Outside Topic Way OT: Ukraine - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Outside Topic Way OT: Ukraine (/thread-23071.html)

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Hurlburt88 - 11-05-2023

Some great posts!   and yes, I can see how my stalemate conclusion needs a re-think.   At the same time continuing to worry about the strategic depth of resourcing for Ukraine in terms of both manpower and materiel given Ukraine's smaller inherent size than Russia, damage from the war, and potentially wavering support from NATO,

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 11-05-2023

(11-05-2023, 06:37 AM)Hurlburt88 Wrote:  Some great posts!   and yes, I can see how my stalemate conclusion needs a re-think.   At the same time continuing to worry about the strategic depth of resourcing for Ukraine in terms of both manpower and materiel given Ukraine's smaller inherent size than Russia, damage from the war, and potentially wavering support from NATO,

IMO that is a very balanced and largely "correct" reading of the situation. One "wild card" that is almost impossible to read is the political situation in both Russia and Ukraine. We have almost no visibility into that in Russia and just barely more in Ukraine. There are undoubtedly all kinds of things going on regarding which we have no clue. These forces could decide the war with almost no warning or could do nothing at all. Makes it hard to know what will actually happen.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - gocard14 - 11-05-2023

Goose dateline='[url=tel:1699046019' Wrote:  1699046019[/url]']
Ukraine is in an unfortunate strategic situation. Russia has invaded Ukrainian territory, and due to the lack of adequate forces Ukraine had to sit by while Russia built both "major" concrete fortifications and less impressive field fortifications throughout southern Ukraine. Some of these fortifications were protected by vast minefields of an extent comparable to the largest such minefields in WW I and WW II. These fortifications are arrayed in depth, meaning breaking through a "front line" doesn't result in an unimpeded trip to the Sea of Azov. It is however true that the strength of these fortifications varies. Some of them have no minefields, some of them are easily outflanked, and some of them are apparently "optionally manned". Russia has the option of sitting in these fortifications and "playing defense". Ukraine is not a viable state unless it can take back the south. To do that, step 1 is to break the "land bridge". Therefore, Ukraine must attack and breach these fortifications someplace. The most direct route to accomplishing this is to take Melitopl'.  Russia knew this and fortified accordingly.

Ukraine is making progress towards this goal, but it is slow. At first glance, one might say that it might just take another 6 months, but the General appears to believe that adequate progress will be impossible.  It certainly will be costly, given that virtually every attack has to be a "frontal" one. Ukraine suffers from the WW I problem that their attacks cannot penetrate beyond the range of their artillery and that they must remove minefields in the full view of Russian drones. The also need artillery and artillery shells in large quantities, which are probably not available.

An "antidote" to this situation is, as in WW II, air power. No new technological breakthrough required. Air power can function in several ways. One, it can be used to simply "pulverize" any given fortification. Two, it can be used to suppress fire directed against attacking Ukrainians and/or mine clearance teams. Three, it can be used to attack Russian logistics that supplies these fortifications. Logistics are inherently "mobile" and somewhat thin-skinned. Air power can destroy such targets. This would render the Russian fortifications impotent when they run out of bullets, food, and fuel.

Ukraine doesn't have that air power. They are getting maybe 50 F-16s. They will have pilots who can fly the jet but have no combat experience in 5 months or so (according to US sources). Can this group operate over the Russian fortifications in the South? Can this group attack the Russian logistics enough to degrade the Russian's ability to defend? We better hope so, or if that isn't probable, we need another plan.

The USAF possesses 5 generation aircraft. It also possesses AWACS and significant numbers of EW aircraft. They can also borrow Growlers from the Navy.  We also have a much larger highly trained air force. The US would use their 5th gen aircraft to execute the DEAD plan, creating an environment where  our 4th gen aircraft can operate successfully. To do that, attacks may be required into Russia proper. Ukraine will have no 5th gen aircraft. Can they successfully execute a DEAD plan, or even a SEAD plan with 4th gen aircraft? If for some reason the USAF had to accomplish that, they could IMO. It would however be costly in pilots, aircraft, and HARMs. (That is a big reason why we invested in stealth.) It would also be an ongoing effort and it would need airborne EW support. I can see why the General is concerned.

So, is this a "stalemate"? No, because Ukraine is still slowly moving towards Melitopl'. This is "plan A". It may be the General's concern that this can't continue is misplaced. Ukraine has done lots of things we never thought they could. If that momentum ceases, it will be up to the "new" F-16s to do the job. That is "plan B". If that doesn't work, it appears the General is hoping for a "breakthrough" technological solution. One such solution would be the arrival of 5,000 ATACMS unitary warhead missiles in Ukraine. That could really "work over" Russian logistics (and the fortifications themselves for that matter). Since we only have about 400 of them, that could take a while :-). Lets hope "plan A" works.

We may not have 5000 ATACMS to give. But we almost certainly do have 5,000 JDAM-ERs to give. After the initial fanfare, we have heard very little about JDAMs in the war except about their Russian equivalents. Reportedly this is due to  widespread GPS jamming. I hope that changing the launch platform to one it was intended for, or software changes could help counteract this.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 11-05-2023

(11-05-2023, 08:15 AM)gocard14 Wrote:  We may not have 5000 ATACMS to give. But we almost certainly do have 5,000 JDAM-ERs to give. After the initial fanfare, we have heard very little about JDAMs in the war except about their Russian equivalents. Reportedly this is due to  widespread GPS jamming. I hope that changing the launch platform to one it was intended for, or software changes could help counteract this.

It will help considerably. The automatic transfer of the launch platform data to the JDAM will initialize the JDAM INS accurately, which will help a lot. JDAMS can "fly" without GPS correction and be fairly useful against ground defensive positions. The CEP isn't as good as with GPS correction, but is not horrible.  https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104572/joint-direct-attack-munition-gbu-313238/ says a 30 meter CEP vs a 5 meter CEP. Depending on what is being attacked and how many JDAMs are used, that may be fine. Currently, Ukraine can't use lots of bombs because they can't sortie lots of planes :-). Also, I have no idea how the INS is getting initialized in a Mig. I am guessing not well. Relying on GPS initialization is not a feature I am aware of in JDAMs.

The JDAM has major problems with fairly unsophisticated GPS jamming. This has been known about JDAMs for about 20 years. Nothing was done because 1) it would cost money, and 2) the people we were fighting didn't have jammers, and 3) we have the ability to locate and target GPS jammers and destroy them. Certainly a "nuisance" but not a "show stopper".

It must be said we have yet to fight against an opponent that has significant jamming capability. However, since the enemy can't predict the target and the TOT very much in advance, the GPS jammers have to run all the time. That should, in theory, give them a very short lifetime. It is also possible to do many things (at a cost varying from a little to a lot) that would improve the JDAM resistance to jamming. However, the big "claim to fame" of the JDAM is that it is a cheap add-on to a conventional bomb. When it becomes less cheap, it becomes considerably less attractive.

The F-16 will however provide greatly improved performance to HARM missiles. The interface to the aircraft RWR and avionics will allow much better employment of these missiles. However, I have no insight into what capabilities the Ukrainians have to geolocate Russian GPS jammers. In general, you need do do this from aircraft. The FEBA is usually too far from the "important" targets to "see" the GPS jammers from the ground, although you can easily see them from the air. For various technical reasons the F-16/HARM isn't great at locating jammers by itself without getting much closer  to the GPS jammer for far longer than is "healthy" for the aircraft. Pre-briefed mode is orders of magnitude better in this scenario. I hope "somebody" has a plan for this, but for some reason I am not betting on it. OTOH, if done "properly" this could make GPS jamming much less of a problem. Will we see "дикі Мустела" (wild Weasel) in Ukraine :-)? Obviously asking a lot more to do that than practical in the short term. Just "regular" pilots with per-briefed targets will have to do. Failing that, JDAMS will still turn to INS guided bombs.

Software changes against the type of jamming the Russians are using is generally not applicable as a countermeasure.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 11-05-2023

https://www.yahoo.com/news/military-ukraine-destroys-russian-electronic-082021502.html

Obviously Russia has greatly increased the number of jammers available in forward areas. If the length of the "line of contact" is 1,200 km (+/-), it will require "only" 120 jammers to cover the whole thing. It is probable they have also protected other "critical" areas (like the Kerch bridge) with such jammers, probably with many backups. No Uber Eats in Crimea. The Storm Shadow visual/IR target recognition capability may now be much more important in hitting anything.

These jammers have got to be destroyed. They can easily be hit if Ukraine had the "right" technology. They don't, and this is a big problem. It isn't necessary to destroy them all. You only need to destroy the ones operating in areas you are attaching at the moment. Russia probably also has alternate jammers that are not activated until required. This too needs to be dealt with. It can be done, but it appears clear Ukraine can't do it without significant US help.

EDIT: https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asset/Pole-21E_Russian_RF_Jammer
One version mounted on cell phone towers. Probably much cheaper that vehicle mounted ones and great for protecting places that have cell phone service.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 11-07-2023

https://www.yahoo.com/news/zelensky-says-not-time-elections-210602765.html

Looks like there may not be elections in Ukraine. IMO perfectly understandable. It would be a great "statement" to have elections in the middle of a war, but I don't think it would be worth the effort. Obviously things can change and elections may be held, but it looks improbable ATM.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - OutsiderFan - 11-08-2023

(11-07-2023, 09:51 PM)Goose Wrote:  https://www.yahoo.com/news/zelensky-says-not-time-elections-210602765.html

Looks like there may not be elections in Ukraine. IMO perfectly understandable. It would be a great "statement" to have elections in the middle of a war, but I don't think it would be worth the effort. Obviously things can change and elections may be held, but it looks improbable ATM.

Pointless is the word I choose. The last thing Ukraine needs is an election season during a war, replete with division and misinformation generated by the SVR.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - GK3 - 11-08-2023

(11-05-2023, 09:24 AM)Goose Wrote:  

(11-05-2023, 08:15 AM)gocard14 Wrote:  We may not have 5000 ATACMS to give. But we almost certainly do have 5,000 JDAM-ERs to give. After the initial fanfare, we have heard very little about JDAMs in the war except about their Russian equivalents. Reportedly this is due to  widespread GPS jamming. I hope that changing the launch platform to one it was intended for, or software changes could help counteract this.

It will help considerably. The automatic transfer of the launch platform data to the JDAM will initialize the JDAM INS accurately, which will help a lot. JDAMS can "fly" without GPS correction and be fairly useful against ground defensive positions. The CEP isn't as good as with GPS correction, but is not horrible.  https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104572/joint-direct-attack-munition-gbu-313238/ says a 30 meter CEP vs a 5 meter CEP. Depending on what is being attacked and how many JDAMs are used, that may be fine. Currently, Ukraine can't use lots of bombs because they can't sortie lots of planes :-). Also, I have no idea how the INS is getting initialized in a Mig. I am guessing not well. Relying on GPS initialization is not a feature I am aware of in JDAMs.

The JDAM has major problems with fairly unsophisticated GPS jamming. This has been known about JDAMs for about 20 years. Nothing was done because 1) it would cost money, and 2) the people we were fighting didn't have jammers, and 3) we have the ability to locate and target GPS jammers and destroy them. Certainly a "nuisance" but not a "show stopper".

It must be said we have yet to fight against an opponent that has significant jamming capability. However, since the enemy can't predict the target and the TOT very much in advance, the GPS jammers have to run all the time. That should, in theory, give them a very short lifetime. It is also possible to do many things (at a cost varying from a little to a lot) that would improve the JDAM resistance to jamming. However, the big "claim to fame" of the JDAM is that it is a cheap add-on to a conventional bomb. When it becomes less cheap, it becomes considerably less attractive.

The F-16 will however provide greatly improved performance to HARM missiles. The interface to the aircraft RWR and avionics will allow much better employment of these missiles. However, I have no insight into what capabilities the Ukrainians have to geolocate Russian GPS jammers. In general, you need do do this from aircraft. The FEBA is usually too far from the "important" targets to "see" the GPS jammers from the ground, although you can easily see them from the air. For various technical reasons the F-16/HARM isn't great at locating jammers by itself without getting much closer  to the GPS jammer for far longer than is "healthy" for the aircraft. Pre-briefed mode is orders of magnitude better in this scenario. I hope "somebody" has a plan for this, but for some reason I am not betting on it. OTOH, if done "properly" this could make GPS jamming much less of a problem. Will we see "дикі Мустела" (wild Weasel) in Ukraine :-)? Obviously asking a lot more to do that than practical in the short term. Just "regular" pilots with per-briefed targets will have to do. Failing that, JDAMS will still turn to INS guided bombs.

Software changes against the type of jamming the Russians are using is generally not applicable as a countermeasure.

Importance of the CEP is depends on the size of JADAM.  The killing radius of a 2000 lb JADAM is reportedly a bit over 30 meters, and the injury radius is much larger. Of course. 
How well protected the target is also is important. Anyone in an unprotected position is probably done, dug in a trench, earthen bunker, concrete bunker etc will all affect the outcome.
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/CoIGaza/Kill_Radius_Compared.pdf
Another question, are flying AWACS flights over NATO territory and feeding take back to Ukraine?

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - fullmetal - 11-09-2023

Yes, NATO AWACS have been monitoring combat theaters since at least a year ago.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 11-09-2023

(11-09-2023, 09:31 AM)fullmetal Wrote:  Yes, NATO AWACS have been monitoring combat theaters since at least a year ago.

Indeed AWACS have been "monitoring combat theaters" from early on. However, it is unclear (to me at least) that the data is available to Ukraine in near real time. We have sometimes answered questions asked of us about specific targets Ukraine has already detected (Moskva sinking). That indicates Ukraine does not have the same access to the real-time picture we have. If they did, they would already know and wouldn't need to ask.

AWACS does do ESM. However, AFIK, the capability is targeted against radars that are used in conjunction with aircraft and IADS operation. They aren't targeted against GPS jammers. We have other platforms that do that, some manned aircraft (Rivet Joint and similar) and also several different types of drones.  To what extent we operate drones over Ukrainian air space I do not know. I assume we do to some extent. In many cases the GPS jammers operated by Russia would be detectable from international/friendly airspace, although GDOP would often be unfavorable. There is also presumably some significant support from LEO satellites, but I have no idea it's extent.  Again, I am unsure of how much of the information we have is shared with Ukraine and in what time period.

The GPS jammers probably are somewhat static at the moment. It takes a while to set them up and move them around. Russia won't start doing that until forced. So far, they haven't been forced. From that I conclude Ukraine doesn't yet have the ability to "go after them". In cases where a bombing raid using GDAMs is to be flown, I would expect an attack on the GPS jammers. So far, we haven't seen that. It may be the Ukrainians can't (for some reason) use HARMs to do it, but in many cases they can use HIMARS.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 11-13-2023

https://www.yahoo.com/news/eu-not-supply-promised-1-213219892.html

No big surprise. The EU is basically incapable of doing anything in a reasonable time. The US is bad, but the EU makes us look like speed merchants. God forbid NATO actually has to fight a "long" conventional war. One would hope the immediacy of the Russian threat would make the EU not function "business as usual". Not the case.

---

https://www.eurotopics.net/en/310100/ukraine-has-the-counter-offensive-failed
Ukraine is still "advancing" in areas of opportunity, like the Kherson Oblast. Right now, the "muddy season" has begun, which limits what is possible. It appears Ukraine intends to keep pressure on the Russians all winter, particularly in logistics. The hope is that the attrition in the Russian ranks will lead to weakness. Russia has supposedly committed 100% of their available troops. There lack of response to multiple bridgeheads in the Kherson Oblast supports that idea.

However, as the article points out, Ukraine's lack of air power has been a big problem. Will the F-16s change that enough to do the job? We shall see. Again, abysmal analysis and planning delayed providing this capability promptly, despite the fact it was clear that without it Ukraine would suffer heavy losses to Russian air while operating offensively. It also was obvious that Ukraine would lack the "deep strike" capability to destroy Russian fixed emplacements.

It is also true that Ukraine is running out of troops. They have improved their mobilization operations, which will undoubtedly yield a larger percentage of eligible young men. This problem is real and cannot be ignored. Ukrainian infantry losses need to be carefully considered in any offensive context.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Mick - 11-14-2023

Could the Russians have really had 302,000 casualties? As reported by UK Intelligence, through the Sun. Also reflects U. S. military understanding. The figure doesn't include mercenaries:

Putin has lost staggering 300,000 Russian soldiers in his failing war in Ukraine, says UK intelligence

They have also lost 7,117 armored vehicles, including more than 2,400 main battle tanks out of 3,000+, 93 fixed wing aircraft, 132 helicopters, 320 drones and 16 naval vessels.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - OutsiderFan - 11-14-2023

(11-14-2023, 01:26 PM)Mick Wrote:  Could the Russians have really had 302,000 casualties? As reported by UK Intelligence, through the Sun. Also reflects U. S. military understanding. The figure doesn't include mercenaries:

Putin has lost staggering 300,000 Russian soldiers in his failing war in Ukraine, says UK intelligence

They have also lost 7,117 armored vehicles, including more than 2,400 main battle tanks out of 3,000+, 93 fixed wing aircraft, 132 helicopters, 320 drones and 16 naval vessels.

As of Nov. 13 according to Ukraine General Staff: (added Nov. 13)

Personnel: 312,550 (+800)

Tanks: 5,354 (+5)

Armored combat vehicles: 10,079 (+6)

Artillery Systems: 7,569 (+10)

Multiple Launch Rocket Systems: 881 (+0)

Anti-Aircraft Missile Systems: 580 (+0)

Aircraft: 322 (+0)

Helicopters: 324 (+0)

Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs): 5,634 (+2)

Cruise Missiles: 1,561 (+1)

Ships / Boats: 22 (+0)

Submarines: 1 (+0)

Automotive equipment and tanks: 9,949 (+5)

Specialized Equipment: 1079 (+1).

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 11-14-2023

IMO it is wise to honor the "fog of war". I am pretty sure UK intelligence is doing it's best to make an unbiased estimate of Russian losses. The use of satellite data can be invaluable for some of the estimates, but the reality is neither the UK nor the US has direct oversight of the battlefield. Both must, to some extent, get data from Ukrainian sources.

It is universally true that in the vast majority of battles, lost or won, the casualties/equipment losses are over-estimated. This is most often not because the reporting troops are TRYING to make things look better than they are. It just "happens" for many reasons. Nobody in history so far has been immune to this problem, despite many attempts to minimize the errors.

All that said, even if the 300k number is wrong by a factor of 3, there have been a LOT of Russian casualties. Undoubtedly the Russian government is doing all they can to suppress any truthful  reporting of casualties. Both Russia and Ukraine have resorted to infantry heavy warfare, and that kills/injures lots of people. Russia has repeatedly spent troops recklessly, as if they are a limitless resource. As Russia is finding out, they are not. Russia has a population that would support greater mobilization. It does not (yet) have the political will to do so. 

Ukraine OTOH has always been quite aware of their numerical disadvantages. They have minimized losses as best they can. Right now, Ukraine is saying next year will be "key" to winning the war. That may be (at least partially) because after that point they expect to be out of troops for offensive operations. 

Let's all hope the 300k is somewhat accurate and that the Russian population "finds out about it". That might end the madness. Otherwise, Ukraine will have to "roll the dice" once more. We (the west) will need to do all we can to help them succeed while they still can. I unfortunately have little confidence that the US and the EU are going to do anything like that. Lets hope that what they do actually do will be "enough". IMO the consequences of a Russian victory in Ukraine are dire. That would have been somewhat true even if the US and the EU had done a Chamberlain and washed our hands of it,  but we didn't. We made it partially "our" war. Arguably, that was the "right thing to do", but we now have to win it. The public and the politicians doesn't seem to understand this. Indeed, "failure is not an option".

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - TrumpCard - 11-14-2023

It's a bit of a tangent, but I thought I read recent research that says we've been grossly underestimating the number of casualties in the U.S. Civil War.  As I recall, the authors base that conclusion on the records of the total number of deaths in the country during the pre-war, war, and post-war periods, not on any analysis of how many people died from wounds suffered during combat.  I don't know whether that methodology is valid, but I found the article interesting.  I think it's a couple years old now, so in this instance, add to all my usual disclaimers that I cannot remember the article perfectly.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - dabigv13 - 11-14-2023

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-troops-have-secured-foothold-south-senior-official-says-2023-11-14/

Quote:Ukrainian forces have secured a foothold on the east bank of the Dnipro River in southern Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's chief of staff said on Tuesday.

Andriy Yermak's remarks were the first official acknowledgement that Ukrainian troops were established on the Dnipro's east bank in Kherson region.

"Against all odds, Ukraine's Defense Forces have gained a foothold on the left (east) bank of the Dnipro," Yermak said in an address to the Hudson Institute think-tank in the United States. The remarks were posted on Zelenskiy's website.

.....

In a highly unusual incident on Monday, two Russian state news agencies published alerts saying Moscow was moving troops to "more favourable positions" east of the Dnipro River in Ukraine, only to withdraw the information minutes later.

In the past, Russia has sometimes used similar phrasing about moving troops to more advantageous positions in order to describe retreats.

From what I have seen, Ukraine has established shallow footholds in several areas on the east bank of the Dnipro, but it looks like mostly small squads of infantry without any vehicles. I think it certainly speaks to Russia's problems with force quality and quantity that they can't defend these areas or counterattack with enough strength to extirpate the relatively lightly held beachheads.

That being said, Ukraine probably lacks the ability to rapidly exploit these beachheads as well. It will be tough to mass any mechanized forces in the very exposed terrain there with Russia easily able to eliminate them from the air or even simply with FPV drones and artillery. 

Still, this will occupy Russia's attention and require them to actively defend a larger part of the front with their scarcer and scarcer high end equipment. And Ukraine will certainly be sending their own drone operators over the Dnipro to continue whittling away at that equipment.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 11-14-2023

(11-14-2023, 07:08 PM)dabigv13 Wrote:  From what I have seen, Ukraine has established shallow footholds in several areas on the east bank of the Dnipro, but it looks like mostly small squads of infantry without any vehicles. I think it certainly speaks to Russia's problems with force quality and quantity that they can't defend these areas or counterattack with enough strength to extirpate the relatively lightly held beachheads.

That being said, Ukraine probably lacks the ability to rapidly exploit these beachheads as well. It will be tough to mass any mechanized forces in the very exposed terrain there with Russia easily able to eliminate them from the air or even simply with FPV drones and artillery. 

Still, this will occupy Russia's attention and require them to actively defend a larger part of the front with their scarcer and scarcer high end equipment. And Ukraine will certainly be sending their own drone operators over the Dnipro to continue whittling away at that equipment.

Recently Ukraine has been deepening these bridgeheads according to several reports. They also have brought armored vehicles across the river, but in limited numbers. Russia has been trying to dislodge the Ukrainians using artillery. Apparently they do not have enough of that to do the job, and are even more short of troops. Ukraine will keep expanding the bridgeheads as long as they don't hit superior forces and have adequate troops. 

The entrenched Russian strong points in Kherson Oblast are supposedly not as well protected as the ones in Zaporizhzhia. They are also less "dense" on the ground. Russia may have decided that air power would be a better way to defend Kherson Oblast, given their lack of sufficient troops and the openness of the terrain. Ukraine may be using the winter weather that makes Russian air considerably less useful to "make hay while the sun doesn't shine". This works fine until the weather clears :-).

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - dabigv13 - 11-15-2023

More on this from WSJ this morning.

https://www.wsj.com/world/ukraine-seeks-to-reignite-counteroffensive-with-daring-river-crossings-07e68b97

Quote:KHERSON, Ukraine—Ukrainian marines slip across the Dnipro River at night in small groups to reinforce a growing contingent of troops engaged in a daring operation to reinvigorate Kyiv’s military efforts in the occupied south.

They have established three toeholds in and around villages on the eastern bank of the river in recent weeks, cutting off a road Russia uses to supply troops in the area, according to soldiers involved in the operation. The Ukrainians are hunkered down in basements and trenches and heavily outnumbered. Their hold is precarious.

....

Ukrainian forces recently transferred armored Humvees and at least one infantry-fighting vehicle to support troops on the Dnipro’s eastern bank, the soldiers said. If the Ukrainians manage to amass sufficient units and armored vehicles there, they could seek to advance into territory where Russian defenses are less extensive than those further east that blunted the main thrust of Ukraine’s counteroffensive.

....

The operation on the opposite bank a few miles from the Ukrainian-held regional capital of Kherson is proving costly and hard going. Soldiers involved in the fight say they are under heavy fire. Russian drones constantly circle over their hastily dug trenches, coordinating artillery strikes each time they detect movement. As darkness falls, the Ukrainian troops use shovels to dig themselves deeper into the ground.

“We need to be realistic about what can be achieved here,” said Franz-Stefan Gady, an independent military analyst who recently toured the front lines in Ukraine. “The terrain is extremely difficult, making it not only a challenge to steadily resupply forces but also generate the necessary momentum to conduct sustained offensive operations.”

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - 81alum - 11-15-2023

(11-14-2023, 08:58 PM)Goose Wrote:  Ukraine may be using the winter weather that makes Russian air considerably less useful to "make hay while the sun doesn't shine". This works fine until the weather clears :-).

As the Germans discovered during the Battle of the Bulge, no?

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 11-15-2023

(11-15-2023, 07:43 PM)81alum Wrote:  

(11-14-2023, 08:58 PM)Goose Wrote:  Ukraine may be using the winter weather that makes Russian air considerably less useful to "make hay while the sun doesn't shine". This works fine until the weather clears :-).

As the Germans discovered during the Battle of the Bulge, no?

Exactly so. Ukraine is hedging their bets by getting F-16s, but these will not be available until next year sometime. I hope they have a "plan b" to deal with Russian air in south Kherson Oblast. If they don't, further advances will be very, very costly.

---