"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (4 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Important that all of us "arm chair" strategists read this.
But if we are honest I don't think that there are an major surprises in this. If NATO were in this fight then Russia would have lost control of the air and these defences would be target practice for the NATO airforces. Ukraine doesn't have that option.
The Ukraine forces which have had some training in combined arms are still but a fraction of the Ukraine army and that level of training wasn't close to that given to NATO forces so problems implementing it can only be expected.

There are some positives in particular the comment that Russia no longer has superiority in Artillery, in what is now an Artillery war. Rough parity would seem to be a fair summary. Ukraine has the advantage in tube weapons, Russia in rocket systems. Generally speaking Tube weapons have the longer range and this can only bode well for the counter battery exchanges which are so important.

The video clip showing the shocking state of the 'refurbished' AA systems says a lot about how ineffective the support systems to Russia are. If this is the state of the rest of the support then you can see why the T62's are being brought back into service. They are low tech, but at least they work.
 
But if we are honest I don't think that there are an major surprises in this. If NATO were in this fight then Russia would have lost control of the air and these defences would be target practice for the NATO airforces. Ukraine doesn't have that option.
The Ukraine forces which have had some training in combined arms are still but a fraction of the Ukraine army and that level of training wasn't close to that given to NATO forces so problems implementing it can only be expected.

There are some positives in particular the comment that Russia no longer has superiority in Artillery, in what is now an Artillery war. Rough parity would seem to be a fair summary. Ukraine has the advantage in tube weapons, Russia in rocket systems. Generally speaking Tube weapons have the longer range and this can only bode well for the counter battery exchanges which are so important.

The video clip showing the shocking state of the 'refurbished' AA systems says a lot about how ineffective the support systems to Russia are. If this is the state of the rest of the support then you can see why the T62's are being brought back into service. They are low tech, but at least they work.

And the article itself focuses on combined arms, but there's very little Western support in terms of airpower for Ukraine, which rather undercuts the point. Combined arms without airpower is like a dog hunting on three legs.
 
This is an anachronism, to be honest.

Here we are in the 21st century and yes, there are smart weapons being employed in both sides.

But the core of the conflict is no different than the time period between the U.S. Civil War and the early years of the First World War where tenches and artillery was the primary factor.
 
Last edited:
Ooopppsss....

Ooopppsss....
More Ooopppsss....

 
This was is an anachronism, to be honest.

Here we are in the 21st century and yes, there are smart weapons being employed in both sides.

But the core of the conflict is no different than the time period between the U.S. Civil War and the early years of the First World War where tenches and artillery was the primary factor.
Nailed it. All else like 'smart' aside, the ground-rules never change. When reality dictates a "grinding game" then that's the game until something breaks. Artillery becomes king,
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back