That was a while ago and we are into 10 million+ shells fired (or destroyed) from the russian side.
But that stuff was stored and maintained by us. Not by Soviets/Russians.
abrandt
21027
My tongue was firmly planted in my cheek. That Perun video was linked, I didn’t watch it, but I did view the slides for it. I pulled out one that was relevant that was basically “we know the supply is deep” followed by all question marks about how deep the Russian artillery supply actually is. I just referenced that again as a joke because he clearly called out that the actual numbers are not known and therefore making statistical calculations based on ??? is impossible.
I’m just having fun with the part of the argument that turned back around to “there isn’t a supply problem” when it all started with a link about how much Russian artillery volumes are down recently followed with a quick “yeah, but that’s a supply problem, not logistics!”. It’s just bonkers and I naturally reply to that somewhat sarcastically.
I can understand the impulse to point out the cognitive dissonance on display — I suffer from it! — but asking him for his sources just seems like masochism.
Donated, and officially dubbed The Best Thing I’ve Seen All Week. That’s so awesome not just that you’re doing this, @Sabotai, but that you’re sharing it with us.
And I apologize for tut-tutting at you guys, but I really wish you would all learn to ignore people with whom you disagree, especially when they’re not contributing anything new to the discussion so you know your disagreement is just going to further the cycle and junk up the thread, BURYING COOL STUFF LIKE THIS and Mark Weston’s RUSI excerpts. I know you guys are smarter than that.
Also, huge props to @Janster for maintaining a civil tone under duress. Dude, you’re a monster, but thanks for not being a dick. I just wish you would be more selective with your sources, because it feels like a lot of the noise in this thread swirls around trying to suss out where you’re getting your faulty information and then correct it. Which is part of how P&R works, but I wish you would let it work instead of just repeating the cycle. :)
Anyway, sorry for the tut-tut. You’re all adults, you don’t need me stepping in, and I just mainly wanted to do my part to keep Sabatoi’s post from getting buried.
abrandt
21032
But Tom, what if this time he finally sees reason?
Thanks for doing this! Donated, and shared with friends. Good luck!
One of the key points in the RUSI study is that Ukraine had worked hard to build up its artillery arm since 2014, and in total artillery tubes was only outnumbered 2:1. Concentrated artillery brigades were their most effective tool for stopping Russian advances in the first month. But then artillery ammo started getting scarce and they’ve had to ration their use of all Soviet artillery calibres since then.
Following on from that is the need for precision. Precision targeting gets the same effects from far fewer rounds, and therefore reduces the required logistical tail (and the need to protect it). Western support gives Ukraine a big advantage here, but only if we can keep them supplied.
abrandt
21035
It’s a shame that Excalibur rounds are so absurdly expensive. Numbers I can find are $100k per round vs $160k for gmlrs round vs <$1k for a dumb 155mm round. If you could cut that Excalibur cost to $2k-$10k and could supply them in real numbers things would really change.
Something I don’t think I’ve seen written explicitly anywhere else;
It is briefly worth flagging here a political factor that shaped, and in some ways constrained, Ukrainian military preparations for the defence of Donbas at this time [after the Russian withdrawal from Kyiv]. The discovery of war crimes perpetrated at scale by Russian forces in occupied territories on the axes approaching Kyiv created a political climate in which the surrender of territory, and especially settlements, became politically unacceptable. Given the disparity in forces, a manoeuvre defence would have been most effective from a purely military point of view, enabling the enemy to be shaped and then cut off through counterattack to maximise its losses. However, the human cost of these tactics on the population, whom the UAF were mobilised to defend, would have been unacceptable. Showing that the Army would hold ground for as long as practicable was therefore not only a political imperative, but also important in underpinning the moral component of the fighting force. This is not to argue that political decisions inappropriately had an impact on military decision-making. Instead, it is one of the ongoing strengths of the Ukrainian state that there remains a healthy civil–military discourse and an ability to balance these critical factors. Nevertheless, this led to tactical dispositions that, from a purely military perspective, may have appeared suboptimal.
That’s a very interesting catch, thanks!
One of the things that we have talked about occasionally in this thread, but I don’t think I’ve yet properly internalized, is the length of the front in Ukraine and relative lack of density of forces compared to recent military history from WWII onwards.
What’s useful about the RUSI report is that it has some numbers. Just before war broke out, Ukraine had 10 brigades deployed on the line of control in Donbas with an average frontage of 30km per brigade. During WWII, a British brigade was ideally expected to cover 2000 yards of frontage.
Fighting in the Donbas during what RUSI calls the 3rd phase of the war (phase 1: the first 3 days of failed Shock and Awe, phase 2: the attempt to take Kyiv, phase 3: concentration on the Donbas), an average UAF company position was expected to cover 3km of frontage. That, theoretically, might be one man every 30 meters (but obviously not in reality). Compared to any military history I’ve read, that’s completely bonkers.
No wonder that no-one ever really gets surrounded.
Unfortunately, they’re concerned that their existence has been leaked to the Ukrainians…
It is truly the winter of their discount tents.
abrandt
21041
Any idea what the numbers on the eastern front in WW2 were?
ddtibbs
21042
As much as it pains me to agree with the fearmonger, the Soviets put a man in space before the US and maintain an active space program. Even though their current military activity is a shit show, they aren’t incompetent at everything, and assuming so is quite dangerous.
Take my goddamn like and get out of here.
