Mopologist William Schryver Continues His Descent Into Madness

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

They were ineffective.

Thousands of Russian tanks and other armored vehicles have been lost so far in the war due to out-of-date designs, poor maintenance, poor leadership, inadequate training, and low troop morale. After collecting and fixing up the tanks abandoned by the Russians during the Kharkiv counter-offensive, the Ukrainian Army had more operational Russian tanks than they had at the beginning of the war. More than half of Ukraine's tank inventory now consists of Russian equipment captured since February 24, 2022.

It’s become fairly apparent that the Russians thought they could overwhelm Ukraine up front by throwing everything they had, even though their inventory and command structure was total and complete dog crap, to snatch up a coveted territory. <- believe you me, China is watching this and they won’t make the same mistakes Russia did when the time cones to take Taiwan back.

Anyhoo. The chatter on the Interwebs has Russia begging for “peace”, and wants Lukashenko to broker it. Ha. No.

On the upside, the Biden admin has a fiscal year of breathing room so the November elections, should they go the way of a GOP flip, gives Ukraine time to push into Crimea. Hopefully they make some irreversible gains over the next month or two.

Going back to the topic of HIMARS armed with tungsten steel balls - yeah, they’re designed for soft targets and target coverage. I think we’ll see them used on ammo caches, command posts, supply points and trains, and of course clearing trenches, to include clearing mines.

Speaking of trenches, here’s a quick breakdown ref current Russian defensive measures:

https://en.defence-United Airlines.com/news/russians ... -4526.html



WWII called, bro. They want their old timey trench warfare back.

- Doc

[Res Ipsa]

Dayum, that’s some scary stuff. Thanks for the information Dr. W et al.

[Chap]

While we are on the topic of thousands of tungsten balls spraying over infantry concentrations, this UK Ministry of Defence posting seems relevant:




Relying on the market to solve the problem? Very post-Soviet ... I wonder which oligarch is making money out of this?

[DrW]

Going back to the topic of HIMARS armed with tungsten steel balls - yeah, they’re designed for soft targets and target coverage. I think we’ll see them used on ammo caches, command posts, supply points and trains, and of course clearing trenches, to include clearing mines.

Speaking of trenches, here’s a quick breakdown ref current Russian defensive measures:

WWII called, bro. They want their old-timey trench warfare back.
- Doc

Some of those German "Dragon Teeth" defensive lines from WW-11 remain in place today. Once the allies had air superiority, those defensive constructions were not of much value.

If the Russians don’t simply abandon these new defensive structures first, I don’t see that they would delay a counter-offensive by more than a day or so once air superiority is established. After shelling them from a distance, (and perhaps using HIMARS to clear the trenches), MICLIC line charges and bulldozers (or even local farm equipment if necessary) could be used to render the defensive structures useless with much less time and effort than it took to install them.

This is but one more indication that the Russians are throwing anything they can think of against a Ukrainian Teflon-coated wall to see if anything sticks. No luck so far.

To date, we have seen the wholesale replacement of military leadership, either because of combat mortality or incompetence, coercive and disarrayed mobilization, missile terror attacks on civilian targets, threats of nuclear weapons use, and retreat in the face of Ukrainian advances. Added to this are Russian troops surrendering themselves and their equipment to Ukraine in exchange for bounty and Ukrainian citizenship, construction of useless WW II era defenses 20 km behind the front lines, and behind the scenes pleading by Putin for a cease-fire and "peace talks" (no doubt so that he can regroup, re-arm and try again in the spring).
_________________

The youtube video linked below shows the surrender of a Russian BMP-2 crew under the Ukrainian program that rewards Russian troops for surrendering with their equipment intact. The bounty for the surrendered equipment is set at some small fraction of the replacement cost so that Ukraine gains economically. In this case, the equipment was a BMP-2 infantry fighting vehicle.

The bounty for a BMP-2 is about $250K. Not sure what a BMP-2 costs new. The American Bradley fighting vehicle, which is a bit larger and more capable, costs $3.6 million. So, let's assume that the BMP-2 is worth roughly a million.

If so, Ukraine is gaining one in good shape at a 75% discount. This in addition to taking its crew out of the fight and gaining their intel and propaganda benefits. Instead of dying for Putin, each one of the crew will get his share of the $250K and Ukrainian citizenship if they request it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sB1c1IqaKfc

Imagine Russians at home - or worse yet, Russian troops with cell phones - getting access to that youtube video. Putin would be pulling his hair out.
___________________________

Note how professionally the Ukrainian troops organize and handle the surrender. The BMP crew has been instructed to have their 30 mm cannon fully elevated and wrapped on a white sheet. Ukrainian troops are spread out alongside the road out of sight and under cover. No one breaks cover within the field of fire of the BMP-2 cannon. Once the BMP-2 is stopped, it is approached from behind and the crew is ordered out and onto the ground.

[Physics Guy]

The video of the BMP surrender does look pretty good. The Ukrainians could in fact be a lot more spread out, but infantry tend to clump together too closely all the time, and at some point it's a trade-off between offering a concentrated target and being out of hearing distance from each other. These guys are at least far enough apart from each other that you can tell they know they're not supposed to clump together.

If it's staged, it was at least staged by people who knew what they should be trying to portray. It is, however, the kind of thing that easily could be staged. The Ukrainian army has plenty of its own BMPs, plus it must have captured some.

Things that look somewhat suspicious:

1) This Russian BMP drives up all by itself. BMPs are usually deployed in platoons of three or four, which are part of companies of three or four platoons. So how did this one get away from its buddies to go and surrender alone? I'm sure it could happen somehow, but it would be a story, not something that goes without saying.

2) The camera. What fool is standing up filming while everyone else is wisely lying much lower? If one BMP just came over the hill, another one could come over at any moment, and you might not hear it over the engine of this one. Or this one, which seems only to have two guys in it, might have dropped off its load of riflemen just behind that last hill, and they are sneaking up right now to shoot everyone.

Either of those scenarios would be bold to the point of recklessness for the Russians. One or two BMPs are a small force to try to tackle a section of Ukrainian infantry even with a tricky fake surrender. It would be two-to-one odds in the Russians' favour, plus their vehicles, but those aren't normally high enough odds for an attack. You want at least three-to-one, plus artillery support. With only a couple of BMPs and two-to-one numbers, you'd be very likely to win but too many of your own guys might die, and armies don't end up winning when every soldier can expect to be expended for a few meters of progress. So it would probably be a fairly good bet for the Ukrainians to assume that this lone BMP was a genuine surrender attempt and not an ambush lure. When your life is at stake, though, you normally want to have more security than a fairly good bet. This camera view looks suspiciously careless.

Maybe the camera is being held up on a selfie stick, or at least at arm's length. This BMP only has its 73mm gun as an external armament and as long as that thing is clearly pointed at the sky, you're not going to get shot in the next second. So maybe this camera person was only brave, not insane or knowingly filming a harmless fake.

And if a BMP did get away from its unit, it is probably more likely to do so with just its driver and gunner than with its whole section. If nothing else the driver and gunner might want to freeze the rest of the section out of the bounty money and get it all for themselves.

So the film is by no means obviously staged. It might be genuine. It might still also be staged. If it was staged, it was at least staged pretty competently. I'd mainly like to see where that BMP came from. The sudden start of the film is the most suspicious thing, now that I think about it, but maybe it was just edited by whomever posted it, to cut out boring footage of a tiny vehicle approaching from the distance.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

When I was stationed at Fort Irwin I was in the “OPFOR” (‘opposing force’ for Shades), and we drove BMP and BRDM mock-ups. We utilized Russian doctrine for ‘force on force’ training. I had 45 rotations under my belt, not counting the various internal exercises where we’d play “BLUFOR” (‘blue forces’ meaning ‘good guys’ for Shades). So through sheer proximity I gained a good sense for Russian military doctrine - I spent a good amount of time in our “TOC” (‘tactical operations center’ for Shades) cross-training with the analysts, giving briefings, so on and so forth. It was quite the education, so to speak.

To the point, the team being isolated isn’t unusual. When you’re on the battlefield you can be separated from command by 20 miles, no problem. Defensive posts, scout teams, maneuver elements, intel, whatever; a platoon or fire team is primarily left alone, so coordinating a surrender is easy enough, much more easy if you’re in a vehicle because you can get out of Dodge much quicker.

eta for BMP &BRDM definitions - BMP & BRDM = mech infantry and scout vehicles, but they’re used for cross spectrum ops which just means they’re work horses used for everything under the sun

- Doc

[DrW]

While we are on the topic of thousands of tungsten balls spraying over infantry concentrations, this UK Ministry of Defence posting seems relevant:

Relying on the market to solve the problem? Very post-Soviet ... I wonder which oligarch is making money out of this?

In this vein, one also wonders who benefitted from supplying the concrete for all of those WW-II dragon tooth barriers in Doc's image above. Even if the obstacles were already in inventory, they would still need to be shipped, installed, and the trenches dug (by machine no less). Looks like a "busy work" (we do it because we can) project to me.

[DrW]

So the film is by no means obviously staged. It might be genuine. It might still also be staged. If it was staged, it was at least staged pretty competently. I'd mainly like to see where that BMP came from. The sudden start of the film is the most suspicious thing, now that I think about it, but maybe it was just edited by whomever posted it, to cut out boring footage of a tiny vehicle approaching from the distance.

1. As to the question of whether the surrender video recording was staged, I would vote “no”. The Ukrainian troops started shouting orders to halt as soon as the BMP-2 passed the first or second dismounted soldier who was hidden from view. However, the BMP-2 didn't stop for more than 100 meters or so after the first shouted instruction to do so. If it had been staged, one would guess the vehicle's driver would have known where the ground troops were and stopped when first instructed.

2. Doc cam explained why it would not have been unusual for the BMP-2 to be separated and effectively isolated from the rest of its formation.

3. The 73mm cannon mentioned by Physics Guy was on the BMP-1. The vehicle in the surrender video was identified as a later BMP-2, which has a 30mm autocannon with selectable rates of fire.

4. The camera operator appeared to be on foot and moved parallel to the BMP-2 during the surrender scene. With the BMP-2 cannon barrel pointed at the sky and shrouded in white so he (or she) could clearly see it, they probably felt safe in making the video.

5. What was shown was identified as 90 seconds of a five-minute video. Had it been staged, there would not have been any need for the longer recording. The length of the original recording indicates that no one was sure how events were going to unfold.

6. Anyone who watched the rest of the report video would see that some Russian troops googled the instructions for surrendering as soon as they knew they were headed for Ukraine. The extended video showed that some Russian troops do have cell phones that provide access to information and instructions on how to surrender. The bounties paid for equipment were also readily available to Russian troops who owned or had access to a cell phone in the field. The instructions no doubt spread among poorly disciplined troops by word of mouth.

_________________________

Economics Will Eventually Determine the Outcome of the War in Ukraine

Of more general interest regarding the prospects for Russia in Ukraine, here is a video from the World Bank that explains why the Russian economy was in such a sorry state before the war. It makes a good case as to why the outcome of the Ukraine conflict will, in the long run, be determined by economics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAMz5kgb7V4

___________________

Russian Economics in American Business (You can't make this stuff up)

As mentioned upthread, I spent a year or so as the "CEO" of a Russian-owned start-up company in the US. CEO is in quotes because the board of directors really ran the company. The board was comprised of the two main investors - Russian oligarch brothers who lived in Switzerland - a former KGB agent living with his trophy wife and two great kids in a luxury beachfront condo who drove a new Bentley and a new Porsche, a Russian scientist who also owned several high-end cars, including a Porsche which he raced, a female Ukrainian college professor with whom I had worked previously (token female), and me (token American).

My tenure as CEO was short because of concerns by my previous employer and the Denver International Airport (Defense Intelligence Agency). This was because Russian nationals controlled the board and had managed to get themselves on the radar of the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) as well as the Denver International Airport, the State Department (USA Patriot Act), and who knows who else. The Russian attitude at the time toward business described in the video emerging from the financial crisis of the early 1990s was very much in play here in the US.

When asked by American colleagues how one might end up with a 20 million dollar company in such a short time, my response would always be, "Invest a hundred million dollars and let the Russians run it."

Things with this business eventually worked out, resulting in a US company that makes automotive battery packs used mainly for mobile equipment in warehouses.

[Chap]

Just to remind everybody why the Ukrainians must be given what it takes to win this war:

Russian troops kill Ukrainian musician for refusing role in Kherson concert
International condemnation swift after conductor Yuriy Kerpatenko shot dead in his home

Charlotte Higgins and Artem Mazhulin in Kyiv
Guardian Sun 16 Oct 2022 10.54 BST
Russian soldiers have shot dead a Ukrainian musician in his home after he refused to take part in a concert in occupied Kherson, according to the culture ministry in Kyiv.



Conductor Yuriy Kerpatenko declined to take part in a concert “intended by the occupiers to demonstrate the so-called ‘improvement of peaceful life’ in Kherson”, the ministry said in a statement on its Facebook page.

The concert on 1 October was intended to feature the Gileya chamber orchestra, of which Kerpatenko was the principal conductor, but he “categorically refused to cooperate with the occupants”, the statement said.

Kerpatenko, who was also the principal conductor of Kherson’s Mykola Kulish Music and Drama Theatre, had been posting defiant messages on his Facebook page until May.

The Kherson regional prosecutor’s office in Ukraine has launched a formal investigation “on the basis of violations of the laws and customs of war, combined with intentional murder”. Family members outside Kherson lost contact with the conductor in September, it said.

Condemnation by Ukrainian and international artists was swift. “The history of Russia imposing a ‘comply or die’ policy against artists is nothing new. It has a history which spans for hundred of years,” said the Finnish-Ukrainian conductor Dalia Stasevska, who was scheduled to conduct the Last Night of the Proms at London’s Albert Hall last month before it was cancelled because of the Queen’s death.

“I have seen too much silence from Russian colleagues,” she said. “Would this be the time for Russian musicians, especially those living and working abroad, to finally step up and take a stand against the Russian regime’s actions in Ukraine?”

[Physics Guy]

1. As to the question of whether the surrender video recording was staged, I would vote “no”. The Ukrainian troops started shouting orders to halt as soon as the BMP-2 passed the first or second dismounted soldier who was hidden from view. However, the BMP-2 didn't stop for more than 100 meters or so after the first shouted instruction to do so. If it had been staged, one would guess the vehicle's driver would have known where the ground troops were and stopped when first instructed.

A good point that I missed because I didn't listen to the sound.

2. Doc cam explained why it would not have been unusual for the BMP-2 to be separated and effectively isolated from the rest of its formation.

I still wonder about this one, but it is plausible that BMPs get used in all kinds of roles besides the official main one of being one of a dozen-odd vehicles in a motor rifle company, so maybe this lone BMP was one of those detached vehicles.

3. The 73mm cannon mentioned by Physics Guy was on the BMP-1. The vehicle in the surrender video was identified as a later BMP-2, which has a 30mm autocannon with selectable rates of fire.

I stand corrected. I'm not sure I was ever very clear on which BMP model had what. The whole idea of giving them big guns seemed doubtful when being a gun platform and a battle taxi is like being a floor wax and a dessert topping. Everybody wanting heavier armour and weapons because they are cooler, until a new lighter and more mobile unit has to be introduced, is a persistent military cycle that goes right back to ancient times.

5. What was shown was identified as 90 seconds of a five-minute video. Had it been staged, there would not have been any need for the longer recording. The length of the original recording indicates that no one was sure how events were going to unfold.

Another good point.

6. Anyone who watched the rest of the report video would see that some Russian troops googled the instructions for surrendering as soon as they knew they were headed for Ukraine. The extended video showed that some Russian troops do have cell phones that provide access to information and instructions on how to surrender. The bounties paid for equipment were also readily available to Russian troops who owned or had access to a cell phone in the field. The instructions no doubt spread among poorly disciplined troops by word of mouth.

If this is true, it's a horrifying situation from the Russian point of view. Surrendering in battle when the situation is hopeless is one thing, but voluntarily driving out to hand over an armed and armoured vehicle to the enemy for cash is plain treason. It's a big step worse than just sabotaging your own vehicle and walking home.

Imagine what your former comrades are going to think of you for handing over the weapon that may well kill some of them. If anybody at home ever finds out what you did, even years after the war, you could expect to be painfully murdered. Tying that white sheet round your barrel and driving over the line would not be a step to take lightly.