UshCha | 25 Nov 2022 2:58 p.m. PST |
Now my understanding of Russian tactics in assult was to pick a spot on the enemy lines hammer it with insane amounts of artillery and then while still under that artillery fire advance to within about 100 of the enemy, lift fires and assult the enemy straight out the vehicle. Now BMP 1 and 2 are of built for this this, effectively just artillery proof not IFV'S which can almost take an anti tank round. So at least at the start when they had the kit to do that did they not? As I understand it Wagner Troops were never that well suppied with armour so were always going to struggle. Is it just the Russians have lacked the ability to coordinate like the cold war? Even NLAW won't work till its too late if the crew is are suppressed. Seems like the Russians have stopped playing to their own strengths and are playing to Ukraine by pretending BMP'S are IFV's. What has changed that has stopped the old cold war strategy working, it's blunt but should have worked, what have I missed? |
Col Durnford | 25 Nov 2022 3:07 p.m. PST |
Perhaps they are not your father's Soviets. |
Bunkermeister | 25 Nov 2022 5:43 p.m. PST |
My observations are: The Russians don't seem to use enough artillery to suppress the enemy. So the Ukrainians using drones and long range AT weapons hit the BMPs too far out for the crews to dismount and close with the Ukrainians. The maintenance and supply are not good enough for the Russians so tanks and other vehicles that should support the assault don't make it because they have broken down along the route of march. Just my observations from random unclassified sources. Mike Bunkermeister Creek |
smithsco | 25 Nov 2022 5:53 p.m. PST |
One thing that is abundantly clear is that poorly trained troops, with little motivation, and incompetent junior officers can't succeed even with solid tactical doctrines. Most of us wargame and know that in a scenario where our troops lack morale and punching power and are poorly trained we will likely lose. The Russians know this too. They just didn't seem to get they were the ones in this situation. Also they clearly underestimated the effectiveness of western made AT and AA weapons. |
rmaker | 25 Nov 2022 6:35 p.m. PST |
And they clearly underestimated the Ukrainians' determination and combat ability. Rather reminiscent of the Winter War. |
Legion 4 | 25 Nov 2022 7:38 p.m. PST |
What has changed that has stopped the old cold war strategy working, it's blunt but should have worked, what have I missed? The Russians don't fight combined arms warfare it is grossly clear. It seems to be too complex for them. And we know they love their FA. E.g. Their BTGs had 3 Mech Cos., 3 FA Batteries, and only one Tank Co. I don't even think there would be too many BTGs up to strength by now. If they ever were. Some in the beginning it was reported were understrength. To coordinate FA support with maneuver elements takes some knowledge and training to be effective. Just shooting in the general direction just won't cut it. They may have thought massive FA fires would be enough to break the Ukrainians and beat them into submission. Their forces were poorly trained, motivated, supplied and lead from the very top down. They underestimated their enemy's will to fight when their land homeland was invaded. The Russians must have forgot, "it's their backyard". This was not the USSR Forces we expected to fight that I and my comrades were training to engage during the Cold War. They were to be Hell on Wheels flooding across the IGB. After heavy & intense FA and CAS prep. Were they even a "paper bear" even back then ? After the 2014 invasion that netted the Russians the Crimea. The US, starting in 2015 was sending SF, CIA, etc. to train the Ukraine to effectively fight the Russians. The last one of those US Forces left only a week or two before the invasion. Good training, weapons, & motivation verses poor training, motivation, supply plus incompetent leadership … well the outcome became obvious in a very short time. I don't think the Russians ever demonstrated the use of combined arms modern mobile maneuver warfare at any time during their invasion. Combined Arm requires a competent force from the top down. Appears the Russian ani't it. |
Saber6 | 25 Nov 2022 7:57 p.m. PST |
When: some time in the last 25 years is my guess. Under the Soviets, I believe, professionalism was still a thing. After the collapse, corruption and nest padding became the norm. |
Legion 4 | 25 Nov 2022 8:03 p.m. PST |
Good points … They are still threat as they have nukes. But they are not a force to be reckoned with otherwise. Good for the Ukraine, the region and maybe even the world. |
Prince Alberts Revenge | 25 Nov 2022 8:11 p.m. PST |
Most of the accounts I have read is that the Russians use artillery barrages in an attempt to suppress the Ukrainian defenders and then send piecemeal infantry attacks in that lose significant casualties. This seemed to result in some battlefield success in the east (before HIMARS) where they could outnumber Ukrainian artillery 20:1 or greater The only instances I read or saw videos hinting at the attempt to coordinate arms was early in the war. As things have gone on, I rarely see infantry or armor together. I saw a post today from Rob Lee where he was stating that Russian civilian airsoft gaming groups have begun to train mobilized men on infantry tactics. What does that tell you? |
Grattan54 | 25 Nov 2022 9:01 p.m. PST |
Who says the old Cold War strategy did work? Where did they ever use it in combat? Maybe we assumed the Soviet Union forces were not as strong as we believed all those years. |
Oberlindes Sol LIC | 25 Nov 2022 9:21 p.m. PST |
They are still threat as they have nukes. Well, they still have silos and other infrastructure. Whether any of the nukes would actually work is conjectural, given the state of the rest of the military, but it's too risky to find out. |
Robert Johnson | 26 Nov 2022 2:22 a.m. PST |
Soviet Cold War strategy was to soak the area of attack in chemicals and biologicals. If the advance seems like stalling, bring on the nukes. |
ROUWetPatchBehindTheSofa | 26 Nov 2022 3:27 a.m. PST |
I think its been reported that in some cases the Russia units were so horribly understrength that some BMPs didn't even have dismounts turning them in to ersatz 'light tanks' and regardless of artillery you aren't going to hold ground with those. Entirely anecdotal but from watching the early war footage of Russian soldiers, particularly the doorbell and CCTV stuff, a lot of them just didn't seem very alert. I assume the veterans here will confirm my assumption that soldiers like their squad mates to be 'situationally aware' while actually soldiering? Granted it might be different if they knew they were about to bail out into the middle of a firefight. As for the 'rinse and repeat' approach to attacks Perun's presentation before last about lying in Russian military culture did at least provide some explainer for that behavior. Early on being restricted to roads also probably had some effect. Hard to get creative if you fear that by going anywhere other than a road you think your instantly going to bog down. |
soledad | 26 Nov 2022 3:48 a.m. PST |
The first attack, on 24 fe, was an attempted "Thunder run". But a run with troops who, in many cases, did not know they were attacking another country. It was also way way under supported by logistics. And without proper dismounts. And being restricted to roads due to extreme mud. And without proper communications as the secure Russian net did not work. I could go on, it was a monumental cluster-fxxk. Not forgetting heavy heavy resistance. After that failed attempt with heavy losses, everything has gone down hill. It is a structural fault on so many levels, from the lowest to the highest. Corruption, lying and very bad treatment of the troops. Non existent morale, old equipment. The Russian war machine was a Potemkin village. The "old" Soviet way of attacking has not been used. After the thunder run failed there was not enough high quality units left that could perform what we though they could. Even their best units, eg 1 guards tank army/shock army" was basically useless. They did not capture Charkiv despite being the best unit in both materiel and men. (well compared to other units I Russia) So they failed in the premier role, attacking and paving the way for other units. Then during the Ukraine counteroffensive, the failed in their other premier role, counterattacking, instead they folded and ran leaving all their equipment. So Russias best could not perform in their intended roles at all. They failed in everything they were tasked to do. Same with their VDV. they also failed in everything they were supposed to shine in. The only units who have performed well is their marine infantry. They appear to be properly lead and motivated and have actually performed good. |
UshCha | 26 Nov 2022 4:43 a.m. PST |
Thank folks, seems like it's not the idea but No effort had been made to train in this most basic of Russian tactics. Representing that on the tabletop would be no fun, utterly boreing. |
ROUWetPatchBehindTheSofa | 26 Nov 2022 4:59 a.m. PST |
Being fair to the VDV they were asked to do some stupid stuff on day one and were then left with their backsides hanging out when the really stupid stuff didn't come off…. And I'd also say asking the VDV to do a thunder run, in light airmobile armour, wasn't really playing to their core strengths – I'd put that in the 'really stupid stuff' category. They continue to be among the short list of skilled contract soldier-heavy units, along with the naval infantry, that seemingly get shoved into any part of the frontline that is under pressure so they must still at least be considered better than the rest – though its an open question how long those units will remain 'skilled' as attrition mounts and the gaps are filled with new members. The 'Guards' probably aren't very 'Guards' anymore since I'd guess that after the first half of the invasion they must have increasingly had their manpower filled out with new recruits. Logistics probably killed the high readiness mechanised units more than anything at the start. Also on the subject of failing to achieve objectives, probably unknowable, but how many units on basis of readiness reports were recorded as fit to do the job versus their actual readiness i.e. how much BS was in the Russian armies readiness reports prior to the invasion? |
ROUWetPatchBehindTheSofa | 26 Nov 2022 5:05 a.m. PST |
No effort had been made to train in this most basic of Russian tactics. Representing that on the tabletop would be no fun, utterly boreing. Might disagree since the objective for the Russian player may simply to be, to loose less badly! Also what are you wanting to game / simulate? I sketched out a rewrite of the old back-of-a-post card colonial ruleset Drums Along the Watsu' to simulate a Russian column moving to capture a village versus Ukrainian light infantry. It will probably make quite a good game. |
Robert Johnson | 26 Nov 2022 6:09 a.m. PST |
I'll bet the poor sods on the sharp end of Putin's folly aren't finding it boring. |
mjkerner | 26 Nov 2022 9:36 a.m. PST |
OT--ROU, where can I find the Drums Along the Watsu rules? |
ROUWetPatchBehindTheSofa | 26 Nov 2022 11:32 a.m. PST |
It's actually 'Drums Along The Watusi' and it was in an early Miniature Wargames issue – unfortunately my very dog eared copy has lost the front cover including number and publication date. But it was the also issue with Andy Callan's Hair Roller armies in as well. |
Legion 4 | 26 Nov 2022 1:03 p.m. PST |
Whether any of the nukes would actually work is conjectural, given the state of the rest of the military, but it's too risky to find out. Yes, that was my point, we don't know the state of their nukes. But it is a 0 – Sum game. By the time you'd know it would be too late. Logistics probably killed the high readiness mechanised units more than anything at the start. Agreed, having served in 3 Mech units, in the past. And being very involved in Log/Maint. functions when on in command, etc. You must spend a lot of time "catering to the Iran Monsters" at all levels. The fact that the USA Army could generally rapidly provide Maint & parts for the crew to attached Maint units being available at Co. Level and above. That was critical in training and I'm sure even more so in combat. E.g. the Bn & Bde Cdrs received a daily report on what the status was with all the vehicles/weapon systems in their commands. To plan tactically you must know what you have in your unit. To make an effective plan. Guess the Russians don't get that ? It's easier to fire a lot of FA and then send in Tanks & Mech rolling forward hoping they attrited enough of the enemy to overrun them. They also forgot the standard of "Never underestimate your enemy.". As I have said before, their performance reminded me of how some of the Mid-East forces vs the Israelis or among themselves did in combat. E.g. the series of Arab-Israeli wars, Iran-Iraq War, etc. I'll bet the poor sods on the sharp end of Putin's folly aren't finding it boring. Those that are not KIA, WIA, etc. |
4DJones | 26 Nov 2022 1:28 p.m. PST |
'Drums along the Watusi': Miniature Wargames #9 A lot of fun to be had. |
Dragon Gunner | 26 Nov 2022 2:39 p.m. PST |
"Being fair to the VDV they were asked to do some stupid stuff" The fate of airborne or elite forces everywhere, whenever something goes to hell ram them into the situation and expect miracles. It feeds the narrative for anti-airborne people… |
Andy ONeill | 26 Nov 2022 5:38 p.m. PST |
To be fair. It is often the leaders of those elite units over sold their capabilities. |
ROUWetPatchBehindTheSofa | 27 Nov 2022 6:17 a.m. PST |
I think its fair to say that given what happened and what we know any future historians are going to have a great time with any Russian military pre-invasion readiness reports they may get their hands on…. It will be interesting to see, given even the utter work of fiction that Russian intelligence assessments were, whether or not the invasion was still plausible with the forces they had. Simulating the Russian military later in invasion may well be down to a deck of event cards…. – Your supporting armour battalion's readiness report is a work of fiction 25% of the force is inoperable. – Poor morale and negligent field officers mean one of you infantry units is dispersed looting and/or drunk. Dice each turn of component units to appear on table. – Unsecured mobile phone usage. The Ukrainian player has your HQ location as a pre-plotted fire mission! etc etc |
soledad | 27 Nov 2022 7:04 a.m. PST |
Your "elite" VDV gets their bottoms spanked by territorial defense units. "elite" VDV does not get a "save" roll as they do not know what tourniquets are or how they work. "Eite" VDV units does not actually get elite status in your game as they actually are novice green and bunch up around vehicles and cannot execute standard squad drills. |
Legion 4 | 27 Nov 2022 11:56 a.m. PST |
It feeds the narrative for anti-airborne people… True … But no doubt it appeared they suffered from not enough training and very poor leadership. Among other things as we have talked about before. I can say with some confidence, the US/most of NATO's plus "ANZAC" airborne [& air assault] units are superior and deserve the rating "Elite". This became clearer from Day 1, IMO … AFAIK the VDV made no drops but were inserted by helicopters. Didn't really matter … their performance overall was poor to marginal at best. Like the rest of their military. |
Dragon Gunner | 27 Nov 2022 12:17 p.m. PST |
Yes the VDV was marginal, and the entire Russian performance was incompetent. I keep thinking back to earlier in the invasion all the VDV units annihilated in Kyiv because the relief force that was supposed to link up with them ran out of fuel. |
wardog | 27 Nov 2022 12:53 p.m. PST |
dragon gunner n a way like arnhem? |
Striker | 27 Nov 2022 1:03 p.m. PST |
I read a report, maybe RAND, on Chechnya and they wrote that the Soviet experiences that were documented and taught have been forgotten. This was their view of why the Russians had a dickens of a time in Chechnya as they had to relearn tactics and even then it was only taught to special units. It looks like the lessons learned from WWII and the cold war, along with A'stan and Chechnya, are still forgotten or ignored. I have no experience with Russian soldiers but it looks like the post cold war plan to train up professional NCO corps and professionalize their military hasn't happened, and probably never will. |
Legion 4 | 27 Nov 2022 5:37 p.m. PST |
n a way like arnhem? Well Arnhem was a larger op. with both paras & gliders. The VDV used choppers. But yeah, sort of like Market-Garden … But much smaller ops. Plus the Allied troops at Arnhem were pretty damn good. looks like the post cold war plan to train up professional NCO corps and professionalize their military hasn't happened, and probably never will. It appears they have no NCO Corps. Or much of a professional military … |
FatherOfAllLogic | 28 Nov 2022 7:44 a.m. PST |
Forgive me if I push this in another direction. Why did this happen? Did Putin say "I want to invade Ukraine" and all his advisors nodded 'great idea, shouldn't be a problem, we'll be in Kiev in two days' or did they go 'erm, well, maybe, if we prepare…..' and Putin accuses them of being cowards and fools? |
ROUWetPatchBehindTheSofa | 28 Nov 2022 8:35 a.m. PST |
I think the working assumption is that basically 'vranyo' ensured that the Boss only saw in the intelligence assessments that his subordinates thought he wanted to see because they desperately need another sinecure and what their subordinates thought wouldn't get them fired or would let them screw over their department rivals…. The military planners then got involved with only readiness reports that would probably win creative fiction awards – at least for some units, to work with and the aforementioned intelligence assesments. And that's before you get into the issues of endemic corruption, poor quality human resources and clearly, at least at the tactical level, badly organised logistics. And the huge irony is that Putin is thought to be entirely familiar with 'vranyo'! |
Legion 4 | 28 Nov 2022 9:30 a.m. PST |
I think Putin and his military advisors, etc. thought they could just invade as in 2014 when they "annexed" Crimea. Rolling thru will little resistance. Did the top military brass know how poor their forces were trained, motivated, Log support, etc.? Can't imagine any military's leaders thinking their troops are combat ready. As poorly as they all preformed. Seems to me the "rot" starts at the very top on down. |
dapeters | 28 Nov 2022 1:57 p.m. PST |
"This was not the USSR Forces we expected to fight that I and my comrades were training to engage during the Cold War. They were to be Hell on Wheels flooding across the IGB. After heavy & intense FA and CAS prep. Were they even a "paper bear" even back then ?" The real question now is who know this and when (I know, a recurring theme of the last 50 years of American history.) |
Striker | 28 Nov 2022 5:46 p.m. PST |
dapeters, I wonder if they had any real idea, not a "keep up the lie to get $$" plan but given Soviet secrecy and such and not many examples of Soviet warfighting did they assume the worse just in case? Now with actual observations of them in action it was probably always this way. Has there been any analysis of WWII supplies given by allies vs domestically produced? I see anecdotal mention of "the West gave the beans, the Soviets did the fighting" but what was the real numbers, could the USSR have fought without Western aid? Since that was a full out shooting war, and if Western aid played a large part, I would assume without aid they would be less than capable. Their equipment may have been adequate and in mass but without spares, fuel, and replacement troops how long would they have lasted? Most of my old WWIII boardgames had about 30-60 days then their forces dropped off pretty badly, how much accuracy was put into that for the game? |
Legion 4 | 28 Nov 2022 8:05 p.m. PST |
The real question now is who know this and when (I know, a recurring theme of the last 50 years of American history.) What … how the USSR was supposed to fight ? Primarily intel, etc., from many sources, etc. Even Old WWII German Generals who had fought Russians would brief, wargame, etc. the US and some of NATO's leadership. If you are asking how I knew the way the USSR/WP was to fight ? That is what we had been trained on how they would fight and how we would counter them since Day 1, etc. |
dapeters | 29 Nov 2022 1:48 p.m. PST |
How could 70-80 years of intel be so far off the map? @Striker yes as a corollary, I wonder the same thing. |
ROUWetPatchBehindTheSofa | 29 Nov 2022 3:09 p.m. PST |
I'd be careful about drawing too many parallels between the USSR in WWII, the USSR during the Cold War and Russia today. I think its fair to say that during WWII there is fair bit of mythologising since the Soviets papered over the effect of the aid they got but by the end of it they could clearly fight a mechanised war – even if perhaps their industrial base wasn't up to it without help. Cold War is different they had a lot of material and manpower to hand, plus the industrial capacity, and the raw materials. Could they fight? Probably but it wouldn't have been pretty. I'd think by day 30 if we weren't all glowing in the dark NATO would be pretty beat up as well. I think its is fair to say by that point Soviets would probably throwing their lower status units into the mix. In the 80's that probably would have meant T-55! Russia, as previously noted, isn't the USSR – they've lost manpower, their industrial base and budget has atrophied – they can't exactly spew out tanks like they did. All pretty simplistic and late Cold War there is the question about Western technical superiority and what that would have meant. May be the Ukrainians are also due a bit more credit, after painting the Russian army as complete s***-show, after all Soviet doctrine was theirs as well at one point, they did fight the Separatists/Russians for a number of years prior to the invasion and they've been heavily trained by NATO. Those experiences probably count for a lot. Its also fair to say intelligence-wise its easy to count systems and study your opponent's doctrines. Way more difficult to understand how soft factors might affect things. Western military planners might have concluded during the Cold War that Soviet logistical plans and capabilities were sketchy but no one going to bet the metaphorical farm on the wheels coming of the Soviet juggernaut for lack of supplies. If the politicians and the chief's of staff ask if the Soviets have enough men, trucks and an apparent logistical plan the answer was yes and any 'but' would have been entirely too subjective. |
Legion 4 | 29 Nov 2022 7:18 p.m. PST |
How could 70-80 years of intel be so far off the map? @Striker yes as a corollary, I wonder the same thing. We may never know. Some good points ROU. Bottom line the Russians are not fighting modern combine arms … And yes, the Ukrainians for a number of reasons as we have discussed before, are handing Putin and his forces their collective s … |