[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-worrie...44826.html

Well, here we go again. The abject failure to plan for F-16 deployment back in the summer of 2022 now gives Russia the opportunity to figure out why their (supposedly already operational) ability to downlink Mainstay data to S-400 command centers doesn't work. This they can probably do faster than Ukraine can train their F-16 pilots. Stupid beyond words.  The only good news is that maybe it can't be made to work.

The whole F-16 fiasco is just nuts. The decision to train F-16 pilots just in case we deployed such aircraft should have been made and executed in as secret a manner as possible (and in 2022, not late 2023). The decision to allow Ukraine to use F-16s should have been kept closely held until there were F-16 on the ground in Ukraine. Their effect against an unprepared enemy would have been greatly magnified. By some quirk of incredible insight the US supplied the shorter range ATACMS with cluster warhead to Ukraine without any advance publicity. This allowed Ukraine to severely damage Russian helicopter  aviation in Zaporizhzhia before Russia knew what hit them. That is how it should be.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-worrie...44826.html

Well, here we go again. The abject failure to plan for F-16 deployment back in the summer of 2022 now gives Russia the opportunity to figure out why their (supposedly already operational) ability to downlink Mainstay data to S-400 command centers doesn't work. This they can probably do faster than Ukraine can train their F-16 pilots. Stupid beyond words.  The only good news is that maybe it can't be made to work.

The whole F-16 fiasco is just nuts. The decision to train F-16 pilots just in case we deployed such aircraft should have been made and executed in as secret a manner as possible (and in 2022, not late 2023). The decision to allow Ukraine to use F-16s should have been kept closely held until there were F-16 on the ground in Ukraine. Their effect against an unprepared enemy would have been greatly magnified. By some quirk of incredible insight the US supplied the shorter range ATACMS with cluster warhead to Ukraine without any advance publicity. This allowed Ukraine to severely damage Russian helicopter  aviation in Zaporizhzhia before Russia knew what hit them. That is how it should be.

[TrumpCard]

This conflict is off the front page news, and I feel that's probably for the best.  I had the feeling that the media reporting on every tiny event and every decision on an hourly basis was not helping the good guys' cause.  Funding from the U.S. and other countries is best negotiated outside the spotlight.  For the short term, at least, this is going to be a grinding conflict, and the average citizen/voter may not appreciate the contribution that our taxpayer dollars are making to our future security.  I hope that Congress is able to overcome the partisan bickering and get something done so that Ukraine can continue the fight for its future while average folks around the world are shifting their attention to other issues.

[TrumpCard]

This conflict is off the front page news, and I feel that's probably for the best.  I had the feeling that the media reporting on every tiny event and every decision on an hourly basis was not helping the good guys' cause.  Funding from the U.S. and other countries is best negotiated outside the spotlight.  For the short term, at least, this is going to be a grinding conflict, and the average citizen/voter may not appreciate the contribution that our taxpayer dollars are making to our future security.  I hope that Congress is able to overcome the partisan bickering and get something done so that Ukraine can continue the fight for its future while average folks around the world are shifting their attention to other issues.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukraine-situa...12946.html

Looks like things are going to slow down for three weeks or so. The ground freezes sequentially from north to south, so Donbas will become "mobile" again before Kherson. The cold (and lack of foliage cover) makes things much more difficult in winter, but Ukraine wants to keep Russia on it's "back foot" as much as possible. They will keep pushing. Note from the article band weather is affecting Russian air ops. As long as it rains, that will be true. When the weather gets cold enough, there will be some brilliantly clear days (no snow) that will allow air ops. Lets hope they are few.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukraine-situa...12946.html

Looks like things are going to slow down for three weeks or so. The ground freezes sequentially from north to south, so Donbas will become "mobile" again before Kherson. The cold (and lack of foliage cover) makes things much more difficult in winter, but Ukraine wants to keep Russia on it's "back foot" as much as possible. They will keep pushing. Note from the article band weather is affecting Russian air ops. As long as it rains, that will be true. When the weather gets cold enough, there will be some brilliantly clear days (no snow) that will allow air ops. Lets hope they are few.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/zelenskyy-ins...57670.html

One does not want to over-interpret anything, but this looks like an admission that Ukraine does not believe it will have the offensive power in the near term to cut the "land bridge" and that Ukraine is concerned about their ability to continue defending Avdiivka. It is unclear to what extent this concern is linked to lack of manpower, but that is certainly becoming a prominent issue. Along those lines, however. creating a fortified line of contact will allow defending the affected area with fewer troops, freeing resources to concentrate and attack elsewhere.  This isn't a great time to be pouring concrete and digging in frozen ground, but you do what is necessary in war.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/zelenskyy-ins...57670.html

One does not want to over-interpret anything, but this looks like an admission that Ukraine does not believe it will have the offensive power in the near term to cut the "land bridge" and that Ukraine is concerned about their ability to continue defending Avdiivka. It is unclear to what extent this concern is linked to lack of manpower, but that is certainly becoming a prominent issue. Along those lines, however. creating a fortified line of contact will allow defending the affected area with fewer troops, freeing resources to concentrate and attack elsewhere.  This isn't a great time to be pouring concrete and digging in frozen ground, but you do what is necessary in war.

[M T]

Other recent reports indicate another Russian general has been killed in Ukraine. 

I find it interesting to see reports of a railway being damaged or destroyed in Eastern Russia by Ukraine. Although the reports mention China as the connection ti the railway, I wonder if North Korea arms might come that way too.

[M T]

Other recent reports indicate another Russian general has been killed in Ukraine. 

I find it interesting to see reports of a railway being damaged or destroyed in Eastern Russia by Ukraine. Although the reports mention China as the connection ti the railway, I wonder if North Korea arms might come that way too.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/media-europea...42440.html

Not really "new" news, but the "EU" countries extremely poor performance on their bold promise of delivering 1 million artillery shells to Ukraine before March reflects a breathtaking level of incompetence/dishonesty at many levels. The people who made and repeated that pledge were either so deluded they thought it could be done or so mendacious they said it knowing full well they wouldn't come close. It is one thing to fall just a bit short, but quite another to be at least 40% (probably more) short.

I am sure Ms. von der Leyen will  simply blame the individual nations for not letting contracts in a timely manner to support her promises. Of course, she didn't do anything when it became clear these contracts were not being put in place. That isn't really an adequate excuse either, as the various EU military stocks were supposedly adequate to meet the need for this year in any case. Ironically enough Ms. von der Leyen's as Defense Minister presided over changes that led to Germany's inability to do so out of their own stocks all by themselves. It also resulted in a somewhat vestigial defense industry that has a "correct" but totally skeptical relationship with it's main customer, and to a military culture that generally will not even attempt to speak truth to power. (there have been one or two exceptions since the war in Ukraine began, but nothing came of them).

In many ways the US relationship with our military-industrial complex has it's problems, but we are in much better shape than in the EU. Essentially all "western European" nations haven't really taken "defense" seriously since the end of the cold war. They do take seriously selling weapons to other nations at a profit, but beyond that, domestic politics completely submerges defense considerations. Unfortunately, despite lots of "noise", it appears this isn't changing.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/media-europea...42440.html

Not really "new" news, but the "EU" countries extremely poor performance on their bold promise of delivering 1 million artillery shells to Ukraine before March reflects a breathtaking level of incompetence/dishonesty at many levels. The people who made and repeated that pledge were either so deluded they thought it could be done or so mendacious they said it knowing full well they wouldn't come close. It is one thing to fall just a bit short, but quite another to be at least 40% (probably more) short.

I am sure Ms. von der Leyen will  simply blame the individual nations for not letting contracts in a timely manner to support her promises. Of course, she didn't do anything when it became clear these contracts were not being put in place. That isn't really an adequate excuse either, as the various EU military stocks were supposedly adequate to meet the need for this year in any case. Ironically enough Ms. von der Leyen's as Defense Minister presided over changes that led to Germany's inability to do so out of their own stocks all by themselves. It also resulted in a somewhat vestigial defense industry that has a "correct" but totally skeptical relationship with it's main customer, and to a military culture that generally will not even attempt to speak truth to power. (there have been one or two exceptions since the war in Ukraine began, but nothing came of them).

In many ways the US relationship with our military-industrial complex has it's problems, but we are in much better shape than in the EU. Essentially all "western European" nations haven't really taken "defense" seriously since the end of the cold war. They do take seriously selling weapons to other nations at a profit, but beyond that, domestic politics completely submerges defense considerations. Unfortunately, despite lots of "noise", it appears this isn't changing.

[oldalum]

Article in the Wash Post by a conservative columnist who participated in a study by the American Enterprise Institute into where U.S. military aid dollars are actually spent (bottom line: almost 90% in the U.S., mainly to manufacture new arms to replace older arms we sent overseas).

(if above link does not work, try: article)

[oldalum]

Article in the Wash Post by a conservative columnist who participated in a study by the American Enterprise Institute into where U.S. military aid dollars are actually spent (bottom line: almost 90% in the U.S., mainly to manufacture new arms to replace older arms we sent overseas).

(if above link does not work, try: article)

[TrumpCard]

Article in the Wash Post by a conservative columnist who participated in a study by the American Enterprise Institute into where U.S. military aid dollars are actually spent (bottom line: almost 90% in the U.S., mainly to manufacture new arms to replace older arms we sent overseas).

(if above link does not work, try: article)

Why would we think it is any other way?  We're the #1 arms manufacturer and like 5x compared to #2.  Russia and China are two of our biggest competitors and we sure as heck aren't going to be buying from them.  It makes sense to have U.S. arms manufacturers produce the necessary vehicles, weapons systems, and other supplies because it's better to support jobs here than support jobs abroad, especially Russia or China.  Also, we have enormous stockpiles of vehicles, weapons systems, etc., which Ukraine urgently needed.  It was more efficient and perfectly sensible for us to give Ukraine the stuff it needed and then replenish our stockpiles as soon as we could.  Making new stuff for Ukraine would: (1) cause delays in the transfer of urgently needed stuff; and (2) increase the likelihood that we'd ultimately have to decommission the aging stuff that had been sitting in our stockpiles.  Also, let's not be fooled into thinking that the arms deliveries are nothing more than government support of the U.S. defense industry.  The stuff we've delivered to Ukraine has made an enormous difference.  I doubt Ukraine would have control of Kharkiv today without that help from the U.S.  The most negative thing you could say is that the U.S. might be overvaluing the military aid it is providing if, for example, it is using some methodology for book value that is too disconnected from actual FMV.

[TrumpCard]

Article in the Wash Post by a conservative columnist who participated in a study by the American Enterprise Institute into where U.S. military aid dollars are actually spent (bottom line: almost 90% in the U.S., mainly to manufacture new arms to replace older arms we sent overseas).

(if above link does not work, try: article)

Why would we think it is any other way?  We're the #1 arms manufacturer and like 5x compared to #2.  Russia and China are two of our biggest competitors and we sure as heck aren't going to be buying from them.  It makes sense to have U.S. arms manufacturers produce the necessary vehicles, weapons systems, and other supplies because it's better to support jobs here than support jobs abroad, especially Russia or China.  Also, we have enormous stockpiles of vehicles, weapons systems, etc., which Ukraine urgently needed.  It was more efficient and perfectly sensible for us to give Ukraine the stuff it needed and then replenish our stockpiles as soon as we could.  Making new stuff for Ukraine would: (1) cause delays in the transfer of urgently needed stuff; and (2) increase the likelihood that we'd ultimately have to decommission the aging stuff that had been sitting in our stockpiles.  Also, let's not be fooled into thinking that the arms deliveries are nothing more than government support of the U.S. defense industry.  The stuff we've delivered to Ukraine has made an enormous difference.  I doubt Ukraine would have control of Kharkiv today without that help from the U.S.  The most negative thing you could say is that the U.S. might be overvaluing the military aid it is providing if, for example, it is using some methodology for book value that is too disconnected from actual FMV.

[Goose]

The most negative thing you could say is that the U.S. might be overvaluing the military aid it is providing if, for example, it is using some methodology for book value that is too disconnected from actual FMV.

No "might" about it. All military equipment that is surplus to requirements should be radically depreciated in terms of "net present value", as it is unlikely to ever be used again. We don't do that, at least not on paper. In reality, the services know lots of that stuff isn't useful and act accordingly, but their evaluation is based on utility, not replacement cost or "book value". The cluster munition armed shorter range ATACMS (M39) rockets have turned out to be extremely valuable to Ukraine, but the US was never going to replace them. However, they were given to Ukraine as if we would and were accounted for as such. Their salvage value was actually negative, as it would cost money to dispose of them.

[Goose]

The most negative thing you could say is that the U.S. might be overvaluing the military aid it is providing if, for example, it is using some methodology for book value that is too disconnected from actual FMV.

No "might" about it. All military equipment that is surplus to requirements should be radically depreciated in terms of "net present value", as it is unlikely to ever be used again. We don't do that, at least not on paper. In reality, the services know lots of that stuff isn't useful and act accordingly, but their evaluation is based on utility, not replacement cost or "book value". The cluster munition armed shorter range ATACMS (M39) rockets have turned out to be extremely valuable to Ukraine, but the US was never going to replace them. However, they were given to Ukraine as if we would and were accounted for as such. Their salvage value was actually negative, as it would cost money to dispose of them.

[TrumpCard]

Put this in the category of "I'll believe it when I see it," but this would be nice:
Sweden expects NATO accession within weeks

[TrumpCard]

Put this in the category of "I'll believe it when I see it," but this would be nice:
Sweden expects NATO accession within weeks

[GK3]

Put this in the category of "I'll believe it when I see it," but this would be nice:
Sweden expects NATO accession within weeks

Maybe Turkey is now more focused on the Middle East.

On another aspect of the war

Also have to admire Ukraine success in blowing up Russian rail lines so far from their own border. It was more than just a couple of guys with backpacks full explosives.  Infiltrating, then getting the team more than 4,000 miles to the target area, providing necessary support is quite an achievement. Hopefully they got them out.

[GK3]

Put this in the category of "I'll believe it when I see it," but this would be nice:
Sweden expects NATO accession within weeks

Maybe Turkey is now more focused on the Middle East.

On another aspect of the war

Also have to admire Ukraine success in blowing up Russian rail lines so far from their own border. It was more than just a couple of guys with backpacks full explosives.  Infiltrating, then getting the team more than 4,000 miles to the target area, providing necessary support is quite an achievement. Hopefully they got them out.

[TrumpCard]

I wonder whether Kazakhstan or another former Soviet republic gave refuge to the Ukrainian soldiers after their attack. I don’t see how Ukraine would be able to extract their soldiers without a safe haven in the East.

[TrumpCard]

I wonder whether Kazakhstan or another former Soviet republic gave refuge to the Ukrainian soldiers after their attack. I don’t see how Ukraine would be able to extract their soldiers without a safe haven in the East.

[Goose]

I wonder whether Kazakhstan or another former Soviet republic gave refuge to the Ukrainian soldiers after their attack. I don’t see how Ukraine would be able to extract their soldiers without a safe haven in the East.

I don't think Ukraine "extracted" anybody. The large plurality of the personnel involved in the operation are undoubtedly Russian citizens, many of which live in the area. There may (or may not) have been Ukrainians infiltrated into the area to co-ordinate the operations, but if there were, they are probably intending to stay there and conduct more operations. It isn't worth the risk of extracting and re-inserting such people. Just stay hidden. If you get caught, that is just the breaks. It could have happened on the way in or the way out just as well.

[Goose]

I wonder whether Kazakhstan or another former Soviet republic gave refuge to the Ukrainian soldiers after their attack. I don’t see how Ukraine would be able to extract their soldiers without a safe haven in the East.

I don't think Ukraine "extracted" anybody. The large plurality of the personnel involved in the operation are undoubtedly Russian citizens, many of which live in the area. There may (or may not) have been Ukrainians infiltrated into the area to co-ordinate the operations, but if there were, they are probably intending to stay there and conduct more operations. It isn't worth the risk of extracting and re-inserting such people. Just stay hidden. If you get caught, that is just the breaks. It could have happened on the way in or the way out just as well.

[GK3]

I wonder whether Kazakhstan or another former Soviet republic gave refuge to the Ukrainian soldiers after their attack. I don’t see how Ukraine would be able to extract their soldiers without a safe haven in the East.

I don't think Ukraine "extracted" anybody. The large plurality of the personnel involved in the operation are undoubtedly Russian citizens, many of which live in the area. There may (or may not) have been Ukrainians infiltrated into the area to co-ordinate the operations, but if there were, they are probably intending to stay there and conduct more operations. It isn't worth the risk of extracting and re-inserting such people. Just stay hidden. If you get caught, that is just the breaks. It could have happened on the way in or the way out just as well.

Are the Russians in that area, those whom Putin classifies as real Russians or those second class Russians whom he is happy to send to the meat grinder in the Ukraine? Might be a good number disgruntled types wiling to help.

[GK3]

I wonder whether Kazakhstan or another former Soviet republic gave refuge to the Ukrainian soldiers after their attack. I don’t see how Ukraine would be able to extract their soldiers without a safe haven in the East.

I don't think Ukraine "extracted" anybody. The large plurality of the personnel involved in the operation are undoubtedly Russian citizens, many of which live in the area. There may (or may not) have been Ukrainians infiltrated into the area to co-ordinate the operations, but if there were, they are probably intending to stay there and conduct more operations. It isn't worth the risk of extracting and re-inserting such people. Just stay hidden. If you get caught, that is just the breaks. It could have happened on the way in or the way out just as well.

Are the Russians in that area, those whom Putin classifies as real Russians or those second class Russians whom he is happy to send to the meat grinder in the Ukraine? Might be a good number disgruntled types wiling to help.

[Goose]

Are the Russians in that area, those whom Putin classifies as real Russians or those second class Russians whom he is happy to send to the meat grinder in the Ukraine? Might be a good number disgruntled types wiling to help.

Mostly second-class "Russians", although there are quite a few "real" ethnic Russians along the railroads. The Czars were aware that the long railroads across Russia were vulnerable and therefore "encouraged" settlement along the railways. Back in the early years, and probably still today, many of the towns are garrisoned. In addition, quite a few better educated personnel were (and still are) necessary to run the railroads. So it isn't a homogeneously indigenous population. That said, many ethnic Russian people along the rail line aren't "European Russians" and don't necessarily like the way they are treated by Moscow. Fertile ground for dissidents of all kinds.

[Goose]

Are the Russians in that area, those whom Putin classifies as real Russians or those second class Russians whom he is happy to send to the meat grinder in the Ukraine? Might be a good number disgruntled types wiling to help.

Mostly second-class "Russians", although there are quite a few "real" ethnic Russians along the railroads. The Czars were aware that the long railroads across Russia were vulnerable and therefore "encouraged" settlement along the railways. Back in the early years, and probably still today, many of the towns are garrisoned. In addition, quite a few better educated personnel were (and still are) necessary to run the railroads. So it isn't a homogeneously indigenous population. That said, many ethnic Russian people along the rail line aren't "European Russians" and don't necessarily like the way they are treated by Moscow. Fertile ground for dissidents of all kinds.

[old spanish trail]

Just wanted to say this has been a really interesting thread. I know zip re war planning and tactics, but find the discussion here educational and fair. And, the participants are up front when their info is not fully substantiated or unclear. Kudos to all!

[old spanish trail]

Just wanted to say this has been a really interesting thread. I know zip re war planning and tactics, but find the discussion here educational and fair. And, the participants are up front when their info is not fully substantiated or unclear. Kudos to all!

[GK3]

Are the Russians in that area, those whom Putin classifies as real Russians or those second class Russians whom he is happy to send to the meat grinder in the Ukraine? Might be a good number disgruntled types wiling to help.

Mostly second-class "Russians", although there are quite a few "real" ethnic Russians along the railroads. The Czars were aware that the long railroads across Russia were vulnerable and therefore "encouraged" settlement along the railways. Back in the early years, and probably still today, many of the towns are garrisoned. In addition, quite a few better educated personnel were (and still are) necessary to run the railroads. So it isn't a homogeneously indigenous population. That said, many ethnic Russian people along the rail line aren't "European Russians" and don't necessarily like the way they are treated by Moscow. Fertile ground for dissidents of all kinds.

Thanks for the information.  The pictures of the line make it appear to fully electrified. It would seem practical if you really have a number of guys on the ground to blow up a few power poles here and there, bring sections of track on various lines to a halt, then go hide out again for a while as the other guy tries to fix his transportation mess.  Then do it again.  They can't have enough troops to patrol all that 4,000 miles, so another use for their drones, maybe it is even beyond them. Too bad they haven't come up with a way to interdict Iranian drone shipments.

[GK3]

Are the Russians in that area, those whom Putin classifies as real Russians or those second class Russians whom he is happy to send to the meat grinder in the Ukraine? Might be a good number disgruntled types wiling to help.

Mostly second-class "Russians", although there are quite a few "real" ethnic Russians along the railroads. The Czars were aware that the long railroads across Russia were vulnerable and therefore "encouraged" settlement along the railways. Back in the early years, and probably still today, many of the towns are garrisoned. In addition, quite a few better educated personnel were (and still are) necessary to run the railroads. So it isn't a homogeneously indigenous population. That said, many ethnic Russian people along the rail line aren't "European Russians" and don't necessarily like the way they are treated by Moscow. Fertile ground for dissidents of all kinds.

Thanks for the information.  The pictures of the line make it appear to fully electrified. It would seem practical if you really have a number of guys on the ground to blow up a few power poles here and there, bring sections of track on various lines to a halt, then go hide out again for a while as the other guy tries to fix his transportation mess.  Then do it again.  They can't have enough troops to patrol all that 4,000 miles, so another use for their drones, maybe it is even beyond them. Too bad they haven't come up with a way to interdict Iranian drone shipments.

[GK3]

Just wanted to say this has been a really interesting thread. I know zip re war planning and tactics, but find the discussion here educational and fair. And, the participants are up front when their info is not fully substantiated or unclear. Kudos to all!

Yes much thanks to all contributors, particularly Goose whose knowledge and willingness to share has been invaluable.

Tactics change as weapons capabilities change and for other reason.  I found this article on the evolution of artillery to be quite interesting.  It is clear that great amounts of money, time and technical research has to be going on all the time, or you risk falling behind.  You can see why the MIC is what it is.
https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloud...emella.pdf

[GK3]

Just wanted to say this has been a really interesting thread. I know zip re war planning and tactics, but find the discussion here educational and fair. And, the participants are up front when their info is not fully substantiated or unclear. Kudos to all!

Yes much thanks to all contributors, particularly Goose whose knowledge and willingness to share has been invaluable.

Tactics change as weapons capabilities change and for other reason.  I found this article on the evolution of artillery to be quite interesting.  It is clear that great amounts of money, time and technical research has to be going on all the time, or you risk falling behind.  You can see why the MIC is what it is.
https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloud...emella.pdf

[Goose]

Thanks for the information.  The pictures of the line make it appear to fully electrified. It would seem practical if you really have a number of guys on the ground to blow up a few power poles here and there, bring sections of track on various lines to a halt, then go hide out again for a while as the other guy tries to fix his transportation mess.  Then do it again.  They can't have enough troops to patrol all that 4,000 miles, so another use for their drones, maybe it is even beyond them. Too bad they haven't come up with a way to interdict Iranian drone shipments.

That part of the line is fully electrified. Further east the line is not. Indeed you can bring down some parts of the catenary and wait for somebody to repair it. It is better to just blow up an autotransformer station if you can, because they are much harder to replace than simply fixing the catenary. In many instances the autotransformer is decades old and there are no spares available. It can be replaced with a "modern" one but that often requires site engineering and all the associated delays. Of course, bringing down the bridges would be ideal but probably requires more time, explosives, and skill than is available.

[Goose]

Thanks for the information.  The pictures of the line make it appear to fully electrified. It would seem practical if you really have a number of guys on the ground to blow up a few power poles here and there, bring sections of track on various lines to a halt, then go hide out again for a while as the other guy tries to fix his transportation mess.  Then do it again.  They can't have enough troops to patrol all that 4,000 miles, so another use for their drones, maybe it is even beyond them. Too bad they haven't come up with a way to interdict Iranian drone shipments.

That part of the line is fully electrified. Further east the line is not. Indeed you can bring down some parts of the catenary and wait for somebody to repair it. It is better to just blow up an autotransformer station if you can, because they are much harder to replace than simply fixing the catenary. In many instances the autotransformer is decades old and there are no spares available. It can be replaced with a "modern" one but that often requires site engineering and all the associated delays. Of course, bringing down the bridges would be ideal but probably requires more time, explosives, and skill than is available.

[GK3]

Thanks for the information.  The pictures of the line make it appear to fully electrified. It would seem practical if you really have a number of guys on the ground to blow up a few power poles here and there, bring sections of track on various lines to a halt, then go hide out again for a while as the other guy tries to fix his transportation mess.  Then do it again.  They can't have enough troops to patrol all that 4,000 miles, so another use for their drones, maybe it is even beyond them. Too bad they haven't come up with a way to interdict Iranian drone shipments.

That part of the line is fully electrified. Further east the line is not. Indeed you can bring down some parts of the catenary and wait for somebody to repair it. It is better to just blow up an autotransformer station if you can, because they are much harder to replace than simply fixing the catenary. In many instances the autotransformer is decades old and there are no spares available. It can be replaced with a "modern" one but that often requires site engineering and all the associated delays. Of course, bringing down the bridges would be ideal but probably requires more time, explosives, and skill than is available.

Thank you for the name of those boxes.  So would you rather have electrified line or non electrified line in a war zone.  I suppose you could run regular diesel electric engines and forget about electrification, but do you have enough rolling stock.  Lots of issues for such a big country have to try and manage with such a limited population who can do it.

[GK3]

Thanks for the information.  The pictures of the line make it appear to fully electrified. It would seem practical if you really have a number of guys on the ground to blow up a few power poles here and there, bring sections of track on various lines to a halt, then go hide out again for a while as the other guy tries to fix his transportation mess.  Then do it again.  They can't have enough troops to patrol all that 4,000 miles, so another use for their drones, maybe it is even beyond them. Too bad they haven't come up with a way to interdict Iranian drone shipments.

That part of the line is fully electrified. Further east the line is not. Indeed you can bring down some parts of the catenary and wait for somebody to repair it. It is better to just blow up an autotransformer station if you can, because they are much harder to replace than simply fixing the catenary. In many instances the autotransformer is decades old and there are no spares available. It can be replaced with a "modern" one but that often requires site engineering and all the associated delays. Of course, bringing down the bridges would be ideal but probably requires more time, explosives, and skill than is available.

Thank you for the name of those boxes.  So would you rather have electrified line or non electrified line in a war zone.  I suppose you could run regular diesel electric engines and forget about electrification, but do you have enough rolling stock.  Lots of issues for such a big country have to try and manage with such a limited population who can do it.