Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)

[Wargamer08]

It's fucking trench warfare. If you think this sort of "slow but steady" is a good idea, you need to look up WW1 a bit more, and if you think Russia is an exception and can take it, remind yourself how WW1 ended for Russia.

That's just plainly wrong.
www.npr.org/2024/02/13/1229974838/ukraine-weapons-industry-russia-war

MSN

MSN

The fresh conscripts aren't going to be good for anything other than defensive uses. If they will be doing any advancing, it will be with the other troops relieved from the defensive uses.

Small arms and unrifled artillery on light trucks is some Afghanistan levels of production. They have to send tanks out of country for depot level repairs. Zero medium range missiles, zero medium to heavy artillery. Zero tanks or IFVs. There was talk about a Leo repair/light production factory being set up but I've lost track of how that was going after the third delay.

Again you've just reiterated my issue. Ukraine and Russia are bleeding trained troops. Trained troops are required for offensive action. Offensive action is required to win an active war barring very few exceptions. Therefore Ukraine's inability to regenerate trained troops is a big issue that needs to be solved. Russia is able to train an ever increasing amount of volunteers in safety while Ukraine is spending months dithering over more conscription.

Russia slapped a zero on their dogshit prewar production numbers. In a vacuum, with nobody else bothering they win by default.

 

[Marduk]

Small arms and unrifled artillery on light trucks is some Afghanistan levels of production. They have to send tanks out of country for depot level repairs.

Of course they don't have the infrastructure for depot level repairs of models that they didn't even see before the war started. They do them for the tank models they are familiar with though. Even some smaller NATO militaries have to send those elsewhere.

The Ukraine repair shop: where Russian tanks go to change sides

Western supplies of Leopards and Challengers have made the news, but the biggest donor is the enemy

www.theguardian.com

Ukrainians Repurpose Junkyards And Garages To Repair Battle-Damaged Tanks

The Ukrainians already are finding ways of fixing vehicles without sending them to big, easy-to-target factories.

www.forbes.com

Zero medium range missiles, zero medium to heavy artillery. Zero tanks or IFVs. There was talk about a Leo repair/light production factory being set up but I've lost track of how that was going after the third delay.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/09/01/ukraine-missile-longrange-russia-manufactured/

They don't need more artillery tubes much, they need more rounds for the tubes they already have, and are focusing on that.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-launches-joint-artillery-shell-production-with-nato-country-2023-02-15/

Making modern tanks or IFVs under war conditions is too ambitious to think about, many richer countries are dropping that even in peacetime.

Again you've just reiterated my issue. Ukraine and Russia are bleeding trained troops. Trained troops are required for offensive action. Offensive action is required to win an active war barring very few exceptions. Therefore Ukraine's inability to regenerate trained troops is a big issue that needs to be solved. Russia is able to train an ever increasing amount of volunteers in safety while Ukraine is spending months dithering over more conscription.

Shitload of armor and fire support are needed for offensive action with trained troops, otherwise you will end up with no trained troops and little to show for it.
So it's a moot question for them considering said shitload doesn't seem to be coming.
Also let's not paint Russian "training" of "volunteers" as something more than it is, considering what they did with their actual trained troops like VDV and how they struggle with replacing them.

Russia slapped a zero on their dogshit prewar production numbers. In a vacuum, with nobody else bothering they win by default.

A lot of this is hilarious number magic, they clean up a mothballed T-62 from Siberia, put some new paint on it and some modern gear on it if they had it available at the moment, if not, whatever, and add it to tank production, but that doesn't mean it's a T-90, or even a new tank in general.

 

[LordsFire]

I mean, it's all well and good to talk about how the West in general and the US in particular could step up production of war material if it wanted to. But it so far hasn't.

Planefag literally linked new shell production facilities being built further up the page.

The EU had to cut back it's production targets over and over. It has hundreds of tank orders for various models of Leos and a per year production in the low tens with vague promises of increased numbers years out.

The US has made zero steps towards increasing vehicle production. I don't think even the tooling for more then engine replacements exist for the Abrams. There has been little movement on increasing missile production, orders for Tomahawks were in the tens for the next couple years with again vague statements promising increasing production years out.

The US doesn't need to up tank production. There are thousands of Abrams hulls in storage, and as has been pointed out multiple times, improvements in tank performance these days generally come from the fittings, not the base hull.

And unlike Russia, those hulls are fully capable of being fully modernized, and are generally stored competently, rather than being left to slowly rust and/or be looted by corrupt officers for spare money.

It's fine to poke fun at how badly Russia has rusted from decades of corruption and decay. But at least they are making the attempt. They are in the race, hungover and crippled as they are. The West is still on the couch talking a big game about how they'll win for sure in this arms race, just like they did eighty years ago. And maybe that's true, but not if they don't try. Not if they stay on the couch.

You're conveniently ignoring the places that the West is doing things Russia is completely incapable of matching:

1. Actual production of generation 5 combat aircraft. Russia has either a handful of these or none at all; the US is producing hundreds.
2. Bleeding edge anti-missile technology.
3. Dedicated EW platforms for taking out drones, individually and in swarms.


I'm not familiar with missile production numbers, so you may have a point there, but most of your post is based out of either ignorance or fantasy.

 

[Wargamer08]

Planefag literally linked new shell production facilities being built further up the page.


The US doesn't need to up tank production. There are thousands of Abrams hulls in storage, and as has been pointed out multiple times, improvements in tank performance these days generally come from the fittings, not the base hull.

And unlike Russia, those hulls are fully capable of being fully modernized, and are generally stored competently, rather than being left to slowly rust and/or be looted by corrupt officers for spare money.

You're conveniently ignoring the places that the West is doing things Russia is completely incapable of matching:

1. Actual production of generation 5 combat aircraft. Russia has either a handful of these or none at all; the US is producing hundreds.
2. Bleeding edge anti-missile technology.
3. Dedicated EW platforms for taking out drones, individually and in swarms.


I'm not familiar with missile production numbers, so you may have a point there, but most of your post is based out of either ignorance or fantasy.

Tomahawk production is a meme, it swings between less then 30 and zero and has for the last decade. Not helped by how tied in China is to military production.
America’s Carriers Rely on Chinese Chips, Our Depleted Munitions Too

Refitting Abrams tanks certainly possible. It's just not done in large numbers and usually involves a total power pack rebuild. It's also expensive.

-Edit- Dug a little harder on the Abrams. This compiled by reddit, so beware, but the links inside seem legit. Basically 240ish days for 200 tanks.


I don't know what to tell you. EU delivered less then a third of the shells they promised and complained that they lacked a source of cotton for manufacturing gun cotton. This because they stopped using Chinese cotton over political issues.

-Edit- Found it. "EU internal market commissioner Thierry Breton told reporters in Paris on Friday that the bloc also faced challenges finding the raw materials for gunpowder. "To make powder, you need a specific kind of cotton, which mostly comes from China," he said."

 

[Wargamer08]

Also the Russian airborne casualty claims are vastly overstated. Reuters found about 10% losses in junior officers, a notoriously high casualties position. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/ukraine-crisis-russia-officers/

 

[LordsFire]

Tomahawk production is a meme, it swings between less then 30 and zero and has for the last decade. Not helped by how tied in China is to military production.
America’s Carriers Rely on Chinese Chips, Our Depleted Munitions Too

Refitting Abrams tanks certainly possible. It's just not done in large numbers and usually involves a total power pack rebuild. It's also expensive.

-Edit- Dug a little harder on the Abrams. This compiled by reddit, so beware, but the links inside seem legit. Basically 240ish days for 200 tanks.


I don't know what to tell you. EU delivered less then a third of the shells they promised and complained that they lacked a source of cotton for manufacturing gun cotton. This because they stopped using Chinese cotton over political issues.

-Edit- Found it. "EU internal market commissioner Thierry Breton told reporters in Paris on Friday that the bloc also faced challenges finding the raw materials for gunpowder. "To make powder, you need a specific kind of cotton, which mostly comes from China," he said."

Yes, and Russia can't get western chips, optics, or other subcomponents for their military industry.

Who do you think is going to have an easier time getting replacements, seven out of the ten largest economies in the world, including the technology and agricultural world leader, or Russia?

I'll grant that the lack of urgency on the part of the political class means things are going slower than there is any need for them to be, but Russian advances along the front lines are even slower.

 

[Wargamer08]

Yes, and Russia can't get western chips, optics, or other subcomponents for their military industry.

Who do you think is going to have an easier time getting replacements, seven out of the ten largest economies in the world, including the technology and agricultural world leader, or Russia?

I'll grant that the lack of urgency on the part of the political class means things are going slower than there is any need for them to be, but Russian advances along the front lines are even slower.

You did see the level of Chinese entanglement in US missile manufacturers yes? Why exactly would Russia not be able to just buy from the same Chinese companies? Sure it furthers Russian dependence on China, but that's a long term issue for Russia.

 

[Zachowon]

The is enough ammo we wouldn't need to worry about immediate replacements until thw facilities are up and running. They would be rushed as well so.
A year max.
Less then that in most cases.

Sadly that is the most I can say.
But do know that cyber and electronic warfare are just as important for making sure arms can be produced......

 

[LordsFire]

You did see the level of Chinese entanglement in US missile manufacturers yes? Why exactly would Russia not be able to just buy from the same Chinese companies? Sure it furthers Russian dependence on China, but that's a long term issue for Russia.

China can produce low and mid-quality chips.

They have no capability to produce at the high end, which is almost entirely Taiwan and the USA.

The US is entirely capable of making anything China does when it comes to microchip fabrication. The problem isn't a lack of capability, the problem is that 'try to make China rich enough to stop being communists' as a policy lasted far too long, and there's a whole host of knock-on effects on mid-range manufacturing.

 

[Wargamer08]

China can produce low and mid-quality chips.

They have no capability to produce at the high end, which is almost entirely Taiwan and the USA.

The US is entirely capable of making anything China does when it comes to microchip fabrication. The problem isn't a lack of capability, the problem is that 'try to make China rich enough to stop being communists' as a policy lasted far too long, and there's a whole host of knock-on effects on mid-range manufacturing.

The currently in use US ship launched cruise missile was built in the '80s. It's certainly been modernized since, but not for over a decade. It certainly doesn't need current top grade silicone. The fact that China might not be able to make current Gen chips doesn't matter, at least for disposable applications like missiles and drones.

 

[Wargamer08]

The is enough ammo we wouldn't need to worry about immediate replacements until thw facilities are up and running. They would be rushed as well so.
A year max.
Less then that in most cases.

Sadly that is the most I can say.
But do know that cyber and electronic warfare are just as important for making sure arms can be produced......

The US Navy has currently zero ability to reload ships at sea. It doesn't need the ability anymore you see, because it has fewer anti-shipping/cruse missiles then it has launcher space. That is to say they there is zero surplus ammo if every ship was given a warload. It's not hard to check yourself, the number of available missiles are the amount produced, minus the number used divided into the number of launchers on ships based on typical launcher split. So no, not a year. Every ship gets to fire everything it's got, once.

 

[Zachowon]

The US Navy has currently zero ability to reload ships at sea. It doesn't need the ability anymore you see, because it has fewer anti-shipping/cruse missiles then it has launcher space. That is to say they there is zero surplus ammo if every ship was given a warload. It's not hard to check yourself, the number of available missiles are the amount produced, minus the number used divided into the number of launchers on ships based on typical launcher split. So no, not a year. Every ship gets to fire everything it's got, once.

There is a reason I said what I said, and we have more then enough shipsbto level a country damn near by themselves....

We are no where near our of ammunition.
That is all I will say

 

[The Whispering Monk]

The US Navy has currently zero ability to reload ships at sea. It doesn't need the ability anymore you see, because it has fewer anti-shipping/cruse missiles then it has launcher space. That is to say they there is zero surplus ammo if every ship was given a warload. It's not hard to check yourself, the number of available missiles are the amount produced, minus the number used divided into the number of launchers on ships based on typical launcher split. So no, not a year. Every ship gets to fire everything it's got, once.

If you believe the 'publicly' stated numbers on stocks. I'm SURE that our govt is honest about that kind of thing.
Just like they were honest about how fast the SR71 was...

 

[Zachowon]

If you believe the 'publicly' stated numbers on stocks. I'm SURE that our govt is honest about that kind of thing.
Just like they were honest about how fast the SR71 was...

Obviously we know nothing and he knows the truth

 

[Wargamer08]

If you believe the 'publicly' stated numbers on stocks. I'm SURE that our govt is honest about that kind of thing.
Just like they were honest about how fast the SR71 was...

I mean sure, it's possible and even probable that outside of the public contract tendering for missile refurbishment, some discretionary black funds got spent. But really? I don't think much money got spent on giga-unsexy ammunition stock refurbishment when there are all kinds of far sexier things or easier ways to embezzle money. It's literally nerd quartermaster shit.

Like what do you think is a reasonable margin, an extra 20%? Barring in mind all the other things the navy would want to spend money on, like ships or planes or subs.

 

[Zachowon]

I mean sure, it's possible and even probable that outside of the public contract tendering for missile refurbishment, some discretionary black funds got spent. But really? I don't think much money got spent on giga-unsexy ammunition stock refurbishment when there are all kinds of far sexier things or easier ways to embezzle money. It's literally nerd quartermaster shit.

Like what do you think is a reasonable margin, an extra 20%? Barring in mind all the other things the navy would want to spend money on, like ships or planes or subs.

He is talking more stock in general.
Remeber this.
The US created the SR 71 and the X 15.
No one has yet to beat then and they were created over 40 years ago.
And the 71 still has classified top speed.

There are things we have saved for rainy days. A lot of things

 

[Bacle]

 

[Husky_Khan]

I remember early in the War someone here was saying how the Ukrainian Navy should've sailed out to challenge the Russian Seas Fleet instead of cowering in Port.

Well... I mean the easiest time to launch an amphibious assault on Odessa was anytime before now. The next easiest time is now. 🤷‍♀️

 

[Husky_Khan]

Another case of exotic "volunteers" in Russia:

Clash Report has cultivated a loyal following from the Middle East for his reporting on the Gazan Conflict. Their OSINT work on Ukraine and their OSINT work on Gaza is an interesting contrast for some, and it shows in the comments. Shocking to see how much antipathy the pro-Palestinians in the comments have for Indians... I wonder if they know at least some of those Indians are actually Indian Muslims IIRC.

 

[Marduk]

Clash Report has cultivated a loyal following from the Middle East for his reporting on the Gazan Conflict. Their OSINT work on Ukraine and their OSINT work on Gaza is an interesting contrast for some, and it shows in the comments. Shocking to see how much antipathy the pro-Palestinians in the comments have for Indians... I wonder if they know at least some of those Indians are actually Indian Muslims IIRC.

I'd guess they have a preference in the India-Pakistan conflict.