= new reply since forum marked as read
And remember this is the UKRAINE and it is WINTER. The temperatures are around freezing. Thus most units will keep the protective material on equipment for it permits more rapid use in such conditions (i,e, the canvas keeps the snow off the items and cleaning snow is more work then removing canvas covered with snow from the same piece of equipment).
Come spring and summer the Canvas covers MAY be viewed as NOT worth being kept, but it is still winter.
The key is what equipment does the Ukrainians need and can use (Those are two different concepts, and then there is the third concept, what can be supplied?). Reading between the lines I have seen reports of tanks and infantry attacks preceded by artillery attacks. I have NOT seen any reports of Air Attacks by anyone.
Russian tactics tend to be short barbarment followed by a joint infantry tank attack. The main "maneuver" is trying to determine where any defensive position is first, then launch the attack if the defensive position is in the way (it it can be bypassed, bypass it). in such situations anti-artillery radar would be useless. by the time you determine when the shells are coming from that unit would have already moved and the ground attack begun. Anti-artillery radar works best when the artillery you are after fires for more then a couple of minutes. In such cases you locate them and open counter battery fire on them. I suspect the Ukrainian army already has this capacity, it is Vietnam era technology, but the tactic of moving within two minutes of opening fire undoes the advantage of using such radar to find where the shells are coming from. I have just NOT heard of any long term barbarments, shells here and there, short bursts by that is all. That all implies a fire and move tactic by the Artillery being used by the Rebels. Thus anti-artillery radar will NOT be that helpful.
Anti-tank weapons would be helpful, and there are easy and quick to move (Tow, Milan, Javelin and At-4, AT-5, and the AT-3 these are still used by some former Warsaw Pact nations such as Poland and the Czech Republic. The At-3 is a 1960s era AT Missile, while not as "good" as later AT missile is still an effective Anti-tank missile).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_modern_Russian_small_arms#Anti-tank_guided_missiles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MILAN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spike_(missile)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-71_TOW
These can be used to knock out tanks and by knocking out tanks, the infantry has a harder time attacking (i.e. Subject to Machine Gun Fire which limits such infantry attacks).
Thus Anti-tank missiles can be sent quickly and cheaply.
As to Trucks, I like pointing out the difference of opinion of which WWII era half track was better? The American or the German. Both had armor, but the American Half track had power front wheels with a short half track in the rear. The actual half track was developed before the war for civilian use as a way to convert heavy trucks to operate in sand and mud. The US Army saw it as a quick way to get something that could go off road in bad conditions and adopted it.
The German Half track is sometimes called a 3/4 track for it is custom made for the German Army (and kept in use by the Czechoslovak army till at least the 1970s) it did NOT have power to its front wheels, but relied on the much longer track.
In the deserts of North African the US half Tracks worked quite well, they were in their element. The loose sand would prevent wheel vehicle from moving into the sand (they would get stuck), but the half tracks could. On the Russian Front the mud of the Thaw and Freeze stuck the few US Half Tracks that made it to Russia (via US shipments to Russia for Combat Evaluations AND German units bring them to Russia from Italy if any were captured) while the German Half tracks, having a much WIDER and LONGER track floated on the mud and kept on going.
I bring this up for the Ukraine is in winter and it is about to become the thaw. Mud is everywhere. Trucks are useless unless they stay on the paved roads. The problem is units often get off those roads and to be able to maneuver they have to have tracks. Full tracks are preferred and given that few retrofit tracks are made today for trucks (some are but not many) the only real option would be tracked vehicles such as the M113 and Tanks. Both require extensive training on maintenance, and thus the better option may be to look for any remaining ex Soviet Equipment that can be rounded up and supplied to the Ukrainians. The Ukrainians would have the training and equipment to maintain such ex-Soviet equipment for that is what they are using today. That will require shipments by rail or barge via Poland (or ship via Turkey to one of the Southern Ports of the Ukraine NOT under attack).
Barge would have to go via the Dnieper–Bug Canal, which is presently NOT up to the standards needed to provide such transport and is in Belarus which is presently allied with Moscow as far as the Ukraine is concerned:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dnieper%E2%80%93Bug_Canal
2008 report on upgrading the Canal:
http://www.osce.org/eea/30481?download=true
That leave Rail and while there are three rail crossings into Poland and another into Hungary, all of them have to go through Kiev (there is a way around Kiev, but it is more in theory then reality).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Railways
Anti Tanks weapons can be flown into the Ukraine, but tanks and other tracked vehicles have to go by rail and right now that means via Poland (The route via Hungary goes via Vienna and then to Germany, the better route is via Warsaw where you can switch to a track to the seaport of Gdansk or via Berlin and then to Hamburg. Given this route, it will be easy to the Russian to find out if such tracked vehicles are being shipped.
Now such tracked vehicles could be shipped via Turkey to Odessa, a port in the Southwest of the Ukraine, but the Turks would have to permit such a shipment and Turkey is dependent on Russia for oil and Natural gas.... i.e. the Turks, like the Poles have good reasons to say no to any transport from their country of tracked vehicles.
Thus US options are limited. Even if the Poles and/or Turks agree to permit such movement of Tracked vehicles, getting them together and on a train will be difficult thing to do.
Furthermore the Ukraine is still using Soviet 5 foot gauge (1520mm) NOT European 4 Foot 8 1/2 inch gauge(1435 mm), which is what POLAND uses. Thus on top of moving by rail to the Ukrainian Border you have to move the tracked vehicles from one set of flat cars to another do to the break in the gauge.
There is one 1520mm rail line in Poland, but it goes to the South east of Poland, it transport Iron Ore to Polish Steel Mills and hauls Coal and Sulphur back to Russia with a brief trackage in the Ukraine, but then through Belarus to Russia itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PKP_rail_line_65
If I was the Rebels I just have someone look at the area where the break in gauge exists and have them report each day on how trains go from one set of gauges to the other. Some change wheel, other are unloaded and loaded onto new cars. If any tracked vehicles are seen report them immediately.
I would also have a person in Odessa looking at what is dropped off the ships. Odessa is a dangerous town for the Ukrainians. While 62% of the population claim to be Ukrainian, most speak Russian at home. 29% of the population are Russian. Thus you have the population base to have a spy network in the port and right now that is all the rebels need and want from the people of Odessa.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odessa#Demographics
This has been a problem for the US since the start of the Fighting, how do you get supplies to the Ukraine? that they need supplies is not a problem, but getting them to the Ukrainians is a problem. I expect an increase amount of man portable anti-tank weapons but that is about it. The Ukrainians either have what they need (Anti-artillery Radar, trucks of on road use etc) or what they need, the US can NOT get to the Ukraine (Tanks and other tracked Vehicles).
The Ukrainian Government has to make a deal with the Rebels. The government does NOT want to make such a deal is clear, but they need to or the Rebels could take not only the area around the Crimean Peninsula, but Kharkov and Odessa, leaving Kiev and the Western Ukraine a small landlord country. I do NOT see the rebels moving into the Western Ukraine, they have no support in the Western Ukraine. On the other hand most people will be neutral to the rule by these rebels or rule by the Ukrainian Government and that would give the Rebels the ability to take and hold everything from Kharkov East and along the Black Sea to Odessa, leaving Kiev and the Western Ukraine as an isolated land locked country.
Last edited Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:10 PM - Edit history (1)
Many years ago I read an article from around 1900, it was called "The Shames of the Cities" and one thread covered the City of Pittsburgh and the relationship between Chris McGee and William Flinn. It was an interesting story of these two men, close allies. Flinn was the hard edge, the hammer. McGee was the soft sell, and the more powerful of the two. The reason was simple, Flinn wanted Power to make money, McGee wanted Money to gain power. To McGee Power was more important then money.
See page 24:
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015012104587;view=1up;seq=38
I bring them up for Putin is like McGee, he is a rich man, an oligarch, but he wants money to obtain and hold power. If Putin had to choose between power and money Putin will go with power every time even if it means going broke.
The rest of the oligarchs (including, it appears both the present President of the Ukraine and the Former President of the Ukraine) want power to make money, if given the choice they will want to keep their money. This was also true of the former president of the Ukraine, Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovych, and why he is politically irrelevant today, instead of spending his money to build up support for him being president, he spent the money to show how wealthy he was. This was a big mistake, when push came to shove, he had no one to fall back on to shove back when he was pushed out of the Presidency. Chris McGee (and Putin) never made that mistake, McGee made sure he had support that if push came to shove he had people who would shove for him (one of them was Flinn).
When the protesters started to form up, McGee knew better then to rely on the police and Military, he made sure he had people who would hit that barricade for him. McGee did this by doing favors for people and getting them to understand it was a two way street, he would help them, if they helped him.
Now, the Putin did several things to the Crimea to make them loyal to him, first he increase all of the pensions being paid, he increase base salary being paid, he confiscated property of Ukrainian Oligarchs. Putin has made himself popular in the Crimea.
Now, one of the reason the Ukraine hates the take over of the Crimea is oil, oil it now loses to Russia under the laws of the sea. The 600 foot line is where it is believe the oil is, note Ukraine loses all of its share of that oil:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/23/crimea-an-eu-us-exxon-screwup/
I do NOT suspect Russia wanted this oil, the timing of the take over of the Crimea smacks of reaction to what was happening in Kiev not a plan to steal the oil. On the other hand I suspect Russia knew of this and counted on it when they took the Crimea.
Thus the Ukraine want the profit from that oil more then it wants the Crimea. The problem is they have to work with the Russia Speakers in their own country and have refused to do so.
Thus Ego comes into play, the ego of the Ukrainian West who still hates Russia and want nothing to do with Russia, even though it is the largest country they have a border with (and the longest Border but NOT on their side of the Ukraine). Money is also a factor, that lost of access to Black Sea oil is causing a massive lost of income to some of the Oligarchs in the Ukraine.
On top of this is massive level of refusal to be drafted. In any country in Civil War, if the Civil War is based on something the people have a stake in, they will agree to be drafted. If they have NO stake in the war, they avoid serving. Vietnam was a classic example of this, the US was able to draft troops for Vietnam TILL the majority of Americans came to oppose the war in mid 1968, then draft dodging increased AND the fighting ability of US units decline rapidly. The main reason that Nixon had agreed to the terms in 1972 for American withdraw was US troops were becoming less and less reliable (North Vietnam actually issued orders in 1969 NOT to engage US troops unless attacks, for many US units would go on patrol, find a place to camp. shoot off most of their ammunition but engaged no one. The North Vietnamese just ignored those troops, but watch for those US Units still willing to fight.
The same thing appears to be going on in the Ukraine. Most Ukrainians, except the Rebels and their Russian volunteers, are NOT willing to fight. Thus the Rebels are on the march. Certain Ukrainian units are holding fast, but it appears most are just going through the motions and retreating when caught in combat. The Rebels still have to watch both sets of troops, but the ones going through the motion the Rebels can ignore for once out flanked they will leave.
Now, some units are holding fast, such as those at the airport, but there the Rebels are making their main push.
As I have said before, Kharkov and Odessa are the edge of the area the Rebels want to control. The support for the rebels does NOT exist at all in the Ukrainian west. On the other hand the South and East speak Russian, even in Odessa where most people call themselves Ukrainian (69% but over 50% speak Russian at home in Odessa).
Now, that 50% speak Russian does not mean they support the Rebels, but I also suspect they do not support the present Ukrainian Government either.
Kharkov and Odessa are still far away from the front lines, Kiev is actually closer, but taking Kiev makes no sense to the Rebels for they do NOT want to rule all of the Ukraine, just they part.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27308526
Russian Analyst of the latest fighting (They call the defense of Debaltsevo stupid. Holding that city to launch a further attack actually make sense, but once it was clear they could no longer attack, it was trap that the Ukrainians should have abandoned. He also reports the Ukraine is issuing 1960s era ammunition to its troops, that does not make it bad, but it is at the end of its life expectancy, i.e. there is no more):
http://www.sott.net/article/292166-Kievs-end-may-come-soon-after-the-Debaltsevo-collapse
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2015/02/novorussia-sitrep-debaltsevo-cauldron.html
