quite a few bloggers have made the same observation, that ukraine has switched to infantry-heavy approach. no surprise there since a large chunk of its armor was lost in the past month. those that werent lost would still need a lot of maintenance by this point.
Even if you believe the Russian numbers on Ukrainian armored vehicle losses, the Ukrainians still have like 2/3rds to 1/2 of the "NATO" armored vehicles of Western design left. Then there is the fact the Poles sent Ukraine at least sixty PT-91 tanks. And I have not seen any losses on those yet. Just T-72M1s. I assume those tanks are being kept in the rear somewhere in case Russia strikes northern Ukraine again.
I think you can say that the Russians massive offensive when the war started had some effect on Ukrainian planning. They have to take into account the contingency of a possible second strike in the north quite seriously.
the point of infantry is supposed to be to punch a hole in the russian defense, through which an armor thrust would take place deep into its rear. at this point, even if ukrainian infantry punctures russian defense, there is no armor to exploit it. i suspect that once ukraine has accumulated enough armor again, they'd be lacking the infantry to go along.
The use of infiltration tactics is a time proven concept. And unlike what a lot of people think the Germans did not invent it in WWI. In fact the Germans copied their storm trooper tactics from the Russians in the Eastern Front in WWI. The Russian Empire used shock troops in the Brusilov Offensive in 1916. The Germans then refined those techniques and applied them in their 2018 Spring Offensive. The French also tried similar tactics in like 1915 but not nearly to the same degree of either sophistication or scope as the Russians did.
The use of such tactics made it possible for the Russian Empire to essentially knock the Austrian Empire out of the war.
It's too soon to make this assumption. Lack of armor could simply mean that Ukraine has stopped major offensive operations.
If anything I think Ukraine is lacking in artillery firepower. Even with all the scrounging of artillery shells by the US from Israel to Pakistan and South Korea. They just do not concentrate fire enough. And now that Russia is spreading minefields all over the place any advances will be extremely hard. Once Ukraine depletes those shells, I doubt they will get any substantial number for a really long time.
The Ukrainians also need more artillery spotter drones that are ECM resistant. The Russians have less of an issue with this since they are the ones doing the ECM.
"Infantry infiltration" could mean either opportunistic commanders trying to seize what low-level officers consider to be important ground, or it could mean that Ukrainian armed forces are trying to "feel out" where Russian positions are by probing.
No, it is just plain infiltration tactics. You probe for weak spots and strike where you find weaknesses in the line. It is just that there are not that many weaknesses to begin with.
Simultaneously, Ukraine is moving reinforcements into the Bakhmut AO in order to develop a real offensive on Klishchiivka and Berkhovka. If taken, this would surround Bakhmut in a semi-circle, making things difficult for the defenders inside Bakhmut.
I have been hearing that since when the Russians were still fighting the Ukrainians inside Bakhmut. Still hasn't happened.
Also, i guess conflict somewhat excuses BMP-3(and ZBD-04) along with it.
Not that thinly armored tracked bombs with dismounts around propellant charges are a great idea, but Bradley TOW rack goes kaboom just as spectacularly.
None of these vehicles are particularly survivable. If you look at how the IDF does things they have quite a lot of heavy IFVs modified from a tank chassis. Russia is addressing that with vehicle designs like the T-15. Whenever they actually start producing it and using it.
The IDF also carries grenade launchers on their tanks. Which is something that the Russians might want to consider using more. Especially to clear trenches or infantry close to the tank. The BMPT "Terminator" has grenade launchers but there are just too few of those vehicles in service for it to make any large impact. Contrary to the reports in the Western press however, I think the BMPT "Terminator" did have a mostly positive impact on the battlefield and this was evident in the Battle of Popasna. They just need more of them.
