Did they really learn to counter all western weaponry?
M777?
HIMARS?
Shadows?
Patriot systems maybe?
They still lag far behind Western military in terms of equipment and this is not changing anytime soon.
The problem is that Ukraine has TIIIINY part of western equipment, not even close to parity with what Russia has in terms of numbers. 50 HIMARS systems at max. Wow. Russia has hundreds of MLRS cokmplexex, thousands of artillery, hundreds of jets including 4+ generation.
If Ukraine was provided with tanks and APV's last year, the Kherson offensive would end in Mariupol. If West would provide F16's in winter, this offensive would have been successfull.
"...they are learning to counter pretty much every weapon NATO has in its arsenal."
This may be precisely the reason advanced arms have not been supplied to Ukraine. With the looming China/Taiwan issue there is likely some hesitancy to allow modern weapon system performance to be observed by potential adversaries. --- That assumes hacking, etc., hasn't already revealed all.
Bulgaria very recently got a very pro-EU government, in the past they only secretly and partially provided shells of all types to Ukraine and now they can go all out
Thanks for your analysis, Tom. Definitely, some food for thought. Overall, reminds me a game of whack a mole, just didn’t expect it would be a surprise for GenStab, I’m sure there was more than enough intel about defence lines long before the start of the offensive. On the other side, the itch in my small toe tells me we haven’t seen the whole picture yet, at least I’ve noticed only several brigades in action and not the whole range of pledged deliveries, wondering when we’ll see the rest.
The problem is not the amount and quality of intel, but the interpretation of that intel.
If 'people' (intel) make a mistake in assessing the importance of 'this and that little forward fortification, somewhere ahead of the frontline', then there is a problem.
On the positive side, this is something like 'natural': nobody - no matter in the East or in the West - has fought a war of this kind since the early 1970s (and even that in the early 1970s was 'just a brawl' in comparison). Thus, there's no experience in 'modern-day battlefield intel analysis'.
Theoretically, that's easy to correct. Indeed: a matter of 'days'...
...a little bit more problematic is the extermination of dogmatic thinking by commanders. See: 'phased deployment of artillery': this is the 21st Century, no Desert Storm. The ZSU has no time to 'first shoot this, then shoot that, and then something else' - because the volumes of high explosives are much too massive. The artillery must 'do everything at once, and, preferably, pronto'....
What's FAR more troublesome is the hesitant Western decision-making at strategic level, almost entirely based on corruption and incompetence, lack of knowledge for local circumstances, and far-sight necessary for strategic planning. At least as troublesome is the constant practice of reacting to Pudding, instead of ignoring him and acting on our own...
For example: had Ukraine got all the stuff it's got the last few months - already a year ago, it could've liberated most of occupied territories long before Pudding & CO managed to start buying time... It didn't because all the West was trembling at the thought of what might Pudding think about arms deliveries...
Totally agree here. This “risk management” policy of Biden’s administration and reactive posture of other EU and NATO members drives me mad. It’s like they’re afraid to defeat Moscow, don’t know what to do with it, lacking far sight. Maybe I don’t understand something, but for me, clear and decisive Ukrainian victory would be much better prevention of future conflicts, then this war of attrition.
Thank you Tom for your great analysis, that gives somehow a logical and coherent picture compared to the "discussions" on "conventional" media. One question about something that is in my head:
Is it only the West trembling about what Putin thinks about arms deliveries or more a welcome opportunity for the US foremost to achieve a strategic goal. Cause every piece of Russian military equipment destroyed and every Russian soldier killed or badly wounded gives the US the freedom to reduce their forces in Europe. This on the other hand is quite handy in the wake of other conflicts the US is involved on the other side of the Asian continent.
Basically if the Ukrainians are degrading the Russian equipment to the level of the 50s and 60s, Poland will have in near time enought of military power to stop the Russians on their own without US boots on the ground (not talking about nukes and other high specialised equipment).
Am I to pessimistic here or is there a point in this?
I'm no expert, not even an amateur, at all of this. That said, here is my thought: Just as the Russians are using vast stores of antiquated equipment, all of the Western allies have(had) similar reserves sitting in warehouses with significant financial cost to maintain. How signidicant, I have no idea. Those reserves also have deterence capability which declines with age, ever more rapidly as warfare has become "high-tech". This war has clearly shown the need for accurate destruction over spray-and-pray.
In short, every country with a military stockpile sees the need to significantly reduce their antiquated equipment in favor of modern replacements. This war is an excellent opportunity to achieve that goal, at a discount relative to cost of decommissioning/destroying/maintaining, and with the benfit of positive P.R. in Western media. A secondary benefit are the U.S., German, etc., agreements to supply modern equivalents, replacement, upgrades, often at a "discount", to those countries supplying Ukraine. "Send your old 1950-1970 era gear to Ukraine and we will send you some of our surplus 1980's gear! Better yet, we will sell you some of our 1990's gear. If you are our friend we will even sell our stuff from 2010's."
As the global economy becomes more "level" ($1 in the USA buying something close to the same value in other countries vs. buying 10X), the Western arms suppliers will be able to sell fewer high-tech items but at a higher profit instead of subsidizing those sales to smaller countries.
The Western military -industrial machine benefits immensely by the consumption of materiel.
Can West increase weapons delivery to degree when it became not important what russia is doing ? West has 30 times bigger production potential and can produce as much as they wish. Cant they?
As long as manufacturing contracts are signed and money change hands, not sooner.
Note that even during World War II, USA industrial capacity took months to get realized, after lots of contracts were let and as the country was in a war footing
(but already was being bootstrapped by Lend-Lease agreements and production).
It takes time and money to restart production lines, even for stuff like artillery shells.
The assumption is that the West wants Ukraine to win - personally I think the main aim is to degrade Moscow's military power by destroying armoured vehicles.
Perhaps this will allow the US to strengthen their power in the Pacific against a far bigger adversarial - China.
As usually, the USA think the US-way, which is obsessed with and dominated by dogmas.
Presently dominating dogma is: 'China first' or 'countering China is Priority No. 1'.
So much so, the USA do not understand that countering Putin = deterring China.
Is 'as simple as a wheel', but entirely out of the US ability to comprehend.... This is why the Americans are aiming for 'degrading' instead for 'defeating' Russia, too.
Whole situation has a lot of similarities to 1939 to 1941 on both sides. Russians in trouble, tossing in whatever thay can to delay and attrit, buy time to rebuild, like the 1939 Winter War and the Smolensk/Moscow defense in 1941. West not as committed as they could be, knowing what needs to be done, not really wanting to, as in 1939 and 1941, needng to get the public behind them. Few new wrinkles thrown in for good measure by both sides too, new weapons, old weapons suddenly becoming useful again. Hurry up and wait and see what happens next.
The big differences are that modern Russia does not have the productive capacity of the USSR in WWII, and the massive capacity of the USA and UK are being fed to the other side - along with that of many other nations.
So while the Russians may be buying time successfully, they lack the capacity to make truly effective use of what they've bought.
One question, what alternative solutions based on currently available info (obviously limited) in your opinion could the ZSU employ in this counter-offensive to avoid being dragged into attrition warfare?
They've got to find a better 'combination of firepower and manoeuvre'.
To me it appears the first 7-8 days of this offensive, they've deployed their firepower - artillery - in much too 'classic' fashion. See: phased targeting of specific segment of the Russian positions. First HQs, storage depots and communications, then artillery, then the '1st Line of Defence/Pudding Line'.
...that left the actual first defence line - the Gerasimov Line - nearly untouched. Indeed, some of Ukrainian troops moving through the minefields received no artillery support at all, and some (37th Naval Infantry) suffered unnecessary losses as consequence.
With other words: artillery must be deployed in more flexible, more immediate, less-pre-planned fashion.
....and....sigh....Ukraine needs yet more artillery (and artillery ammo): in a battle of attrition, the principal issue is that of the 'tonnage' (of high explosives hurled upon the enemy), followed by precision.
...good thing about this is that the ZSU artillery 'can': it's FAR more precise than the Russian. Means: it's not squandering 20-30 shells to score 1 direct hit.
Tom, do you think "a better combination of firepower and manoeuvre" is primarily a doctrinal issue or a problem of insufficient combined arms training?
Tom thanks for the update, i've got a question regarding Russian attack helicopters (mainly Ka-52) if committed to the frontline would the Avengers given by the US be enough to counter them? or would they still get outranged by laser guided Ka-52 rockets?
Like almost everything else in a war, this is not an issue of one or another weapon system, but of system of systems.
In good weather, Ka-52s can engage already from 4,000m away, and as far as 12,000m away. That's - hopelessly - outside the range of the M1097 Avenger. That's taking stuff like IRIS-T, at least MIM-23 HAWK and similar. However, when PSU attempts deploying such stuff close to the frontline, it's getting hit by Lancets and similar stuff. Even by nocturnal raids of the Spetsnaz. That's taking Avengers, Gepards, this latest Skynex (of which there are hopelessly too few around) - and then a lot of them - and that's taking ground troops, too...
....and even if, the mass of these systems are still too slow. Not manoeuvreable enough.
....which is why the most effective, though also most overlooked, Ukrainian anti-Shahed and anti-Lancet weapon is a pair of KPT machine guns mounted on Toyotas.
I saw a tweet from a Ukrainian soldier on the frontline saying the SPAAG technicals are good at all things except the lancet because it moves so low and so fast, they cant react in enough time to take them out. I wonder what you're thoughts on this are. Maybe its not true?
I've heard exactly the opposite - and then from several different sources, independently from each other.
That said: yes, obviously, ZSU can't go arming itself with 'thousands of simple Toyota technicals'. That's never going to work. And is hopelessly obsolete way of thinking.
Obviously, the solution is in advanced technologies. Foremost in electronic warfare. It's simply outrageous that so many Lancets are 'still' getting through. That must be stopped. And the only way to stop them is to block them in big numbers, area-wise - through electronic warfare.
This is good to hear the technicals been effective because I have been dreading those loitering munitions since the Nagorno-Karabakh war. I hope we're working on those EW solutions for them because they're obviously resource constrained
in one of today's Ua papers, Ua analyst are quoting Ru "warcorrs" saying Ru has huge advantage in electronic jamming both for GPS-led arms and batallion -level and higher field comms. The Ru equipment is named there is "Krasuha-4" Murmansk-BN". Rather surprising and disturbing if true. I understand you are referring to the same type of difficulty, is there a quick cure based on the equipment that was / is handed over to ZSU?
Electronic jamming is something Russians appear to have developed to quite high level. I think it's enormously difficult to counter this "in the field" (except for destruction of jamming systems, which is another can of worms). You *can* switch to comms systems that are not prone to jamming, but then we're talking about replacing entire battlefield communication network with something new. Easy to do for specialized cases (with software defined radios you can do whatever), for entire army it's like switching all guns to a new caliber all at once, and that under fire. It's going to take years.
What do you think of SPAAG technicals with early-warning radar* and computer-assisted tracking? Seems like that would solve most problems of human deficit in reaction time and accuracy against a sudden inbound target moving hundreds of meters a second.
*Minimum performance of the radar should probably be FPV-sized target at 10m altitude from 1km away
During 9 years i was reading, that TIME WORK ON UKRAINE..... Tom say opposite in this article.
West gave 9 years to Moscow for preparetions. And 2.4 trillions $. This money enough for producing 1000 000 000 shells 155mm and 122mm, + repair and modernise 1000 000 tanks and armor vehicles + produsing 1000 000 Orlans + 1000 000 Lancets + 500 000 cruise missiles + huge volumes others
Moscow already got ALL for 10-25 years such war. Espatialy if we look at: just now West is buying russian goods on 15 billions $/ month
Blinken lied: Ukraine got ALL what need for counter offenssive.
Now even for stupid .... to see that Blinken is lied
This is one of the way how information operations are performed:
1. Pick the pain point of your target - in this case "fear of loosing the war"
2. Push in half truth (mixture of true and false information) - narrating the information to increase the pain.
3. Observe how the target is being affected by fear and doubt , and increase pressure.
Considering that this character is doing it for more then a year - make your own conclusions.
You can find that type of characters on every social platforms.
Other people may present unpleasant information (like Tom does regularly) - however the difference is in narration. Tom tries to make us think and analise with him - this character is trying to cause pain and doubt.
Wow. A hell of an analysis. Looking the big picture, another thing became clear: Russia is figthing a full war. Ammo factories works in three shifts. They managed to import the vital chips for their modern planes and missiles, they are replaced they fuel markets for others and succeded in not being isolated in the world.
The west is figthing a "medium hearted" war. The supplies to Ukraine have a "market" logic. The big arsenals of the "democracias" are in hands of prívate groups that ask for the contract first and then plan to scale up production "within the next two or three years". Imposed economic sanctions than no one want to fully implement. Depleted their military stocks of Old equipment and have peacetime timetables yo replenish them.
Russians Lost their peacetime army. And they have already buit a new one. Bad trained, older equipment, subpar equipment. But russian shells and bombs are as good as western when we talk about shelling an enemy column. Ukraine have been flodded with old weapons and sistems. But the replacement in the places where they was stored, has not started yet.
This is unfortunately how it "feels" and seems. I hope this new Ramstein meeting discusses improving Western production capacity to meet Ukrainian and future demands as well as serious CUAS capabilities.
Orks destroyed half of ukrainian IRIS-T. By Lancet. Ukraine has not get proper weapon against Orlans Lancets FPV drones, cruise missiles, and most problem - bombs. So only liars say that Ukraine will win counterofenssive. Fairy tales during 14 months already
If serving in Pudding's Troll Army, he's got to post 20 times an hour.
Really, nothing like an easy job.
Problem: at least some of stuff he 'says' is something I can agree with. Thus, must carefully monitor him - which is time-consuming. And the time is something I do not have.
So, I'll 'wait' for another day, but then have to make my decision.
I understand. What he is doing - is trying to put his fingers in the wounds of people. Induce the pain by repeating all those things he repeats for more then a year.
Some of those things are true (as you rightfully noted), some of them are half truth (just like dr. Goebbels told), and the rest are plain false.
This is the way how smart ruzzian information operatives work.
All his rethorics may seem as supporting arguments to your statements about "Western corruption and indecisiveness" (that's why, I think he's a regular here, or "smotryaschi" as per kremlin mafia vernacular) , but that's maskirovka for a real objective of his posts: to make everybody feel resistance is futile, all along the lines of "scott ritters/col macgregors" that ruzzia can't be stopped, better agree on terms now.
Why to block him? I taught that this platform is available for people to express their point of view that we could than dispute, take it or leave it. Quite sobering analyses by Tom as usual, we will see what the counteroffensive will bring.
He is posting the same stuff over and over again (West is bad, Ukraine is ungrateful, russia is too strong, Ukraine is losing) all the while disguising himself as Ukrainian, although Ukrainian language speakers would easily recognise Google translate in his rare posts in Ukrainian language.
This platform, like any other, is not a free-for-all. Nobody forbids Roman to go on a street and push his agenda, but Tom might not like pushing it here and ban him.
I believe you wanted to reply @asdf, I don't quite see how I would have insulted you. I only explained that Tom has freedom to choose who can comment. Hardly insulting.
I tried talking to "the other side" on http://simplicius76.substack.com -- I was banned after several comments pointing at the various conjectures in the author's arguements. I don't think this "roman koval" adds anything useful to the discussion.
I write facts and arguments. My oppponents write lies and insults. Enough to look on my profile here, and you can see that i live in Kherson right now. And under shelling every day
Bild already "russian propaganda channel"? I just read in ukrainian news. They cite Bild. You may be know ukrainian language, so CAN look in google:" IRIS-T Ланцет "
Украина потеряла немецкий ЗРК Iris-T — эксперт назвал ошибки ВСУ
8 дней назад — По мнению Юлиана Репке, ЗРК была выдвинута излишне близко к передовой и оказалась в зоне досягаемости БПЛА «Ланцет
Thanks Tom crap you just made me feel like I fell off my galloping horse and am looking at dirt , But I think you have hit the nail right smack dab on the head
That sounds like a sobering summary of the Ukrainian actions.
The question that naturally arises for me is what was the reason? Has Russia's will been underestimated, or has the offensive not been prepared well enough?
I (from my comfortable couch) doubt that Ukraine will find any other solution.
The Ukrainians would have to come through the minefields over a large area (for this they need clearing equipment which not even the West has in such large numbers I claim), while they must not be discovered by Russian UAVs (for which they need significantly more drone jammers which they do not get from the West ), then they have to destroy the enemy artillery before their own troops are caught advancing (the ZSU is the closest thing to the target, I have a feeling), then the Ukrainians have to avoid being attacked from afar by helicopters or jets (needs they still have significantly more anti-aircraft systems), then the ZSU must ensure that after a small advance the Russians sow new minefields, for this every type of artillery that can fire cluster mines must be destroyed (I have the feeling that the ZSU did not give enough thought to this beforehand ) and then the ZSU only has to neutralize the masses of mobiks that are "thrown against" them, which Russia theoretically has enough of, if only because the Russian population is more than four times larger than the Ukrainian one.
I'm afraid Ukraine can't do anything other than a war of attrition because at least one of the problems I mentioned above will remain unsolved with every offensive and just one of these problems is enough to buy the Russians the necessary time and slow down the Ukrainians decisively.
Trying to look at it from a different more positive angle: Ukraine has to only find one/few weak spots, exploit them properly and the Russian Defence will collapse. Sure, tough task but assuming Ukraine learns, adjusts it is hopefully a matter of tries to break through.
Jumping to conclusions based on misfortunes of one ZSU brigade (or incompetence of its commander and his superiors).... yes, that's going to bring us very far.
Tragic fact is: such 'things' happen. Doesn't mean they're a pattern; that they are happening to all the ZSU brigades involved.
Yes, you are right. I just mean, VSFR is still tough enemy, punishing every mistake hardly . It's not a bunch of mobiks running away after they got their first artillery barrage.
Many thanks for your analyzes. Situation seems not good (for me as Ukrainian) and I see only such steps for crossing it (may be, it's fantastic, but....)
1. Destroying of Kerch bridge (but how it's make is a big question)
2. Destroying 3-th line of defense where I suppose are ammo and technic in big quantity (but for it need a lot of long range misseles I hope, that our pertners could find it on their stocks and give it to Ukraine)
3. Continue strike with artillery on first line of russinas (for it need a lot of ammo for artelery )
and if all it will be made only after that i suppose can use a lot of troops.
I know, that may be ,my thoughts are naive but may be such steps could save a lot of lives.
I find it good the PSU is not wasting time (nor jeopardising its scarce Su-24s) to blast the Kerch Bridge. Blasting the railway line from the Crimea to Melitopol is as effective, and has been done some 3-4 times the last week or so.
On the frontline, principal problem - mind: it's spring, no winter any more - are Orlans, which are nowadays connected to Lancets, 'instead' to artillery. Both are deployed in such numbers, that they're effectively suppressing the ZSU air defences, too. That's forcing the ZSU artillery into more frequent re-deployments than expected. Artillery can't shoot while on the move - which means when it's moving, there's no artillery support. More about this in the 'next' one...
Thanks for your explanation. I hope our Genstab could find solving of this problem (may be ammo for short and middle range air defense system what was talking on last Ramstein will be a small decision in this way ). I' m worried time between decision and deployment of equipment on battlefield . But Ukrainians now have not a lot of possibilities of solving of this question in short time.
Did they really learn to counter all western weaponry?
M777?
HIMARS?
Shadows?
Patriot systems maybe?
They still lag far behind Western military in terms of equipment and this is not changing anytime soon.
The problem is that Ukraine has TIIIINY part of western equipment, not even close to parity with what Russia has in terms of numbers. 50 HIMARS systems at max. Wow. Russia has hundreds of MLRS cokmplexex, thousands of artillery, hundreds of jets including 4+ generation.
If Ukraine was provided with tanks and APV's last year, the Kherson offensive would end in Mariupol. If West would provide F16's in winter, this offensive would have been successfull.
"...they are learning to counter pretty much every weapon NATO has in its arsenal."
This may be precisely the reason advanced arms have not been supplied to Ukraine. With the looming China/Taiwan issue there is likely some hesitancy to allow modern weapon system performance to be observed by potential adversaries. --- That assumes hacking, etc., hasn't already revealed all.
Bulgaria very recently got a very pro-EU government, in the past they only secretly and partially provided shells of all types to Ukraine and now they can go all out
As Tom wrote above, Russia needs a few dozen shells to hit 1 target, so it makes sense for them.
I’m waiting for your update all day!
Thanks a lot!
Thanks for your analysis, Tom. Definitely, some food for thought. Overall, reminds me a game of whack a mole, just didn’t expect it would be a surprise for GenStab, I’m sure there was more than enough intel about defence lines long before the start of the offensive. On the other side, the itch in my small toe tells me we haven’t seen the whole picture yet, at least I’ve noticed only several brigades in action and not the whole range of pledged deliveries, wondering when we’ll see the rest.
The problem is not the amount and quality of intel, but the interpretation of that intel.
If 'people' (intel) make a mistake in assessing the importance of 'this and that little forward fortification, somewhere ahead of the frontline', then there is a problem.
On the positive side, this is something like 'natural': nobody - no matter in the East or in the West - has fought a war of this kind since the early 1970s (and even that in the early 1970s was 'just a brawl' in comparison). Thus, there's no experience in 'modern-day battlefield intel analysis'.
Theoretically, that's easy to correct. Indeed: a matter of 'days'...
...a little bit more problematic is the extermination of dogmatic thinking by commanders. See: 'phased deployment of artillery': this is the 21st Century, no Desert Storm. The ZSU has no time to 'first shoot this, then shoot that, and then something else' - because the volumes of high explosives are much too massive. The artillery must 'do everything at once, and, preferably, pronto'....
What's FAR more troublesome is the hesitant Western decision-making at strategic level, almost entirely based on corruption and incompetence, lack of knowledge for local circumstances, and far-sight necessary for strategic planning. At least as troublesome is the constant practice of reacting to Pudding, instead of ignoring him and acting on our own...
For example: had Ukraine got all the stuff it's got the last few months - already a year ago, it could've liberated most of occupied territories long before Pudding & CO managed to start buying time... It didn't because all the West was trembling at the thought of what might Pudding think about arms deliveries...
Totally agree here. This “risk management” policy of Biden’s administration and reactive posture of other EU and NATO members drives me mad. It’s like they’re afraid to defeat Moscow, don’t know what to do with it, lacking far sight. Maybe I don’t understand something, but for me, clear and decisive Ukrainian victory would be much better prevention of future conflicts, then this war of attrition.
Thank you Tom for your great analysis, that gives somehow a logical and coherent picture compared to the "discussions" on "conventional" media. One question about something that is in my head:
Is it only the West trembling about what Putin thinks about arms deliveries or more a welcome opportunity for the US foremost to achieve a strategic goal. Cause every piece of Russian military equipment destroyed and every Russian soldier killed or badly wounded gives the US the freedom to reduce their forces in Europe. This on the other hand is quite handy in the wake of other conflicts the US is involved on the other side of the Asian continent.
Basically if the Ukrainians are degrading the Russian equipment to the level of the 50s and 60s, Poland will have in near time enought of military power to stop the Russians on their own without US boots on the ground (not talking about nukes and other high specialised equipment).
Am I to pessimistic here or is there a point in this?
I'm no expert, not even an amateur, at all of this. That said, here is my thought: Just as the Russians are using vast stores of antiquated equipment, all of the Western allies have(had) similar reserves sitting in warehouses with significant financial cost to maintain. How signidicant, I have no idea. Those reserves also have deterence capability which declines with age, ever more rapidly as warfare has become "high-tech". This war has clearly shown the need for accurate destruction over spray-and-pray.
In short, every country with a military stockpile sees the need to significantly reduce their antiquated equipment in favor of modern replacements. This war is an excellent opportunity to achieve that goal, at a discount relative to cost of decommissioning/destroying/maintaining, and with the benfit of positive P.R. in Western media. A secondary benefit are the U.S., German, etc., agreements to supply modern equivalents, replacement, upgrades, often at a "discount", to those countries supplying Ukraine. "Send your old 1950-1970 era gear to Ukraine and we will send you some of our surplus 1980's gear! Better yet, we will sell you some of our 1990's gear. If you are our friend we will even sell our stuff from 2010's."
As the global economy becomes more "level" ($1 in the USA buying something close to the same value in other countries vs. buying 10X), the Western arms suppliers will be able to sell fewer high-tech items but at a higher profit instead of subsidizing those sales to smaller countries.
The Western military -industrial machine benefits immensely by the consumption of materiel.
Can West increase weapons delivery to degree when it became not important what russia is doing ? West has 30 times bigger production potential and can produce as much as they wish. Cant they?
As long as manufacturing contracts are signed and money change hands, not sooner.
Note that even during World War II, USA industrial capacity took months to get realized, after lots of contracts were let and as the country was in a war footing
(but already was being bootstrapped by Lend-Lease agreements and production).
It takes time and money to restart production lines, even for stuff like artillery shells.
The assumption is that the West wants Ukraine to win - personally I think the main aim is to degrade Moscow's military power by destroying armoured vehicles.
Perhaps this will allow the US to strengthen their power in the Pacific against a far bigger adversarial - China.
Yesno.
As usually, the USA think the US-way, which is obsessed with and dominated by dogmas.
Presently dominating dogma is: 'China first' or 'countering China is Priority No. 1'.
So much so, the USA do not understand that countering Putin = deterring China.
Is 'as simple as a wheel', but entirely out of the US ability to comprehend.... This is why the Americans are aiming for 'degrading' instead for 'defeating' Russia, too.
Crisp, clear-eyed analysis.
Whole situation has a lot of similarities to 1939 to 1941 on both sides. Russians in trouble, tossing in whatever thay can to delay and attrit, buy time to rebuild, like the 1939 Winter War and the Smolensk/Moscow defense in 1941. West not as committed as they could be, knowing what needs to be done, not really wanting to, as in 1939 and 1941, needng to get the public behind them. Few new wrinkles thrown in for good measure by both sides too, new weapons, old weapons suddenly becoming useful again. Hurry up and wait and see what happens next.
The big differences are that modern Russia does not have the productive capacity of the USSR in WWII, and the massive capacity of the USA and UK are being fed to the other side - along with that of many other nations.
So while the Russians may be buying time successfully, they lack the capacity to make truly effective use of what they've bought.
The massive capacity of US and UK no longer exists. The big defense companies not move a inch if they not have a contract over the table.
Thanks for this analysis Tom!
One question, what alternative solutions based on currently available info (obviously limited) in your opinion could the ZSU employ in this counter-offensive to avoid being dragged into attrition warfare?
They've got to find a better 'combination of firepower and manoeuvre'.
To me it appears the first 7-8 days of this offensive, they've deployed their firepower - artillery - in much too 'classic' fashion. See: phased targeting of specific segment of the Russian positions. First HQs, storage depots and communications, then artillery, then the '1st Line of Defence/Pudding Line'.
...that left the actual first defence line - the Gerasimov Line - nearly untouched. Indeed, some of Ukrainian troops moving through the minefields received no artillery support at all, and some (37th Naval Infantry) suffered unnecessary losses as consequence.
With other words: artillery must be deployed in more flexible, more immediate, less-pre-planned fashion.
....and....sigh....Ukraine needs yet more artillery (and artillery ammo): in a battle of attrition, the principal issue is that of the 'tonnage' (of high explosives hurled upon the enemy), followed by precision.
...good thing about this is that the ZSU artillery 'can': it's FAR more precise than the Russian. Means: it's not squandering 20-30 shells to score 1 direct hit.
Yep, that makes sense. Thanks Tom!
Tom, do you think "a better combination of firepower and manoeuvre" is primarily a doctrinal issue or a problem of insufficient combined arms training?
Still thinking of all of that.... will be covered 'next'.
Tom thanks for the update, i've got a question regarding Russian attack helicopters (mainly Ka-52) if committed to the frontline would the Avengers given by the US be enough to counter them? or would they still get outranged by laser guided Ka-52 rockets?
Like almost everything else in a war, this is not an issue of one or another weapon system, but of system of systems.
In good weather, Ka-52s can engage already from 4,000m away, and as far as 12,000m away. That's - hopelessly - outside the range of the M1097 Avenger. That's taking stuff like IRIS-T, at least MIM-23 HAWK and similar. However, when PSU attempts deploying such stuff close to the frontline, it's getting hit by Lancets and similar stuff. Even by nocturnal raids of the Spetsnaz. That's taking Avengers, Gepards, this latest Skynex (of which there are hopelessly too few around) - and then a lot of them - and that's taking ground troops, too...
....and even if, the mass of these systems are still too slow. Not manoeuvreable enough.
....which is why the most effective, though also most overlooked, Ukrainian anti-Shahed and anti-Lancet weapon is a pair of KPT machine guns mounted on Toyotas.
I saw a tweet from a Ukrainian soldier on the frontline saying the SPAAG technicals are good at all things except the lancet because it moves so low and so fast, they cant react in enough time to take them out. I wonder what you're thoughts on this are. Maybe its not true?
I've heard exactly the opposite - and then from several different sources, independently from each other.
That said: yes, obviously, ZSU can't go arming itself with 'thousands of simple Toyota technicals'. That's never going to work. And is hopelessly obsolete way of thinking.
Obviously, the solution is in advanced technologies. Foremost in electronic warfare. It's simply outrageous that so many Lancets are 'still' getting through. That must be stopped. And the only way to stop them is to block them in big numbers, area-wise - through electronic warfare.
This is good to hear the technicals been effective because I have been dreading those loitering munitions since the Nagorno-Karabakh war. I hope we're working on those EW solutions for them because they're obviously resource constrained
Hello,
in one of today's Ua papers, Ua analyst are quoting Ru "warcorrs" saying Ru has huge advantage in electronic jamming both for GPS-led arms and batallion -level and higher field comms. The Ru equipment is named there is "Krasuha-4" Murmansk-BN". Rather surprising and disturbing if true. I understand you are referring to the same type of difficulty, is there a quick cure based on the equipment that was / is handed over to ZSU?
Electronic jamming is something Russians appear to have developed to quite high level. I think it's enormously difficult to counter this "in the field" (except for destruction of jamming systems, which is another can of worms). You *can* switch to comms systems that are not prone to jamming, but then we're talking about replacing entire battlefield communication network with something new. Easy to do for specialized cases (with software defined radios you can do whatever), for entire army it's like switching all guns to a new caliber all at once, and that under fire. It's going to take years.
AFAIK, that with the Russian advantage is correct.
Quick cure? Nope.
What do you think of SPAAG technicals with early-warning radar* and computer-assisted tracking? Seems like that would solve most problems of human deficit in reaction time and accuracy against a sudden inbound target moving hundreds of meters a second.
*Minimum performance of the radar should probably be FPV-sized target at 10m altitude from 1km away
During 9 years i was reading, that TIME WORK ON UKRAINE..... Tom say opposite in this article.
West gave 9 years to Moscow for preparetions. And 2.4 trillions $. This money enough for producing 1000 000 000 shells 155mm and 122mm, + repair and modernise 1000 000 tanks and armor vehicles + produsing 1000 000 Orlans + 1000 000 Lancets + 500 000 cruise missiles + huge volumes others
Moscow already got ALL for 10-25 years such war. Espatialy if we look at: just now West is buying russian goods on 15 billions $/ month
Blinken lied: Ukraine got ALL what need for counter offenssive.
Now even for stupid .... to see that Blinken is lied
Don't bother with this guy. He has been posting the same thing in every Tom's post since the beginning of the massive invasion.
You do not like truth, so begin quarrel.
So WHAT heading? Obviiously you lied.
Sorry. "Header" not "heading".
Roman....we've heard that song already. Even the 'greatest hits' gets boring if constantly repeated on the radio...
We are hearing about sanctios EVERY DAY DURING 9 0R 15 YEARS, IF from 2008 Georgia.
Lies every day durig 9 years.
And many other lies.
Too many lies. Eberyday
Fairy tales about counteroffensive EVERY DAY DURING 13 months
1 billion shells????
Hm. What was your question? You do not know arithmetic, OR NOT And aweit that i will calculate?
Moscow empire produce shells . So 1 billion shells will cost approx 1 trillion $, West gave 2.4 trillion $
what are you leading readers into? Resistance is futile, right?
You lied. WHY do you think that resistance is futile?
I am leading readers to: people have to less lie!
And West have to stope help orks to kill ukrainians
https://t.me/truexakhersonua/33092
It was 500 m from me
This is one of the way how information operations are performed:
1. Pick the pain point of your target - in this case "fear of loosing the war"
2. Push in half truth (mixture of true and false information) - narrating the information to increase the pain.
3. Observe how the target is being affected by fear and doubt , and increase pressure.
Considering that this character is doing it for more then a year - make your own conclusions.
You can find that type of characters on every social platforms.
Other people may present unpleasant information (like Tom does regularly) - however the difference is in narration. Tom tries to make us think and analise with him - this character is trying to cause pain and doubt.
Wow. A hell of an analysis. Looking the big picture, another thing became clear: Russia is figthing a full war. Ammo factories works in three shifts. They managed to import the vital chips for their modern planes and missiles, they are replaced they fuel markets for others and succeded in not being isolated in the world.
The west is figthing a "medium hearted" war. The supplies to Ukraine have a "market" logic. The big arsenals of the "democracias" are in hands of prívate groups that ask for the contract first and then plan to scale up production "within the next two or three years". Imposed economic sanctions than no one want to fully implement. Depleted their military stocks of Old equipment and have peacetime timetables yo replenish them.
Russians Lost their peacetime army. And they have already buit a new one. Bad trained, older equipment, subpar equipment. But russian shells and bombs are as good as western when we talk about shelling an enemy column. Ukraine have been flodded with old weapons and sistems. But the replacement in the places where they was stored, has not started yet.
West and russians are seing two different wars.
This is unfortunately how it "feels" and seems. I hope this new Ramstein meeting discusses improving Western production capacity to meet Ukrainian and future demands as well as serious CUAS capabilities.
Orks destroyed half of ukrainian IRIS-T. By Lancet. Ukraine has not get proper weapon against Orlans Lancets FPV drones, cruise missiles, and most problem - bombs. So only liars say that Ukraine will win counterofenssive. Fairy tales during 14 months already
Not again...
Are you paid by post? Or you get more for more outrageous claims?
If serving in Pudding's Troll Army, he's got to post 20 times an hour.
Really, nothing like an easy job.
Problem: at least some of stuff he 'says' is something I can agree with. Thus, must carefully monitor him - which is time-consuming. And the time is something I do not have.
So, I'll 'wait' for another day, but then have to make my decision.
I understand. What he is doing - is trying to put his fingers in the wounds of people. Induce the pain by repeating all those things he repeats for more then a year.
Some of those things are true (as you rightfully noted), some of them are half truth (just like dr. Goebbels told), and the rest are plain false.
This is the way how smart ruzzian information operatives work.
yes, it's obvious "roman koval" is pretending to be concerned Ukrainian.
But you just lied.
If not agree - then write about TEXT , not about me.
You just insult me, becouse you do not like truth, and can not write facts
All his rethorics may seem as supporting arguments to your statements about "Western corruption and indecisiveness" (that's why, I think he's a regular here, or "smotryaschi" as per kremlin mafia vernacular) , but that's maskirovka for a real objective of his posts: to make everybody feel resistance is futile, all along the lines of "scott ritters/col macgregors" that ruzzia can't be stopped, better agree on terms now.
You lied. And why do you think, that resistance is futile?
All you answers are LIES. Why do you think, that Ukraine "better agree on terms now"?
You not like the truth,
So begin quarrel
And start with insult
You do not have arguments, so begin bla bla bla.
Roman Koval is a ruzzian bot. I'm surprised it hasn't been blocked yet.
Why to block him? I taught that this platform is available for people to express their point of view that we could than dispute, take it or leave it. Quite sobering analyses by Tom as usual, we will see what the counteroffensive will bring.
He is posting the same stuff over and over again (West is bad, Ukraine is ungrateful, russia is too strong, Ukraine is losing) all the while disguising himself as Ukrainian, although Ukrainian language speakers would easily recognise Google translate in his rare posts in Ukrainian language.
This platform, like any other, is not a free-for-all. Nobody forbids Roman to go on a street and push his agenda, but Tom might not like pushing it here and ban him.
Tom know that i live in Kherson just now.. and Grad rocket hit our 9 storey building in 15 m from our windows.
So you just insult me
I believe you wanted to reply @asdf, I don't quite see how I would have insulted you. I only explained that Tom has freedom to choose who can comment. Hardly insulting.
I tried talking to "the other side" on http://simplicius76.substack.com -- I was banned after several comments pointing at the various conjectures in the author's arguements. I don't think this "roman koval" adds anything useful to the discussion.
I write facts and arguments. My oppponents write lies and insults. Enough to look on my profile here, and you can see that i live in Kherson right now. And under shelling every day
https://t.me/truexakhersonua/33092
It was in 150m from path i usually walking
I awaite sorry from you
'Half'? Wasn't it 19 out of 3 already...
For your info, Roman: the 'destroyed IRIS-T' was a Lancet hitting the top of the radar antenna, and then ricochetting.
The radar was back in operation in a matter of 30 minutes...
Oh. Radar untenna vertical. Too low probability of your case. Ricochetting.
Any proof that ricochet had place and IRIS-T save?
It mast be SO LUCK! Lancet realy came,
SO in how many % cases ricochette has place?
Oh. Just 1 another example of ricochette https://t.me/truexakhersonua/33092
Switch and bait.
Where is your proof of IRIS-T destroyed other then repost from ruzzian propaganda channel?
Bild already "russian propaganda channel"? I just read in ukrainian news. They cite Bild. You may be know ukrainian language, so CAN look in google:" IRIS-T Ланцет "
Украина потеряла немецкий ЗРК Iris-T — эксперт назвал ошибки ВСУ
8 дней назад — По мнению Юлиана Репке, ЗРК была выдвинута излишне близко к передовой и оказалась в зоне досягаемости БПЛА «Ланцет
https://focus.ua/voennye-novosti/571768-porazhenie-nemeckoy-zrk-iris-t-ekspert-proanaliziroval-podrobnosti-oshibki-vsu
А он взял информацию с расеянской помойки.
Привет товарищу майору.
Thanks Tom crap you just made me feel like I fell off my galloping horse and am looking at dirt , But I think you have hit the nail right smack dab on the head
This is why I like reading Tom - he's not giving out a lot of predictions, but is providing sober information about developments on the ground.
Thank you Tom. Sober analysis.
Thanks a lot
That sounds like a sobering summary of the Ukrainian actions.
The question that naturally arises for me is what was the reason? Has Russia's will been underestimated, or has the offensive not been prepared well enough?
I (from my comfortable couch) doubt that Ukraine will find any other solution.
The Ukrainians would have to come through the minefields over a large area (for this they need clearing equipment which not even the West has in such large numbers I claim), while they must not be discovered by Russian UAVs (for which they need significantly more drone jammers which they do not get from the West ), then they have to destroy the enemy artillery before their own troops are caught advancing (the ZSU is the closest thing to the target, I have a feeling), then the Ukrainians have to avoid being attacked from afar by helicopters or jets (needs they still have significantly more anti-aircraft systems), then the ZSU must ensure that after a small advance the Russians sow new minefields, for this every type of artillery that can fire cluster mines must be destroyed (I have the feeling that the ZSU did not give enough thought to this beforehand ) and then the ZSU only has to neutralize the masses of mobiks that are "thrown against" them, which Russia theoretically has enough of, if only because the Russian population is more than four times larger than the Ukrainian one.
I'm afraid Ukraine can't do anything other than a war of attrition because at least one of the problems I mentioned above will remain unsolved with every offensive and just one of these problems is enough to buy the Russians the necessary time and slow down the Ukrainians decisively.
So much for the couch front. ✌🏻
Is OK. Though, mind, please: there are always solutions.
That's why it's important to keep minds open, to avoid succumbing to dogmas and to continue exchanging information.
Trying to look at it from a different more positive angle: Ukraine has to only find one/few weak spots, exploit them properly and the Russian Defence will collapse. Sure, tough task but assuming Ukraine learns, adjusts it is hopefully a matter of tries to break through.
This is why strategic initiative is so important - those who has initiative choose the place of attack.
And ZSU pays high price for their mistakes https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/06/13/ukraine-counteroffensive-kryvyi-rih-donetsk/
Jumping to conclusions based on misfortunes of one ZSU brigade (or incompetence of its commander and his superiors).... yes, that's going to bring us very far.
Tragic fact is: such 'things' happen. Doesn't mean they're a pattern; that they are happening to all the ZSU brigades involved.
Yes, you are right. I just mean, VSFR is still tough enemy, punishing every mistake hardly . It's not a bunch of mobiks running away after they got their first artillery barrage.
Oh, they are (a bunch of mobiks running away at the first sign of trouble).
Problem is that there are so many of them... and that's taking literal shiploads of ammunition to shot away, while every single mistake is too costly.
Dear Tom
Many thanks for your analyzes. Situation seems not good (for me as Ukrainian) and I see only such steps for crossing it (may be, it's fantastic, but....)
1. Destroying of Kerch bridge (but how it's make is a big question)
2. Destroying 3-th line of defense where I suppose are ammo and technic in big quantity (but for it need a lot of long range misseles I hope, that our pertners could find it on their stocks and give it to Ukraine)
3. Continue strike with artillery on first line of russinas (for it need a lot of ammo for artelery )
and if all it will be made only after that i suppose can use a lot of troops.
I know, that may be ,my thoughts are naive but may be such steps could save a lot of lives.
I find it good the PSU is not wasting time (nor jeopardising its scarce Su-24s) to blast the Kerch Bridge. Blasting the railway line from the Crimea to Melitopol is as effective, and has been done some 3-4 times the last week or so.
On the frontline, principal problem - mind: it's spring, no winter any more - are Orlans, which are nowadays connected to Lancets, 'instead' to artillery. Both are deployed in such numbers, that they're effectively suppressing the ZSU air defences, too. That's forcing the ZSU artillery into more frequent re-deployments than expected. Artillery can't shoot while on the move - which means when it's moving, there's no artillery support. More about this in the 'next' one...
Dear Tom .
Thanks for your explanation. I hope our Genstab could find solving of this problem (may be ammo for short and middle range air defense system what was talking on last Ramstein will be a small decision in this way ). I' m worried time between decision and deployment of equipment on battlefield . But Ukrainians now have not a lot of possibilities of solving of this question in short time.
Once again thanks for your answer.