3 ms·

Unlikely. The Russian’s have struggled logistically almost from the start. Within a day-or-two of the invasion there were numerous reports of Russian tank units

Unlikely. The Russian’s have struggled logistically almost from the start. Within a day-or-two of the invasion there were numerous reports of Russian tank units walking around on foot looking for diesel. This is consistent with the convoy looking like it’s struggling with mechanical and fuel problems. Those soldiers can’t have much food left. The Russian’s also wouldn’t park themselves like that. They don’t have air dominance and from the numerous Ukrainian air strikes, it doesn’t seem like they have much idea of what’s above them at any given time. (They’re parked close together to stay under the umbrella of anti-aircraft weaponry.) The longer the convoy waits, the more time the Ukrainians have to prep to shell the convoy or hit it from the air.

syntheweave 5y ago
Most of these things fall within Russia's known doctrine. The daily advancement rate of the convoy is right at their by-the-book limit - it just takes time to advance an operation on the ground, and this is why airfields were targeted early on in a bid to accelerate deployment; media reports of a "slow" advance are just unrealistic analysis. This goes for other questions about the campaign. As a large conscript force still basically using the Soviet model, weak troops are often thrown into the fire early on to soften opposition. Likewise, reliance on artillery is a byproduct of the air force being stretched thin and not reinvesting in new equipment: air dominance and precision bombing missions are expensive, and Russia's military primarily focuses on maintaining its own sovereignty, thus most of the allocation is towards a defensive air war with support provided by ground-based rockets and shelling. However, there are severe challenges still to be reckoned with, which support the idea of Russia remaining on the back foot. The reports of abandoned vehicles, disorganized troops and stretched supplies hold some credence; again, as a conscript army it's harder to pursue delegation of responsibility like a professional force. You are getting relatively less out of more troops simply due to lack of coordination. As well, Ukraine has a smaller force but has been spurred to rearm with the assistance of foreign aid and equipment since the 2014 invasion, getting access to some of the best technologies and training of NATO forces. So Ukraine has some significant battlefield advantages, and with the cutoffs to supply chains on Russia's end, from my viewpoint, while a Russian victory could still occur if they rout the forces in major cities, a slow, protracted conflict will definitely end in Russian defeat at significant cost to civilians. The next weeks will be critical.
- esperent 5y ago
  > Most of these things fall within Russia's known doctrine That is statement begging for a source. Do you have one? What is Russia's "known doctrine"?
  - Khaine 5y ago
    I do. War on the Rocks had an article about Russian Logistics[1] which mentions that: "The Russian army does not have enough trucks to meet its logistic requirement more than 90 miles beyond supply dumps. To reach a 180-mile range, the Russian army would have to double truck allocation to 400 trucks for each of the material-technical support brigades." Task and Purpose has been doing some videos on the war in Ukraine, and they use that article to evaluate Russia's progress against those supply limitations[2], and basically it all lines up that Russian progress has been constrained by supply, and that the current pause is likely because of the next actions they will take[3]. [1] https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/ https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKFSK_9e-g4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKFSK_9e-g4 [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5BAZ2bBUzM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5BAZ2bBUzM
- jollybean 5y ago
  It's not. They tried to take Hostomel and airports SE and SW of Kyiva and failed. They were going for fast strikes. The failed to get the other airports (tried to land a cargo plane and it was destroyed) - thought they go to Hostomel it was only by landing literally 100 assault helicopters with 1000 soldiers. That is literally 1/2 of their entire rotary fleet for a single, risky operation. Since then, they've been mauled over and over around the airport and have actually made negative or neutral progress for 5 days. So it remains to be seen if the balance of force can move in one direction or the other, I really wish the West would do more to make it more decisive. In the meantime, the USA can pay $100-200K (i.e. per javelin/stinger/mlaw etc.) to have a large chunk of Russian Amour sent to the dustbin with not much risk, that's not such a bad deal at all.
  - ncmncm 5y ago

syntheweave 5y ago

Most of these things fall within Russia's known doctrine. The daily advancement rate of the convoy is right at their by-the-book limit - it just takes time to advance an operation on the ground, and this is why airfields were targeted early on in a bid to accelerate deployment; media reports of a "slow" advance are just unrealistic analysis. This goes for other questions about the campaign. As a large conscript force still basically using the Soviet model, weak troops are often thrown into the fire early on to soften opposition. Likewise, reliance on artillery is a byproduct of the air force being stretched thin and not reinvesting in new equipment: air dominance and precision bombing missions are expensive, and Russia's military primarily focuses on maintaining its own sovereignty, thus most of the allocation is towards a defensive air war with support provided by ground-based rockets and shelling. However, there are severe challenges still to be reckoned with, which support the idea of Russia remaining on the back foot. The reports of abandoned vehicles, disorganized troops and stretched supplies hold some credence; again, as a conscript army it's harder to pursue delegation of responsibility like a professional force. You are getting relatively less out of more troops simply due to lack of coordination. As well, Ukraine has a smaller force but has been spurred to rearm with the assistance of foreign aid and equipment since the 2014 invasion, getting access to some of the best technologies and training of NATO forces. So Ukraine has some significant battlefield advantages, and with the cutoffs to supply chains on Russia's end, from my viewpoint, while a Russian victory could still occur if they rout the forces in major cities, a slow, protracted conflict will definitely end in Russian defeat at significant cost to civilians. The next weeks will be critical.

esperent 5y ago
> Most of these things fall within Russia's known doctrine That is statement begging for a source. Do you have one? What is Russia's "known doctrine"?
- Khaine 5y ago
  I do. War on the Rocks had an article about Russian Logistics[1] which mentions that: "The Russian army does not have enough trucks to meet its logistic requirement more than 90 miles beyond supply dumps. To reach a 180-mile range, the Russian army would have to double truck allocation to 400 trucks for each of the material-technical support brigades." Task and Purpose has been doing some videos on the war in Ukraine, and they use that article to evaluate Russia's progress against those supply limitations[2], and basically it all lines up that Russian progress has been constrained by supply, and that the current pause is likely because of the next actions they will take[3]. [1] https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/ https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKFSK_9e-g4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKFSK_9e-g4 [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5BAZ2bBUzM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5BAZ2bBUzM
jollybean 5y ago
It's not. They tried to take Hostomel and airports SE and SW of Kyiva and failed. They were going for fast strikes. The failed to get the other airports (tried to land a cargo plane and it was destroyed) - thought they go to Hostomel it was only by landing literally 100 assault helicopters with 1000 soldiers. That is literally 1/2 of their entire rotary fleet for a single, risky operation. Since then, they've been mauled over and over around the airport and have actually made negative or neutral progress for 5 days. So it remains to be seen if the balance of force can move in one direction or the other, I really wish the West would do more to make it more decisive. In the meantime, the USA can pay $100-200K (i.e. per javelin/stinger/mlaw etc.) to have a large chunk of Russian Amour sent to the dustbin with not much risk, that's not such a bad deal at all.
- ncmncm 5y ago