Ukraine 3

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Yeah, the tune of the TOS appeaseniks has suddenly changed too over the past few days.  Now they're claiming that the Russians have stopped advancing or completing the encirclement because they want the Ukrainians to supposedly keep feeding their troops into the cul de sac, which doesn't make much sense.  I think that the Russians in general, and Wagner in particular, have run out of steam there and just can't do it, or else they got word of a trap.

The pro-Russian article I saw actually said that "nobody knows" why the Russian advance has stopped.  And it made some ridiculous point about Sun Tzu saying to leave a gap in encirclement...which was a valid strategy 1500 years when you had more cavalry than your enemy and could run them down as they fled through the gap.

Doesn't work and hasn't been doctrine for hundreds of years, especially in the era of modern artillery.

[Elderberry]

Faster, Traxxas! Kill! Kill!

During World War II, the Wehrmacht developed the remote-controlled Goliath tracked mine to take out tanks, fortifications, and other targets. Despite some models packing a whopping 220 pounds of explosive, they sort of looked like a toy a child could ride on, and would almost be adorable if it weren’t for the fact that they were Nazi death bombs.


                                         Who’s an adorable little Nazi death bomb? You are! You are!

As in so many things, Ukrainians have rediscovered and deployed (kinda) another lost weapon/tactic from World War II. Namely, they’re using remote control vehicles as suicide antitank bombs.

I’ve long thought you could use even smaller, slightly modified off-the-shelf RC cars in mass to take out softer targets like trucks. Or drive into a enemy barracks with just a couple of pounds of plastique studded with roofing nails.

More: https://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=54431


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8oDuvGnsnw

[Kamaji]

Russian offensive on Bakhmut could be losing momentum, UK says

CNBC
March 22, 2023

Russia’s bid to seize Bakhmut in Donetsk, eastern Ukraine, could be losing momentum, according to the U.K.’s Ministry of Defence.

“There is a realistic possibility that the Russian assault on the town is losing the limited momentum it had obtained, partially because some Russian MoD [Ministry of Defense] units have been reallocated to other sectors,” the British defense ministry said in an intelligence update Wednesday.

It noted that Ukrainian forces had been able to initiate a local counterattack to the west of Bakhmut in recent days, a move that was likely to relieve pressure on the threatened H-32 supply route, one of the last main roads into the city that its Ukrainian defenders can use.

*  *  *

Source:  https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/22/ukraine-war-live-updates-latest-news-on-russia-and-the-war-in-ukraine.html

[Kamaji]

A shrinking reservoir signals Ukraine and Russia are waging a dangerous water war

March 22, 20235:00 AM ET
By Geoff Brumfiel, Connie Hanzhang Jin

At the massive Kakhovka Reservoir in southern Ukraine, water levels should be rapidly rising. As winter snowmelt and rain flow into the Dnipro River, the reservoir fills so it can be used later in the year by farmers in the region's hot, dry summer.

But this spring, water levels at Kakhovka remain far below normal. The cause is a Russian-controlled hydroelectric power plant at the lower end of the reservoir. Since November, sluice gates at the plant have been left open, and water levels at Kakhovka have plunged to lows not seen in decades.

The reservoir is critical to southern Ukraine. It supplies water for villages and towns in the region and irrigates around half-a-million acres of farmland that's used to grow grains and vegetables. The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant also relies on it for cooling water.

The Ukrainian government has tried to stem the flow by releasing water from other Ukrainian-controlled reservoirs along the Dnipro River to refill Kakhovka, but it's at best a temporary solution.

Experts say that the situation at the reservoir highlights the growing impact of Russia's war on Ukraine's water supply.

*  *  *

Source:  https://www.npr.org/2023/03/22/1164838051/ukraine-russia-war-kakhovka-reservoir

[Kamaji]

Desperate Putin, 70, brings Soviet-era T-55 tanks as old as he is out of retirement to bolster his faltering war efforts – having already raided museums for T-62 models

Video showing Soviet-era T-54B and T-55A tanks on a train has emerged
Models have long been obsolete in Russian army, but could be used in Ukraine

By WILL STEWART and CHRIS JEWERS FOR MAILONLINE
22 March 2023

Russia's president Vladimir Putin, 70, is taking tanks as old as he is out of storage in his desperate bid to crush Ukraine on the battlefield.

A video showing long obsolete Soviet-era T-54B and T-55A tanks - designed to be used in the armies of Soviet tyrant Josef Stalin - on a train carried across Russia, presumably destined for the frontlines of the war, has emerged.

It comes with Putin having already raided museums and storage depots for retired T-62 battle tanks, which halted production 12 years ago.

*  *  *

Source:  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11890123/Desperate-Putin-70-brings-Soviet-era-T-55-tanks-old-retirement.html

[sneakypete]

Desperate Putin, 70, brings Soviet-era T-55 tanks as old as he is out of retirement to bolster his faltering war efforts – having already raided museums for T-62 models

Video showing Soviet-era T-54B and T-55A tanks on a train has emerged
Models have long been obsolete in Russian army, but could be used in Ukraine

By WILL STEWART and CHRIS JEWERS FOR MAILONLINE
22 March 2023

Russia's president Vladimir Putin, 70, is taking tanks as old as he is out of storage in his desperate bid to crush Ukraine on the battlefield.

A video showing long obsolete Soviet-era T-54B and T-55A tanks - designed to be used in the armies of Soviet tyrant Josef Stalin - on a train carried across Russia, presumably destined for the frontlines of the war, has emerged.

It comes with Putin having already raided museums and storage depots for retired T-62 battle tanks, which halted production 12 years ago.

*  *  *

Source:  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11890123/Desperate-Putin-70-brings-Soviet-era-T-55-tanks-old-retirement.html

@Kamaji

Does anyone  else suspect  that the Chinese are having multiple orgasms at the thought of the Russian military becoming too weak to stop a Chinese landing on western Russian soil in order to take possession of the untapped oil fields and other assets there?

I can see a scenario developing where the Chinese publicly agree to pay a sum of money to Russia for "allowing" them to take possession, and I can see the neo-Soviets agreeing because they no longer have the ability to do it, and because it would save them face because they could announce they agreed to it, instead of whining because it was taken away from them.

Face it, by the time the neo-Soviets are forced to back down due to both finances and a shortage of new draftees to be sent to slaughtered, there really isn't going to be anything they can do about it other  than pretend they made a deal to the benefit of Russia.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Desperate Putin, 70, brings Soviet-era T-55 tanks as old as he is out of retirement to bolster his faltering war efforts – having already raided museums for T-62 models

Video showing Soviet-era T-54B and T-55A tanks on a train has emerged
Models have long been obsolete in Russian army, but could be used in Ukraine

By WILL STEWART and CHRIS JEWERS FOR MAILONLINE
22 March 2023

Russia's president Vladimir Putin, 70, is taking tanks as old as he is out of storage in his desperate bid to crush Ukraine on the battlefield.

A video showing long obsolete Soviet-era T-54B and T-55A tanks - designed to be used in the armies of Soviet tyrant Josef Stalin - on a train carried across Russia, presumably destined for the frontlines of the war, has emerged.

It comes with Putin having already raided museums and storage depots for retired T-62 battle tanks, which halted production 12 years ago.

*  *  *

Source:  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11890123/Desperate-Putin-70-brings-Soviet-era-T-55-tanks-old-retirement.html

Was just about to post this. From Twitter:

https://twitter.com/PaulJawin/status/1638489171017752576

This is getting awfully close to sending in the same tanks that fought Hitler's army.

[Kamaji]

Was just about to post this. From Twitter:

https://twitter.com/PaulJawin/status/1638489171017752576

This is getting awfully close to sending in the same tanks that fought Hitler's army.

If true, it would appear that the Russians have simply decided to start funding target practice for the Ukraine military.

[sneakypete]

Was just about to post this. From Twitter:

https://twitter.com/PaulJawin/status/1638489171017752576

This is getting awfully close to sending in the same tanks that fought Hitler's army.

@Weird Tolkienish Figure


Serious question. I do not know diddly squat about tanks,but they basically seem to be vehicles covered with armor that have cannons and machine guns.

Is there some reason I am unaware of they couldn't be a match for modern tanks if they had their electronics updated?

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

@Weird Tolkienish Figure


Serious question. I do not know diddly squat about tanks,but they basically seem to be vehicles covered with armor that have cannons and machine guns.

Is there some reason I am unaware of they couldn't be a match for modern tanks if they had their electronics updated?

I used to play a tank game (M1 Tank PLatoon) and my friend and I would talk tanks all the time.

Newer soviet tanks had (at the time):

laser rangefinder
much thicker armor
reactive armor (explosives that deflect certain shells)
self-leveling cannon so the tank could fire while driving.
improved engine etc.

And American tanks had things like composite and DU armor that was much harder to penetrate.

From the game the older tanks were basically trivial to defeat in battle, they couldn't stand up to modern armaments armor-wise.

Of course, I'm not an expert at all.

[Kamaji]

@Weird Tolkienish Figure


Serious question. I do not know diddly squat about tanks,but they basically seem to be vehicles covered with armor that have cannons and machine guns.

Is there some reason I am unaware of they couldn't be a match for modern tanks if they had their electronics updated?

Modern anti-tank munitions would almost certainly make quick work of the old Soviet-style tank armor.  Tank armor has evolved substantially in the last 60 years, mainly to keep up with the evolution of the anti-tank munitions and their ability to punch through old-style steel plate armor.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@Kamaji

Does anyone  else suspect  that the Chinese are having multiple orgasms at the thought of the Russian military becoming too weak to stop a Chinese landing on western Russian soil in order to take possession of the untapped oil fields and other assets there?

No.

I think any nuclear armed nation that actually had its home territory invaded by an expansionist enemy might actually follow through on a threat to use nuclear weapons in defense of itself.  So I think all the scenarios about a Chinese plan to literally invade Russia are wrong.  And that's the exact same reason Russian claims that NATO expansion presented a "threat" to Russia were bogus from the start.  Everybody knows that is a potential trigger for nuclear war, and there's no invasion whose fruits outweigh that.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@Weird Tolkienish Figure


Serious question. I do not know diddly squat about tanks,but they basically seem to be vehicles covered with armor that have cannons and machine guns.

Is there some reason I am unaware of they couldn't be a match for modern tanks if they had their electronics updated?

The short answer is no, and many of those older tanks would be impossible to upgrade fully electronically anyway.   The Russians previously got critical high-end components for their sights from the Germans, and that obviously isn't happening.  But there are tons of other differences that really matter -- engine, drivetrain, weight, suspension, gun, armor (including thickness, slope, etc..) Many of those things are limited by basic framework of the tank -- internal space available, what components would fit, etc..  Russian tanks had -- and actually still do have -- a critical design flaw in the way their gun autoloaders access the ammunition storage.  Essentially, their ammo isn't sealed from the troop compartment, so penetrations results often result in turrets being blown clean off tanks -- catastrophic kills that kill the crews.

The kind of improvements you can do account for all the different models of T-64's, T-72's, T-80, T-90's, etc..  But there are just frame limits that means some tanks will always be limited, and that's particularly true when you get to T-62's and T-55's, which are significantly older and on different basic frames.  The T-64's and T-80's are sort of in the same family, the T-90 being an improved version of the T-72.  But actually, a T-80 is probably a better tank than a T-90, just as a T-64 is a better tank than the T-72.   The T-64/T-80 family is really more high-tech/complicated/more expensive than the T-72'/T-90 family.  But also more expensive and harder to maintain.

[DB]

@Weird Tolkienish Figure


Serious question. I do not know diddly squat about tanks,but they basically seem to be vehicles covered with armor that have cannons and machine guns.

Is there some reason I am unaware of they couldn't be a match for modern tanks if they had their electronics updated?

RPG

[sneakypete]

Modern anti-tank munitions would almost certainly make quick work of the old Soviet-style tank armor.  Tank armor has evolved substantially in the last 60 years, mainly to keep up with the evolution of the anti-tank munitions and their ability to punch through old-style steel plate armor.

@Kamaji

Thanks!

I am just an old grunt that used to work in the wilderness,and never even saw a tank,although there were rumors the NVA ran some up the Ho Chi Mihn Trail.

[sneakypete]

Modern anti-tank munitions would almost certainly make quick work of the old Soviet-style tank armor.  Tank armor has evolved substantially in the last 60 years, mainly to keep up with the evolution of the anti-tank munitions and their ability to punch through old-style steel plate armor.

@Kamaji

Thanks,as I noted,I am totally ignorant when it comes to armor. They always struck me as nothing more than moving targets for aircraft.

[sneakypete]

No.

I think any nuclear armed nation that actually had its home territory invaded by an expansionist enemy might actually follow through on a threat to use nuclear weapons in defense of itself.  So I think all the scenarios about a Chinese plan to literally invade Russia are wrong.  And that's the exact same reason Russian claims that NATO expansion presented a "threat" to Russia were bogus from the start.  Everybody knows that is a potential trigger for nuclear war, and there's no invasion whose fruits outweigh that.

@Maj. Bill Martin

Ok,but keep in mind that the Chinese care even less about casualites,other than leadership casualities,that is,than the Soviets,there is an awful lot of wealth and natural resources there that the Chinese need. Plus it is virtually unoccupied by the neo-Soviets,so it would basically be a walk-in by the Chinese.

Face it,the Soviets look like Mother Teresa compared to the Chinese,and by the time this current war ends,the Russians will for all practical purposes be out of soldiers and out of weapons other than nuclear.

So,I guess the question to be asked is "Are the Neo-Soviets so desperate they would be willing to go nuclear with China to maintain control over a vast wilderness with assets they are unable to exploit?

I ask this because by the time their war with Ukraine ends,win or lose,they will have lost so many men and so much military equipment they will be incapable of forcing the Chinese out of Russia.

Sure,they can go nuclear,but so can the Chinese,and the Neo-Soviets will still lose.

MY best guess is the Chinese MIGHT offer a purchase plan to the Neo-Soviets that gives them a percentage of the take from the mining and timber operations. That way both could avoid war,and the Neo-Soviets can replenish some of the money they lost in Ukrainie.

Don't forget,the Neo-Soviets control their media even more than the left controls ours,so what they want reported inside the USSR is what WILL be reported.

[sneakypete]

The short answer is no, and many of those older tanks would be impossible to upgrade fully electronically anyway.   The Russians previously got critical high-end components for their sights from the Germans, and that obviously isn't happening.  But there are tons of other differences that really matter -- engine, drivetrain, weight, suspension, gun, armor (including thickness, slope, etc..) Many of those things are limited by basic framework of the tank -- internal space available, what components would fit, etc..  Russian tanks had -- and actually still do have -- a critical design flaw in the way their gun autoloaders access the ammunition storage.  Essentially, their ammo isn't sealed from the troop compartment, so penetrations results often result in turrets being blown clean off tanks -- catastrophic kills that kill the crews.

The kind of improvements you can do account for all the different models of T-64's, T-72's, T-80, T-90's, etc..  But there are just frame limits that means some tanks will always be limited, and that's particularly true when you get to T-62's and T-55's, which are significantly older and on different basic frames.  The T-64's and T-80's are sort of in the same family, the T-90 being an improved version of the T-72.  But actually, a T-80 is probably a better tank than a T-90, just as a T-64 is a better tank than the T-72.   The T-64/T-80 family is really more high-tech/complicated/more expensive than the T-72'/T-90 family.  But also more expensive and harder to maintain.

@Maj. Bill Martin

Thanks! As I wrote earlier,I know next to nothing about  tanks.

[sneakypete]

RPG

@DBlack15NC

That I DO understand,but I also understand you have to get "danger close" to a tank to  use one effectively,and if the tank crew spots you before you are in position,you are dead.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@Maj. Bill Martin

Ok,but keep in mind that the Chinese care even less about casualites,other than leadership casualities,that is,than the Soviets,there is an awful lot of wealth and natural resources there that the Chinese need. Plus it is virtually unoccupied by the neo-Soviets,so it would basically be a walk-in by the Chinese.

Face it,the Soviets look like Mother Teresa compared to the Chinese,and by the time this current war ends,the Russians will for all practical purposes be out of soldiers and out of weapons other than nuclear.

So,I guess the question to be asked is "Are the Neo-Soviets so desperate they would be willing to go nuclear with China to maintain control over a vast wilderness with assets they are unable to exploit?

I'd say "yes", because once you start surrendering chunks of your home territory, your deterrent no longer exists.  And the real question is "do the Chinese want to take the gamble that the Russians won't react?"  My guess is "no".

Sure,they can go nuclear,but so can the Chinese,and the Neo-Soviets will still lose.

.  Yes, but I think the risk/reward is different.  The Russians could reasonably look at it and say "if we don't stop this, there is nothing stopping anyone from thinking they can grab are whole country." So for them, a Chinese attempt to grab parts of Russia is literally an existential event.  That makes it more logical to pull out all the stops.  For the Chinese, not taking those parts of Russia isn't an existential threat.

It's basically the flip side of Ukraine.  If Ukraine gives up any significant territory, they know the Russians will just come back and finish the job.  So for them, it is an existential war.  But that isn't the case for Russia, which could choose to go right back to the status quo ante without threatening their survival as a nation.

[Smokin Joe]

Just one comment on tanks. Sometimes quantity has a quality all its own.

[sneakypete]

Just one comment on tanks. Sometimes quantity has a quality all its own.

@Smokin Joe

That is definitely true from the infantryman's POV.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@Maj. Bill Martin

Thanks! As I wrote earlier,I know next to nothing about  tanks.

I have a good friend who was an Army tank officer in Iraq, and is a huge miltary buff still.  He's all.over the tank stuff.  I had always assumed the t90 was a better tank than the t80, but he sent me straight on that. The only reason the Russians went to the T-90 is that it was cheaper and easier to produce than the T80.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@Smokin Joe

That is definitely true from the infantryman's POV.

@Smokin Joe @sneakypete

Yes, but....

Man portable anti-tank weapons, and light vehicles mounted with anti-tank weapons, are far more effective than they were in your day.  Still, if enough tanks can reach the infantry quickly enough before they get whittled down, that quantity can be devastating.

The problem the Russians have is that they have poor coordination between their artillery and their tanks, which means the artillery isn't effectively suppressing the anti-tank defenses.   The anti-tank weapons we have provided to the Ukrainians also outrange the Russian tanks.  And the Russians rather foolishly have been dispersing their armor rather than concentrating it and moving quickly.

What all that means is that even when they begin and attack with a quantitative superiority, it gets whittled down quickly by those anti-tank weapons.

On the flip side, the Western tanks with which the Ukrainians are now being provided are much faster, much better integrated with command control, and outrange both the Russian tanks and their antitank missiles.  So even though the Western tanks will begin an attack In smaller quantities than a comparable Russian assault, it is far more likely that a greater number of tanks will actually reach the defending infantry.  The Ukrainians also are much better trained at coordinating their artillery with their maneuver elements.

And if we're talking tank to tank battles, it's not even close.  The greater range, accuracy, ability to fire while on the move, and armor of the Western tanks is just a massive advantage - even if outnumbered.  Google the Battle of 93 Easting, where - with each side using equipment remarkably similar to what we'd see when the Western tanks arrive - we knocked out 160 tanks and 180 APC's to the loss of just one Bradley.  Granted, the Ukrainians won't have all the advantages that we did, but they'll have a lot of them.

[sneakypete]

I have a good friend who was an Army tank officer in Iraq, and is a huge miltary buff still.  He's all.over the tank stuff.  I had always assumed the t90 was a better tank than the t80, but he sent me straight on that. The only reason the Russians went to the T-90 is that it was cheaper and easier to produce than the T80.

@Maj. Bill Martin

Isn't building things to the minimum specifications pretty much  Communist dogma?