History in the Making: Russian Invasion

02Pilot said:

...and closets full of designer tracksuits...

That was pure venom. Nicely done. 

On a lighter note, this just showed up on my Youtube feed.

Opti said:

In reply to frenchyd :

This is mostly hyperbole. Russian energy exports have been hurt, but not like you say. Russia was bringing in 1.1 billion a day from fossil fuels, now it's about 700M a day. It is considerably more than Iran an NK buying from them, countries in the EU are still buying.

 

Russia, along with plenty of other countries, has had demographic problems for a long time. You make it sound like they are going to run out of people tomorrow, they arent. All reporting is pointing towards Russia setting up for a protracted war. In all likelihood if nothing changes, this will still be going on in 5 years. It will hurt Russias demographics even more, but they aren't running out of fighting men anytime soon.

 

Population is down to 143 million according to estimates.  Comments about more lost people this year than any time since WW2  is certainly valid. 
     Remember in 10 months they have lost more men than 10 years of Afghanistan.  That's when they were many millions more than they are now.  
     Of that 143 million how many are children, women, sick, infirm, drug addicts, diseased, And elderly?
      Or to put the important number out there.  How many of the 20-35  year old men  are available ( and willing to risk their lives for $700 a month)? 

In reply to frenchyd :

Do you understand that they've had about 143 million people for the last 20 years and have been pretty close to that peaking at like 148 for the last 40 years? Yes they have demographic problems, like most developed countries these days, BUT you frame it as if it's something new and they've lost a huge percentage of their population, but really they are pretty much where they've been for a few decades.

You can easily look up their demographics. This war will hurt their demographics even more in the future, but it's not like they are almost out of people and it's going to have an impact on the conflict anytime soon.

Unofficial leopard count.  Not including the 30 Abrams from the US.

I remember the first time I tried to join an adult conversation and made a fool of myself. 

In reply to 84FSP :

I feel like theres some weird alternate universe where German tanks are sent to defend from a Russian invasion of a smaller country and we accidentally slipped over into it like that TV show sliders. 

bobzilla said:

In reply to 84FSP :

I feel like theres some weird alternate universe where German tanks are sent to defend from a Russian invasion of a smaller country and we accidentally slipped over into it like that TV show sliders. 

It's even weirder than that, Poland -asked permission- to send -its German made tanks- to fight Russia. If you said that sentence from 1914-1960 it would be batE36 M3 crazy.

bobzilla said:

I remember the first time I tried to join an adult conversation and made a fool of myself. 

I still do that from time to time.  Hopefully I will learn something in the process.

NOHOME said:

So, I have a question:

As part of their PR effort, russia has been using a LOT of bombs to destroy pretty much every building and house in any village they visit. I never understood their need to level every single building in a city that they target. Kind of a low-yield strategy insofar as stopping soldiers.

So either this is a huge waste of bombs that they can't really afford, or russia has no end of mortars to use on anything that remotely looks like infrastructure. 

I think what you are seeing is less a "lets level all the villages" kind of tactic, and more a result of prolonged urban combat.  Buildings are cover and eventually get blown up if the fighting last long enough.  Add to that that the Russians love their artillery and they are not exactly pinpoint accurate, ruble is an eventuality if a fight in a town lasts long enough.

Here is an image of Stalingrad in WWII, after a lot of urban fighting:

I think Frenchy's concept of the Russia running out of people may not be entirely accurate, but I think it does touch on an important point:  You don't have to kill a large percentage of the population to have huge effect on the society.  Take Vietnam for example.  The US lost around 65,000 and it absolutely turned the populace against the war (took a number of years of course).  Other factors involved of course.

For every young Russian (well... many are not ethnic Russians...) dead, there are at least a few people who will be affected/upset by that.

tuna55 said:

bobzilla said:

In reply to 84FSP :

I feel like theres some weird alternate universe where German tanks are sent to defend from a Russian invasion of a smaller country and we accidentally slipped over into it like that TV show sliders. 

It's even weirder than that, Poland -asked permission- to send -its German made tanks- to fight Russia. If you said that sentence from 1914-1960 it would be batE36 M3 crazy.

And afterward it would be like "....they asked for permission?"

Since Russia knows these heavy tanks are on the way, what is Russia's next move?

And Russia shames Germany for sending tanks.  I just do not know what to say about that.

In reply to Noddaz :

We're talking maybe 100 Leopards at most, plus the 14 Challengers, arriving in the short term (~2-3 months). Much depends on how Ukraine deploys them. There has been a lot of pressure from Western advisors for Ukraine to stop focusing on Bahkmut and start preparing for an offensive in the south. If it concentrates the tanks in the south, Russia will dig in hard(er) and wait for them to try to push through the minefields and dragon's teeth. If they are deployed piecemeal, they're not going to be as much of a factor, and Russia will only have to worry about local successes. The big danger of these new tanks is if they break through and can exploit it - even with them and all the APCs that have and are being sent, I have some doubts about how deep a penetration the Ukrainians will be able to achieve. Against 30-year old Russian tanks, they are a game-changer, but against infantry, fixed defenses, drones, and top-attack ATGMs, they're not really that much of an advance (except in crew survival rates). And logistics remain a question. A Leopard with a thrown track or out of fuel is just as useless as a four decade old T-72.

In reply to 02Pilot :

Their benefit may be more as a morale booster during any Ukranian offensive.

This piece from The War Zone mentions another issue with the Abrams transfer that I hadn't considered: the DU armor package on existing US Abrams tanks is non-exportable, so a solution that allows these tanks to be shipped to Ukraine is going to either require working a deal with an existing export operator, or setting up production (or at least rebuilding) from scratch. In all likelihood, those Abrams won't turn a track in Ukraine in the foreseeable future.

Based on what I'm seeing, the big problem Ukraine needs to address is the disparity in the number of bodies the Russians are going to have available.  Oh, to be a fly on the wall at the PsyOps department...

Rumors are that the latest Russian missile spasm resulted in zero missiles hitting Kyiv as the result of the improved air defense.

Kyiv city administration: about 20 missiles were launched against the city, all shot down, casualties due to debris

In the rest of Ukraine:

Ukrainian air defense shot down 47 of 55 missiles launched by Russia this morning. Kh-101, Kh-555, Kh-47, Kinzhal, Kaliber, Kh-59 cruise missiles, launched by Tu-95, Su-35, Mig-31K and naval vessels from Black Sea

The advantage the Leopard has is primarily in accuracy at range and especially while moving.  I would expect them to be used with that advantage in mind.  Perhaps holding back and sniping Russian vehicles as they are spotted.

Of interest is the Leopard II and the Abrams have sort of similar origins.  They both came out of an attempt to make a next generation main battle tank in the early 70's.  The experimental vehicle ended up being way to complex and expensive and Germany and the US went their own ways but obviously influenced by their co-development.  Using the same main gun is a clear indication of this.

The Russians have been conducting various light attacks in the the Zaporizhia district (southern front).  Hard to say the motivation, but they may be trying to disrupt any buildup there, just looking for weak spots, or make it look like the Russian army (as opposed to Wagner) is doing SOMETHING.

Here is a MBT-70 prototype:

One of its unique aspect was it's crew arrangemeny (in an attempt to get the tank as low as possible).  The driver is in the turret:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBT-70

Some interesting stuff in this update:  Seems like a lot of potential in-fighting in the Russian military.  Still using cell phones....

• The Ukrainian defense of Bakhmut is likely a strategically sound effort despite its costs for Ukraine.
• Milblogger discourse surrounding the reported replacement of Colonel General Mikhail Teplinsky with Lieutenant General Oleg Makarevich as commander of the Russian Airborne Forces (VDV) has further emphasized the fracture between two main groups within the Russian MoD—the pro-Gerasimov camp, comprised of those who represent the conventional MoD establishment, and milblogger favorites who are less aligned with the MoD institution. The milblogger discourse on this issue additionally offers insight into internal Russian MoD dynamics that may have led to Teplinsky’s removal.
• Wagner Group financier Yevgeny Prigozhin has launched a series of information operations aimed at portraying himself as a sacrificial hero of Russia in a crusade against petty and corrupt Russian authorities.
• The Sun reported that US intelligence estimates total Russian military casualties in Ukraine as 188,000 as of January 20, suggesting a possible 47,000 Russians killed in action in less than a year of fighting.
• Russian forces conducted a small ground reconnaissance into northeastern Sumy Oblast.

• Russian forces continued limited ground attacks to regain lost positions along the Svatove-Kreminna line.
• Russian forces continued to conduct ground attacks around Bakhmut and west of Donetsk City. Russian forces are likely making incremental gains around Bakhmut.
• Available open-source evidence as of January 21 indicates that Zaporizhia Oblast Russian occupation official Vladimir Rogov’s January 20 claims of a major territorial capture are likely part of a Russian information operation.
• Complaints from Russian milbloggers indicate that Russian forces continue to rely on cell phones and non-secure civilian technologies for core military functions – serious breaches of operational security (OPSEC).

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11679651/Russia-warns-treat-uranium-shells-German-Leopard-2-tanks-dirty-bombs.html

'We know that the Leopard 2 tank, as well as the Bradley and Marder infantry fighting vehicles, are armed with uranium-core armor-piercing projectiles, the use of which leads to contamination of the area, as happened in Yugoslavia and Iraq. 

'If Kyiv is supplied with such shells for NATO heavy military equipment, we will consider this as the use of dirty nuclear bombs against Russia with all the ensuing consequences.'

In reply to Opti :

It's a bit odd that the White House is specifically saying that it won't confirm one way or the other - makes me think they didn't even consider it and need time to come up with an answer. As for the Germans, there's enough anti-nuclear sentiment there that it could be a major headache. I don't know how many countries actually use DU penetrators, besides the US, UK, and Russia. I'm sure there are export controls on them, but again I don't have a good answer right now - arms control is not my area of expertise.

The Russian statement is probably as much an attempt to slow down the delivery process as it is an actual warning.

LOL

https://www.theonion.com/zelensky-calls-on-u-s-to-send-totally-psycho-marine-1850041391

I'd love to know the performance difference between DU and Tungsten penetrators...

In reply to stroker :

From what I have heard, DU fractures the same way tungsten does, but the US military had access to whopping snotloads of DU practically for free, so they use it to make ammunition, control surface counterweights, all sorts of things.

Per Wiki

Depleted uranium (DU; also referred to in the past as Q-metal, depletalloy or D-38) is uranium with a lower content of the fissile isotope 235U
 than natural uranium.[2] Natural uranium contains about 0.72% 235U
, while the DU used by the U.S. Department of Defense contains 0.3% 235U
 or less. The less radioactive and non-fissile 238U
 constitutes the main component of depleted uranium. Uses of DU take advantage of its very high density of 19.1 grams per cubic centimetre (0.69 lb/cu in) (68.4% denser than lead).

Civilian uses include counterweights in aircraft, radiation shielding in medical radiation therapy and industrial radiography equipment, and containers for transporting radioactive materials. Military uses include armor plating and armor-piercing projectiles.

*****

Sorry about the formatting.