***Russian - Ukraine War Tactical and Strategic Updates*** [Warning on OP]

7,601,022 Views | 47846 Replies | Last: 5 hrs ago by sclaff
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to USAFAg • 1:01p, 4/5/22
AG
Quote:
Don't know. If they can, it's probably classified. Been a long time since I did things like that. It would be problematic, though. While links and transmissions can be encrypted, they still emit energy that can be tracked back to a source. If we did it, we would essentially be entering the war by putting weapons on target.
We have already been sharing intelligence with them. Haven't we?
Reply Quote
4
AgLA06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggie_sprt • 1:01p, 4/5/22
AG
aggie_sprt said:
Just think if the Ukes were able to threaten Sevastopol with drones or other military assets with memory of what the Ukes were able to do Berdyans'k or as others have mentioned to threaten the bridges in that region.

Could the Ukes then bargin for a complete Russian withdrawl from all contested territory by agreeing to formally cede the Crimea? On the other hand, Russa probably sees controlling territory to at least the east bank of Dnieper river as critical to the protection of Sevastopol/Crimea since it seems Russia's vision of controlling all of the Black Sea coast in Ukraine is out the window?

While it would be a huge victory to reclaim Crimea it would be a huge strategy failure to actually give it back. The reason its so hard for the Ukes to defend themselves is they literally have to defend their entire northern, eastern, and southern borders against Russian attack. Strategically (from a military perspective) hold crimea and losing the east beneficial for a future defense perspective.

The problem is everyone says the wealth of Ukraine is the easter portion of the country.
Reply Quote
ATX_AG_08
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:01p, 4/5/22
AG
Reply Quote
24
AgLA06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GAC06 • 1:03p, 4/5/22
AG
GAC06 said:
None of those weapons can do much to actual rail infrastructure. They could take out locomotives though. The switchblades are man portable too so that opens a wide range of options with infiltration
As someone said. Rail bridges are the vulnerability of railines. A track on flat ground can be repaired in hours. Over a body of water or canyon and it could be weeks. I just don't have an understanding of the railines in western russia to know if there are enough bridges to shut it down.

Since western russia is a lot like eastern Ukraine (flat farmland) I doubt there are bridges to take out.
Reply Quote
USAFAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 1:04p, 4/5/22
AG
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
Don't know. If they can, it's probably classified. Been a long time since I did things like that. It would be problematic, though. While links and transmissions can be encrypted, they still emit energy that can be tracked back to a source. If we did it, we would essentially be entering the war by putting weapons on target.
We have already been sharing intelligence with them. Haven't we?



I suspect we have, but don't know for sure. It's one thing to share information, it's another thing to start guiding weapons and blowing things up. At the very least, Russia can't prove we are sharing data if they have a problem with it.

12thFan/Websider Since 2003
Reply Quote
1
AgLA06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ATX_AG_08 • 1:07p, 4/5/22
AG
ATX_AG_08 said:
If that Uke tank could shoot, that could have gotten real ugly for the Russians.

He was set up in the perfect ambush spot.
Reply Quote
32
P.U.T.U
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Who?mikejones! • 1:08p, 4/5/22
AG
Agthatbuilds said:
Retired Marine MARSOC Mark Turner said when he was in Ukraine he ran into some CIA guys that said they were training the Ukes since late January/early February in Ukraine. Probably got around it by using them as contractors instead of CIA. He was also helping to train the Ukes but he was volunteering with another guy from the company he owns.

There is 100% foreign military helping Ukraine. You can't hand someone some of these advanced weapon systems and have them figure it out on their own. There are some woman that said they were accountants before the war in charge of SAM systems.
Reply Quote
4
BlueTaze
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Htownag11 • 1:14p, 4/5/22
Htownag11 said:
I dont see how you nuke Kiev without drawing in the US and the "West."


What does "drawing in" mean?

US fighter jets and drones in Russian air space or Ukraine space?

US nuking Russia?

More of the same, sanctions and weapons?

IMO, US should remind Russia we will annihilate their entire country should they fire a nuke at any NATO country. Then let Europe handle what's in their own backyard IF they nuke Ukriane. If Euros can't get job done with their military, then US can think about stepping in.

But thankfully we won't get to nukes. Ukraine will be partially or fully annexed. Right now the economic war being waged on Russia is likely to confine them to eastern Ukraine at best. The question is will Putin allow Western Ukraine to join NATO in that negotiation. We are probably a few months or couple years away from newly drawn borders in Ukraine. It sucks, but it's better than a nuclear WW3.
Reply Quote
1
GAC06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgLA06 • 1:16p, 4/5/22
AG
And no switchblade or anything coming off Bayraktar can take out a bridge
Reply Quote
2
lb3
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggie_sprt • 1:16p, 4/5/22
AG
aggie_sprt said:
Just think if the Ukes were able to threaten Sevastopol with drones or other military assets with memory of what the Ukes were able to do Berdyans'k or as others have mentioned to threaten the bridges in that region.

Could the Ukes then bargin for a complete Russian withdrawl from all contested territory by agreeing to formally cede the Crimea? On the other hand, Russa probably sees controlling territory to at least the east bank of Dnieper river as critical to the protection of Sevastopol/Crimea since it seems Russia's vision of controlling all of the Black Sea coast in Ukraine is out the window?

To me Sevastopol should be the goal. Just threatening the home of Russia's Black Sea Fleet would force a redeployment of Russian forces away from the east and would completely change the domestic perceptions of the war for Putin. To actually lose control of Sevastopol could result in a credible coup attempt.

The game should be to hold the line in the east, and push for Sevastopol.

First secure Kherson as a means of providing supplies across the river then march east to Crimea using switchblades to take out the artillery covering the western isthmus. That leaves only two remaining access roads into Crimea both of which have strategic bridges that could be removed if the west would provide a few cruise missiles.
Reply Quote
2
AgLA06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GAC06 • 1:18p, 4/5/22
AG
GAC06 said:
And no switchblade or anything coming off Bayraktar can take out a bridge
Directly, no.

But Russia is moving enough fuel and high explosive ammo, that a hit on that on a bridge could.

Then again the Ukes have already proven their attack choppers can do so. As well as their airforce.
Reply Quote
5
Blackbeard94
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgLA06 • 1:28p, 4/5/22
AG
AgLA06 said:
GAC06 said:
None of those weapons can do much to actual rail infrastructure. They could take out locomotives though. The switchblades are man portable too so that opens a wide range of options with infiltration
As someone said. Rail bridges are the vulnerability of railines. A track on flat ground can be repaired in hours. Over a body of water or canyon and it could be weeks. I just don't have an understanding of the railines in western russia to know if there are enough bridges to shut it down.

Since western russia is a lot like eastern Ukraine (flat farmland) I doubt there are bridges to take out.


I would think rail would be extremely vulnerable to attack. Hard to protect the whole line. Saboteurs can set explosives to detonate on pressure or by wire, taking out the engine and causing a derail. Lawrence of Arabia exploited this against the Turks.
Reply Quote
3
javajaws
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:29p, 4/5/22
AG
The last article I read on Switchblades was that we were only sending 10 of the larger ones. I hope that was a typo.
Reply Quote
1
lb3
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgLA06 • 1:30p, 4/5/22
AG
AgLA06 said:
ATX_AG_08 said:
If that Uke tank could shoot, that could have gotten real ugly for the Russians.

He was set up in the perfect ambush spot.
That solo effort with little or no (visible) infantry support might be worthy of their equivalent to a service cross.

Nice job.
Reply Quote
7
Gilligan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgLA06 • 1:30p, 4/5/22
AG
AgLA06 said:
ATX_AG_08 said:
If that Uke tank could shoot, that could have gotten real ugly for the Russians.

He was set up in the perfect ambush spot.
Setup like that against that many opposition forces. Is that a suicide mission for the Uke?
Reply Quote
1
Waffledynamics
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:31p, 4/5/22
AG
I might have missed it, but what ever happened to that 40 mile long convoy that never made it to Kyiv? Was it all just abandoned? Did they somehow back it all up?

If there was any armor in that, I wonder if it's of any use to the Ukes or if it would be in too much disrepair.
Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Blackbeard94 • 1:32p, 4/5/22
AG
Quote:
I would think rail would be extremely vulnerable to attack. Hard to protect the whole line. Saboteurs can set explosives to detonate on pressure or by wire, taking out the engine and causing a derail. Lawrence of Arabia exploited this against the Turks.
Agree. Ukes were very adept at rear actions on supply efforts, but that was on their own turf.

OTOH, that's a long border with Russia. How much of it can effectively be guarded by Russian forces?
Reply Quote
1
3rd and 2
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waffledynamics • 1:40p, 4/5/22
AG
Waffledynamics said:
I might have missed it, but what ever happened to that 40 mile long convoy that never made it to Kyiv? Was it all just abandoned? Did they somehow back it all up?

If there was any armor in that, I wonder if it's of any use to the Ukes or if it would be in too much disrepair.
I think i read that it just evaporated. Like everyone snuck away and left all their crap.
.
Reply Quote
txags92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 1:42p, 4/5/22
AG
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
That would be interesting if they could destroy the rail lines near the border so that Russia would have to go further into the country to reroute. It could maybe buy them some time.
My thought process is using them to blow up the rail lines while there have tanks and other vehicles on them. Not only the loss of the line but loss of those items as well. So diverting to a rail line further inside the country doesn't solve the problem of losing more materiel.
You are better off sending a couple of saboteurs with pry bars to loosen the rail mounting plates from the ties on a corner or two and cause a large derailment. Cleaning up the mess of a derailment with multiple cars jumping the track could take many days.
Reply Quote
12
AgLA06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 1:43p, 4/5/22
AG
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
I would think rail would be extremely vulnerable to attack. Hard to protect the whole line. Saboteurs can set explosives to detonate on pressure or by wire, taking out the engine and causing a derail. Lawrence of Arabia exploited this against the Turks.
Agree. Ukes were very adept at rear actions on supply efforts, but that was on their own turf.

OTOH, that's a long border with Russia. How much of it can effectively be guarded by Russian forces?
Well, the Russians are trying to move their entire army to that border right now. Ukes would have to get through the lines well west of it at the moment and then through the entire Russian Army to sabotage behind lines. It would be worse than a suicide mission.
Reply Quote
1
ATX_AG_08
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waffledynamics • 1:43p, 4/5/22
AG
Dispersed and redeployed all over.
Reply Quote
1
wangus12
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to lb3 • 1:44p, 4/5/22
AG
lb3 said:
AgLA06 said:
ATX_AG_08 said:
If that Uke tank could shoot, that could have gotten real ugly for the Russians.

He was set up in the perfect ambush spot.
That solo effort with little or no (visible) infantry support might be worthy of their equivalent to a service cross.

Nice job.
That one shot at :23 looks like Molotovs being thrown out of that building
Reply Quote
3
txags92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 1:45p, 4/5/22
AG
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
I would think rail would be extremely vulnerable to attack. Hard to protect the whole line. Saboteurs can set explosives to detonate on pressure or by wire, taking out the engine and causing a derail. Lawrence of Arabia exploited this against the Turks.
Agree. Ukes were very adept at rear actions on supply efforts, but that was on their own turf.

OTOH, that's a long border with Russia. How much of it can effectively be guarded by Russian forces?
Given how much of the rest of this war has resembled Red Storm Rising by Tom Clancy, I fully expect the Ukes to stage a surprise counter offensive using a pipeline easement, while the Russians guard the roads and highways.
Reply Quote
5
AgLA06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Gilligan • 1:45p, 4/5/22
AG
Gilligan said:
AgLA06 said:
ATX_AG_08 said:
If that Uke tank could shoot, that could have gotten real ugly for the Russians.

He was set up in the perfect ambush spot.
Setup like that against that many opposition forces. Is that a suicide mission for the Uke?
Maybe. The way it looks was the Uke tank was there as a forward observation post and caught them moving through at high speed. It looks like they more concerned with bugging out than fighting. But yes, his best chance was to wait until the column had moved almost all through and then hit them in the rear.
Reply Quote
Dorm 15
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:57p, 4/5/22
AG
During yesterday's briefing by the National Security Director he mention supplying Ukraine with UAV's and the nomenclature he used was not Switchblades. Is there another name for those or are we supplying them with a different system? I also thought his reference to the Mig 29's was also interesting. He seemed to imply the problem with the planes was the Poles wanted to deliver them to a US airbase in Germany and then to Ukraine. It may just have been blabber but I found it puzzling.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
lb3
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to wangus12 • 2:01p, 4/5/22
AG
wangus12 said:
lb3 said:
AgLA06 said:
ATX_AG_08 said:
If that Uke tank could shoot, that could have gotten real ugly for the Russians.

He was set up in the perfect ambush spot.
That solo effort with little or no (visible) infantry support might be worthy of their equivalent to a service cross.

Nice job.
That one shot at :23 looks like Molotovs being thrown out of that building
The Molotovs are just going to get them killed. They might be effective dropped from high rises, but tossing them 30ft into the lawn is stupid.
Reply Quote
1
MouthBQ98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:06p, 4/5/22
AG
Ukraine might have to invade part of Russia they aren't defending well, then trade it back for their own territory, if the Russians are well dug in in the east.
Reply Quote
4
ABATTBQ11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Blackbeard94 • 2:10p, 4/5/22
AG
Blackbeard94 said:
AgLA06 said:
GAC06 said:
None of those weapons can do much to actual rail infrastructure. They could take out locomotives though. The switchblades are man portable too so that opens a wide range of options with infiltration
As someone said. Rail bridges are the vulnerability of railines. A track on flat ground can be repaired in hours. Over a body of water or canyon and it could be weeks. I just don't have an understanding of the railines in western russia to know if there are enough bridges to shut it down.

Since western russia is a lot like eastern Ukraine (flat farmland) I doubt there are bridges to take out.


I would think rail would be extremely vulnerable to attack. Hard to protect the whole line. Saboteurs can set explosives to detonate on pressure or by wire, taking out the engine and causing a derail. Lawrence of Arabia exploited this against the Turks.


Pull up the spikes that hold the track to the sleepers. You need a lot of explosives to move a 430,000 lb locomotive, but a missing section of track or two will cause a very bad day.
Reply Quote
11
ABATTBQ11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:14p, 4/5/22
AG
Someone mentioned previously about giving the Ukrainians HIMARS not being a game changer. I tend to think it would be with their range. That would put everything in the Russian rear within take of MLRS attack, potentially enabling strikes on ammunition and fuel stores, as well as railroad depots and docked vessels.
Reply Quote
BlueSmoke
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to lb3 • 2:19p, 4/5/22
lb3 said:
wangus12 said:
lb3 said:
AgLA06 said:
ATX_AG_08 said:
If that Uke tank could shoot, that could have gotten real ugly for the Russians.

He was set up in the perfect ambush spot.
That solo effort with little or no (visible) infantry support might be worthy of their equivalent to a service cross.

Nice job.
That one shot at :23 looks like Molotovs being thrown out of that building
The Molotovs are just going to get them killed. They might be effective dropped from high rises, but tossing them 30ft into the lawn is stupid.
The chain gun on those APCs/BMP's isn't going to do much to a tank, even the older T-64, but it's going to ruin someone's day trying to hide in a house.

"cover and concealment" take on very different meanings with much larger calibers.
Nobody cares. Work Harder
Reply Quote
1
G-Town Cracker
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:34p, 4/5/22
AG
How good does it feel? You belong in these hills.
Reply Quote
3
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:35p, 4/5/22
AG
About those Russian soldiers at Chernobyl.

Quote:
But serious problems begin when you start to disturb the ground. The strontium 90 and cesium 137 that seeped into the ground are still there. Even at 35%, they are still admitting very dangerous levels of a poison that no one can taste, see, smell, or feel. For example, in 1996, workers at the plant were building a new barbed wire fence. They dug holes about 2 feet deep for the support posts. The dirt extracted from the post holes measured anywhere from 5000 to 7500 counts per minute. The hazmat specialist who was with us said the deeper anyone dug, the higher the level of expected radiation.
Quote:
Putin's forces overran the plant on February 24. In building their defensive positions, Putin's troops dug foxholes, 6-foot-deep trenches, and revetment for tanks and artillery pieces into the earth south and west of the plant. They used bulldozers to dig deep into the dirt to push up protective berms.
Quote:
The Pripyat River and marshy ground surrounding the river protect the plant against ground attacks from the north and east. But the Russians knew they had to defend against any Ukrainian avenue of attack from the west and south. We can only estimate the radioactive level of the dirt they unearthed as they dug holes to protect themselves. Best estimates predict radiation levels between 5000 and 10,000 counts per minute. The foxholes that protected them against the expected incoming Ukrainian counterattack also wrapped them in radioactive poison.

The fatality level in radiation poisoning is not determined by just the exposure level but also the time of exposure. The degree of deadly effect is a combination of the dosage level, those 5000 to 10,000 counts per minute, multiplied by the time the soldiers were irradiated. Our hazmat advisor recommended spending no more than a couple of minutes near that post hole. The Russian soldiers lived and slept in their foxholes and trenches 24 hours a day. That's a month of living inside a radioactive cauldron.
Quote:
If you ever wondered how real this radiation poisoning is, the six firefighters who died from the radiation poisoning the night of the explosion had to be buried in lead-lined coffins to protect other people walking through the graveyard in the future.
Link
Reply Quote
9
deddog
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to wangus12 • 2:36p, 4/5/22
AG
wangus12 said:
lb3 said:
AgLA06 said:
ATX_AG_08 said:
If that Uke tank could shoot, that could have gotten real ugly for the Russians.

He was set up in the perfect ambush spot.
That solo effort with little or no (visible) infantry support might be worthy of their equivalent to a service cross.

Nice job.
That one shot at :23 looks like Molotovs being thrown out of that building
I don't think it's molotovs.
That's the after effect of the BTRs firing into the building.

And where were the soldiers running to? all in all, one heck of a chaotic scene. and the Russians seemed to have no idea where the fire was coming from.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
Charpie
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 2:36p, 4/5/22
AG
That's awful
Reply Quote
2
Rossticus
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:42p, 4/5/22




Reply Quote
8
1 edit
First Page Last Page
Page 442 of 1368 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.