History in the Making: Russian Invasion

06HHR (Forum Supporter) said:

Hungary Bill is probably the guy to ask but he may not be able to respond on classified matters.  Back in my day it depended on the severity of the situation, but even back then (Mid-late 80's) IIRC Rapid Deployment Force heavy lift capability existed (Via C5 and C-141) so we could move battalion strength from point to point within 72 hours, so if the brass has determined it needs to be there, than actual quick is the correct answer. 

It's hard to say because when it comes to weapons and military tech, we're dealing with export controlled items, foreign military sales, and that sort of stuff (or at least normally we would).  That's gotta go through certain channels before the green light is lit.

But if the paperwork's done and you got something that's already palletized and at an airfield then you are correct:  "Actual quick quick" is the answer.  Even with the paperwork, I wouldn't expect it to be the stereotypically "military quick" (months) given how dynamic this situation is.

This was actually part of a conversation I had with Mrs. Hungary when we were setting up our "get outta dodge" plans, and what points we picked that would trigger such things.  This is her first foray into military stuff and she used to being further removed from such things.  As such, she hadn't really considered the value that airlift capability has and hadn't really thought that our little operation would be of much interest.  We went back over the numbers that our program pulled out of Afghanistan and I mentioned "now change that to soldiers, or equipment, and place that anywhere in the world.  If you could drop that many soldiers there, how much would that change the course of a battle or even a war?"

It's a bit oversimplified (as you need certain infrastructure, and the C-17 makes for a very fat target), but it really puts things into perspective as to just how much stuff the US can place very far away, very quickly.

As I mentioned previously, I saw a video, taken near Kyiv, of a Ukrainian unit heavily supplied with ATMs, of a variety of types, so those almost certainly where externally supplied, how recently is hard to say.

It does seem like a lot of stuff is getting there.  I suspect the most difficult aspect is getting them distributed around the country, especially in the south.  The Russians have shown no ability to disrupt distribution from what I can see.  The Ukrainians have a huge advantage that they can send trucks one by one and not worry about a convoy for self defense so it would be very difficult for the Russians to figure out what to attack.

Something is happening with the Ukrainian air defense also.  There was some statement by a US official that talked about the "creative" use of air defense by the Ukrainians.  What that means, I don't know, but it appears to be more than just Stingers and such.

aircooled said:

You are thinking javelin.  I would not think it (or other ATM's) would do much to a full ship (amphibious assault ship, destroyer etc).  It would certainly penetrate, but mostly just a hole.  Much smaller charge than an anti-ship missile.

The real power of a shaped charge (HEAT) round on a tank is the overpressure if it penetrates and the spalling if it doesn't.  The overpressure is the simple explosion, made much worse by the enclosed space of a tank. The spalling is the inner part of the armor doing a bit of a metal blender routine to the interior.  Since a ship is so large, you might hope for a few casualties with a hit.

Ships would probably stay out of range in general.  The anti-missile systems (e.g.Phallanx equivalent) would probably pick one up (?)

A landing craft or amphibious tank.  That should be fully effective of course.

Another tidbit:  Sounds like they lost another General (I think it might have been an Admiral equivalent).  Apparently it's not uncommon for higher ranking officers to be close to the action for the Russians.  I think this has a lot more to do with lack of effective command and control than it does bravery.

Understood.  But the intent would not be to sink the ship.  Just to damage it and have it retire from the battlefield.  

Noddaz said:

aircooled said:

You are thinking javelin.  I would not think it (or other ATM's) would do much to a full ship (amphibious assault ship, destroyer etc).  It would certainly penetrate, but mostly just a hole.  Much smaller charge than an anti-ship missile.

The real power of a shaped charge (HEAT) round on a tank is the overpressure if it penetrates and the spalling if it doesn't.  The overpressure is the simple explosion, made much worse by the enclosed space of a tank. The spalling is the inner part of the armor doing a bit of a metal blender routine to the interior.  Since a ship is so large, you might hope for a few casualties with a hit.

Ships would probably stay out of range in general.  The anti-missile systems (e.g.Phallanx equivalent) would probably pick one up (?)

A landing craft or amphibious tank.  That should be fully effective of course.

Another tidbit:  Sounds like they lost another General (I think it might have been an Admiral equivalent).  Apparently it's not uncommon for higher ranking officers to be close to the action for the Russians.  I think this has a lot more to do with lack of effective command and control than it does bravery.

Understood.  But the intent would not be to sink the ship.  Just to damage it and have it retire from the battlefield.  

 

I think you're right, and this is part of the brilliance of the Ukrainian position. Because Russia has no supply chain now, they had to shutter their tank plant already. If you damage stuff, they do not have the industrial capacity to repair it.

A quick map update.  Not much changing of course, but the map highlights (the bulls eye things) recent air and missile attack warnings (not necessarily attacks).  I think this highlights what appears to be a general bombardment scheme by the Russians (mostly with ballistic missiles I believe).

This made me think of a bit of a parallel to WWII.  It's not a great one, but it's similar: 

The strategic bombing campaign by the Allies in Germany is well know.  Most think of B17's in daylight "precision" raids (in the best of conditions, they where at best somewhat precise).  Of course most of the bombers by number, were B-24's and there was an entirely different side to the campaign.

The British conducted a nighttime bombardment campaign.  This campaign was is no way precision.  It was simple area bombardment, of population centers.  This is almost certainly highly inspired by the German attacks on London, which where pure terror attacks and had no strategic targets.  The British effectively terrorized the German population for most of the war.  The US campaign can be shown to have had some noticeable effects (if nothing else, the cost of defending against it).  It's very difficult to quantify Britain's campaigns effect.  I guess you could say, not letting workers sleep might affect their factory work, but I suspect the effect they hoped for was for them to turn against the government, which I don't think it really did.

The lesson here of course is you need to be careful when you terrorize a population.  It can have two entirely opposite effects.  If overwhelming it can inspire capitulation, but in most cases, it simply solidifies and energizes the terrorized against the attacker.  This can be clearly seen in 911, as well as the blitz on London.

I think a Javelin would be very effective against smaller boats and likely send even larger ones packing as who's going to want to keep fighting with holes in their ship? I did see an article where the US Marines were testing Javelins as a defense against smaller boat attacks against ships. Sure it's not perfect but a hole through a ship/boat is a hole, right? With a 3 mile range, that's a pretty good defense item to have on hand.

Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to z31maniac :

Wikipedia:In September 2014, the Azov Battalion was expanded from a battalion to a regiment and enrolled into the National Guard of Ukraine.[31][33] At this time, the unit worked to de-politicize itself: its far-right leadership left and founded the National Corps political party,[42] which works with its associated activist organization, Azov Civil Corps. At about this time it started receiving increased supplies of heavy arms.[33] The Azov Battalion received funding from the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine and other sources (believed to be Ukrainian oligarchs).[33] So while its volunteers were officially paid 6,000 hryvnia ($316) per month, they really received around 10,000 hryvnia ($526) per month.[33] The national socialist "Patriot of Ukraine" websites were shut down or put under restricted access.[33]

I'm learning as well.  

Thanks for sharing that. I have learned so much from this thread. 

aircooled said:

The British conducted a nighttime bombardment campaign.  This campaign was is no way precision.  It was simple area bombardment, of population centers.  This is almost certainly highly inspired by the German attacks on London, which where pure terror attacks and had no strategic targets.  The British effectively terrorized the German population for most of the war.  The US campaign can be shown to have had some noticeable effects (if nothing else, the cost of defending against it).

https://yarchive.net/mil/strategic_bombing.html

Collection of quotes from high ranking Germans who were questioned after the war.

aircooled said:

Something is happening with the Ukrainian air defense also.  There was some statement by a US official that talked about the "creative" use of air defense by the Ukrainians.  What that means, I don't know, but it appears to be more than just Stingers and such.

the Russians have fielded a tracked AAA vehicle called a ZSU-23 for quite some time.  It's four radar-controlled 23mm cannons with a hellish rate of fire.  The first time the West saw them in action was in the October War against the Israelis and it was a distinctly unpleasant surprise for them.   My guess is that the Ukrainians are using something like that against "soft" targets like trucks, APC's and convoys.  

stroker said:

aircooled said:

Something is happening with the Ukrainian air defense also.  There was some statement by a US official that talked about the "creative" use of air defense by the Ukrainians.  What that means, I don't know, but it appears to be more than just Stingers and such.

the Russians have fielded a tracked AAA vehicle called a ZSU-23 for quite some time.  It's four radar-controlled 23mm cannons with a hellish rate of fire.  The first time the West saw them in action was in the October War against the Israelis and it was a distinctly unpleasant surprise for them.   My guess is that the Ukrainians are using something like that against "soft" targets like trucks, APC's and convoys.  

Even scarier is the Tunguska, which has a higher rate of fire, larger rounds, and missiles as well.

stroker said:

aircooled said:

Something is happening with the Ukrainian air defense also.  There was some statement by a US official that talked about the "creative" use of air defense by the Ukrainians.  What that means, I don't know, but it appears to be more than just Stingers and such.

the Russians have fielded a tracked AAA vehicle called a ZSU-23 for quite some time.  It's four radar-controlled 23mm cannons with a hellish rate of fire.  The first time the West saw them in action was in the October War against the Israelis and it was a distinctly unpleasant surprise for them.   My guess is that the Ukrainians are using something like that against "soft" targets like trucks, APC's and convoys.  

Ok, a Russian version of the German Wirbelwind from WWII.  Da, could be useful.

My guess for "creative" may be something more like:

US AWACS tracks targets, then transmits track information to AA missile battery somehow (so they don't have to use their search radar).  Battery waits for target to get within range, then activates tracking radar and launches as soon as they get a lock.

The reason this is creative is because the use of any radar in a modern battlefield immediately makes you a potential target for an ARM (anti-radiation missile), which tracks the emissions and homes in on them.

It does harken back to another "old-timey" story.  When radar first appeared in ships, some of the old ship Captains where not really "up" on them.  In one particular case (don't remember exactly where) ships where involved in a bit of cat an mouse at night, where radar is super useful.  One of the old-timers thought it would be a great idea to fire up the spot lights to get a good look at the enemy.  That of course, made his ship a huge and very obvious target and was immediacy lite up in a big way!  Interestingly, it's kind of moved on to the next technology now days: keep the radar off, lest you can get tracked by it (true in planes and ships)

sobe_death said:

 

Even scarier is the Tunguska, which has a higher rate of fire, larger rounds, and missiles as well.

And this is one of the reason why the A10 is not quite as useful as you might think against a modern army.  The Russians have a pretty wide variety of AA systems tied to their army (which was designed to fight the plane happy US).  Heck, the US effectively did not have much of any AA systems for many years!  They just assumed air superiority!

I saw this earlier today: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44859/secretive-american-stocks-of-soviet-air-defense-systems-are-headed-to-ukraine-report

Apparently, the US has a store of Soviet weaponry that is being raided for transfer to Ukraine.  I guess the theory is that we're not giving them anything that the Russians don't already know about, so we don't have to worry about it getting captured.  And it's stuff that the Ukraine army is probably already familiar with - or it's closer to things they're familiar with than our own stuff.

aircooled said:

Needs more Cranberries Zombi...tell me it has camo truck nutz.

from NPR

Russia withdraws from WWII peace talks with Japan in response to sanctions

Japan on Tuesday protested a Russian decision to pull out of stalled peace treaty talks in response to Japan’s sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine.

The talks had been aimed at resolving a dispute over four islands, known in Japan as the Northern Territories and in Russia as the Southern Kurils. Russia seized them in 1945 and deported Japanese residents.

Because of the dispute, Japan never signed a peace treaty with Russia formally ending hostilities in WWII.

*snip*

WWII

Noddaz said:

 

from NPR

Russia withdraws from WWII peace talks with Japan in response to sanctions

 

Japan on Tuesday protested a Russian decision to pull out of stalled peace treaty talks in response to Japan’s sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine.

The talks had been aimed at resolving a dispute over four islands, known in Japan as the Northern Territories and in Russia as the Southern Kurils. Russia seized them in 1945 and deported Japanese residents.

Because of the dispute, Japan never signed a peace treaty with Russia formally ending hostilities in WWII.

*snip*

WWII

 

That could get ugly. We have our own separate alliance with Japan, and it really needs to stick.

In reply to tuna55 :

"Go Go Godzilla"

RX Reven' said:

In reply to tuna55 :

"Go Go Godzilla"

Uhmm. Not exactly what I meant, but sure.

A couple dozen pages back I asked about Japan jumping in to get those islands back. It's always a pride thing with the Japanese and those islands were a very sore point to them. 

I had read a snippet on a news feed that essentially boiled down to the Ukrainians dealing with surviving the daytime and then going hog on the Russians at night. It seems the Russians have a very complicated time getting around the country at night and the Ukrainians all know the area. Survive the day, retake the night.

Guess what this is:

Yes, that is a Russian artillery position NW or Irpin, as shot by a commercial satellite company... the Russians are not pleased, and may be attacking the websites of those companies.

Or, you know, you could hide your artillery a bit better.

Not sure I would want to be part of this unit, if it still exists.

In reply to aircooled :

Judging from the number of circular marks on the ground, I'm guessing the Ukrainians already knew it was there when the photo was taken.

As has been noted, The Russians seem to be digging in and flinging long-range munitions at Ukraine. it's a very expensive approach. That stuff ain't cheap - especially the precision targeted systems. So instead of using that, they are going with the blunt objects that won't hit much in the way of specific targets, but is reducing cities to rubble. It's really ugly. Russia is saying "If you don't submit, we're going to make sure that you've got a couple of generations worth of rebuilding to do. And by the way, we don't care if irreplaceable cultural treasures are destroyed in the process.

berkeleying rat bastards. 

Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:

As has been noted, The Russians seem to be digging in and flinging long-range munitions at Ukraine. it's a very expensive approach. That stuff ain't cheap - especially the precision targeted systems. So instead of using that, they are going with the blunt objects that won't hit much in the way of specific targets, but is reducing cities to rubble. It's really ugly. Russia is saying "If you don't submit, we're going to make sure that you've got a couple of generations worth of rebuilding to do. And by the way, we don't care if irreplaceable cultural treasures are destroyed in the process.

berkeleying rat bastards. 

Most car thieves try to avoid damaging the car they're stealing to preserve its value.

Even if Russia just wants their ports / wheat, infrastructure is still going to be required; desperation is apparent.  

Noddaz said:

 

from NPR

Russia withdraws from WWII peace talks with Japan in response to sanctions

 

Japan on Tuesday protested a Russian decision to pull out of stalled peace treaty talks in response to Japan’s sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine.

The talks had been aimed at resolving a dispute over four islands, known in Japan as the Northern Territories and in Russia as the Southern Kurils. Russia seized them in 1945 and deported Japanese residents.

Because of the dispute, Japan never signed a peace treaty with Russia formally ending hostilities in WWII.

*snip*

WWII

 

Well that complicates things. I guess it won't be WWIII after all, just WWII.V?