[ca245]

Good piece on the importance of rail for Russian resupply, and why they haven’t been able to take advantage of the rail network.

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/how-ukra...ck-2804108

Ukraine -- unlike Western Europe -- uses the same gauge of railroad as Russia. That infrastructure, though, can't be used to bring supplies until troops control the towns that sit on them, in particular key junctions such as Kharkiv, Sumy and Chernihiv in the north, or Kherson, Mykolaiv and Zaporizhzhia in the south.

The problem for Russia is that its military needs to take major cities to access the rail network, Vershinin said by telephone from Virginia. "The other problem is that the Russians have not brought enough manpower," he said. "This is a of immense proportions country, and every time they need to take a city they also have to leave force behind to hold it."

The other significant problem is that rail infrastructure is more vulnerable than roads. If you just blow up the signaling equipment, not even the track itself, you drastically reduce the capacity of the network. Some of the rail lines are electric. Blow up the substations and they are useless unless Russia brings their own diesel locomotives. I would expect Ukraine will make sure no working locomotives are left for the Russians. Broken ones derailed across the tracks and booby trapped are a nice touch. Of course, blowing up rail bridges is nice too. You can't simply substitute a Baily bridge or equivalent. Trains are too heavy for that. Javelin missiles work great on locomotives. Heck, even an AT4 (M136) will do the job if you can get close enough. Ukraine probably won't waste aircraft (that are valuable and in short supply) on the railroads, but drones can do a good enough job.

Goose, you seem to be into the weapons strategy side of this.   I owned a company that supplied electronic sub-assemblies to defense contractors.   I sold it a few years ago and mostly retired. 

I’m surprised Javelin is the only U.S. missile making it into the news.   Javelin is a portable, shoulder fired missile, relatively easy to use so it’s ideal for Ukraine.  But there are other small, mobile missile systems that could be employed in Ukraine.  I don’t why they’re not or maybe they are being supplied covertly. Between heat seeking and GPS guided missiles there’s an array of U.S. technology for ground and drone attack that is specifically designed for this type of war.

Another anti-armor weapon the Ukrainians have been using with great success is the NLAW, supplied by Britain and developed by SAAB of Sweden. It is lighter and shorter range, so it complements the Javelin.
NLAW

[ca245]

Good piece on the importance of rail for Russian resupply, and why they haven’t been able to take advantage of the rail network.

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/how-ukra...ck-2804108

Ukraine -- unlike Western Europe -- uses the same gauge of railroad as Russia. That infrastructure, though, can't be used to bring supplies until troops control the towns that sit on them, in particular key junctions such as Kharkiv, Sumy and Chernihiv in the north, or Kherson, Mykolaiv and Zaporizhzhia in the south.

The problem for Russia is that its military needs to take major cities to access the rail network, Vershinin said by telephone from Virginia. "The other problem is that the Russians have not brought enough manpower," he said. "This is a of immense proportions country, and every time they need to take a city they also have to leave force behind to hold it."

The other significant problem is that rail infrastructure is more vulnerable than roads. If you just blow up the signaling equipment, not even the track itself, you drastically reduce the capacity of the network. Some of the rail lines are electric. Blow up the substations and they are useless unless Russia brings their own diesel locomotives. I would expect Ukraine will make sure no working locomotives are left for the Russians. Broken ones derailed across the tracks and booby trapped are a nice touch. Of course, blowing up rail bridges is nice too. You can't simply substitute a Baily bridge or equivalent. Trains are too heavy for that. Javelin missiles work great on locomotives. Heck, even an AT4 (M136) will do the job if you can get close enough. Ukraine probably won't waste aircraft (that are valuable and in short supply) on the railroads, but drones can do a good enough job.

Goose, you seem to be into the weapons strategy side of this.   I owned a company that supplied electronic sub-assemblies to defense contractors.   I sold it a few years ago and mostly retired. 

I’m surprised Javelin is the only U.S. missile making it into the news.   Javelin is a portable, shoulder fired missile, relatively easy to use so it’s ideal for Ukraine.  But there are other small, mobile missile systems that could be employed in Ukraine.  I don’t why they’re not or maybe they are being supplied covertly. Between heat seeking and GPS guided missiles there’s an array of U.S. technology for ground and drone attack that is specifically designed for this type of war.

Another anti-armor weapon the Ukrainians have been using with great success is the NLAW, supplied by Britain and developed by SAAB of Sweden. It is lighter and shorter range, so it complements the Javelin.
NLAW