The Russian Invasion of Ukraine Part 4

[Garrison]

Meanwhile, according to ISW, Russia continues to make tiny gains in the East and dig in elsewhere expecting a Ukrainian counteroffensive.

IMO counteroffensives will have to start happening comparatively soon so that gains can be consolidated before the onset of "mud season" in the early autumn. I'm sure that the Ukrainians are well aware of this - even if the Russians seemed oblivious.

Or they will go with that other bit of history the Russians seem to have forgotten and wait for winter, when the shaky Russian logistics collapse as it turns out someone sold off all the smow tyres and cold weather gear, or it never existed to begin with.

 

[lobosrul5]

And the A10 is not a flying tank, lets look at one of the premier airdefense guns and anti tank guns of WWII, the German 88mm gun.

No modern tank would take it as a serious threat, but while it might have difficulty hitting and a10 it would make a mess out of any it did hit. I think the A10 would not like getting hit by even say the 4 20mm cannons of the Wirbelwind.

So while WWII air defense guns might not be as able to hit as modern AA guns, they would still damage and A10 unlikely say an Abrams that would laugh off any WWII antitank munitions.

You just can not put enough armor on something and make it fly to make it be able to take hits like you can ground vehicles.

Hitting even a ww2 era plane directly with AAA was extremely difficult. The Germans used timed fuzes to explode the warhead at a specific altitude*. So, yes a direct hit with an 88mm would likely down an A-10 but it would be almost impossible to do so, and it generally took multiple indirect hits to down an allied WW2 era heavy bomber.

The Ukrainians are still flying a few close air support sorties with helo's and SU-25's/ I can't even imagine how an A-10 with NATO missiles is not going to be more effective than those two options

I'm really puzzled at the resistance to the US giving away planes that the USAF doesn't even want to Ukraine, who seems to want them.

*unlike the allies they never developed a proximity fuze, something that modern day Russia is in short supply of.

ETA: if Ukraine would rather have F-16's then I'm all for doing that instead. I believe some of the older ones in ANG and reserve duty, don't have all the latest toys that we really don't want Russia to get their hands on.

 

[Stout]

Looks like the EU has agreed to reduce energy consumption:



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62305094

It's not all good news though

Well, kinda, sorta maybe. There's enough exemptions in there to make this pretty much useless since the EU has pretty much crazy glued it's lips to the teat of Russian gas this won't happen if it's a cold winter.

They're totally missing the opportunity to market these reductions as being a solution to climate change as it is, after all, what climate change people have been demanding, government regulation/legislation forcing society away from fossil fuels. Greta Thunberg must be over the moon.

 

[theprestige]

Hitting even a ww2 era plane directly with AAA was extremely difficult. The Germans used timed fuzes to explode the warhead at a specific altitude*. So, yes a direct hit with an 88mm would likely down an A-10 but it would be almost impossible to do so, and it generally took multiple indirect hits to down an allied WW2 era heavy bomber.

Al Bundy's four high school touchdowns. Modern anti-aircraft guns are radar-guided. They have also mostly been superseded by radar-guided or infrared-guided missiles. It's time to retire the fantasy of the A-10 lumbering low and slow through clouds of big dumb flak and somehow coming through with nothing worse than a few "speed holes".

The point of close air support was never to get the plane close to the troops it was supporting. The point was always to get the bombs close to the troops. As things get more precise, this can be accomplished while keeping the plane at a safer distance. That's the way it should be. The A-10 hearkens from an older time period. Using it today would be a step backwards.

 

[Stout]

Or they will go with that other bit of history the Russians seem to have forgotten and wait for winter, when the shaky Russian logistics collapse as it turns out someone sold off all the smow tyres and cold weather gear, or it never existed to begin with.

We were already here at the beginning of the invasion? Russians freezing in their tanks, cheap Chinese snow tires, the upcoming mud season, no fuel or food....didn't stop the horde then.

 

[The Don]

We were already here at the beginning of the invasion? Russians freezing in their tanks, cheap Chinese snow tires, the upcoming mud season, no fuel or food....didn't stop the horde then.

Indeed it could be argued that, having been through the loop once, the Russians will be far better prepared and equipped thanks to the $150bn they have received from the EU since the start of the invasion, the looseness of sanctions and the number of countries who are still willing to deal with Russia, especially at a considerable premium.

Then again that would require them to address the huge issues of fraud and to fundamentally rethink their logistics during a war - so expect more of the same next time around. I suppose their only saving grace is that it's unlikely that the Russians will be moving quickly so their logistics will not be stretched too far.

 

[Andy_Ross]

We were already here at the beginning of the invasion? Russians freezing in their tanks, cheap Chinese snow tires, the upcoming mud season, no fuel or food....didn't stop the horde then.

Yes it did stop them.

 

[Jimbo07]

As already posted, Ukraine doesn't want A-10. It wants to Westernize. In that context, Western airforces smaller than the mighty USAF (read - pretty much all of them) are looking for single platform strike fighters. Maintaining multi-platform fighter forces is expensive.

The A-10 is used in more permissive environments with other air cover. The A-10 hit hundreds of vehicles in Irag, but there were other aircraft flying air superiority missions.

If you're moving away from MiG-29 and Su-25 toward a single Western (non-stealth) platform, F-16 seems like a good fit (and is apparently favoured by Ukraine).

 

[theprestige]

The F-16 is relatively cheap. It's also mature, proven highly capable, and can be upgraded to current tech in avionics, sensors, and weapons. It's widely exported, and familiar to most if not all NATO members. If you're not going to spring for one of the latest Eurocanards, the F-16 is probably your best choice of 4th-gen multirole. Even compared to the Eurocanards, what it lacks in stealth features it probably makes up for in just being super effective at its job.

 

[eerok]

We were already here at the beginning of the invasion? Russians freezing in their tanks, cheap Chinese snow tires, the upcoming mud season, no fuel or food....didn't stop the horde then.

That's how they took Kiev. Oh, wait.

Don't you remember the stalled, sitting duck convoy?

 

[lobosrul5]

The F-16 is relatively cheap. It's also mature, proven highly capable, and can be upgraded to current tech in avionics, sensors, and weapons. It's widely exported, and familiar to most if not all NATO members. If you're not going to spring for one of the latest Eurocanards, the F-16 is probably your best choice of 4th-gen multirole. Even compared to the Eurocanards, what it lacks in stealth features it probably makes up for in just being super effective at its job.

That is, I hear, part of the problem. We do not want Russia getting their hands on our latest and greatest tech. Especially things like our IFF (Identify Friend or Foe) systems. And by Russia, what I mean is Russia sending tech to China to be reverse engineered.

 

[Stout]

That's how they took Kiev. Oh, wait.

Don't you remember the stalled, sitting duck convoy?

Oh yea, I remember that. It may have stopped the Russians from taking Kyiv that is, if they actually intoned to take it at opposed to making it unlivable and getting the refugee stream flowing from the city. Point is, the invasion kept coming and here we are five months later and there's no end in sight.

Hoping for weather and corruption to be the Russians undoing this time looks more like wishful thinking especially since there's predictions that this conflict is going to continue for quite some time.

Every time I bring up the liveua.com map it's filled with red Russian attacks. Odessa was just hit(again) 4 hours ago. Russia says it's planning on "liberating" the Odesa region...They still keep coming and plan to keep coming weather be dammed.

From the CBC

These endless articles about Russia running out of everything are starting to get old. Why it was only a couple of weeks ago when we were reading about prolapsed artillery barrels yet the shelling goes on.

and on and on.

 

[theprestige]

That is, I hear, part of the problem. We do not want Russia getting their hands on our latest and greatest tech. Especially things like our IFF (Identify Friend or Foe) systems. And by Russia, what I mean is Russia sending tech to China to be reverse engineered.

The F-16 has been widely exported for decades. There are at least as many different upgrade packages as there are customers for the plane. The F-16 is not "latest and greatest tech". It's just a well-designed plane that's very mature. The Ukrainians almost certainly wouldn't be getting the USAF/ANG cutting-edge models with the current USAF upgrade package. They'd be getting base models that are already well-known to Russia and China, with some other upgrade package designed for foreign markets and smaller budgets. And they'd still be an improvement over the Su-25. And they'd still be suitable for further upgrades, either by Ukraine's own military-industrial complex, or by third-party contractors who specialize in that kind of work.

 

[lobosrul5]

The F-16 has been widely exported for decades. There are at least as many different upgrade packages as there are customers for the plane. The F-16 is not "latest and greatest tech". It's just a well-designed plane that's very mature. The Ukrainians almost certainly wouldn't be getting the USAF/ANG cutting-edge models with the current USAF upgrade package. They'd be getting base models that are already well-known to Russia and China, with some other upgrade package designed for foreign markets and smaller budgets. And they'd still be an improvement over the Su-25. And they'd still be suitable for further upgrades, either by Ukraine's own military-industrial complex, or by third-party contractors who specialize in that kind of work.

You've missed my point. I never meant to say the F-16 is the latest and greatest (it actually never was given the F-15 is more advanced and was adopted 2 years earlier). The trouble is I think all of our*F-16's have been upgraded, at least the IFF systems have been. And we really don't want the enemy getting a hold of our IFF system.

*if we have any in inventory meant for export that's what we would send Ukraine

ETA: and also, I cannot see how the A-10 wouldn't also be an improvement over the SU-25. But the same issue may exist with them. Updated electronics that we do not want Russia getting.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Oh yea, I remember that. It may have stopped the Russians from taking Kyiv that is, if they actually intoned to take it at opposed to making it unlivable and getting the refugee stream flowing from the city. Point is, the invasion kept coming and here we are five months later and there's no end in sight.

Hoping for weather and corruption to be the Russians undoing this time looks more like wishful thinking especially since there's predictions that this conflict is going to continue for quite some time.

Every time I bring up the liveua.com map it's filled with red Russian attacks. Odessa was just hit(again) 4 hours ago. Russia says it's planning on "liberating" the Odesa region...They still keep coming and plan to keep coming weather be dammed.

From the CBC

These endless articles about Russia running out of everything are starting to get old. Why it was only a couple of weeks ago when we were reading about prolapsed artillery barrels yet the shelling goes on.

and on and on.

False dichotomy. The fact that Russia does not and will not have the capability to mount any more major offensives, particularly away from the Russian border, does not mean that they will completely run out of artillery shells and guns and stop attacking altogether.

And yes, the Russians absolutely did intend to take Kyiv, and they failed miserably.

 

[jimbob]

Article on sending jets to Ukraine

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/07...fting-ukraine-new-fighter-jets-but-what-type/

 

[lobosrul5]

Article on sending jets to Ukraine

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/07...fting-ukraine-new-fighter-jets-but-what-type/

Very last bit of that article is the most telling IMO:

Venable said it might be possible to train a capable MiG-29 pilot the fundamentals of operating an F-16 — including how to control the F-16, basic fighter tactics for the platform, and how to employ munitions — within three to four months. The more difficult piece would be training Ukrainian maintainers on how to repair and sustain F-16s that are being flown hard in battle, and establishing a logistics workforce to manage spare parts, fuel and other necessities.

“Unless you’ve got a contractor who was willing to go into an active combat zone with a team of maintainers that were already proficient on the aircraft, barring that, you’re looking at a year to year and a half before Ukraine can begin using these aircraft,” Venable said.

The logistical and maintenance type hurdles of providing Ukraine with NATO combat jets is going to be significant. Not going to be very effective if we send them a bunch of planes that they can only use for a handful of sorties.

 

[eerok]

Hoping for weather and corruption to be the Russians undoing this time looks more like wishful thinking especially since there's predictions that this conflict is going to continue for quite some time.

The weather is just one thing they got wrong. It's a long list.

No one knows how long this war will last. At this point Russia seems unable to mount a meaningful assault -- their mercenary groups are making some trivial gains here and there at great cost around Donbas, and they're still throwing missiles. Will they fold up once Ukraine pushes back in force? Hard to say, but maybe.

 

[Jimbo07]

... you’re looking at a year to year and a half before Ukraine can begin using these aircraft,” Venable said.

The logistical and maintenance type hurdles of providing Ukraine with NATO combat jets is going to be significant. Not going to be very effective if we send them a bunch of planes that they can only use for a handful of sorties.

F-16 is not something that is going to reverse the tide of conflict within the next month. Nobody has said that. You're looking to a longer term future as Ukraine starts to rebuild its airforce. If the conflict drags into next year, then some Western aircraft might actually creep in, but I think it's being looked at more as a long term solution.

ETA: and also, I cannot see how the A-10 wouldn't also be an improvement over the SU-25. But the same issue may exist with them. Updated electronics that we do not want Russia getting.

Except, long term, they should be getting rid of Su-25, as well. I expect they'll move toward a single platform. With Western blessing, it may wind up being F-16.

 

[Stout]

False dichotomy. The fact that Russia does not and will not have the capability to mount any more major offensives, particularly away from the Russian border, does not mean that they will completely run out of artillery shells and guns and stop attacking altogether.

And yes, the Russians absolutely did intend to take Kyiv, and they failed miserably.

So they're running out of everything just not quickly enough to end the invasion? Sure, I'll buy that it's just that the way our western media is presenting it we're being led to believe...any day now.