russian soldiers who are paying heavy price on the frontlines...

OT for this thread but Russians are amateurs compared to Chinese Military when it comes to corruption. The publicly released information alone in China is mind boggling, nevermind the information that is restricted. Chinese generals put Indian politicians to shame.

[Karan M]

Karan - I don't think its fair to accuse John of western propaganda, I don't think he is doing any propaganda.

Given your posts on the matter, please don't go around giving any clean chits on the matter please. Some of you have made your preferences for which side you support clear. Just dont expect the rest of us to go for your preferences without examining the sources you quote.

For instance, its very clear that you believe hook, line and sinker in the western narrative - dont expect thought that because you do so, the rest of us align to the very same belief system.

Did you see the video of the analysis posted by Lt. Gen Syed Ata Hasnain? It would be clear to you that Russian's had a major failure in their logistical operations which resulted in huge losses and hence the retreat to a region where logistical hurdles won't be a nightmare. No matter where our emotions lie, lets be pragmatic and logical.

Please do consider your own advise of being pragmatic and logical regarding the topic as you were busy advising people that there are no Nazis in Ukraine wherein the actual evidence speaks otherwise.

Next, with all due respect to Lt Gen Hasnain, his is *one* view and even his view is countered by other military veterans who spent a lifetime studying the Russian military to fight against it. Time will tell who is correct. But the certitude with which you quote one opinion as correct merely because it aligns to your preconceptions is not something I would do.

Russia committed their best divisions for Kiev, then a huge logistical operation which didn't take off as planned. All these losses for many weeks just for a diversion attack to Donbass?

Of course they would commit their best - the problem is you guys dont even read what is offered to you on a platter.
For instance check this (posted earlier in the thread)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_on_Tatsinskaya

The Raid on Tatsinskaya was a Soviet armoured raid deep into the German rear conducted by 24th Tank Corps under the command of Major General Vasily Mikhaylovich Badanov in late December 1942. It took place during Operation Little Saturn, on the heels of the successful encirclement of the Wehrmacht's 6th Army in the Battle of Stalingrad. The raid was designed to force the Germans to divert forces attempting to relieve the 6th Army. The Soviet force captured its objective, the Luftwaffe's airlift hub at the Tatsinskaya Airfield. The Soviet forces destroyed over 72 aircraft on the ground, but was left cut off and without supplies. Despite the loss of most of the tank corps during the ensuing breakout, the raid was a great operational victory.

The Soviets lost an *entire corps* to gain an operational advantage. Now consider that mindset and what they've actually lost during the current fighting and revisit your assumptions on how different nations with different operational strategies, war reserves fight.

India fights with a very different mindset - most of our equipment is imported, have you seen anything like the above in any Indian conflict with Pakistan? Then think on how pointless it is for us to apply our mindset to how the Russians would do things. Does the US do COIN as India does? Same answer.

Ritter makes the same point - a different analyst - that the initial fight would be fierce, to make sure the Ukrainians pour all they have into Kiev, and then it tapers off. Which is what has occurred.

Take this Ukraine friendly account from the NYT
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/06/worl ... olaiv.html

The Russian force that poured out of Crimea was five times the size of his Ukrainian unit and quickly overwhelmed it. His brigade had no air support and few functional antiaircraft systems, because most had been sent to Kyiv to defend the capital. Much of the brigade’s tanks and armored fighting vehicles were destroyed in the initial attack by Russian aviation.

This, in an account of how great and plucky the Ukrainians are.

More, on how ineffective Russian airpower is and how useless their tactics are.

The brigade’s commander, Col. Oleksandr Vinogradov, had lost touch with military leadership and was forced to make decisions on the fly, said Colonel Stetsenko, who was with the commander throughout. Encircled and suffering heavy losses from strikes by Russian fighter jets, Colonel Vinogradov ordered his remaining tank and artillery units to punch a hole through a unit of Russian airborne assault troops that had positioned itself at the Ukrainian brigade’s rear.

“The fighter jets of the enemy attacked our tanks, several tanks were hit and burned, and the rest remained and did not flee,” Colonel Stetsenko said. “They knew that behind them were other people, and they gave up their lives to break through the bridge to dig in on the other bank.”

The tactic worked, but the costs were steep. By falling back to Mykolaiv, Colonel Stetsenko’s brigade had to sacrifice Kherson, which on March 2 became the first major city to fall to the Russian forces. They had no choice, Colonel Stetsenko said. If they had tried to defend Kherson, Russian forces could have flanked them and cut them off, opening a road to the west, and to Odessa.

Given the western media has imposed a complete omerta on any and every Ukrainian account of loss, beyond incompetent Russians, the above excerpts are telling.The Russian airborne infantry and airpower literally decimated an entire armoured brigade.

And what do we have in the BBC - oh look, how badly the elite Russian infantry are doing. They have high casualties. In contrast, a true analysis would look at what they achieved. It is this that is completely missing from the western end, apart from the occasional Ritter, as nobody wants to break ranks over the evil Russians stuff.

It will be a difficult war for Russia henceforth as they have lost the element of surprise and momentum. Furthermore, the retreat from Kiev will only accelerate weapons supply from the west and Ukrainian's will resort to a guerrilla style war - and so far what we have seen that Russian armor has no answer to this strategy. I think Putin will look for an exit strategy now after taking Mariupol and Donbass oil fields, after which their would be temporary peace. But long term - holding some of these places would be difficult unless the local population likes the Russian administration.

All this is your opinion, and you are welcome to it, but it only shows how little you know about actual tactics and strategy despite making such categorical assumptions.

"Russian armor has no answer to a guerilla style war" - really?! Have you been accompanying Russian troops in the Ukraine while they conduct anti-armor ops and doing road opening, or anti-ATGM missions and taking calculated risks? Instead, all you have are propaganda videos from the Ukrainian side of their *successful* strikes. None of how many ATGM operators they have lost, their casualties, their failures and what the Russians are doing. On that basis you have decided Russians have no answer and the Ukrainians are winning.

Please spare me the sort of analysis that you've engaged in.

Heck, even if the Russians did lose the Kiev battle, all this does is worsen the strategic situation for the Ukrainians as the relieved units from Kiev rush into the next fight over the Donbass and the Ukrainians still have to contend with Russian airpower preventing them from re-positioning heavy forces.

[Karan M]

And now, a lot about the BTGs and how they've lost tanks, this, that. Consider this analysis.
https://twitter.com/ArmchairW/status/15 ... bxqvspAAAA

Okay team, tonight I'll be talking about how the Russian Battalion Tactical Group is actually an artillery unit (and I'm only slightly kidding about that).
Artillery isn't glamorous like tanks, but it's far and away the most dangerous thing on the modern battlefield.

Why is this? Well, the BTG is basically an infantry or tank battalion with maneuver enablers (AT units, an opposite-arm company, air defense, etc.) grafted onto an artillery battalion with fires enablers like target acquisition and electronic warfare assets.

This is a 1:1 ratio of maneuver to fires elements. Western doctrine is 3:1. What this means is that a Russian BTG has an area of influence (where it can reach out and touch you) equal to or greater than a NATO-style brigade.

I say equal to or greater than because at least some BTGs get to play with rocket artillery and that's generally a divisional or corps-level asset in the US.

My understanding is that there's generally an artillery battalion headquarters with the BTG, which would make it more than capable of managing that deep fight. The maneuver guys aren't going do that on their own, particularly a small Russian headquarters.So you have a battalion that's capable of conducting the deep fight.

And bear in mind this isn't just gun tubes, but enablers - particularly target-acquisition UAVs, electronic warfare systems that can pull ELINT, counterfire and ground-surveillance radars. This is a unit that can ping your radios, find you and kill you at forty kilometers away.

So what does this mean in practice?
For US forces, it'd be a hard fight. Fortunately we have a gigantic air force to even out the firepower differential.
Less well-supported armies are going to quickly lose fire superiority under the sheer weight of Russian gun tubes.

Like Ukraine, which organized its forces prewar on a NATO-style 3:1 ratio and which has basically no air force left. This difference in long-range firepower explains a lot of the dynamics of this war - the Russians are quite comfortable sitting back and having an artillery duel.

It's also very much worth noting that the Russians have had very low artillery casualties thus far, even by Oryx's count. I estimate attrition at less than 5%. Very much an indication they're operating freely and not particularly troubled by counterbattery fire.

I expect that we'll be seeing the results of this crushing fire superiority and a month of the resulting attrition among Ukrainian units when the Russians kick off their next offensive. /end

Coda: if the Russian Army is an artillery army with a lot of tanks, the US Army is an infantry army with a lot of helicopters.

Now consider the above, and see how pointless all the rah-rah about the Ukrainians taking out a few hundred tanks and a couple of thousand soldiers are from the strategic perspective.The vast majority of Russian firepower remains untouched.

[Karan M]

All the rubbish in most western media/analyst reports (who should have known better, but don't) about Russian airpower being ineffective and how the poor chaps have to compromise etc. Lets consider how the chaps on the receiving end feel like.

So a Brit veteran decided to do the soldiering thing again for the Ukrainian side.

https://www.the-sun.com/news/4860494/uk ... ter/[quote]

Jason recalled: “It was a very confusing situation. No one really knew what was going on.

“As we headed into the dark I think it’s fair to say I was scared.

“Anyone who goes into that position that isn’t scared is a liar.

“When we arrived it was very quiet. But all of a sudden the gates of hell opened up on us.”

A squadron of Russian jets fired down rockets before a fleet of attack choppers joined in.

Jason and ten soldiers from the Georgian Legion took cover in woodland. Jason, who served with the Mercian Regiment, added: “We got very close to getting whacked. I’ve never experienced firepower like that, I don’t think anyone of this generation ever has.

“Iraq and Afghanistan was totally different. The Russians are a conventional modern army.”

Reinforcements then arrived with Stinger missiles to pick off the Russian choppers in a brave show of Ukrainian resistance.[/quote]

So here is what you'll see. The Stingers fired at the Russian choppers. A loss for the Russians if Ukrainians are lucky. What you wont see is the attack before that, and what effect it had on the defenders and in shaping the battlefield.

[Karan M]

Now, from the entire "Russians wanted Kyiv, they are incompetent and lost" group, lets parse some details.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/04/us-warn ... raine.html

“All indications are that Russia will seek to surround and overwhelm Ukrainian forces in eastern Ukraine,” Sullivan said. “We anticipate that Russian commanders are now executing the redeployment from northern Ukraine to the region around the Donbas.”

He added that Russia’s renewed ground offensive in eastern Ukraine will likely also “include air and missile strikes across the rest of the country to cause military and economic damage, and frankly, to cause terror.”

And prevent resupply and reinforcement

A senior U.S. Defense Department official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share details of the Pentagon’s thinking, said the Kremlin has moved about 65% of its forces near Kyiv to Belarus.

Yes, 35% of the actual forces remain in play as a blockade force.

The official said the Pentagon believes those Russian troops are being resupplied with additional manpower in Belarus before deploying back to the fight in Ukraine. When asked where the troops would likely go, the official said the Pentagon believes the majority of them will move to the Donbas region.

Yes, the incompetent Russians are engaging in replenishment and an operational pause. Just like what Ritter noted. But what would he know, having trained to similar standards for similar reasons.

The official added the U.S. believes the “vast majority” of Russian forces are still in Ukraine and that Kyiv is still under threat.

Oops. So can the Ukrainians pivot their elite units from Kyiv to the Donbas? Apparently not. And the Russians control the roads with airpower.

“We don’t believe that this is a complete withdrawal from the war effort. These guys are not going home, I guess is the main point,” Kirby said, adding that the Pentagon was “not able to perfectly predict exactly how they’re going to reform their units.”

When pressed, Sullivan didn’t provide a timeline of how long the U.S. expects the war will last.

“It may not be just a matter of a few more weeks,” Sullivan said. “This next phase could be measured in months or longer,” he added.

So even the Pentagon can't predict what's next. The Russians are clearly so incompetent, nobody understands what they are up to.

[John]

Right. This is the level of your argumentation. The analyst mentioned the Russians attack Kiev to deliberately seduce the best forces away from Donbass, fix them in place, and committed heavy forces to Kiev to attempt to show a serious attempt (as versus committing the real number of forces required for urban Warfare) and you state they merely wanted to prevent forces from moving over to Donbass as versus fixing them in one place, restricting maneuver and hammering them.

Karan, Calling him an analyst is a stretch especially given his personal background . What forces have moved away from Donbass to Kiev every orbat breakdown shows all Ukr forces stayed dug in Donbass, Odessa and Lukhsnsk? He didn’t provide any proof just a bunch of statements.

A rush retreat to get to point B fastest. And what are these heavy casualties beyond propaganda from Oryx's blog? Why would you dig in half your forces when you need most of them for Donbass now that yiu can move to phase 2 of your plan?

There is plenty of documented video proof of the losses due to retreat, are you saying they are all fabrication? Oryx is simply linking those he is done a good job I can’t say whether he has other agenda. Can you find things that he has posted that are outright false or incorrect? I been trying to close scrutinize his work but they been fairly accurate. As I said earlier I was critical of his work during Azb-Arm conflict as I was routing for Armenian victory but his work turned out to be accurate.

Where are those magical Bayraktar anyways?

Looks like like they being using TB2 for artillery spotting and recon. The attack that lead to sinking of Saratov and attack on ammo depot in Belgorod I suspect both were caused by TB.2 but Ukraine seems to be purposely ambiguous on what was used. So far there have been 3 documented shoot downs by Russia.

I mean a picture was posted of aircraft on fire falling to ground and was falsely presented as Tu-160 White Swan bomber.

Manish, That was fog of war it was widely misreported in social media by both sides as large AC shot down, I was first one to also note it was friendly fire after it was corrected.

[Manish_P]

...

So even the Pentagon can't predict what's next. The Russians are clearly so incompetent, nobody understands what they are up to.

Karan saar, the Amreekis muddling in A'stan for 10 years were just being thorough (checking for the ragheads under each rock yee haw), the Russkies not able to conquer Yuckraine in 10 weeks is being incompetent..

[hanumadu]

I don't know how urban warfare was expected to be over in a week or month, especially when care was being taken not to turn the city into a rubble and minimize civilian deaths.

[Manish_P]

But Hanumadu ji only the white westerners are the great humanitarians while the rest of the world, even the white easterners, are non-civilized barbarians. After all did they not coin terms like collateral damage, war crimes.. or at least popularized them.

[John]

Don’t see this quite often image of low flying Su-34 dropping flares.

https://twitter.com/ralee85/status/1511 ... QGW9wTWndw

[ldev]

Absolutely- took us 2 years to learn how to operate T72s in Ladakh. Cold plays havoc with tanks......

There is a huge problem with the condition of Russia's tanks that were in storage.
At the best of times, tanks are difficult to maintain. Its easier to identify problems when a tank is used, rather than stored away for months. In IA, crew have years of familiarity with their vehicle. In Russia, its a few months experience in active tanks and none with stored tanks. When a tank is stored at temperatures below zero for several months, its a struggle to get it to start.

Typically stored tanks are intended used by conscripts/ reservists. They are pulled out once every 6 months for an exercise. Due to rampant corruption, few of the tanks are actually battle worthy, so figures on operational readiness are fudged. It is routine for fuel to be sold on the black market, parts of the tanks get stolen (electronics with high value raw materials, or optics), or cannibalised, because there's no visibility on spares.
One source estimated that in the 4th Tank division (1 of the 2 tank divisions of the elite 1st Guards tank army) only 10% of their reserve tanks were battle worthy.

Most heavy duty diesel engines in cold climates in the West are started with the help of an APU, typically diesel powered APU (or same fuel as used in the main engine) which because of it's small size can be started with the large batteries that are on board the tank/large sized truck etc, even if the battery is at ~50% charge or less because of the cold temperature. For that you need an oil pan heater embedded within the oil pan with a plug for the electrical connection. It can be even set on a timer or thermostat to heat up the oil or to maintain it's heat so that quick starting is possible even in -30 Celsius temperatures. And the APU is a fixed add on to each vehicle so there is 100% mobility. The complete kit including installation can be as little as $2000-$3000. But if the culture in the Russian Army is that of rampant corruption, these APU units will be the first ones to be stolen and sold off in the black market!!

[Vayutuvan]

So even the Pentagon can't predict what's next. The Russians are clearly so incompetent, nobody understands what they are up to.

This war news has fallen off the top three items in the news cycle. On FNN, it is more of Hunter Biden, Immigration, inflation, and increasing crime rates. Ukr war comes fourth. Amreekans have lost interest. Par for the course considering their short attention span.

[k prasad]

So even the Pentagon can't predict what's next. The Russians are clearly so incompetent, nobody understands what they are up to.

This war news has fallen off the top three items in the news cycle. On FNN, it is more of Hunter Biden, Immigration, inflation, and increasing crime rates. Ukr war comes fourth. Amreekans have lost interest. Par for the course considering their short attention span.

It's now picked back up with the news about the killings in Bucha.

[edit] ... oh wait... I think you meant F(ox)"N"N... yeah... nope, they're not talking about that.

[Deans]

Most heavy duty diesel engines in cold climates in the West are started with the help of an APU, typically diesel powered APU (or same fuel as used in the main engine) which because of it's small size can be started with the large batteries that are on board the tank/large sized truck etc, even if the battery is at ~50% charge or less because of the cold temperature. For that you need an oil pan heater embedded within the oil pan with a plug for the electrical connection. It can be even set on a timer or thermostat to heat up the oil or to maintain it's heat so that quick starting is possible even in -30 Celsius temperatures. And the APU is a fixed add on to each vehicle so there is 100% mobility. The complete kit including installation can be as little as $2000-$3000. But if the culture in the Russian Army is that of rampant corruption, these APU units will be the first ones to be stolen and sold off in the black market!!

That's what I was implying with my quote on corruption in the Russian military (Ukraine was no better).
Consider a situation where a group of young conscripts arrive at a tank storage area, to exercise tanks that have been kept in storage for months
- they have had only weeks on training on tanks and none on the tanks they are going to take out of storage. The commanding general has said his
readiness is 90%, In reality its 50% (but no one wants to know the truth). So, the CO of the regiment agrees his tanks are operational. His conscripts train on only half the available tanks (the already limited crew training time is halved), some of the diesel is sold and conscripts get to enhance their pay from the fuel money (reward for keeping their mouth shut). Officers sell the more valuable parts like the APU, or electronics containing precious metals.

In a combat situation, the crew of these tanks fully expect that the tank can break down anytime. They don't have the experience to do `jugaad', or deal with small defects/ breakdowns on the battlefield. There's hope that if their tank is written off, their replacement tank will be better.
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.

[ShivS]

Defence industry outside India but a long time ago - was one of the early users of BR in the mid and late 90s

So some of us believe the Kiev operation was a feint or an attempt to engage the Ukrainian forces in attritional warfare.

Feints are normally accompanied by a knockout punch from a different direction. No such punch was launched - the biggest resource allocation was Kiev, so unlikely.

Attrition - why spend 10,000 VDV troops in gaining the airport in that case? Just a simple land assault would suffice. These are the cream of the Russian army - why send them on a mission that served no meaningful purpose?

Secondly, why wait so long after Kiev for the eastern assault? Every day means more arms for the Ukrainian army and more time to reposition troops to the East. Increasingly lethal systems are being supplied by the west now.

I will still hold to the view that the Russians tried a manoeuvre based war, failed and are now going to shift towards their classic tactics of massed artillery on a narrow front, tank armies driving thru defences and mechanised infantry following - sort of like a mini Fulda gap plan.

It will take some time for the Russians to build up their own strength in the east - 40% plus of the available troops were in the North, and will need to be rested, equipped and moved. I also suspect, given the scale of losses that some units will need to be combined to retain effectiveness.

Can Russia still win? Certainly- at a cost. This now plays to Russia’s advantages - more men, firepower and armour with few supply issues.

The weather will also become a lot more amenable to armour by the end the month as temperatures turn up towards the mid teens and twenties but both sides will loose lots of men in open assaults - not going to be good.

My personal guess - the talks will go on for another week to ten days - if a solution is not found then the eastern operations will commence in the e-second half of April.

[ShivS]

On Russian losses

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61033173

Sachin - would be very keen to know of the IA approach to top attack munitions and how to guard against them?

Secondly the combination of Elint, satellite imagery and drones take battlefield awareness to a different level altogether. How is the IA using this new combination - it makes tanks incredibly vulnerable to long range artillery interdiction.

Finally, what’s their view of the Russian tactics - I still can’t believe I see pictures of tanks advancing down a road in single file!

[Deans]

On Russian losses

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61033173

Sachin - would be very keen to know of the IA approach to top attack munitions and how to guard against them?

Secondly the combination of Elint, satellite imagery and drones take battlefield awareness to a different level altogether. How is the IA using this new combination - it makes tanks incredibly vulnerable to long range artillery interdiction.

Finally, what’s their view of the Russian tactics - I still can’t believe I see pictures of tanks advancing down a road in single file!

On advancing in single file: I think its because is now mud (Rasputitsa) season, when melting snow makes off-road movement difficult for tracked
vehicles.

[vinod]

Russia may have overwhelming firepower but Ukraine is going to employ more and more guerrilla warfare.
With spring already started and green cover increasing, forests are going to be used in a major way. So, any capture of land by Russia is going to get difficult day by day. You can argue it both ways but I think spring will favour Ukraine's tactics more.

[Pratyush]

1)Unless Russians are able to retrofit most of the fighting vehicles engaged in Ukraine with hard kill APS.

2) Unless it finds a cheap way to deal with the medium drones it's heavy forces will not be able to survive in the field for long.

I think that Russian losses will now become unviable.

Ukraine with weapons support from NATO can fight for a very long time. But Russia doesn't have the same kind of ability to regenerate it's equipment. Unless it can prevent losses in the first place.

[enaiel]

Attrition - why spend 10,000 VDV troops in gaining the airport in that case? Just a simple land assault would suffice. These are the cream of the Russian army - why send them on a mission that served no meaningful purpose?

That was a brutal battle. Tom Cooper's take:

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/russian ... ve-failed/

Well, it seems the Russian heliborne assault on Antonov/Gostomel/Hostomel Airport, 15km NW of Kiev, ended in a complete catastrophe.

Not only that the VKS paid a hefty price just to bring the airborne troops to their target (it lost 6-7 helicopters, including two confirmed Ka-52s; several of these to Ukrainian MiG-29s), but then the expected para-jump didn’t take place. Obviously, the Ukrainian air defences are still up, and the Russians couldn’t fly in the expected 18-20 Il-76s.

The Russian VDV held out as long as supported by their air force, this afternoon. But, later on, the 4th Rapid Response Brigade of the Ukrainian National Guard counterattacked with support from the Ukrainian Air Force (the photo in this post shows an Ukrainian Sukhoi Su-24M bombing the Russians there).

What was left of the VDV was then finished by the 45th (Ukrainian) Spetsnaz Brigade: few survivors scattered and run away into the nearby forests.

[brar_w]

Slovakian S-300 AD system is already in Ukraine based on this tweet from its Prime Minister. Czech's have also supplied some of their T-72 tanks. It also appears that the first of Switchblade Loitering Munitions have also made their way, with the US confirming that they've gone from 100 initial system deliveries to "hundreds" and the mix includes the anti-armor Switchblade 600 system as well. It would be interesting to see how these LM systems are employed compared to the tactics used for ATGMs (I'm thinking LMs would be more of a SF use case given the larger Q of ATGMs available allowing them to be dispersed more freely).

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/defe ... tchblade-/

[John]

That was a brutal battle. Tom Cooper's take:

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/russian ... ve-failed/
Well, it seems the Russian heliborne assault on Antonov/Gostomel/Hostomel Airport, 15km NW of Kiev, ended in a complete catastrophe.
.

That piece of the initial operation reminds me of Operation Storm -333 in Soviet-Afghan conflict which was successful.

In that operation Soviet Union Spetsnaz where able to quickly secure the airbase, storm the palace in Kabul and kill Amin. Soviets also used forces dressed as afghan forces and civilians to help with infiltration. Soviets where outnumbered by quite a lot but the quick and well trained forces where able to defeat the Afghans forces and take out & replace the leadership.

Also securing of the airbase allowed Soviets to bring in reinforcements in case Afghan Army did not surrender.

[Cyrano]

FWIW

[enaiel]

^^^^
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.

[Atmavik]

Being Capt Obvious here but I think this is the Beginning of the End for Putin.


The world must plan for what comes after him

[vinod]

Being Capt Obvious here but I think this is the Beginning of the End for Putin.


The world must plan for what comes after him

I dread to think what happens if putin does indeed fall and US gets its way. The full focus will be on demolishing next upcoming challengers - China and India.

With the withdrawal from Kiev, they have smelt blood and now will go for full victory against Russia. i.e Ukraine is planning to take back both Crimea and Donbas. The West will ensure that war carries on until that.

Russia hasn't called for full mobilisation yet. Watch out for that and the moment it does, we can expect the war to expand further.

[John]

Putin will survive it IMO. Based on what I am hearing they are gearing for an offensive in the east next week and if they score some gains by end of April. They can try to negotiate a deal which may end up being status quo but where Russians can point to their success at the end as proof of achievement.

However if Ukrainian hold out on the east and win some gains it could force Putin to drag it out even longer where the terrain (mud and return of foliage) may make it even difficult for either side to advance resulting in bloody quagmire. In which case he may be forced out by Oligarchs.

[vinod]

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.

[Vayutuvan]

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

Strategically Odesa is important for both the belligrants. Russia probably will try to take Odesa next and pause the ops to replenish and rotate their troops.