Russian invasion of Ukraine

[LongTimeLurker]

Definitely not a good day for Vlad:

this means they did do the general withdrawal mentioned above.

[MazzyStar]

57 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

 

So that’s what Jude Law has been up to since getting that submarine.

[ICTChris]

Seems like Ukraine is advancing quickly but that the Russians have withdrawn in an organised fashion - more like they did in the North around Kyiv than the rout in Kharkiv.

This could be proven wrong, like everything else, of course.

[TxRover]

4 hours ago, ICTChris said:

 

To me, the most interesting thing is the note that, due to lack of sufficient infantry, the Russians are trying to control areas with garrisons. The immediate comparisons are the Germans in WWII (ironically, in the Soviet Union) and the French and Americans in Vietnam. The results for both were, shall we say, sub-optimal.

So, you camp in your strongpoint, and get cutoff. Your choices are now attempt a breakout, which is possible on foot or on/in light vehicles, but impossible with the heavy equipment you have in the garrison…or surrender (possibly, after siege). This is even more true in the area in question, as there are few roads, and the tanks and heavier personnel carriers risk bogging on the farmed fields in the area should they try to break out…and even any light vehicles (yes, that includes commandeered cars/trucks) would be restricted to the few roads I the area. The Ukrainians have been doing an excellent job of preventing any of their troops from failing to properly accept Russian surrenders, which adds greatly to the incentive for bypassed forces to simply drop their weapons and give up.

The mobilization could theoretically help address the lack of infantry that Russia is suffering from, except that properly trained infantry is NOT what the mobilization is providing. Turning the alcoholic, disgruntled and scared groups of men they have press-ganged into the Russian army into an effective infantry force could be done one of two ways. Either withdraw sufficient experienced NCO’s and Officers from line units to leaven the new formations, properly equip the formation (another problem), and provide a 3 month plus training period before deployment OR feed new recruits into the line, AFTER a month plus initial training/re-training period, in a proportion of 10% or less of the total force (1 in 10 fresh meat).

Given the mobilization is sweeping up a publicized total number of more than 150% of the total troops initially deployed in the Ukraine operation, and might reach closer to 700%, neither of these tactics is possible. The numbers are actually worse than this shows, since the Russians are specifically short on plain old infantry, which are, paradoxically, more difficult to properly train than armoured personnel. They could theoretically use the new recruits heavily in support roles and rotate the current support troops into combat, but the support troops already know what’s up, and are likely to be quite risk adverse given the Russians failures so far.

[TxRover]

Interesting twist…each area will be allowed to finance its own troops equipment…resulting in a logistics nightmare.

 

[ICTChris]

19 minutes ago, TxRover said:

The mobilization could theoretically help address the lack of infantry that Russia is suffering from, except that properly trained infantry is NOT what the mobilization is providing. Turning the alcoholic, disgruntled and scared groups of men they have press-ganged into the Russian army into an effective infantry force could be done one of two ways. Either withdraw sufficient experienced NCO’s and Officers from line units to leaven the new formations, properly equip the formation (another problem), and provide a 3 month plus training period before deployment OR feed new recruits into the line, AFTER a month plus initial training/re-training period, in a proportion of 10% or less of the total force (1 in 10 fresh meat).

Given the mobilization is sweeping up a publicized total number of more than 150% of the total troops initially deployed in the Ukraine operation, and might reach closer to 700%, neither of these tactics is possible. The numbers are actually worse than this shows, since the Russians are specifically short on plain old infantry, which are, paradoxically, more difficult to properly train than armoured personnel. They could theoretically use the new recruits heavily in support roles and rotate the current support troops into combat, but the support troops already know what’s up, and are likely to be quite risk adverse given the Russians failures so far.

If they wanted to actually do that then withdrawing from some of the territory they already hold (West bank of the river in Kherson, the currently contested areas around Lyman and the nearby Luhansk areas) to more defensible lines would be the sensible approach but it looks like that isn't on the cards.  The political decisions stop this happening - the annexation of territory and the stated objective to take the Donbas area mean the Russians can't regroup properly which will make it harder to incorporate the mobilised soldiers.  I'm sure they will get something out of the mobilisation - all the videos of drunk middle aged men are probably not a true representation of who has been drafted.  You are of course, right in saying that there isn't the resource to train people etc.

Edited to add - FT story on the impact of mobilisation on ethnic minorities in Russia - https://www.ft.com/content/ae06c532-e1ff-488a-b77c-cb93422d3dd7

Edited again to add - The story above about Russian regions being asked/told to buy military equipment for their formations is interesting.  There was a rumour I read, not from the most reliable source, that a couple of Russian regions had pulled together military formations but then not sent them to the war.  

Edited October 4, 2022 by ICTChris

[TxRover]

Just now, ICTChris said:

If they wanted to actually do that then withdrawing from some of the territory they already hold (West bank of the river in Kherson, the currently contested areas around Lyman and the nearby Luhansk areas) to more defensible lines would be the sensible approach but it looks like that isn't on the cards.  The political decisions stop this happening - the annexation of territory and the stated objective to take the Donbas area mean the Russians can't regroup properly which will make it harder to incorporate the mobilised soldiers.  I'm sure they will get something out of the mobilisation - all the videos of drunk middle aged men are probably not a true representation of who has been drafted.  You are of course, right in saying that there isn't the resource to train people etc.

Part of the issue there is the inherent Russian military objection to combining combat inefficient units rather than loading in a group of replacements. Combining two shattered Battalion can effectively create a new one in less than a quarter the time that adding fresh meat to two shattered Battalion can potentially deliver two new Battalion. Also, the deactivation of a unit to combine it with another unit is a noticeable public event, and not part of the narrative Vlad is seeking. On the other hand, you also simply can’t redesignate a shattered Battalion into a Company, as the role within the Brigade or BTG is different, and they would be unable to properly fill the correct role.

[ICTChris]

[LongTimeLurker]

21 minutes ago, TxRover said:

Interesting twist…each area will be allowed to finance its own troops equipment…resulting in a logistics nightmare.

 

I've always been a wee bit skeptical about break up of Russia narratives but this could effectively turn certain mobilized units into the armed forces of the component republics and oblasts answering to local leaders as well as to Vlad. That was already happening with Chechnya to a certain extent obviously but elsewhere Russia has been functioning as a unitary state in recent years with the ethnic republics as little more than window dressing. Kadyrov with drones? Are you sure you want to do that Vladimir Vladimirovich?

[Sergeant Wilson]

6 hours ago, ICTChris said:

The Times report source is this tweet, from Konrad Muzya, a Polish defence analyst.

If you read the replies and other posts he’s made about it he gives some more details about his conclusions and possible reasons for this movement.  He is a good follow about the conflict and worth reading, although I think you have to pay for his newsletter etc.  He did this piece about the Kharkiv offensive in Riddle last month

https://ridl.io/the-kharkiv-offensive-and-its-consequences/

 

I thought they attached nukes to a rocket or something these days, not send  them by train.

[Dev]

48 minutes ago, TxRover said:

Interesting twist…each area will be allowed to finance its own troops equipment…resulting in a logistics nightmare.

   .......... so, first of all, hundreds of thousands of unwilling conscripts are armed by Russia (albeit very poorly at a War level but maybe effectively at a more personal level) then each republic etc will be able to arm itself.

Is that wise?

Some weapons controlled centrally at first but "taken over" by one of the republics, maybe one controlled by Putin's mob or, even, by an opposing or rival group based in another republic?

There-again republics could do arrangements with other nations for weapons and fall under their control - thinking China here but it could apply to others e.g. Iran or Turkey given time?

 

Edited October 4, 2022 by Dev
.

[beefybake]

2 hours ago, TxRover said:

To me, the most interesting thing is the note that, due to lack of sufficient infantry, the Russians are trying to control areas with garrisons. The immediate comparisons are the Germans in WWII (ironically, in the Soviet Union) and the French and Americans in Vietnam. .....

 

And the Americans, and Brits et al... in Afghanistan, to a large extent.   They didn't control anything in the end,

while the SAS seems to have operated as an outreach death squad.

Something no one wants to talk about right now, bar one newspaper.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 4, 2022 by beefybake

[dorlomin]

Anytime any rumours about nuclear weapons hit the press its best to check Dr Jeffrey Lewis and what he has to say on it. 

An in general any time someone starts talking any of these three: space weapons (especially ASAT), hypersonic weapons or nuclear weapons, factor in a high degree of bullshit unless it is from a recognised expert. 

 

[Billy Jean King]

Anytime any rumours about nuclear weapons hit the press its best to check Dr Jeffrey Lewis and what he has to say on it. 
An in general any time someone starts talking any of these three: space weapons (especially ASAT), hypersonic weapons or nuclear weapons, factor in a high degree of bullshit unless it is from a recognised expert. 
 

.....factor in a high degree of bullshit unless it is from a recognised expert. 

We will be fine on here then !

[ICTChris]

Another arms package for Ukraine from the US, includes four new HIMARS systems plus ammunition.

I assume these are to be delivered asap, unlike the other recent announcement of HIMARS which was earmarking then for next year and beyond.

[doulikefish]

So reports of Russians retreating all over the shop are there any reports of them retreating to prepared positions ie an organised retreat or is it just as chaotic as reports on social media are portraying?

[Sergeant Wilson]

12 minutes ago, doulikefish said:

So reports of Russians retreating all over the shop are there any reports of them retreating to prepared positions ie an organised retreat or is it just as chaotic as reports on social media are portraying?

 

[Boo Khaki]

12 minutes ago, doulikefish said:

So reports of Russians retreating all over the shop are there any reports of them retreating to prepared positions ie an organised retreat or is it just as chaotic as reports on social media are portraying?

Given their well documented struggles with logistics, manpower, and coordination at the actual coalface, I'd be extremely doubtful that they've given any thought whatsoever to preparing anything further back. 

More holing up in significant buildings that they didn't shell into oblivion on the way in and ignoring everything else would be my bet.

[LongTimeLurker]

17 minutes ago, doulikefish said:

So reports of Russians retreating all over the shop are there any reports of them retreating to prepared positions ie an organised retreat or is it just as chaotic as reports on social media are portraying?

Problem appears to be that the terrain in Kherson oblast is as flat as a pancake and provides few natural barriers other than major rivers, so it's not easy to do something quickly on that.

The problem for the Russians is they were using a river called the Inhulets as their defence line to the west but were attacked from the north along the Dniepr to the east and lost the line of defence they had been able to build in that direction back when they still had the upper hand militarily and have had nothing sensible to fall back to so far.

 

[Newbornbairn]

1 hour ago, dorlomin said:

Anytime any rumours about nuclear weapons hit the press its best to check Dr Jeffrey Lewis and what he has to say on it. 

An in general any time someone starts talking any of these three: space weapons (especially ASAT), hypersonic weapons or nuclear weapons, factor in a high degree of bullshit unless it is from a recognised expert. 

 

Added to which, those things have a huge range. They could launch them from Red Square and hit just about anything they wanted - they certainly don't need to put them on a train to get them a bit closer. More of Putin's pish, like when he drove missiles around when he invaded to try and scare the West away from helping Ukraine.