The War in the Ukraine

Phead128

Captain
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
If I was to ask you what the biggest failings of the early Russian campaign was besides poor use of air power, I would guess you will say logistics. If they were struggling and failing to keep 250k soldiers properly supplied in the field before, how do you think their logistics will handle a million soldiers at the front with all the losses they have suffered in logistics support vehicles and personnel already?

I dare say that if they did surge a million troops in as things stand, their logistics will kill more of those troops than the Ukrainians!

Also, just as you need 3 warships for every one you could operationally deploy in the long run, you can never field 100% of the troops you technically have available, even if you can support them all logistically. Because just as people cannot work 24/7 for long periods, they cannot fight wars 24/7. You need downtime to rest, catch your breath and refit before you can go back onto the front or your combat effectiveness is going to drop, drastically.

Which is another factor that seems to sail blissfully over the heads of the Zelensky regime in how they are running this war. The Ukrainians are fully committed for a short war, but increasingly, it looks like the Russians are gearing up for a long slog. This miss-match in combat posture and preparedness is going to become more and more relevant on the battlefield as time drags on; when the Russians can rotate in fresh troops while the Ukrainians are over-committed without reserves and their frontline troops become weary and exhausted from months of constantly being on the line eating crappy field rations and always being on edge all the time.
... but Ukraine, specifically Donbass, is directly on Russia's borders, so I don't get how logistics is a problem. You are correct, logistics is a massive issue for 200K troops spread along 2,000km border in a 5-axis multi-prong attack... but if you only focus on Donbass, it should be more manageable.

For reference, 1950's era China can supply peak strength 1.4 million troops over 400km to occupy DMZ/Seoul.
How come 2020's era Russia cannot supply even 700K or 800K troops over 150km to Donbass region?
 

FriedButter

Colonel
Registered Member
Sheer cope. Ukraine has unlimited supplies of advanced weaponry from NATO and can impose more costs on Russia than Russia can inflict. Russia, meanwhile is running low on stocks of PGM and will struggle to replace these under sanctions. Plus the number of recruits for the Russian army must be diminishing fast, and there is little left to deploy from elsewhere in Russia.

M777/Excalibur combo with advanced counter-battery radars is going to make life short but interesting for Russian artillery in the very near future, if it isn't already.

A war of attrition only favours Ukraine/NATO.

The war of attrition where it was reported the US already sent 1/3 of their javelin stockpiles and 1/4 of their stringer stockpiles to Ukraine.

Also the West said 15,000 casualties within the first few weeks and just a couple weeks ago said 15,000 since it started.

It’s either a lie or Russian casualties have significantly declined. So where is this war of attrition favouring Ukraine?
 

Broccoli

Senior Member
... but Ukraine, specifically Donbass, is directly on Russia's borders, so I don't get how logistics is a problem. You are correct, logistics is a massive issue for 200K troops spread along 2,000km border in a 5-axis multi-prong attack... but if you only focus on Donbass, it should be more manageable.

For reference, 1950's era China can supply peak strength 1.4 million troops over 400km to occupy DMZ/Seoul.
How come 2020's era Russia cannot supply even 700K or 800K troops over 150km to Donbass region?

You are expecting too much from military what is underfunded (60-64 billion dollars in 2021) for it size. Many hundreds of combat planes/helicopters of all sizes, massive land forces with thousands of AFV's and artillery, massive nuclear forces, very large navy, and all with budget what is smaller than Britains. Yeah, they get more per dollar than Brits but that only get's so far and then minus losses caused by massive corruption problems.


Look for example how many nuclear powered submarines Russian Navy got and compare what Royal Navy has and RN most likely got bigger budget.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

Maikeru

Major
Registered Member
The war of attrition where it was reported the US already sent 1/3 of their javelin stockpiles and 1/4 of their stringer stockpiles to Ukraine.

Also the West said 15,000 casualties within the first few weeks and just a couple weeks ago said 15,000 since it started.

It’s either a lie or Russian casualties have significantly declined. So where is this war of attrition favouring Ukraine?
There are other ATGMs besides Javelin and other MANPADS besides Stinger - and production is ramping up anyway.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please provide evidence of your claims re casualties? Where is this war of attrition favouring Russia?

In other news, Gerasimov missed the 9th May parade, perhaps shrapnel wounds, perhaps a "heart attack". Other notable absentees were a T14 tank, any mention of 'victory' at Mariupol and the entire Russian AF. Also Lend Lease was signed into law.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
The ruble is undervalued and the british pound is overvalued. Try buying any consumer electronics item in the UK and check the price.
Then consider the fact the UK needs to import a lot more things than Russia. It is not even self reliant in terms of food.

People joke about how Russia's electronics industry is crap, but Russia at least can design a workstation class CPU, and manufacture a chip at 90nm. The UK can do neither. Even when you consider they have ARM, try seeing which chip designs come out of ARM Cambridge, it is embedded grade crap, not workstation or server grade. All the latest high end cores designed by ARM in the last 3 years come from ARM Austin (Texas, US) and before that their unit in France.

Corruption in Russia is overrated. Good luck pushing that in their MIC. You will land your ass in jail. Talk about corruption is way more applicable in the US MIC, where projects which make no sense continue being acquired because they provide jobs in a given congressional district regardless of how good they are. This is how programs like LCS are allowed to continue. In Russia even if a project like that managed to be pushed out, they would produce one or two units at best then shitcan it.

People always try to explain how Russia can be supposedly insanely corrupt, not invest enough in its military, and yet produce loads of weapons. The answer is quite simple really. Both your initial premises are wrong. Another tired argument I still hear, is how Russia's MIC is full of old people in their late 40s. You clearly don't watch Combat Approved all that much and still think the Russian MIC is like it was two decades ago.
 
Last edited:

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Sheer cope. Ukraine has unlimited supplies of advanced weaponry from NATO and can impose more costs on Russia than Russia can inflict. Russia, meanwhile is running low on stocks of PGM and will struggle to replace these under sanctions. Plus the number of recruits for the Russian army must be diminishing fast, and there is little left to deploy from elsewhere in Russia.

M777/Excalibur combo with advanced counter-battery radars is going to make life short but interesting for Russian artillery in the very near future, if it isn't already.

A war of attrition only favours Ukraine/NATO.

If Russia still has air superiority, then Russia can target all that advanced NATO weaponry at will.
 

Maikeru

Major
Registered Member
If Russia still has air superiority, then Russia can target all that advanced NATO weaponry at will.
They never had air superiority, and they won't get it now. UAF still flying and fighting, on the ground Ukr getting increasingly sophisticated SAM systems. RuAF running out of PGMs. In any event, RuAF has failed to target, or prevent the inflow in any meaningful way, of NATO weapons to date.
 

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
On the contrary the Russians had air superiority from day 1, and the extent of their air superiority had grown more or less continuously from day 1 to now.

Right now the russian air superiority is as comprehensive as any ever attained by any power facing an opponent with continued ability to acquire modern air denial weapons.

It is as comprehensive as the allie’s over Germany in 1943-1944, as comprehensive as the Americans gained over north korea or north vietnam, more comprehensive as the israelis gained during 1973, more comprehensive than the british was able to attain over falklands.

Russian air forces actually performance when seen in detail is shite, but that did not prevent it from gaining air superiority.

What they don’t have is air supremacy.

I think your love for Monty Python has diminished your ability to discern its skits from reality.
 
Last edited:

MortyandRick

Senior Member
Registered Member
They never had air superiority, and they won't get it now. UAF still flying and fighting, on the ground Ukr getting increasingly sophisticated SAM systems. RuAF running out of PGMs. In any event, RuAF has failed to target, or prevent the inflow in any meaningful way, of NATO weapons to date.
Russians have air superiority just not supremacy. There a difference.

Also as you asked before about providing evidence for Ukrainian casualties please provide evidence for Russians running out of PGM?
 
Top