Continuation The Russian Invasion of Ukraine part 8

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by Doubt

Deepstate live map has for some time now shown a small area across the river from Antonivka having been liberated. It did not change much. The area expanded today on the map.

Not great terrain for a Ukrainian offense. I suspect they took that area to prep for a bridge if the Russians are forced to retreat because of a breakthrough.

As a location for an offensive by itself, it is not great. Low wet ground with the main road leading into a town. But it is worth watching.

If you look back some months, the bridge there was a target by Ukraine to cut off the Russians. It took awhile, but they did destroy the bridge. Now the Ukrainians control both sides of the bridge site.

https://deepstatemap.live/en#13/46.6556/32.6995

Unless I'm misunderstanding the situation there and to add a bit more context, that area's been serving as bait and threat far more than anything else. Strategically, Russia cannot intelligently ignore it, because of the threat that it poses to their relatively poorly defended rear and supply lines. Ukraine's both not committed much and not been able to commit all that much, though, so the threat is limited. As bait, Russia's sent in a bunch of attackers to dislodge them, though, and the attackers have been pounded hard with artillery across the river, leading to very disproportionate Russian losses.

When it comes to area controlled, I've seen a number of different assessments following Ukrainian raids, with the link's being small in comparison.

It's unlikely that Ukraine currently has enough forces there to present serious threat to Oleshki, just to the south, either way, though that could possibly have changed in the last couple weeks. The more Russian forces are fixed in place there, though, the better for Ukraine's offense.

Speaking of the offense, as an onlooker, it's unpleasant that it seems frozen in place. So long as Gerasimov's strategy pretty much consists of assaulting entrenched Ukrainian positions to try to retake them and not relying on Surovikin's fortifications unless they're the front line, this strategy of controlling the pace of advance to attrite Russian forces at far less cost to Ukraine may well be smart, albeit not flashy.

[Pixel42]

This seems to be a reasonably realistic assessment:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66796358

[a_unique_person]

The defensive lines don't seem to be being used as intended by the designer. Any attempt to take any land is just being met head on by the Russians with massive counter attacks being launced immediately.



The lines are meant to be used to cause attrition losses by the Russians to the Ukraine forces, with a mobile defense retreating to the next line of defence when necessary.

[steenkh]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

The defensive lines don't seem to be being used as intended by the designer. Any attempt to take any land is just being met head on by the Russians with massive counter attacks being launced immediately.



The lines are meant to be used to cause attrition losses by the Russians to the Ukraine forces, with a mobile defense retreating to the next line of defence when necessary.

As far as I know, the Germans in WWII had the principle of making immediate counter attacks to take back land that had been lost. I don’t know if this is still the preferred tactics, but apart from that fact that it does not give the enemy time to dig in, it also means that you can regain the advantage of the original defences.

Of course, if it is obvious that the Ukrainians are well prepared to repel counter attacks, it does not make so much sense.

[jimbob]

Don't think the sub is going anywhere.

https://x.com/kromark/status/1703734290926731749?s=20

Photo in tweet

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Don't think the sub is going anywhere.

https://x.com/kromark/status/1703734290926731749?s=20

Photo in tweet

Elon has deleted the tweet already.


https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1...896898/photo/1

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by steenkh

As far as I know, the Germans in WWII had the principle of making immediate counter attacks to take back land that had been lost. I don’t know if this is still the preferred tactics, but apart from that fact that it does not give the enemy time to dig in, it also means that you can regain the advantage of the original defences.

Of course, if it is obvious that the Ukrainians are well prepared to repel counter attacks, it does not make so much sense.

Basic to the British Army battle school, is that when you take a position the fight has just started.

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Don't think the sub is going anywhere.

https://x.com/kromark/status/1703734290926731749?s=20

Photo in tweet

Can't see it
Just getting an error

Got it by finding his profile

https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1...270-RAIkQ&s=19

[Andy_Ross]

He has before and after satellite images as well

https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1...8yvbtjCTw&s=19

[jimbob]

Also here

https://twitter.com/oryxspioenkop/st...28356208881975

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

He has before and after satellite images as well

https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1...8yvbtjCTw&s=19

That will buff right out.

[Mike!]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

That will buff right out.

Might need a little Bondo too.

https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/bondo-us/

[Jack by the hedge]

I had wondered if the damage to the sub might be far enough forward to be outside the pressure hull, and if the sub might be repairable. But obviously not, and that looks like two separate hits. All they'll do with that junk is pick over it for spares, and if they soon need the dry dock for something else they won't have much free time to do even that.

Nice work. Though I imagine in every naval dockyard worldwide someone is looking at this and wincing and pondering their own defences.

[Andy_Ross]

Reports from pro Russian Telegram channels say there have been large explosions overnight around Cape Fiolent on the southern edge of Sevastopol. It's the sight of a large radar and communications facility on the coast.
Drone and missile strikes apparently.

[MarkCorrigan]

Bahahahaha. Go Ukraine, **** them up.

[Jack by the hedge]

One might ask what airdefence doing? But when it's airdefence getting a pasting the question has probably occurred to them already.

[Gulliver Foyle]

Originally Posted by steenkh

As far as I know, the Germans in WWII had the principle of making immediate counter attacks to take back land that had been lost. I don’t know if this is still the preferred tactics, but apart from that fact that it does not give the enemy time to dig in, it also means that you can regain the advantage of the original defences.

Of course, if it is obvious that the Ukrainians are well prepared to repel counter attacks, it does not make so much sense.

As far as I recall that was around the time that the nazis really started hemmoharaging troops and losing strategic positions at a rapid pace on the Eastern Front. Hitler's insisting on defending every position to the last man and counter-attacking every Soviet gain was bone headed.

But hey, the more the Russians draw from Hitler's military genius, the better.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

As far as I recall that was around the time that the nazis really started hemmoharaging troops and losing strategic positions at a rapid pace on the Eastern Front. Hitler's insisting on defending every position to the last man and counter-attacking every Soviet gain was bone headed.

But hey, the more the Russians draw from Hitler's military genius, the better.

Immediate counterattack is sound doctrine.

It can be very difficult to tell ahead of time how much staying power the enemy has. Sometimes, your best bet is simply to keep on testing them until they break or you do. Ultimately, the only way to win a war is to hit the enemy's main strength with your main strength, and see who prevails. That's what Hitler ordered, and there's wisdom in that order. The orders failed not because they were stupid, but because the German army was already strategically exhausted. Falling back would have been even worse, since it would still degrade the German army, without even testing the Russian's strength.

You'll notice that Moscow is ignoring Hitler's "military genius", and doing all this very close to their own borders, not balls-deep in Western Europe with no exit strategy.

Not everything going on in Ukraine right now is properly understood as a replay of WW2.

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

The defensive lines don't seem to be being used as intended by the designer. Any attempt to take any land is just being met head on by the Russians with massive counter attacks being launced immediately.



The lines are meant to be used to cause attrition losses by the Russians to the Ukraine forces, with a mobile defense retreating to the next line of defence when necessary.

It's perhaps worth repeating that the defenses were designed by Surovikin for a defense in depth strategy that assumed that Ukraine would be able to breach one or two, but the defenses would be used to make Ukraine's offensive culminate much quicker, allowing Russia to counterattack and retake the areas. Surovikin didn't stay in charge, though. Gerasimov's overall strategy is far more focused on the front and preventing Ukraine from making any advances, period, which meant that the first line was fortified overwhelmingly more than those behind and the preparations for a breach in the front lines are relatively poor and there's significantly more emphasis on counterattacking to retake land and restore the front lines compared to riding out the storm and retaking when Ukraine's spent.

Ukraine very likely could have taken a fair bit more land and much more quickly, but their strategy has been far more about attrition and opportunity. Along similar lines, it looks like Russia's artillery losses were notably less for the last two days (after a far few days with an average well over 30 a day), but have still crossed 6,000 lost artillery. Russia MLRS, air-air, and special equipment (not specific, but that category includes equipment like trench diggers, I think) have been taking notably higher losses, too.

[lobosrul5]

Originally Posted by Aridas

It's perhaps worth repeating that the defenses were designed by Surovikin for a defense in depth strategy that assumed that Ukraine would be able to breach one or two, but the defenses would be used to make Ukraine's offensive culminate much quicker, allowing Russia to counterattack and retake the areas. Surovikin didn't stay in charge, though. Gerasimov's overall strategy is far more focused on the front and preventing Ukraine from making any advances, period, which meant that the first line was fortified overwhelmingly more than those behind and the preparations for a breach in the front lines are relatively poor and there's significantly more emphasis on counterattacking to retake land and restore the front lines compared to riding out the storm and retaking when Ukraine's spent.

Ukraine very likely could have taken a fair bit more land and much more quickly, but their strategy has been far more about attrition and opportunity. Along similar lines, it looks like Russia's artillery losses were notably less for the last two days (after a far few days with an average well over 30 a day), but have still crossed 6,000 lost artillery. Russia MLRS and special equipment (not specific, but that category includes equipment like trench diggers, I think) have been taking notably higher losses, too.

Hopefully thats because Ukraine is running out of targets. Next up they need ATACMS to take out most of Russia's air defense systems, and then F-16's can operated with impunity. I don't think the Russia Army will survive the winter.

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

Hopefully thats because Ukraine is running out of targets. Next up they need ATACMS to take out most of Russia's air defense systems, and then F-16's can operated with impunity. I don't think the Russia Army will survive the winter.

Hopefully.

With that said, I wouldn't keep my hopes up for F-16's being able to operate with impunity, though, even if that happened, and nor would I count on them arriving soon enough to make a significant difference before the end of the year, especially given that it's very unlikely that Ukraine will be able to immediately use them as part of combined arms or immediately execute complex group missions with them. They might be game changers when it comes to the Black Sea, but I don't see them being game changers in general. Useful, though, yes.

As for Russia's Army surviving the winter... I rather expect that they will. The southern offensive's strategic goal of breaking the GLOC's is quite important, but it's not a means to immediately break the Russian forces. It'll likely take time to liberate the cut-off areas, for starters, like it took time to liberate Kherson City, and it will have limited direct impact on the eastern front, where Russia's logistics are much shorter and harder to break.

[ginjawarrior]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Don't think the sub is going anywhere.

https://x.com/kromark/status/1703734290926731749?s=20

Photo in tweet

Beautiful.

Even more satisfying now I know it's the sub that killed baby Lisa last year. Would have been happier if it'd been all hands lost but from what I heard the captain has been eliminated so it's good

[Andy_Ross]

Ukraine troops have recaptured key village of Klishchiivka near Bakhmut

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

Ukraine troops have recaptured key village of Klishchiivka near Bakhmut

Key to what?

Bakhmut is obviously a boondoggle. It remains to be seen which side benefits most from the snipe hunt. But don't pretend there's some great strategic jumping-off point in contest there.

[trustbutverify]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

Ukraine troops have recaptured key village of Klishchiivka near Bakhmut

Not possible. The Putinestas have been assuring me the Ukrainian offensive is a dismal failure all summer long.

[Wildy]

[vatnik] Nothing that happened at Sevastopol matters because Russia doesn't care about the Black Sea Fleet [/vatnik]

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Key to what?

Bakhmut is obviously a boondoggle. It remains to be seen which side benefits most from the snipe hunt. But don't pretend there's some great strategic jumping-off point in contest there.

Russia have a fixation with it. They keep putting resources in to it's defence and they keep losing them. They put their airborne troops in to bolster it's defences and they were all but destroyed.
They were redeployed from the front around Robotyne allowing Ukraine to advance there
It's becoming symbolic for them and draining resources.

[Jack by the hedge]

It feels like many weeks ago Denys Davydov began telling us of the imminent liberation of Klishchiivka and speculating on which target would be next. Reality has been agonisingly slower though, slower even than Robotyne. I hope the time spent represents a lot Russian materiel being fed into resisting its liberation and being destroyed, but that could just be my wishful thinkning. Territory matters but destroying Russian resources faster than Russia can replace them matters too.

[Andy_Ross]

Russia have squandered some of their best units there
All the roads in and out are under fire from Ukrainian artillery.

It's in their interest to not take the city but to keep Russian forces fixed there.

[kookbreaker]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Immediate counterattack is sound doctrine.

It can be very difficult to tell ahead of time how much staying power the enemy has. Sometimes, your best bet is simply to keep on testing them until they break or you do. Ultimately, the only way to win a war is to hit the enemy's main strength with your main strength, and see who prevails. That's what Hitler ordered, and there's wisdom in that order. The orders failed not because they were stupid, but because the German army was already strategically exhausted. Falling back would have been even worse, since it would still degrade the German army, without even testing the Russian's strength.

You'll notice that Moscow is ignoring Hitler's "military genius", and doing all this very close to their own borders, not balls-deep in Western Europe with no exit strategy.

Not everything going on in Ukraine right now is properly understood as a replay of WW2.

The immediate counter attack was mostly based on the fact that Soviets had gotten extremely good at digging in. They took the phrase “the shovel is the brother to the gun” to heart and any land taken would be almost immediately be dug in and entrenched unless immediately expelled by counter-attack.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Aridas

...I wouldn't keep my hopes up for F-16's being able to operate with impunity, though, even if that happened, and nor would I count on them arriving soon enough to make a significant difference before the end of the year, especially given that it's very unlikely that Ukraine will be able to immediately use them as part of combined arms or immediately execute complex group missions with them. They might be game changers when it comes to the Black Sea, but I don't see them being game changers in general. Useful, though, yes....

Wondering out loud:

One of the surprises of the war is that Russia has not achieved air superiority over Ukraine. That they seem to be using their air force remarkably sparingly. At least that's my impression, as I see little reporting of the RUAF in use - please correct me if my impression is wrong.
The only part of their air fleet that seems to be regularly employed with good effect is the heavy bombers that launch long-range missiles from like the Caspian Sea far into Ukraine. Those stay a long way away from the border.

The reason for this, I suppose, is that Russia lacks the ability to find and take out Ukraine's air defense, from manpads to Patriots and Irises with any meaure of reliability, such that they would suffer more damage than they could inflict if they tried to cross the border or even just get too near to it.

Likewise, Ukraines air force is so weak they can't penetrate into Russian-held territory and are very careful to come near with their SU's and Mig's. and when they do they don't inflict all that much damage - because Russian air defense is still good enough to deter Ukraine from risking what little they have in attack capabilities.
Again, the exception, since lately, are air-launched mid-range missiles (Storm Shadows).

With me so far?

Now. Enter F-16s.
The point of equipping Ukraine with Western fighter jets is for them to be able to penetrate into occupied area, to operate more freely over the Black Sea, or even to go into Russia proper (if NATO donors allow that).

How will the Russians react to that?
Is that when we will see Russian fighters in action? To do dog fights? Rumor has it that some planes+arms in their arsenal aren't all that bad in that regard. We have seen Flankers in action - will we see many more once F-16s are in service? How will that play out?
What are Russian Early Warning capabilities, how fast and where would they be able to intercept Ukrainian attacks? Will this trigger a similar response? I mean once their own airspace becomes dangerous with the presence of F-16s, why not go into UA air space and take the fight there?

----

You probably see how I know pretty little about such operations.
Happy to see comments.

[The Great Zaganza]

how can Russia react?
I mean apart from attacking any possible airfield with cruise missiles all the time.

What won't happen is an escalation by Russia: they had so many red lines that where just ignored without any consequences, there is no reason that plane would suddenly change that.

[theprestige]

Moscow is murdering civilians across Ukraine every day. Moscow will continue to murder Ukrainians until Ukraine stops resisting. That's the reaction. That's the escalation. Just because they're comically bad at strategic bombing, that doesn't mean they're not retaliating, not exacting a heavy price from Ukraine for all the fighting they're doing and all the help they're getting.

[lobosrul5]

They'd be carpet bombing Kyiv right now if they had the capability.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

Russia have a fixation with it. They keep putting resources in to it's defence and they keep losing them. They put their airborne troops in to bolster it's defences and they were all but destroyed.
They were redeployed from the front around Robotyne allowing Ukraine to advance there
It's becoming symbolic for them and draining resources.

Oddly like Stalingrad became for Hitler;so much so he gave it a greater priority on men and resources then the drive for the Oil Fields in the Cacauses Mountains.....one of his most fatal mistakes.
In the original Case Blue, Stalingrad was a secondary objective; it would be taken or screened only to protect the northern flank of the Drive to the Cacausue and it's Oil Fields. But GROFAZ turned that on on it's head, and catastrophe followed.

"We won't go back from the VOlga! We won't go back from the Volga".

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Wildy

[vatnik] Nothing that happened at Sevastopol matters because Russia doesn't care about the Black Sea Fleet [/vatnik]

Ah, Sevastopol. Will Flashman be invovled this time?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

They'd be carpet bombing Kyiv right now if they had the capability.

There is a certain tragicomedy in the fact that on the one hand, Moscow's precision-guided munitions cannot be precisely guided enough to be strategically or tactically decisive, and on the other hand, Moscow can't even manage the much more primitive strategy of just spamming dumb bombs at enemy cities.

[Doubt]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Wondering out loud:

One of the surprises of the war is that Russia has not achieved air superiority over Ukraine. That they seem to be using their air force remarkably sparingly. At least that's my impression, as I see little reporting of the RUAF in use - please correct me if my impression is wrong.
The only part of their air fleet that seems to be regularly employed with good effect is the heavy bombers that launch long-range missiles from like the Caspian Sea far into Ukraine. Those stay a long way away from the border.

The reason for this, I suppose, is that Russia lacks the ability to find and take out Ukraine's air defense, from manpads to Patriots and Irises with any meaure of reliability, such that they would suffer more damage than they could inflict if they tried to cross the border or even just get too near to it.

Likewise, Ukraines air force is so weak they can't penetrate into Russian-held territory and are very careful to come near with their SU's and Mig's. and when they do they don't inflict all that much damage - because Russian air defense is still good enough to deter Ukraine from risking what little they have in attack capabilities.
Again, the exception, since lately, are air-launched mid-range missiles (Storm Shadows).

With me so far?

Now. Enter F-16s.
The point of equipping Ukraine with Western fighter jets is for them to be able to penetrate into occupied area, to operate more freely over the Black Sea, or even to go into Russia proper (if NATO donors allow that).

How will the Russians react to that?
Is that when we will see Russian fighters in action? To do dog fights? Rumor has it that some planes+arms in their arsenal aren't all that bad in that regard. We have seen Flankers in action - will we see many more once F-16s are in service? How will that play out?
What are Russian Early Warning capabilities, how fast and where would they be able to intercept Ukrainian attacks? Will this trigger a similar response? I mean once their own airspace becomes dangerous with the presence of F-16s, why not go into UA air space and take the fight there?

----

You probably see how I know pretty little about such operations.
Happy to see comments.

Not an air force guy, so I am pretty much taking educated guesses here as well.

Russia does not seem to have any reliable airborne early warning ability. They did build planes for this, but it seems they never did get the job done. Without that, they cannot reliably know what is going on over Ukraine. They do have local control with ground based radar in their own area. Not sure how good that is. But given that they have a dedicated branch of the military for air defence, you would think it should have some serious abilities. But then, look at the rest of the Russian military.

Without AEW, they have limited ability to put aircraft over Ukraine to look for anti-aircraft systems. Satellites should tell them something but we don't see any results. It seems they still have not hit a HIMARS launcher.

The F-16s are probably best brought in slowly rather than go for a deep strike right off the bat. Start in the west and get some experience where they are safer. Then start working east.

That last part has a big chance of being wrong. Way back during the gulf war, I figured the air campaign would not start for a couple of days after the deadline for Iraq to withdraw. Give the air defence crews a chance to think nothing would happen. That is the opposite of what did happen.

[theprestige]

The US is pretty unique in being able to sortie the equivalent of every other air force in all of human history combined, all at once, to the other side of the planet, on D-Day. Ukraine will probably take a more moderate approach.

I suspect the F-16s will be appreciated at first as more and better bombers. Modern avionics, able to mount the entire complement of NATO arms. Just what Ukraine needs, to properly suppress and destroy Moscow's ground based air defense complexes. After that? The sky's the limit, I think.

[Andy_Ross]

Ukraine are using their aircraft selectively. Those strikes on Sevastopol were by Storm Shadow missiles which are sir launched.