A lot of people are wondering what the deal is with the so-called "cauldrons" in which the Ukie forces seem to get surrounded over and over again. Are the Ukie generals simply stupid, or what is the deal? I will try to explain.
Remember that that Ukie forces are typically "heavy". They have lots of tanks, lots of artillery, lost of ammo, lots of soldiers, etc. At least initially. They are also much inferior in terms of tactical skills, morale and willpower. In contrast, the Resistance forces have dramatically fewer tanks, fewer artillery pieces, much less ammo and less soldiers too. But their morale is sky-high, their tactical skills excellent and they are fighting on their own land - a big "home turf" advantage. Add to all this the following: the Ukies are desperately trying to prove to the world that they are "winning" whereas the Resistance is trying to eject an occupying force. Now if you keep all that in mind, you will very easily understand how these "cauldrons" form. It typically goes like this:
The political powers in Kiev order the commanders of the so-called "anti-terrorist operation" to show some results. The latter get together and define what they consider a number of key towns and villages. They then order their forces to go in and take these towns/villages. The junta forces move in and with much superior firepower typically destroy a few Resistance roadblocks on the main roads and move to seize the said towns. At this point they report "mission accomplished - our flag is on the administration of town X". The BBC picks up the info handed to them by the Ukies and the world learns of yet another Ukie victory. In the meantime, Ukie terror squads are brought in to smoke out any sympathizers of the Resistances in the occupied towns. As for the tanks, they are used to protect the Ukie force while their artillery is used long range to terrorize the population of the next town on the list.
Then everything goes down the tubes.
First, a big forces requires lots of petroleum, lubricants, ammo, supplies, food, etc. But the roads are under constant attack by Resistance forces. Next, the Novorussians slowly but inevitably bring in some artillery which begins ponding on the Ukie forces. Gradually, the bigger Ukie forces is forced to dig in while the Resistance take back full control of the main roads and surrounding towns. That's it - the circle has closed, the Ukies are surrounded and a 'cauldron' has formed.
At that point two things happen: a) the Ukies try to retreat b) reinforcements are sent in to rescue them. But at this point the density and quality of Resistance forces is sufficient to block the main roads and to prevent both retreats or reinforcements. In some cases the Ukies succeed in breaking out or reinforcing, but typically at great costs in equipment and lives. And that brings me to another important point:
The Ukies prefer to fight on the main roads. The Resistance is at home in the forests, hills, fields and bushes (what the Russian military calls the "The Green"). That means that Ukie movements are very predictable. Not so for the Resistance. The Ukies fear the "Green" - the Novorussians love it. I don't know of a single battle so far in which the Ukies attempted to attack through, or from. the "Green". The Novorussians do that all the time.
Pretty soon, supplies become a real problem, and with more or less the entire Ukie Air Forces kaput, and the density of anti-air weapons of the Resistance, even large units go from a fighting mode to a survival mode. At least 4 Ukie death squads are in that mode right now, today.
But remember, the Ukies sill have more armor and more firepower, so it is not that easy to reduce and crush a cauldron - that is why the Resistance needs so much time to eventually finish them off. They do though, one by one. If they had the time and forces, they could do it easily, but they don't.
Right now, the main forces protecting Mariupol are all stuck in 2-3 cauldrons southeast of Donetsk. But instead of wasting time reducing them, the Novorussian Armed Forces have launched an attack along the sea coast towards Mariupol were the Ukies are already in a panic mode as nothing much stands between them and the Resistance. And this is the correct move for the Novorussians.
Just as in chess a blocked figure is essentially useless, so is a Ukie force in a cauldron. The important thing is to keep the initiative and press the advantage. This is why the Resistance is pushing towards Mariupol. If that city is taken, or even surrounded, or if the cauldrons south of Donetsk are reduced, that will mean a collapse of the entire southern front of the Ukie attack on Novorussia.
There are risks however. First, any Novorussian force moved in or towards Mariupol risks been cut off and surrounded by Ukie reinforcements. Now, I don't know for a fact what the Ukies are up to, but I bet you that there is total panic in Kiev and that reinforcements are sent from all over the country to prevent Mariupol from falling into Novorussian hands. The Novorussians need to keep a very careful eye over their shoulder (but then, I am pretty sure that the many GRU eyes in space and on the ground are already doing that for them). Second, the surrounded Ukies can try to join forces and then either break out or attack towards the north. If they fail, they will probably either do what they have done in the past - run for their lives and abandon all their heavy equipment or fight to the last man. Either way is fine for the Novorussians.
I hope that the short (and somewhat simplified) explanation above explain, at least in general lines, why and how these "cauldrons" are constantly forming.
Cheers and kind regards,
The Saker
Showing posts with label military tactics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label military tactics. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 26, 2014
Sunday, June 30, 2013
Syrian Army tactics and few examples of how Russia, China and Iran could help
The Abhazian Network News Agency ANNA (http://anna-news.info/ and http://www.youtube.com/user/newsanna) and its editor in chief, Marat Musin (http://maramus.livejournal.com/) have recorded some truly fantastic coverage from the frontlines of the war in Syria. Alas, the video commentary is always in Russian, hence I do not show these videos here, but their latest video shows a good example of the new tactics adopted by the Syrian army. Take a look at this photo:
It shows a Syrian Army T-72 using its smoke-generation capability not to hide itself as much as to hide the soldiers behind it from sniper fire while advancing into a covered position. Just a few minutes after the moment shown here, a solider was still wounded by a sniper shot, which tells you how much of a problem these snipers are. The sniper, by the way, was spotted and killed using a rocket.
Now check out this photo:
It shows you a wider angle of the same battle scene. Notice the third armored vehicle behind the two tanks? This is a a Syrian Army BMP-2, an infantry fighting vehicle. To see tanks supported by infantry fighting vehicles is typical, but in this case the BMP-2 is used as a rapid and safe evacuation vehicle for wounded soldiers. Again, a very nice adaptation of available resources to different circumstances.
What is also curious is what is not shown on this footage:
1) no helicopters or aircraft
2) no use of artillery
3) the infantry assault groups are rather lightly armed
I suppose that the very close proximity of the two fighting sides can explain the lack of airstrikes (they are close enough to toss hand grenades at each other). I suppose that tanks could be considered as more accurate than, say, mortars, but they can only shoot in a direct line of sight way whereas mortars can be used to strike target hidden behind obstacles. Yet the Syrian only use tank and rockets, both direct fire support means. I am not sure why.
As to why the Syrian assault groups are so much more lightly armed than the Russian assault groups were in Grozny I suppose that this indicate that the Syrian Army simply lacks that kind of weapons and maybe that is something which Russia could deliver to them. I am thinking of the following weapons:
Judging from the ANNA news footage, the Syrians are only using regular AKM-74 assault rifles and SVD sniper rifles. While these are extremely reliable and effective, they simply do not provide the assault groups the kind of tactical flexibility which modern weapons designed for urban warfare do. And that means that Syrian soldiers have to take extra risks to compensate for their small choice of equipment.
Furthermore, the beauty of the gear I listed above is that it is small in size and can be delivered by land, sea and air without triggering any suspicion. Equipment like that can be loaded in the cargo bay of any civilian aircraft and delivered without anybody noticing anything.
Finally, there is no need to deliver large amounts of such weapons as these are not primary, general purpose, infantry weapons, but rather specialized weapons needed in small number to support the larger infantry force.
In conclusion, I would add that there is a lot of non-lethal gear which Russia, China and Iran could give to the Syrians, including modern encrypted radio systems, compact field-hospitals and medical gear, RPVs for intelligence collection, electronic warfare equipment, etc.
If this situation drags on, as I think it will, I hope that Russia, China and Iran will start delivering a steady flow of key equipment to the Syrians which really could make a difference in this war.
The Saker
PS: I wanted to add here that according to Russian military experts who spent some time observing the Syrian Army operations the typical casualty ratio between the Syrian Army and the Wahabis is 1:8 on average (meaning 8 Wahabis killed/injured for every one Syrian solider) and much higher when the Syrian manage to surprise the Wahabis. One can only dream of the ratios the Syrian could achieve if given better urban warfare weapons!
It shows a Syrian Army T-72 using its smoke-generation capability not to hide itself as much as to hide the soldiers behind it from sniper fire while advancing into a covered position. Just a few minutes after the moment shown here, a solider was still wounded by a sniper shot, which tells you how much of a problem these snipers are. The sniper, by the way, was spotted and killed using a rocket.
Now check out this photo:
It shows you a wider angle of the same battle scene. Notice the third armored vehicle behind the two tanks? This is a a Syrian Army BMP-2, an infantry fighting vehicle. To see tanks supported by infantry fighting vehicles is typical, but in this case the BMP-2 is used as a rapid and safe evacuation vehicle for wounded soldiers. Again, a very nice adaptation of available resources to different circumstances.
What is also curious is what is not shown on this footage:
1) no helicopters or aircraft
2) no use of artillery
3) the infantry assault groups are rather lightly armed
I suppose that the very close proximity of the two fighting sides can explain the lack of airstrikes (they are close enough to toss hand grenades at each other). I suppose that tanks could be considered as more accurate than, say, mortars, but they can only shoot in a direct line of sight way whereas mortars can be used to strike target hidden behind obstacles. Yet the Syrian only use tank and rockets, both direct fire support means. I am not sure why.
As to why the Syrian assault groups are so much more lightly armed than the Russian assault groups were in Grozny I suppose that this indicate that the Syrian Army simply lacks that kind of weapons and maybe that is something which Russia could deliver to them. I am thinking of the following weapons:
The RPO-A Shmel rocket launched infantry flamethrower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPO-A_Shmel)I want to stress here that all these weapons have been used by Russian assault teams in Chechnia and that they are not some kind of supermodern unique weapon that only Russian Spetsnaz forces have access to (for an example of that, check out the VKS "Vykhlop" silenced heavy sniper rifle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdvuZZOhW2U).
The GM-94 grenade launcher (http://world.guns.ru/grenade/rus/gm-94-e.html)
The PP-19 submachine gun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PP-19_Bizon)
The VSS Vintorez special sniper rifle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VSS_Vintorez)
The AS Val special assault rifle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AS_Val)
The Pecheneg machine gun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pecheneg_machine_gun)
The OSV-96 special sniper weapon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSV-96)
Judging from the ANNA news footage, the Syrians are only using regular AKM-74 assault rifles and SVD sniper rifles. While these are extremely reliable and effective, they simply do not provide the assault groups the kind of tactical flexibility which modern weapons designed for urban warfare do. And that means that Syrian soldiers have to take extra risks to compensate for their small choice of equipment.
Furthermore, the beauty of the gear I listed above is that it is small in size and can be delivered by land, sea and air without triggering any suspicion. Equipment like that can be loaded in the cargo bay of any civilian aircraft and delivered without anybody noticing anything.
Finally, there is no need to deliver large amounts of such weapons as these are not primary, general purpose, infantry weapons, but rather specialized weapons needed in small number to support the larger infantry force.
In conclusion, I would add that there is a lot of non-lethal gear which Russia, China and Iran could give to the Syrians, including modern encrypted radio systems, compact field-hospitals and medical gear, RPVs for intelligence collection, electronic warfare equipment, etc.
If this situation drags on, as I think it will, I hope that Russia, China and Iran will start delivering a steady flow of key equipment to the Syrians which really could make a difference in this war.
The Saker
PS: I wanted to add here that according to Russian military experts who spent some time observing the Syrian Army operations the typical casualty ratio between the Syrian Army and the Wahabis is 1:8 on average (meaning 8 Wahabis killed/injured for every one Syrian solider) and much higher when the Syrian manage to surprise the Wahabis. One can only dream of the ratios the Syrian could achieve if given better urban warfare weapons!
Friday, March 22, 2013
Has Ayatollah Ali Khamenei made an empty threat? (UPDATED)
If this is not yet another case of mistaken translation, as there have been many in the past, then it appears that the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has made a completely empty threat towards Israel. According to RT,
The biggest problem with all that is that this threat is nonsensical. Never in the history of warfare has a city been razed by missile attacks. From the Nazi V-1/V-2 strikes on London, to Saddam's strikes on US forces in the Persian Gulf and on Israel, missiles were never effective in striking cities. In fact, unless they carry nuclear warheads, missiles are not at all suited for that task simply because of the relatively small payloads they carry. For example, the throw-weight of the Iranian Shahab-4 is reportedly less than 1000kg. Sure, 1 ton of high-explosives or cluster warheads will result in a huge explosion, but that is no bigger than the old V-2 rocket were capable of. It will bring down any building, or even a street block, but you would need a huge number of missiles to really raze a major city. Frankly, there are only three ways to raze a city: nuclear warheads, carped bombing from the air, or a massive and sustained artillery barrage. Iran can deliver none of these.
Iran does have an impressive missile force, and Iran's missiles can painfully strike Israel, these missile can destroy key buildings in Israeli cities, which will create a panic and chaos, and if Hezbollah joins in these strikes with its own missiles the panic in Israel will be total, but even in these conditions no city in Israel will be "razed to the ground".
The Iranian leadership should be very careful to avoid making bombastic but empty threats as these only damage Iran's credibility and serve Zionist interests.
The Saker
UPDATE: alas, the translation has been confirmed by PressTV. This is most unfortunate and, I would add, rather uncharacteristic of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Iran’s most powerful authority, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said the Islamic Republic would raze the cities of Tel Aviv and Haifa “to the ground” if Israel launched a military strike against it. “At times the officials of the Zionist regime [Israel] threaten to launch a military invasion, but they themselves know that if they make the slightest mistake the Islamic Republic will raze Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground,” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said during an address on live state television.Sure enough, the Zio-media turned that into yet another "proof" that the Iranians are hell-bent on genocide.
The biggest problem with all that is that this threat is nonsensical. Never in the history of warfare has a city been razed by missile attacks. From the Nazi V-1/V-2 strikes on London, to Saddam's strikes on US forces in the Persian Gulf and on Israel, missiles were never effective in striking cities. In fact, unless they carry nuclear warheads, missiles are not at all suited for that task simply because of the relatively small payloads they carry. For example, the throw-weight of the Iranian Shahab-4 is reportedly less than 1000kg. Sure, 1 ton of high-explosives or cluster warheads will result in a huge explosion, but that is no bigger than the old V-2 rocket were capable of. It will bring down any building, or even a street block, but you would need a huge number of missiles to really raze a major city. Frankly, there are only three ways to raze a city: nuclear warheads, carped bombing from the air, or a massive and sustained artillery barrage. Iran can deliver none of these.
Iran does have an impressive missile force, and Iran's missiles can painfully strike Israel, these missile can destroy key buildings in Israeli cities, which will create a panic and chaos, and if Hezbollah joins in these strikes with its own missiles the panic in Israel will be total, but even in these conditions no city in Israel will be "razed to the ground".
The Iranian leadership should be very careful to avoid making bombastic but empty threats as these only damage Iran's credibility and serve Zionist interests.
The Saker
UPDATE: alas, the translation has been confirmed by PressTV. This is most unfortunate and, I would add, rather uncharacteristic of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
