[W:#23,579]Ukraine War Thread

[Chomsky]

Such losses can work both ways, remember ukraine lost that plus more trying the kherson offensive, that was not a river but open terrain, while they did well in kharkiv exploited the terrain and lack of planning by the russians.

This is also the reason no one is ever successful invading russia, because terrain is far more formidable than their army, and russias entire terrain save a few spots near ukraine and belarus absolutely favors the defender.

Also russia was pretty stip with their crossing, river crossings are dangerous, from my army training I remember in tight bridges and pontons the trucks, tanks etc were supposed to be staggered in a way that it minimized loss if an attack happened, which it often does being even the most retarded enemy can notice a bottleneck is an opening to attack. The russians screwed up bad by trying to ram theior armor across the river as fast as possible, and a buch of tanks bunched up plus artillery equals a bad day for the recieving end of the artillery.

Yes the recent/current kherson offensive, the opening days saw major losses for the ukrainians. It could have been a decoy or just poor planning, but they did make up for losses there with the kharkiv offensive where they made major gains with minimal losses.

You do not need to be a military man to understand a chokepoint is bad, You never want everything bunched up together but it happens even in the us military. When I was in 4id, we were taught in ruch marches and convoys to stagger and space out in uneven amounts, this is because if an ied, or rpg or whatever hits, you only lose a few soldiers and vehicles rather than mass numbers.

When I transitioned to the national guard, the brass could not understand why I protested to the layout of a ruckmarch, everyone nut to but basically a few inches apart, I explained a single ied or a single rpg attack could wipe out mass numbers being so close and the response I got was well not everything happens in a shitty country. The combat vets there knew, most of the nco's knew what I was talking about, but the brass were often not combat vets in the guard, or even much of the military, a combat experienced officer likes to do things based off known results, while a non experienced one makes decisions off what looks good on paper.

I wasn't aware of 'major' loses, there. Have you got a cite or source?

 

[maxparrish]

Yep. The bolded is my thought, too. I also found the 1K Excalibur order.

Is it possible there are 'smart' shells that are not to the abilities of the Excalibur's?

I found something else. Apparently there is the (Wikipedia):

M1156 Precision Guidance Kit (PGK), formerly XM1156, is a U.S. Army-designed precision guidance system to turn existing 155 mm artillery shells into smart weapons.[1] The prime contractor was Alliant Techsystems – later merging with Orbital Sciences Corporation to form Orbital ATK, in turn being taken over by Northrop Grumman and renamed Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems – and the industry team includes Interstate Electronics Corporation.[2] By April 2018, more than 25,000 PGKs had been produced.[3]

Since some of these kits have been exported, the US might have 10 to 20K in stock. They transform an extended range dumb shell into a smart shell...although the CEP is around 50 meters while Excalibur is closer to 5 to 10 meters.

So some of these might be provided as well. Supposedly this year an improved version of this kit is supposed to start production. For 10K each it will improve 155mm shells to a CEP of meters or less.

 

[Variant]

The russians did order retreat, however you are partially right, many of the frontier areas were guarded by irregulars of the dnr and lpr and often in small numbers, they were no match to begin with. The shocker was ordering the retreat from izyum, as izyum and kopiansk(I probably mispelled both of them) were the major holder of troops, meaning they actually had the numbers but instead ordered a retreat in izyum and in kupiansk they ordered them to retreat to the east of the river.

If they ordered the retreat, then it means they simply couldn't afford to lose the troops to encirclement. Which is probably true given the situation on the other front.

 

[Chomsky]

Here is a link to an article from July 9th about 1K rounds being shipped to Ukraine.

Defense Industry of Ukraine

Good find, Minerva.

This was interesting:

 

[maxparrish]

Wiki put it at a 22 Kg warhead. No idea how potent that is, but I found this on YouTube:



I realize PGM is the thing, but the impact wasn't overly impressive for $112K USD.

Well, given that dumb artillery has a CEP of 300 meters at full range, this will hit where you want it (e.g. bridges, command HQs). And I expect the new add on kit for dumb shells will provide closer to Excalibur for far less cost.

 

[Chomsky]

I found something else. Apparently there is the (Wikipedia):

M1156 Precision Guidance Kit (PGK), formerly XM1156, is a U.S. Army-designed precision guidance system to turn existing 155 mm artillery shells into smart weapons.[1] The prime contractor was Alliant Techsystems – later merging with Orbital Sciences Corporation to form Orbital ATK, in turn being taken over by Northrop Grumman and renamed Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems – and the industry team includes Interstate Electronics Corporation.[2] By April 2018, more than 25,000 PGKs had been produced.[3]

Since some of these kits have been exported, the US might have 10 to 20K in stock. They transform an extended range dumb shell into a smart shell...although the CEP is around 50 meters while Excalibur is closer to 5 to 10 meters.

So some of these might be provided as well. Supposedly this year an improved version of this kit is supposed to start production. For 10K each it will improve 155mm shells to a CEP of meters or less.

Check-out my post directly above yours, and Minerva's link in it.

 

[beerftw]

I wasn't aware of 'major' loses, there. Have you got a cite or source?

Most of them were from russian media posting polish made t-72 tanks and polish and other nato country provided soviet gear either destroyed or captured.

Ukraine will not tell the truth and russia will stretch the truth under such situations, but many estimate three whole armored brigates were lost in the opening week of the kherson offensive. Many of the areas ukraine claimed many maps are unpainting blue as social media is showing ukraine did not capture much of anything in kherson.

If you look at the terrain it is easy to see why their offense there failed, it is all flat plains, russia could see their infantry and armor hundreds of miles away, while in kharkiv and in the donbas the ukrainians could use woodlands to conceal cover rather than getting hit by long range artillery and missiles long before reaching the destination.

 

[armycowboy]

There are a few, and off the top of my head, can due to their experience offer far more insight on the war in Ukraine
I will miss some, so if you wish tag them. Going by a bad memory & all
No doubt they would provide excellent opinions
@armycowboy
@braindrain
@cpwill
@Rexedgar

Thank you for tagging me, but I haven't been following the war in the Ukraine as closely as many others.

I will offer a few general points, if you'll allow me. One of the biggest problems I've noticed through the years from being an observer during tactical evaluations in Europe, is the lack of a strong NCO corps in European Armies. They're all Officer driven and NCOs have very little authority, vs the American Army. That means orders take more time to be enforced on the battlefield, which can lead to potential gains never realized. More over, during intense combat, as an NCO, especially a Senior NCO, I could take charge and lead troops to seize and important initiative, without having to wait for orders from above. European Armies can't do this. Their NCOs wait back on their heels until their officers issue orders. This often leads to missed opportunities. There are a lot of former American Special Operation Soldiers in the Ukraine (we were all NCOs in SOC) so that may give an advantage to the Ukraine.

Secondly, there's the issue of moral, which can't be overstated in warfare. Yeah, every Soldier is trying to stay alive, but how much risk he's willing to take to accomplish the mission comes down to training and moral. I was an observer during tactical evaluations of both Dutch and Danish forces, during my time in Europe, and most of the lower enlisted Soldiers (including some of the junior NCOs) just didn't give a shit. They were conscripts who were waiting their enlistments out and weren't particularly well paid, well fed or cared for. Take this over to the Ukraine war, and assuming the training is similar between the Russian and Ukrainian Soldiers, the Ukraine holds a huge moral superiority. Why? Because they're defending their homeland and their families. They simply have more to fight for than their Russian counterparts.

Finally, there's the tactics of offense vs defense in warfare. If the two sides are fairly evenly matched (and they seem to be, with Russia having a small advantage) it's much less costly in terms of blood and treasure, to play defense than it is to play offense. Russia started out on the offensive and may have burned itself out in terms of men, equipment and moral. They cost themselves the initiative and now the Ukrainians, who have, for the most part held most of their ground, are counter attacking.

To wind this up, I spent over 20 years in the Army and I'd be more comfortable fighting as a Ukrainian right now than a Russian.

 

[Minerva]

Good find, Minerva.

This was interesting:

View attachment 67413855

Yes, the diagram really drives home the difference in accuracy between the different shells. The notations that accuracy of the two guided shells was much improved in 2014 and 2015 makes you wonder if they have gotten any better in the past six years or so.

 

[maxparrish]

Check-out my post directly above yours, and Minerva's link in it.

Done. Very good find, as you said. Minerva's getting to be pretty good at this.

Here is a few other facts:

The M549A1 is an extended range, rocket assisted shell.
The M795 is a standard shell.

Apparently both can empty the PGM kit. After reading the info found by Minerva, it sounds like they are not providing Excalibur but the Kit modified shells.

 

[Chomsky]

Most of them were from russian media posting polish made t-72 tanks and polish and other nato country provided soviet gear either destroyed or captured.

Ukraine will not tell the truth and russia will stretch the truth under such situations, but many estimate three whole armored brigates were lost in the opening week of the kherson offensive. Many of the areas ukraine claimed many maps are unpainting blue as social media is showing ukraine did not capture much of anything in kherson.

If you look at the terrain it is easy to see why their offense there failed, it is all flat plains, russia could see their infantry and armor hundreds of miles away, while in kharkiv and in the donbas the ukrainians could use woodlands to conceal cover rather than getting hit by long range artillery and missiles long before reaching the destination.

Brigades? UKR lost three brigades? I find this hard to believe.

Well, at first anyway.

I did find this below while Googling (behind paywall):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/09/07/ukraine-kherson-offensive-casualties-ammunition/

 

[Chomsky]

There are a few, and off the top of my head, can due to their experience offer far more insight on the war in Ukraine
I will miss some, so if you wish tag them. Going by a bad memory & all
No doubt they would provide excellent opinions
@armycowboy
@braindrain
@cpwill
@Rexedgar

Good tags, I must say.

 

[Chomsky]

Yes, the diagram really drives home the difference in accuracy between the different shells. The notations that accuracy of the two guided shells was much improved in 2014 and 2015 makes you wonder if they have gotten any better in the past six years or so.

Yes, the bolded is a good point.

If those add-on kits are better than 20M CEP (possible), then it seems to me they're getting pretty darn accurate.

 

[Chomsky]

Thank you for tagging me, but I haven't been following the war in the Ukraine as closely as many others.

I will offer a few general points, if you'll allow me. One of the biggest problems I've noticed through the years from being an observer during tactical evaluations in Europe, is the lack of a strong NCO corps in European Armies. They're all Officer driven and NCOs have very little authority, vs the American Army. That means orders take more time to be enforced on the battlefield, which can lead to potential gains never realized. More over, during intense combat, as an NCO, especially a Senior NCO, I could take charge and lead troops to seize and important initiative, without having to wait for orders from above. European Armies can't do this. Their NCOs wait back on their heels until their officers issue orders. This often leads to missed opportunities. There are a lot of former American Special Operation Soldiers in the Ukraine (we were all NCOs in SOC) so that may give an advantage to the Ukraine.

Secondly, there's the issue of moral, which can't be overstated in warfare. Yeah, every Soldier is trying to stay alive, but how much risk he's willing to take to accomplish the mission comes down to training and moral. I was an observer during tactical evaluations of both Dutch and Danish forces, during my time in Europe, and most of the lower enlisted Soldiers (including some of the junior NCOs) just didn't give a shit. They were conscripts who were waiting their enlistments out and weren't particularly well paid, well fed or cared for. Take this over to the Ukraine war, and assuming the training is similar between the Russian and Ukrainian Soldiers, the Ukraine holds a huge moral superiority. Why? Because they're defending their homeland and their families. They simply have more to fight for than their Russian counterparts.

Finally, there's the tactics of offense vs defense in warfare. If the two sides are fairly evenly matched (and they seem to be, with Russia having a small advantage) it's much less costly in terms of blood and treasure, to play defense than it is to play offense. Russia started out on the offensive and may have burned itself out in terms of men, equipment and moral. They cost themselves the initiative and now the Ukrainians, who have, for the most part held most of their ground, are counter attacking.

To wind this up, I spent over 20 years in the Army and I'd be more comfortable fighting as a Ukrainian right now than a Russian.

Thanks.

As to your offense/defense remark, we've got to remain cognizant UKR is now & offense - albeit on familiar home territory.

 

[maxparrish]

Yes, the diagram really drives home the difference in accuracy between the different shells. The notations that accuracy of the two guided shells was much improved in 2014 and 2015 makes you wonder if they have gotten any better in the past six years or so.

Actually they seem to have been better than published specs in 2015.

"During tests, PGK-fuzed rounds had consistent performance across towed and self-propelled artillery platforms, passing the accuracy objective requirement of 30 m (98 ft) or less CEP with a majority of rounds being placed within 10 m (33 ft)."

and:

"In 2021, the U.S. Army plans to produce the upgraded M1156E2/A1, compatible with newer XM1128 high explosive and XM1113 rocket-assisted projectiles to achieve 10-meter accuracy at 30 km and 40 km respectively when fired from a 39-caliber barrel. The follow-on M1156E3/A2 in 2022 will be designed to operate with the GPS-M satellite constellation along with having a lower cost electronic module. After that, a new version known as the Long Range PGK will enable accuracy with XM1113 projectiles out to 70 km when fired from 58-caliber barrels of artillery pieces developed from the Extended Range Cannon Artillery (ERCA) program, as well as being compatible with legacy projectiles and being able to operate in a near-peer GPS threat environment.[13]"

I don't know if XM113 (long range) or X1128 shells are in production yet, but the upgraded guidance kit ( M1156E2/A1) sounds like it will be equal or near equal to Excalibur in accuracy (at far less cost) to conventional shells.

M1156 Precision Guidance Kit - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[maxparrish]

Brigades? UKR lost three brigades? I find this hard to believe.

Well, at first anyway.

I did find this below while Googling (behind paywall):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/09/07/ukraine-kherson-offensive-casualties-ammunition/

Very distressing, and it is what I feared from the outset. The Ukrainians still need more artillery and far more ammunition. Without it they are in danger of having to live on the defense indefinitely. Their gains in he north were from tactical brilliance and a depleted Russian front, but telegraphing their intentions in Kherson was the heavy price paid to pull it off.

"Brigades" sounds like an large exaggeration but it depends on what size they consider a brigade. If they were 1,000 men each, it is plausible 3 were demolished given how fierce it was.

It only underscores my belief that Ukraine must win indirectly, by cutting logistics as deep as possible. As long as Russians have guns galore, only by killing their ammo, food, and fuel is it the only route to breaking through fortified defenses and concrete tank bunkers.

In WW1, that was how the allies won. Years of stalemate turned because of Germany's depleted food and material base (a lack of steel) which kept shrinking. Eventually they wore out, and the stalemate and their spirit was broken.

Which brings back to the same issue since the start of the war: weapons like ATACMS are absolutely necessary to sever supply lines 100 or more miles behind enemy. lines. Ukrainian planes can't do it. Artillery can't reach it. Special missions behind enemy lines are brave but not nearly sufficient. Now the Russians are using their monopoly on long range mega missiles to freely demolish the remainder of Ukraine's infrastructure...including dams and power stations.

Enough has been enough for many months. Something must be done to level the playing field against Russian Iksander's and Kalibers and now the S300's being converted to surface to surface missiles and safely fired behind their lines.

It has always been a case of starve the body and the head dies. When will we grasp the obvious?

 

[armycowboy]

Thanks.

As to your offense/defense remark, we've got to remain cognizant UKR is now & offense - albeit on familiar home territory.

A counteroffensive can be quite different that an initial offensive, depending on the strength and moral of the belligerents. From what I've read and heard, the moral of the Russian Army is at an all time low. I'd bet at on the Ukrainians right now, but I've been wrong before.

 

[armycowboy]

Very distressing, and it is what I feared. The Ukrainians need more artillery and far more ammunition. Without it they are in danger of having to live on the defensive indefinitely. Their gains in he north were from tactical brilliance and a depleted Russian front, but telegraphing their intentions in Kherson was the price paid.

"Brigades" sounds like an large exaggeration but it depends on what size they consider a brigade. If they were 1,000 men each, it is plausible given how fierce it was.

It only underscores the belief that Ukraine must win indirectly, by cutting logistics as deep as possible. As long as Russians have guns galore, killing their ammo, food, and fuel is the only route.

In WW1, that was how the allies won. Germany's food and material base (especially steel) kept shrinking. Eventually they wore out, and the stalemate was broken.

Which brings back to the same issue since the start of the war: weapons like ATACMS are absolutely necessary to sever supply lines 100 or more miles behind enemy. lines. Ukrainian planes can't do it. Artillery can't reach it. Special missions behind enemy lines are brave but not sufficient. Now the Russians are using their monopoly on long range mega missiles to freely demolish the remainder of Ukraine's infrastructure...including dams and power stations.

Enough has been enough for many months. Something must be done to level the playing field against Iksander's and Kalibers and now S300's being converted to surface to surface missiles.



Starve the body, kill the head. When will we grasp the obvious?

You're missing the obvious question here. Which Soldiers have more to gain here, Ukrainian or Russian? Military hardware is secondary. The US had military hardware vs Vietnam, but not the will that they had to win.

 

[Chomsky]

Very distressing, and it is what I feared. The Ukrainians need more artillery and far more ammunition. Without it they are in danger of having to live on the defensive indefinitely. Their gains in he north were from tactical brilliance and a depleted Russian front, but telegraphing their intentions in Kherson was the price paid.

"Brigades" sounds like an large exaggeration but it depends on what size they consider a brigade. If they were 1,000 men each, it is plausible given how fierce it was.

It only underscores the belief that Ukraine must win indirectly, by cutting logistics as deep as possible. As long as Russians have guns galore, killing their ammo, food, and fuel is the only route.

In WW1, that was how the allies won. Germany's food and material base (especially steel) kept shrinking. Eventually they wore out, and the stalemate was broken.

Which brings back to the same issue since the start of the war: weapons like ATACMS are absolutely necessary to sever supply lines 100 or more miles behind enemy. lines. Ukrainian planes can't do it. Artillery can't reach it. Special missions behind enemy lines are brave but not sufficient.

Starve the body, kill the head. When will we grasp the obvious?

Yeah, that article sure was a bummer.

I'd like to hear @beerftw's comments. We need to thank him for bringing this to our attention.

It's also why I accept the presence of dissent, as we never want to get caught-up in an echo chamber.

--

I'm getting concerned it's going to be hard to discern the wheat from chaff in Kherson. What I found troubling from the article was the seeming technological proficiency the UKR soldiers claimed RU had. I wasn't expecting that.

We need to keep in mind that article is nearly two weeks old, and the UKR starvation techniques employed probably had some effect in degrading RU.

 

[Chomsky]

A counteroffensive can be quite different that an initial offensive, depending on the strength and moral of the belligerents. From what I've read and heard, the moral of the Russian Army is at an all time low. I'd bet at on the Ukrainians right now, but I've been wrong before.

Oh, I'm with UKR prevailing here - barring some immense RU mobilization of some sort.

My concern is the cost to be occurred. I just recently became aware of how heavy the loses may be in Kherson.

 

[maxparrish]

You're missing the obvious question here. Which Soldiers have more to gain here, Ukrainian or Russian? Military hardware is secondary. The US had military hardware vs Vietnam, but not the will that they had to win.

As the Empress of Japan is reputed to have written in her diary at WW2's end, marveling at the endless wave of allied aircraft overhead "I believe we relied too much on fighting spirit, and not enough on science".

Fighting spirit can only take a people so far.

 

[Minerva]

With the longer range missiles it would open up the ability to hit rail bridges and junction inside Russia. However wouldn't it necessitate the use of HARM missiles ahead of these to remove the ADWs that these places would quickly receive?

It would seem to me that you would want to hit as many critical infrastructure choke points as you could the first time you use them because after that they are all going to have ADWs. Of course maybe satellite recon can help determine which ones are protected and which ones aren't. Either way it will likely have one heck of a response from Russia. Maybe tactical nuclear as is their doctrine, which from what I've read about their war gaming, they always considered this something the west couldn't/wouldn't counter and they would win.

 

[armycowboy]

Oh, I'm with UKR prevailing here - barring some immense RU mobilization of some sort.

My concern is the cost to be occurred. I just recently became aware of how heavy the loses may be in Kherson.

You're confusing warfare at the macro level vs warfare fought at the micro level. WW2 was the only war in recent memory fought at the macro level. WW1, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. have been fought at the micro level. It come down to the Russian ground forces vs the Ukrainian ground forces. The "grand strategy" means shit. Do the guys on the ground care enough to make it happen.

 

[armycowboy]

As the Empress of Japan is reputed to have written in her diary at WW2's end, marveling at the endless wave of allied aircraft overhead "I believe we relied too much on fighting spirit, and not enough on science".

Fighting spirit can only take a people so far.

That was the last macro war. "Fighting spirit' aka 'moral' allowed Vietnam and Afghanistan to defeat a technologically soupier enemy.

 

[maxparrish]

Yeah, that article sure was a bummer.

I'd like to hear @beerftw's comments. We need to thank him for bringing this to our attention.

It's also why I accept the presence of dissent, as we never want to get caught-up in an echo chamber.

--

I'm getting concerned it's going to be hard to discern the wheat from chaff in Kherson. What I found troubling from the article was the seeming technological proficiency the UKR soldiers claimed RU had. I wasn't expecting that.

We need to keep in mind that article is nearly two weeks old, and the UKR starvation techniques employed probably had some effect in degrading RU.

Russians are slow, but not stupid. They had to straighten out their poor use of EW and horrible signals security, their lack of drone experience, there dated doctrine. It looks like they have (and the new Iranian drones are especially worrisome).

They are well dug in, well protected by concrete supplemented defensive works, largely engaged in static defensive warfare. There is a lot of firepower packed into that strip of land. Unlike the north, they have no need to be masters of maneuver. Their tanks are no longer exposed to Javlins, their topsides protected by those bunkers.

My view is that only a more prolonged action to drain or impede their logistics will dislodge them. If Ukraine were a western army, air delivered missiles would render those bunkers to dust. Cruise missiles would pound deep into their GLOC's ... you would see what we saw in the two gulf wars.

Still they are making incremental progress... small costly steps that may yet succeed in the next several weeks. Otherwise they should wind it down and focus on the many weaker areas of the Russian front.