The Russian Invasion of Ukraine Part 4

[Andy_Ross]

You don't fight for ground that can't be defended, you fall back to defensible positions, you keep your line in order and make the attacker pay heavily for it.

Russia is obviously degraded, every they have a finite supply of usable equipment, they are not getting resupplied or re-equipped with new systems and weapons.

 

[Oystein]

...
I'll bow to their greater access to intelligence and their far superior knowledge, but if they're so heavily degraded, how come their advances seem to be accelerating ?

a) Russia is heavily concentrating its forces on that Ukrainian bulge near Severodonetsk; Ukraine says the Russians have quite an advantage in number of soldiers and equipment there. They can attack from three sides
b) As the Russian advances are slow, they have some time to dig in
c) It would take a considerable numerical advantage for the Ukrainians to reclaim areas where the Russians are dug in

That bulge (small at the moment) may eventually fall in a few days or weeks, and let's hope the Ukrainians can pull out of it before it closes.

After this, Russia gets to choose a next bit of territory to take.

You say Kharkiv. Why? Is that because of supply routes? The Russians have fared ill in urban warfare before. All they can hope for is to advance close enough to Kharkiv to bring the center of city into reach of artillery, and just destroy it. Which yeah, sounds like something Russia would do. Barbaric fascists and all that.

I think Russia wants to make a move on Odesa eventually, in the not-too-distant future:
- They control a large area in the South already
- They have bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnjepr already
- They want to flush Ukrainian forces and their surface-to-ship missiles away from the beaches to protect what remains of the fleet
- Oh, and they absolutely want Odesa. And give it back its missing "s"
- I don't know, but it appears that Ukraine has kept only a bare minimum of forces in the Kharson / Melitopol areas. They concentrate on Donbas and Kharkiv.

I think the Russians would be smart to open their next front where the Ukraine forces are weakest, and where the most gains are to be made. If UIA wins back a bit of territory in the North of Donbas - so what? Only adds to the destruction there. At this point, there is not much of a strategic difference in where you draw the next line of control in Donbas. If Russia however links up to Transnistria and leaves Ukraine entirely landlocked...

I read today in ticker news that Ukraine intelligence has spotted Iskander missiles being hauled to Belarus, indicating that more attacks on Western Ukraine are in the making.

 

[a_unique_person]

According to the BBC, the messaging from the Ukrainian government has taken a turn towards being more pessimistic (and perhaps more realistic )



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/wor...906edcb622de4ef912291c&pinned_post_type=share

The BBC are saying that after they have finished in Donbas, then the Russians will switch to Kharkiv. IIRC a couple of months ago I linked to a CNN video where a retired US general said it was inevitable that Russia would seize, and hold, everything East of the Dnieper river. At the time I thought he was being ridiculously pessimistic, now I'm not so sure.

For all the talk of Russia taking heavy casualties, having low morale and having to resort to using ancient equipment, they seem to be advancing inexorably. Maybe their losses are being vastly overestimated, maybe their reserves run far, far deeper than first assumed, maybe they're much better at regrouping and re-equipping units or a combination of all three, but they seem to be getting more, not less, effective.

IMHO they have a virtually endless supply of artillery shells and have no qualms about leaving their local separatist supporters with an uninhabitable wasteland to live in.

 

[jimbob]

The West needs to salami slice up the aid. Not only long range anti shipping missiles which are coming, but also MLRS and now is the time to improve the Ukrainian air force as well.

In the future, I don't know what the impact of loitering munitions with say an 80km range would have on artillery battles.

 

[The Don]

You don't fight for ground that can't be defended, you fall back to defensible positions, you keep your line in order and make the attacker pay heavily for it.

The Russians don't seem to mind the price.

It's been mentioned that this could be the equivalent of the US' Vietnam War for Russia but I think that misses a crucial point - the Russians don't care how many men they lose or the impact on the local population. In that way they're more like the North Vietnamese.

Russia is obviously degraded, every they have a finite supply of usable equipment, they are not getting resupplied or re-equipped with new systems and weapons.

You're right - but they don't seem to be functionally degraded in any way. In fact they seem to be accelerating their advances.

 

[jimbob]

The Russians don't seem to mind the price.

It's been mentioned that this could be the equivalent of the US' Vietnam War for Russia but I think that misses a crucial point - the Russians don't care how many men they lose or the impact on the local population. In that way they're more like the North Vietnamese.



You're right - but they don't seem to be functionally degraded in any way. In fact they seem to be accelerating their advances.

The USSR suffered severely from its war in Afghanistan. The Russian regime is more vulnerable to losses and information than the Soviet Union was.

The thing is that three months ago, analysts were pointing out how hard it would be for Russia to *hold* Ukraine, especially the West *once* it had installed a puppet regime, given that the Ukrainian people had overthrown one in 2014.

Instead we are now talking about what Russia can do in the East. And there is partisan activity in some of the occupied areas, with at least one AFV being destroyed well behind the Russian lines, near the SE border with Russia, in fact.

Yes it is not going to be good for Ukraine, but they still have a military force that's functioning.

We do need to step up our support and pressure on Russia though.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The Russians don't seem to mind the price.

It's been mentioned that this could be the equivalent of the US' Vietnam War for Russia but I think that misses a crucial point - the Russians don't care how many men they lose or the impact on the local population. In that way they're more like the North Vietnamese.



You're right - but they don't seem to be functionally degraded in any way. In fact they seem to be accelerating their advances.

They do mind the price. They are still flogging themselves for very little headway.
They will reach a point where they can no longer support an advance and will have to go onto the defensive but will lack the resources to sustain it.
They will have to start to retreat.
I think it will happen fairly quickly when it starts.

 

[The Don]

They do mind the price.

I disagree, IMO there has been no indication that Russia's leadership care at all how many Russian soldiers or Ukrainian civilians die.

They are still flogging themselves for very little headway.

They've been making more headway recently than they have for a couple of months.

They will reach a point where they can no longer support an advance and will have to go onto the defensive but will lack the resources to sustain it.
They will have to start to retreat.

That's certainly been the opinion of the majority of analysts since the first few days of the war. There were stories of BTGs in which the only people left to fight were the logistics people and we were assured that the forces which retreated from Kyiv would take weeks or months to reorganise, resupply and return to the front (if they would be able to). Instead they seem to be back in action very quickly and are being very effective.

Russia also seems to have addressed the logistics issues that were plaguing them early on. We no longer hear of vehicles running out of fuel and of soldiers eating long out of date rations. Indeed, they seem to have no shortage of ordnance.

I think it will happen fairly quickly when it starts.

I really hope so, but if anything it seems as if the Russians are intensifying their efforts and are once again looking to restart their advances in the South towards Odesa and attacking from Belarus.

A couple of weeks ago we had all kinds of stories about how effective the NATO-supplied 155mm howitzers were, how long-range anti-ship missiles were on the way, what a great job the anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles were doing. That's all gone very quiet now so maybe those weapons systems aren't as effective as we'd hoped against the current Russian tactics of simply laying waste to towns and cities before advancing.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I disagree, IMO there has been no indication that Russia's leadership care at all how many Russian soldiers or Ukrainian civilians die.



They've been making more headway recently than they have for a couple of months.



That's certainly been the opinion of the majority of analysts since the first few days of the war. There were stories of BTGs in which the only people left to fight were the logistics people and we were assured that the forces which retreated from Kyiv would take weeks or months to reorganise, resupply and return to the front (if they would be able to). Instead they seem to be back in action very quickly and are being very effective.

Russia also seems to have addressed the logistics issues that were plaguing them early on. We no longer hear of vehicles running out of fuel and of soldiers eating long out of date rations. Indeed, they seem to have no shortage of ordnance.



I really hope so, but if anything it seems as if the Russians are intensifying their efforts and are once again looking to restart their advances in the South towards Odesa and attacking from Belarus.

A couple of weeks ago we had all kinds of stories about how effective the NATO-supplied 155mm howitzers were, how long-range anti-ship missiles were on the way, what a great job the anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles were doing. That's all gone very quiet now so maybe those weapons systems aren't as effective as we'd hoped against the current Russian tactics of simply laying waste to towns and cities before advancing.

They are hollowing out formations to keep the ones at the front in the field.
Yes, they pushed the formations that retreated back in to the line but they are not properly re-equipped and rested.

They care about losses in that their formations are less effective, not that they are getting killed.

 

[The Don]

They are hollowing out formations to keep the ones at the front in the field.
Yes, they pushed the formations that retreated back in to the line but they are not properly re-equipped and rested.

That's what we were told by people in the know, that they were put back into the fighting too soon and that they are underequipped and have poor morale. The trouble is that they're not fighting like a poorly equipped army with poor morale, they're inexorably gaining ground and taking villages, towns and cities.

If anything their combat effectiveness seems to be higher now than it was a month or two ago. The Russians seem to have found a way to get them back in the fighting and make them effective.

They care about losses in that their formations are less effective, not that they are getting killed.

Except that their formations seem to be more effective, they're making relentless progress on the Eastern front. It's taken them months, but they seem to have got their act together both logistically and tactically.

Oleksiy Arestovych, adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, appears to have also confirmed that Russian-backed separatists have control of the city.

"According to unverified data, we lost the town of Lyman," Arestovych said in a video, adding that the attack had been well organised.

"This shows, in principle, the increased level of operational management and tactical skills of the Russian army," he added.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/wor...90b999fc2fb576dc00c333&pinned_post_type=share

The Russians couldn't stay that badly disorganised for ever.

 

[Andy_Ross]

That's what we were told by people in the know, that they were put back into the fighting too soon and that they are underequipped and have poor morale. The trouble is that they're not fighting like a poorly equipped army with poor morale, they're inexorably gaining ground and taking villages, towns and cities.

If anything their combat effectiveness seems to be higher now than it was a month or two ago. The Russians seem to have found a way to get them back in the fighting and make them effective.



Except that their formations seem to be more effective, they're making relentless progress on the Eastern front. It's taken them months, but they seem to have got their act together both logistically and tactically.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/wor...90b999fc2fb576dc00c333&pinned_post_type=share

The Russians couldn't stay that badly disorganised for ever.

They are barely moving.

 

[The Don]

They are barely moving.

They don't have to move quickly. If they advance a handful of Kilometres a day, as long as they do it most days, over the course of a month the front has moved a long way.

They seem to have settled into a routine of pounding an area with artillery for several days to completely flatten it and avoid the need for (expensive) urban warfare. Then they advance, rinse and repeat.

Ukraine seems powerless to stop this kind of inexorable advance.

They were very successful at disrupting mobile Russian formations and breaking vulnerable supply lines. Russia appear to have addressed this by slowing down the advance so that their supply lines are nowhere near as stretched and so armed columns cannot get isolated and destroyed.

 

[Andy_Ross]

They don't have to move quickly. If they advance a handful of Kilometres a day, as long as they do it most days, over the course of a month the front has moved a long way.

They seem to have settled into a routine of pounding an area with artillery for several days to completely flatten it and avoid the need for (expensive) urban warfare. Then they advance, rinse and repeat.

Ukraine seems powerless to stop this kind of inexorable advance.

They were very successful at disrupting mobile Russian formations and breaking vulnerable supply lines. Russia appear to have addressed this by slowing down the advance so that their supply lines are nowhere near as stretched and so armed columns cannot get isolated and destroyed.

They are still being degraded every day. How long do you think they can do this against an enemy that is constantly resupplied and equipped?
How much territory do you think they have taken?

 

[The Don]

They are still being degraded every day.

...and yet functionally they seem to be getting more effective.

They're gaining ground, their logistical and morale issues seem to have been addressed and they seem to be getting their tactics sorted out if Oleksiy Arestovych's comments are anything to go by.

How long do you think they can do this against an enemy that is constantly resupplied and equipped?

At the moment they seem to have a near-inexhaustible supply of artillery munitions and if they are losing men and materiel they seem to be able to resupply quickly enough to maintain their effectiveness.

Another month with a similar rate of progress and they'll have control over all of Donetsk, another six months and they'll be all the way to the Dnieper.

For all the talk of poor performance, they seem to be getting more effective. I cannot recall a major reverse since that BTG was destroyed in a river crossing.

How much territory do you think they have taken?

Looking at maps from a couple of months ago, several thousand square kilometres in the last two months.

 

[theprestige]

For all the talk of Russia taking heavy casualties, having low morale and having to resort to using ancient equipment, they seem to be advancing inexorably

I don't think "advancing inexorably" is the right term for an invasion that used to be advancing on Kiev and is now not advancing on Kiev.

It seems pretty clear that the Russian army isn't up to the grand task of conquering all of Ukraine, which they set out to accomplish in February. Now they are consolidating what's left of their forces, and "advancing inexorably" towards a much more limited and achievable goal: A further sliver of territory eastern Ukraine, captured and held from well-established jumping-off points in Donbas.

It's highly unlikely that this is going to translate into a magical depth of competence, morale, equipment, and supplies to "inexorably" conquer Ukraine.

 

[The Don]

I don't think "advancing inexorably" is the right term for an invasion that used to be advancing on Kiev and is now not advancing on Kiev.

True, they demonstrated that they were utterly incompetent at a fast-moving mobile war. That's why they've switched to their go-to plan of simply pounding things to smithereens and grinding slowly along.

It seems pretty clear that the Russian army isn't up to the grand task of conquering all of Ukraine, which they set out to accomplish in February. Now they are consolidating what's left of their forces, and "advancing inexorably" towards a much more limited and achievable goal: A further sliver of territory eastern Ukraine, captured and held from well-established jumping-off points in Donbas.

It's highly unlikely that this is going to translate into a magical depth of competence, morale, equipment, and supplies to "inexorably" conquer Ukraine.

I'm not sure that they need to conquer all of Ukraine, just completely neuter it as a state. If they "just" get to keep what they've conquered to date, the Ukrainian economy may never recover.

Alternatively they can keep grinding away month after month. Artillery rounds are cheap and they seem to have no shortage of them. They don't care one bit about the devastation they leave behind or the human cost and every few days they get more hostages.

 

[Jimbo07]

True, they demonstrated that they were utterly incompetent at a fast-moving mobile war. That's why they've switched to their go-to plan of simply pounding things to smithereens and grinding slowly along.

We predicted in these threads, that the fighting in the east was always going to be harder. Even if Russia didn't improve in any appreciable way, the position was more suitable. They enjoy shorter logistics chains and entrenched positions.

Alternatively they can keep grinding away month after month. Artillery rounds are cheap and they seem to have no shortage of them. They don't care one bit about the devastation they leave behind or the human cost and every few days they get more hostages.

This is the tragedy. Even if Ukraine 'wins', it loses. The Russian strategy almost seems like an, "If we can't have it, no one can," sort of thing. I jest, but I almost wouldn't be surprised to see Russia literally salt the earth if they faced a general rollback.

ETA:

The thing that gets me is the general sense of stability we're getting out of Russia. The Ruble is rising, interest rates are decreasing. Putin says he's taking steps to weather Western sanctions. There's no mention of widespread political unrest. Some of the earlier comments ring hollow, things like, "oh, there's vast discontent, we're just not seeing it from the repression, but people will go into the streets." That hasn't happened yet. Putin hasn't been deposed. They don't seem to mind that their units are what we would call 'degraded.' A boot gets the kids back into the meat grinder. I predict that this is going to be long and unpleasant, and I don't know the ultimate outcome.

 

[SpitfireIX]

The Germans gained a huge amount of territory during the Ardennes Offensive (AKA The Battle of the Bulge). It didn't mean they could sustain their attack or hold what they took.

Russia's modest gains in the Donbas are likely coming at the cost of unsustainable losses in men and materiel. The Russians have been reduced to deploying T-62s to Ukraine, and they've raised the maximum age for enlisting in the Army from 40 to 50.

Also, they are now operating on much shorter supply lines; any additional advances will only further strain their already overtaxed logistics. The idea that Russia can continue to make significant advances, or even successfully defend against the eventual Ukrainian counteroffensive, is speculative at best.

Finally, the Biden administration is likely to include MLRS in the next tranche of weapons shipments. These would greatly increase the ability of Ukraine to strike at Russian depots and supply convoys, and reduce Russia's edge in artillery.

 

[a_unique_person]

The Russians don't seem to mind the price.

It's been mentioned that this could be the equivalent of the US' Vietnam War for Russia but I think that misses a crucial point - the Russians don't care how many men they lose or the impact on the local population. In that way they're more like the North Vietnamese.



You're right - but they don't seem to be functionally degraded in any way. In fact they seem to be accelerating their advances.

The North Vietnamese were fighting for their country. The Russians aren't.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Especially if you have a poor cook!

If you're having the cook, who's preparing the meal?

*shudders inwardly*