Russian special military operation in Ukraine #8

Ukrainian forces appear to be counterattacking in many places. Probably the Mykolaiv area as well.In my opinion, Russia has not engaged enough forces in this operation.
Kyiv is not willing to make any concessions, let alone capitulation
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1507779992415047688?t=f1TMd7X0IfejNS-niRhJlw&s=19

Sujoy wrote:

flamming_python wrote:In terms of air-defense the Ukrainians had S-300Ps, Tunguskas, Strela-10s, Buk-Ms (M1s, M1-2s), even a few early Tors.

It has a bunch of older systems too, Kubs, S-125s, and so on

All of them seem to be integrated with NATO infrastucture. They of course had their own radars and so on too.

Interesting! Russian/Soviet SAM systems integrated with NATO infrastructure?

Greece couldn't integrate their S 300 with NATO infra and neither could Turkey integrate their S 400.

I don't know about the extent of integration

But laptops with data from NATO getting streamed in have already been found in some Ukrainian units

My hypothesis about Ukrainian air defenses is speculation, but it makes sense that they would similarly be sent NATO radar data, and could avoid switching on their own radars until they know a Russian aircraft is in range.

Arrow wrote:Ukrainian forces appear to be counterattacking in many places. Probably the Mykolaiv area as well.In my opinion, Russia has not engaged enough forces in this operation.
Kyiv is not willing to make any concessions, let alone capitulation
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1507779992415047688?t=f1TMd7X0IfejNS-niRhJlw&s=19

Russia has redeployed many units now to attacking the Donbass grouping. Redeployed from around Kiev, Kharkov and Kherson

But the remaining forces there should be able to hold the line quite handily. If the Ukrainian forces take a couple of villages, it's no big deal, there are bigger objectives at the moment.

Urluber wrote:

Sujoy wrote:

ArgentinaGuard wrote:The bastard of Biden calling to overthrow Putin in Russia. This guy is sick.

By contrast, Biden has treated Xi with respect. Despite Xi's Covid coverup, Asian expansionism, and Muslim gulag—the largest mass incarceration of people on religious grounds since Hitler—President Biden has not hurled any personal insult at him, nor imposed meaningful sanctions.

Then again China has never beaten huge western empires into dust, or put a man in the space before "the civilized world".
Russia has. And it has done it for centuries. It has put to grave the Swedish empire, French empire, Third Reich (probably most powerful of western empires ever when taking in count the peers at same time and age). I don't remember everything.

They will go after China when China shows the west has all the reasons to fear it. And I think it's already starting for the past few years. It starts gradually. Then they finally attack when they have winded up themselves with years and years of hate speech, get their asses handed to them and it all starts over again.

They're already sanctioning Chinese officials for a conflict the PRC is no way, shape or form affiliated with. Uncle Sham wants to recreate this:


Modi was already sanctioned before, it's already just a matter of time for India.

It will depend on what the Ukies gain from their counterattacks. They will likely make small gains,

Counter attacks should be expected, Russians are over stretched and out numbered so its sensible for the Ukies to attack them.

Russians either need to deploy moe forces or shorten the frontline ASAP

Rosgvardiya


Tanks entering Kupyansk

Large column of BMP-3´s was filmed entering Donbass.

A question on infantry tactics. I am a civilian, and what I know about fighting comes from books. My knowledge is about both world wars. Since 2014 I have had some difficulty figuring out tactics in this war.

I know I should read Glantz books on the Soviet army. Perhaps someone can help me and gauge my comments on the Battalion Tactical Group, if I am understanding how it works correctly and wether if it's a good tactic or just what can be done with what's available.



From another forum, translated with yandex

OP: One thing I have found out there, composition and organization of the Russian "battalion groups" that seems to be the basic tactical unit they are using in Ukraine, it is striking the large number of support units and the firepower with 6 self-propelled which should be 120 mm, 6 Grad rocket launchers (I think) and 3 TOS for each unit..., there also seems to be an organic deficit of infantry which could explain these episodes of ambushes and attacks by the Ukros with Javelin or NLAW launchers.


My reply:


According to Soviet military doctrine, in an offensive operation, a mechanized infantry battalion always consisted of 3 motorized rifle companies (wheeled BTR armored) or mechanized (armored BMP, with a tank company (about 13) divided into sections of 4 tanks integrated into each rifle company, to which was added the infantry company, which included a mortar battery, 1 reconnaissance section, anti-aircraft section (missiles), anti-tank.. etc. Even the smallest unit was a combined arms formation

In defensive operations, the tanks (and also the BMPs) were withdrawn and concentrated to be used as a reserve for the counterattack.

Therefore, when we talk about a Battalion Tactical Group, we mean a mechanized infantry battalion, reinforced with a company of tanks and artillery"



The issue of modern tactics is complex, and what the Soviets, now Russians, are doing is different from what the Westerners are doing.

Very summarized, I am no expert either,

The Russians realized that in modern warfare infantry on foot is no longer worth anything. At least on offensive. That the massacres of the world wars with mass assaults of infantry and storming trenches with the bayonet and with grenades should not and could not be repeated. That infantry always has to be supported by armor. And they have carried it out to its ultimate consequences. Even the smallest unit combines armor, artillery and infantry, to balance and compensate for each other's shortcomings.

Infantry can occupy and hold ground if they have anti-tank weapons to defend themselves against an armored attack and basically to act as observers for artillery.

Tanks and armored vehicles are used to support the attack, but they are not used defensively as bunkers or artillery pieces. This is a temptation to avoid. An ambushed tank in a firing position can be very effective, but it is a waste of the advantage of the tank, which is mobility. As useful as armored vehicles are on the defensive, they are always more decisive when attacking with them.

There is no shortage of infantry. At least not organically. It's not that the BTGs have few infantry, it's that there are not enough battalion arounds. The ambushes have been against the marching and transport columns, in the second case because the Russians advanced so fast and so far that they left the lines of communication unprotected. In the first case due to stupidity, for not taking precautions or insufficient recognition. All that's missing is drones.

Now the BTG thing is very good for an open field fight. But it happens that cities and towns have to be cleaned up, and then you no longer see battalions or companies, only small groups of some tanks and armored and a few infantry platoons. Out of necessity and because the fronts are so extensive and there are no troops for everyone, it is a war of small units. Even in the cities and towns where thousands of men and hundreds of armored personnel get into, in the end everything is fragmented.

This dispersion is anathema against the principle of concentration and mass operations, whether armored wedges or large batteries, but you gave to do with what you have and also has a benefit, I don't know if unexpected or calculated, the absence of large concentrations of troops greatly minimizes the damage that can cause Ukrainian artillery, especially saturation bombing with multiple rocket launchers.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Counter attacks should be expected, Russians are over stretched and out numbered so its sensible for the Ukies to attack them.

Apparently, they launched a counterattack in the Kherson region. I do not know how they will force Kyiv to surrender.

Ispan wrote:A question on infantry tactics. I am a civilian, and what I know about fighting comes from books. My knowledge is about both world wars. Since 2014 I have had some difficulty figuring out tactics in this war.

The last research paper done by the US in 2017. Apparently commissioned by MacMaster when he was Trumps National Security advisor.


The Russian Way of War - Army University Press
https://www.armyupress.army.mil › portals › russia
PDF
The Russian Way of War. Force Structure, Tactics, and Modernization of the Russian Ground Forces. Dr. Lester W. Grau. Charles K. Bartles.

kvs wrote:

flamming_python wrote:

Arrow wrote:Ukrainian forces appear to be counterattacking in many places. Probably the Mykolaiv area as well.In my opinion, Russia has not engaged enough forces in this operation.
Kyiv is not willing to make any concessions, let alone capitulation
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1507779992415047688?t=f1TMd7X0IfejNS-niRhJlw&s=19

Russia has redeployed many units now to attacking the Donbass grouping. Redeployed from around Kiev, Kharkov and Kherson

But the remaining forces there should be able to hold the line quite handily. If the Ukrainian forces take a couple of villages, it's no big deal, there are bigger objectives at the moment.

There has been no draw-down from these regions.   Russian reinforcements moved towards Izyum and the LDNR front in the last couple of days from the north-west.

There will soon be 20,000 troops free from Mariupol and the American warned the Ukrainians that it appears a large force of reinforcements is gathering in Belgorod... waiting for the next phase.

Arrow wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Counter attacks should be expected, Russians are over stretched and out numbered so its sensible for the Ukies to attack them.

Apparently, they launched a counterattack in the Kherson region.  I do not know how they will force Kyiv to surrender.

The Ukrs have literally sent a column of guys on foot to occupy some village near the Dniepr

What bloody counterattack.

They're sending men to be killed just to make it look like the Ukraine is winning in the Western media, by their team of showmen and comedians in the government.

They did not engage Russian forces, there were none there

If they don't leave they will be dealt with, simple as that.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:It will depend on what the Ukies gain from their counterattacks. They will likely make small gains,

Counter attacks should be expected, Russians are over stretched and out numbered so its sensible for the Ukies to attack them.

Russians either need to deploy moe forces or shorten the frontline ASAP

No, it makes no sense for the Ukrainians to attack the Russians in Kherson, or Sumy, or any such place 50-100km from the Russian border where a bunch of Russian planes can simply lift off and vaporize them, or Russian artillery can do the same job

It's a bunch of offensives for the cameras, but its dangerous for the people involved. This is the sort of regime Russia is dealing with

The only thing resembling an attack was the one near Sumy yesterday, where some Ukrainian territorial guard attacked a checkpoint and took out a tank, in return for their own losses and a destroyed Ukrainian SPG. Russia has not gotten around to clearing this area, it's a failure, but such a small-scale skirmish can hardly be called a counter-attack.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

Firebird wrote:

FP wrote: here weren't any Polish SS volunteers or anything of the sort. In Russia we had Vlasov's army, but in Poland I should note they didn't have anything like that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poles_in_the_Wehrmacht
Well this is a Western source ie pro Polish. And even they add mass collaboration.

Western sources about Polish crimes, aren't they the same "telling truth" about tens  of millions of Russians killed in Gulags? That Stalin and Hitler were like soul brothers? and millions of raped women  by Russian Army? tell me more about that. Copmngrats sources.


As for Wehrmacht, you should learn history. Before IIWW Poles of German descent were drafted to Wehrmacht. Poland was pretty multiethnic those times. + Anybody living in Silesia was considered a German. My advice read with understanding,

EOT in this topic

In the parts of western and northern Poland incorporated into the Reich during late 1939 ethnic Poles were forcibly conscripted into the Wehrmacht. The word "forcibly" is the key word here, as almost nobody volunteered. Overall during WWII there were more ethnic Poles who served in the Wehrmacht, than there were Polish partisans.  

From those who served on the Eastern Front, a relatively small number defected to the Soviets, and later joined the Polish People's Army.

There were also some who defected to the Allies elsewhere, and also to the local partisans in countries like Yugoslavia and Greece.


There was a failed attempt to create an SS legion from a few hundred members of the Goralenvolk, but majority of them deserted after quarreling with some ethnic Ukrainian collaborators (in the quarrel the Germans apparently sided with the Ukrainians, and that upset most of the Gorals). The Polish Gorals (Mountaineers) are the inhabitants of the Polish Carpathians, and they do have significant German and Romanian ancestry.


There was also some collaboration with the Germans by some Polish extreme right-wing "resistance", for example the top leadership of the MiP (apparently in secret from majority of the lower-ranking members), a significant portion of the NSZ, and some AK units (not only in Belarus and Lithuania, but also sporadically in Poland-proper).

http://michalw.narod.ru/index-ZiemiLubelskiej.html



In case of the ethnic Germans from Poland, obviously lots of them served in the various police formations, and also in the German government apparatus; the Sonderdienst (Special Service) which existed in the General Governorship (GG) consisted entirely of them.

http://michalw.narod.ru/index-GL42.html


In addition to it also the deceptively named Selbstschutz (Selfdefence), which existed during 1939-1940 in both the GG and the parts of Poland incorporated into the Reich.

Reportedly many ethnic Germans from Poland also served in the Waffen-SS (Armed SS).

Besides these, there were also the Landwacht (Rural Sentry) and Stadtwacht (Urban Sentry) reserve formations, which existed until 1944, when they were both disbanded and transformed into the Volkssturm (Popular Assault).

Ukrainians shooting on captured russians !! Graphic video.

Exhibit A: Member of a septic Stink Tank getting triggerd lol!

Ispan wrote:A question on infantry tactics. I am a civilian, and what I know about fighting comes from books. My knowledge is about both world wars. Since 2014 I have had some difficulty figuring out tactics in this war.

I know I should read Glantz books on the Soviet army. Perhaps someone can help me and gauge my comments on the Battalion Tactical Group, if I am understanding how it works correctly and wether if it's a good tactic or just what can be done with what's available.



From another forum, translated with yandex

OP: One thing I have found out there, composition and organization of the Russian "battalion groups" that seems to be the basic tactical unit they are using in Ukraine, it is striking the large number of support units and the firepower with 6 self-propelled which should be 120 mm, 6 Grad rocket launchers (I think) and 3 TOS for each unit..., there also seems to be an organic deficit of infantry which could explain these episodes of ambushes and attacks by the Ukros with Javelin or NLAW launchers.


My reply:


According to Soviet military doctrine, in an offensive operation, a mechanized infantry battalion always consisted of 3 motorized rifle companies (wheeled BTR armored) or mechanized (armored BMP, with a tank company (about 13) divided into sections of 4 tanks integrated into each rifle company, to which was added the infantry company, which included a mortar battery, 1 reconnaissance section, anti-aircraft section (missiles), anti-tank.. etc. Even the smallest unit was a combined arms formation

In defensive operations, the tanks (and also the BMPs) were withdrawn and concentrated to be used as a reserve for the counterattack.

Therefore, when we talk about a Battalion Tactical Group, we mean a mechanized infantry battalion, reinforced with a company of tanks and artillery"



The issue of modern tactics is complex, and what the Soviets, now Russians, are doing is different from what the Westerners are doing.

Very summarized,  I am no expert either,

The Russians realized that in modern warfare infantry on foot is no longer worth anything. At least on offensive. That the massacres of the world wars with mass assaults of infantry and storming trenches with the bayonet and with grenades should not and could not be repeated. That infantry always has to be supported by armor. And they have carried it out to its ultimate consequences. Even the smallest unit combines armor, artillery and infantry, to balance and compensate for each other's shortcomings.

Infantry can occupy and hold ground if they have anti-tank weapons to defend themselves against an armored attack and basically to act as observers for artillery.

Tanks and armored vehicles are used to support the attack, but they are not used defensively as bunkers or artillery pieces. This is a temptation to avoid. An ambushed tank in a firing position can be very effective, but it is a waste of the advantage of the tank, which is mobility. As useful as armored vehicles are on the defensive, they are always more decisive when attacking with them.

There is no shortage of infantry. At least not organically. It's not that the BTGs have few infantry, it's that there are not enough battalion arounds. The ambushes have been against the marching and transport columns, in the second case because the Russians advanced so fast and so far that they left the lines of communication unprotected. In the first case due to stupidity, for not taking precautions or insufficient recognition. All that's missing is drones.

Now the BTG thing is very good for an open field fight. But it happens that cities and towns have to be cleaned up, and then you no longer see battalions or companies, only small groups of some tanks and armored and a few infantry platoons. Out of necessity and because the fronts are so extensive and there are no troops for everyone, it is a war of small units. Even in the cities and towns where thousands of men and hundreds of armored personnel get into, in the end everything is fragmented.

This dispersion is anathema against the principle of concentration and mass operations, whether armored wedges or large batteries, but you gave to do with what you have and also has a benefit, I don't know if unexpected or calculated, the absence of large concentrations of troops greatly minimizes the damage that can cause Ukrainian artillery, especially saturation bombing with multiple rocket launchers.

You're really not taking into account Ukrainian geography

It's a lot of forests all throughout the east and north-east. You can only travel by the roads.

Russians have travelled by the roads and set up checkpoints in most places. They entered a few towns where they made agreements, but left most towns and cities alone, including ones which have garrisons or territorial defense units - and these guys are now being ordered to make trouble.

The territorial defense unit in Sumy at the beginning of the war tried to ambush some Russian convoy. For this its base in Sumy was shelled, and then they stayed quiet. Now the Chernigov territorial defense has surfaced and carried out an attack. Russia is trying to avoid exterminating these people and instead come to agreements with their cities and towns of operation, for them to lay down arms.

As for the concentration of forces, this has been addressed before. No-one's building Blitzkrieg spearheads. Russia is tying down Ukrainian forces across a large front, it's deep order battle. But at the moment its only focused on advancing and exploiting the advance in the Donbass and Kharkov areas.

Broski wrote:Is it just me or is flamming_python more concerned for the wellbeing of ukrops than the Russian army? What's the problem with orcs fighting inadequately?

Because the point is to get them to surrender than just killing everyone

flamming_python wrote:

Broski wrote:Is it just me or is flamming_python more concerned for the wellbeing of ukrops than the Russian army? What's the problem with orcs fighting inadequately?

Because the point is to get them to surrender than just killing everyone

War is about killing... russians are still nice to not level their country, they should be happy.

Well once they take the donbas I doubt russians will care about western ukrainian population and go at full power. Lviv won't exist anymore IMO once they come there.

[quote="d_taddei2"]

Hole wrote:
The Buk it seems was on a suicide mission parked out in the open on a ploughed field where it stuck out like a sore thumb.
I think Russia has to be careful of fakes/decoy's Ukraine seems willing to try anything. And a fake could easily be a an old rusting vehicle sitting in a military scrapyard towed into position.

Very true, some can be used as decoys to lure out planes, hence why Iskander was used instead. It's better take out those systems, not much you can do against decoys unfortunately, but it's not all about the cost, this will not be 10-year war so anything goes.