Notes from an analyst

Ukrainian Infantry… not analysts

Franz-Stefan Gady is a conflict journalist and military analyst with experience embedding with NATO forces, Kurdish militias, and the (former) Afghan national army. He just spent time at the front in Ukraine with prominent (on Twitter) military analysts Michael Koffman and Rob Lee, and has reported back on what he saw. This is a transcript of his relevant tweet thread:

1.) By and large this is an infantryman’s fight (squad, platoon & company level) supported by artillery along most of the frontline. This has several implications: 1st: Progress is measured by yards/meters and not km/miles given reduced mobility. 2nd: Mechanized formations are rarely deployed due to lack of enablers for maneuver. This includes insufficient quantities of de-mining equipment, air defenses, ATGMs etc.

2.) Ukrainian forces have still not mastered combined arms operations at scale. Operations are more sequential than synchronized. This creates various problems for the offense and IMO is the main cause for slow progress.

3.) Ukrainian] forces by default have switched to a strategy of attrition relying on sequential fires rather than maneuver. This is the reason why cluster munitions are critical to extend current fire rates into the fall: weakening Russian defenses to a degree that enables maneuver.

4.) Minefields are a problem as most observers know. They confine maneuver space and slow advances. But much more impactful than the minefields per se on Ukraine’s ability to break through Russian defenses is Ukraine’s inability to conduct complex combined arms operations at scale. Lack of a comprehensive combined arms approach at scale makes Ukrainian forces more vulnerable to Russian ATGMs, artillery etc. while advancing. So it’s not just about equipment. There’s simply no systematic pulling apart of the Russian defensive system that I could observe.

5.) The character of this offensive will only likely change if there is a more systematic approach to breaking through Russian defenses, perhaps paired with or causing a severe degradation of Russian morale, that will lead to a sudden or gradual collapse of Russian defenses. Absent a sudden collapse of Russian defenses, I suspect this will remain a bloody attritional fight with reserve units being fed in incrementally in the coming weeks and months.

6.) There is limited evidence of a systematic deep battle that methodically degrades Russian C2/munitions. Despite rationing on the Russian side, ammunition is available and Russians appear to have fairly good battlefield ISR coverage. Russians also had no need to deploy operational reserves yet to fend off Ukrainian attacks.There is also evidence of reduced impact of HIMARS strikes due to effective Russian countermeasures. (This is important to keep in mind re. any potential tactical impact of delivery of ATACMs.) Russian forces, even if severely degraded and lacking ammo, are likely capable of delaying, containing or repulsing individual platoon- or company-sized Ukrainian advances unless these attacks are better coordinated and synchronized along the broader frontline.

7.) Quality of Russian forces varies. Attrition is hitting them hard but they are defending their positions well, according to Ukrainians we spoke to. They have been quite adaptable at the tactical level and are broadly defending according to Soviet/Russian doctrine.

8.) Russian artillery rationing is real and happening. Ukraine has established fire superiority in tube artillery while Russia retains superiority in MRLSs in the South. Localized fire superiority in some calibers alone does not suffice, however, to break through Russian defenses.

9.) An additional influx of weapons systems (e.g., ATACMs, air defense systems, MBTs, IFVs etc.) while important to sustain the war effort, will likely not have a decisive tactical impact without adaptation and more effective integration.

Ukraine will have to better synchronize and adapt current tactics, without which western equipment will not prove tac. decisive in the long run. This is happening  but it is slow work in progress. (Most NATO-style militaries would struggle with this even more than the Ukrainians IMO).

10.) The above is also true for breaching operations. Additional mine clearing equipment is needed and will be helpful (especially man-portable mine-clearing systems) but not decisive without better integration of fire & maneuver at scale. (Again, I cannot emphasize enough how difficult this is to pull off in wartime.) Monocausal explanations for failure (like lack of de-mining equipment) do not reflect reality. E.g Some Ukrainian assaults were stopped by Russian ATGMs even before reaching the 1st Russian minefield.

11.) There is a dearth of artillery barrels that is difficult to address given production rates and delivery timelines.

12.) So far Ukraine’s approach in this counteroffensive has been first and foremost direct assaults on Russian positions supported by a rudimentary deep battle approach. And no, these  direct assaults are not mere probing attacks.

13.) There is evidence of tactical cyber operations supporting closing of kinetic kill-chains. That is cyber ISR contributing to identifying & tracking targets on the battlefield. Starlink remains absolutely key for Ukrainian C2.

14.) Quality of Ukrainian officers and NCOs we met appears excellent & morale remains high. However, there are some force quality issues emerging with less able bodied & older men called up for service now.

15.) The narrative that Ukrainian progress thus far is slow just because of a lack of weapons deliveries and support is monocausal and is not shared by those we spoke to actually fighting and exercising command on the frontline.

16.) It goes without saying that in a war of attrition, more artillery ammunition and hardware is always needed and needs to be steadily supplied. (Western support of Ukraine certainly should continue as there is still the prospect that the counteroffensive will make gains.) But soldiers fighting on the frontline we spoke to are all too aware that lack of progress is often more due to force employment, poor tactics, lack of coordination [between] units, bureaucratic red tape/infighting, Soviet style thinking etc. and Russians putting up stiff resistance.

None of this is new to anyone reading me the past year and a half—I’ve long argued that combined arms warfare is incredibly difficult, that NATO armies struggle with it even with regular training, and that Ukraine couldn’t just learn it in 3-6 months, no matter how smart and motivated they are.

Gady writes that, “Ukrainian forces have still not mastered combined arms operations at scale. Operations are more sequential than synchronized.” In proper combined arms operations, all the elements work together as one. By sequential, he means something like this: Artillery strikes these trenches first, then armor softens them up more before infantry moves in to finish the job.

Comment: I’m surprised Gady didn’t mention the role of drones. I suppose he was getting around to it in his point 13, although his phrasing smacks of think tank gobbledegook. Ukraine has raised the use of relatively cheap drones for reconnaissance, target acquisition and attack to a high state of military art. The Russians have taken notice of this are are working to emulate their adversary. Their Lancet attack drones has already proven to be an effective weapon. The rest of the world’s armies have a lot of catching up to do.

Gady notes that in addition to not enough artillery ammunition, there are not enough replacement artillery tubes. Although EUCOM has established depots for refurbishing artillery pieces in Poland, more are needed. Russia seems to be suffering from the same problems as evidenced by their artillery rationing. Their unending stocks of artillery and ammunition appear to be coming to an end.

Gady notes that Ukraine is still not able to conduct combined arms operations at scale. Tom Cooper notes the same thing. A point to keep in mind, though, is that gaining and maintaining air superiority is an important aspect of our combined arms operations. Such operations may be possible if those combined arms forces could maneuver under a robust AD/A2 umbrella that moves with the combined arms force, but I don’t think such a thing has ever been tried. Tom Cooper describes how Ukrainian forces are operating in lieu of combined arms maneuver. It sounds effective, maybe not at generating exciting headlines, but effective.

I also recommend the latest interview with the Ukrainian artillery officer with the call sign Arty Green. Mark Logan provided the link to that interview a few days ago. His views on the current counteroffensive tracks with what Tom Cooper said. But I also think Arty Green is overly optimistic about the fall of the Putin regime. My view is that Putin will easily last into next near at least, as will the war.


This entry was posted in The Military Art, TTG, Ukraine Crisis. Bookmark the permalink.

76 Responses to Notes from an analyst

  1. Jimmy_w says:

    Other mainstream reporting on the stalled counter-offensive, reversing the former happy-talk “shaping phase” propaganda.

    TTG, your Gady article and the above CNBC article conclusively shows that the whole “Shaping Phase” nonsense, spearheaded by Petraeus and the whole British pantheon, is patently false. Which makes obvious sense, because during a “Shaping Phase”, Fires is the main effort, and Maneuver does economy-of-force. Because, obviously, you do not throw away 1/3 of your Leopard 2’s before your Fires had attrited the enemy reserves!

    Moreover, most of Gady’s points were obvious *before* counter-offense start. Which plainly demonstrated that the whole Counter-Offense was driven by political considerations (specifically American and German poll numbers), rather than military conditions on the ground.

    [Alternatively, future trends are so bad that AUF will not get any better advantage-wise, and had to attack now. Which also bodes badly.]

    Petraeus’s strategic track record is so bad now, that whatever he says, the reverse is highly likely to be true. In other words, if any of us find agreement with Petraeus, that should automatically prompt an assessment review.

    And Gady/Kos still seem to have some misunderstanding of cluster weapon effects, though a bit better than all of the talking heads.

    • TTG says:


      The whole shaping the battlefield followed by combined arms maneuver seems to depend on almost complete battlefield domination for success. More evenly matched adversaries calls for something else. I think the Ukrainians are now coming up with that something else.

      In addition to cluster munitions, I’m surprised there’s not more use of proximity fuses.

      • billy roche says:

        Other than infantry and “their” weapons which arms, specifically, are combined in effective combined arms operations. Once a month there is a story about getting rid of the A10’s. Would Ukrainians profit by the close support they provide. Certainly they would not be as controversial as F 16’s. Thank you for your explanation of sequential. Sequential has been around for 2500 years. It’s logical. We would not use artillery to soften up trenches and infantry to attack them simaltaneously.

    • F&L says:

      Go to this link to see the location within Crimea of this (UK) Storm shadow missile strike. (Nice choice of initials SS. Subtle hints of lime by way of Coburg Saxe Gotha). Are sick jokes in order about how when Washington DC burns to the ground this time, it will again be complements of Madame Tussauds chamber of horrors on the Thames? When was it – 1812? There was another war against Russia going on simultaneously I think. The US is more of a British colony now than in 1770. Translation below link:
      ❗️🇬🇧🇺🇦 About the strike of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with Storm Shadow missiles on Oktyabrsky in Crimea
      Today, Ukrainian formations fired two British Storm Shadow cruise missiles at the Oktyabrskoye village in the Krasnogvardeisky district of the Crimean peninsula.
      An oil storage facility and an ammunition depot of the Black Sea Fleet were hit: a large fire broke out in the incident zone, local residents report sounds of secondary detonation.
      The authorities announced the evacuation of the population within a radius of five kilometers from the scene to temporary accommodation. To minimize risks, traffic on the Crimean railway was suspended. According to the latest information, there were no casualties.
      The incident was the first time that Storm Shadow long-range missiles were used to strike targets in the Republic of Crimea. Previously, the Armed Forces of Ukraine released this type of ammunition along the Chongar bridge, which connects the region with the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions.
      Against the backdrop of the preparation of the Ukrainian command for the second phase of the offensive, attacks on the rear facilities of the Russian troops will only increase, including along the Crimean bridge, as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said yesterday.
      High resolution map# Crimea #Russia #Ukraine
      Since I’m already pecking away on my phone, why not this?
      Here’s the CIA division called “Democracy Now” interviewing the CIA division called Newseek! It’s worthless for readers of this forum unless you need an emetic, except for the humor, especially at 4 minutes 25 and immediately following where the nice man gives the CIA “High Marks” for totally illegal activity – in a rather high, unusual voice for a man I might add, though that’s not very nice to say. Dem-Mock-Crazy-Now!
      William Arkin: Cia playing outsize role in Your Cranium.

  2. Yeah, Right says:

    Perhaps the author puts the cart before the horse w.r.t. “combined arms operations”.

    Perhaps it isn’t so much that the Ukrainians haven’t “mastered” that art but, rather, the very concept is only possible when your forces have complete control of the air and have rear echelons that are completely free of enemy interference.

    Two factors that the Ukrainians do not have and can’t acquire merely by adopting a can-do attitude and undergoing more western training.

  3. F & L says:

    Russian news services report cluster munitions were shot into the Belgorod district yesterday. Strelkov was arrested. On July 18 he called for Putin to resign on his Telegram channel. (Keep in mind it might have been by arrangement of some sort). He never went that far before. Below the dashed line is an amalgamation of posts making the rounds on Ru Telegram. Implies that in the foreseeable future “Ukraine” will be able to hit Moscow and everything in between with 500 kg bombs, and much worse. These posts appeared just around the time of Strelkov’s call, but may have nothing to do with it.
    “Can carry nuclear weapons and finish off to Moscow”: Kyiv will receive F-16 fighters before the end of the year
    “F-16 fighters will arrive [to Ukraine] probably before the end of the year. However, they will not be able to make a difference [on the battlefield] on their own,” said John Kirby, strategic communications coordinator at the White House NSS.
    He also highlighted the priority needs of Ukraine:
    “What [Ukrainians] really need is artillery, ammunition, air defense systems and tanks. We provided it all: massive amounts of support at an unprecedented rate.”
    Indeed, American-made fighters will not fundamentally change the situation on the battlefield. But they complicate it.
    ▪️ Earlier, we noted that at the initial stage of combat use in the Ukrainian theater, F-16s will be used primarily as platforms for various NATO weapons, which will not be lacking. The range of strikes against our ground and surface targets will sharply increase. This follows from the characteristics of the missile armament that the F-16 fighter can carry.
    For example, you can hang two AGM-158B JASSM-ER cruise missiles on it with a flight range of up to 980 km and a warhead weight of 450 kg. Ukrainian sources are already happily writing that this is exactly equal to the straight-line distance from Lutsk to Moscow.
    ▪️ We add that in 2024 the US Armed Forces will receive the AGM-158B-2 JASSM-XR missile with a flight range of up to 1800 km and a warhead weight of more than 900 kg. Most likely, it will be too heavy for the F-16 – 2.3 tons.
    However, we recall that the US defense budget for fiscal year 2023 included $100 million for the training and familiarization of Ukrainian pilots “with the F-15 and F-16 fighters, other aviation platforms for air combat and the use of AIM-9X2 and AIM-9M air-to-air missiles.” And now the F-15 will be able to carry the AGM-158B-2 JASSM-XR.
    ▪️ Thus, the “destructive coalition for Ukraine” is the most serious round of escalation in the Ukrainian conflict. Do not forget about the ability of the F-16 C / D to carry nuclear bombs of the B-61 series. Versions C and D of the F-16 fighters will be delivered to Kyiv in the first batch.
    If Russia confines itself to responding to such a challenge only in the Ukrainian theater of operations, this may not be enough. Once again: the capabilities of the F-16 will allow Kyiv to strike even at Moscow, and the conflict itself can be transferred to a nuclear scenario at any time. All this means that the initiators and moderators of the war in the person of the United States and Britain should also feel the threat.

    • billy roche says:

      It also means that Russia can no longer stand off and destroy Ukrainian infrastructure and homes w/o the possibility that they can be repaid.
      Russians started the war and continue to use it to destroy Ukraine and threaten the rest of Europe. Two sentences say all.

    • d74 says:

      Let’s assume that the F16s given to UKr are an important issue.
      Let’s further assume that Moscow is technically within range of the weaponry carried.
      Then the real question is the quantity (10 or 5000 missiles?) and duration( 1 or 365 days/nights) of this bombardment, assuming that the operational life of these aircraft is not too short.
      Too many ifs.
      F16 will only be able to take off from western UKr. They will have to gain altitude without going too far east. They will deliver their missiles as quickly as possible and land just as fast.
      All this because the Russians control 2/3 of the Ukrainian sky from the eastern border, from an altitude of 0 to 30,000 feet.
      It would be better for them to focus on the Russian military rear, such as ammunition and fuel depots everywhere, and communication routes not too far from the front. Attacking cities, as they are doing, is unproductive. Russian civilians can curse the missile or plane that destroyed their home, but not surrender to it (adapted from Captain Sir Basil Liddell Hart).

      Another consequence of UKr’s weakness in air control is the total ineffectiveness of the F16 in providing ground support to offensive troops. Luckily, they were able to deliver their parcels, but rarely did they do so again.

      Ukr has a big problem, several in fact. The F16 is not the solution. We need to go further upstream, and first destroy Russian air dominance.
      As for nuclear armament, I can’t think of anything more inept in the art of war than solving a tactical question with a big strategic-level hammer.
      All Russians will be furious at the sight of the nuclearized Kremlin. The last leader will press the retaliation button without hesitation. And the USA will lose whatever fading popular sympathy it still has in Europe, which will have to live with the fallout.

    • PeterHug says:

      I am reasonably confident that the US would not release B-61s to Ukraine, and I’m also confident that if that were to happen, Ukraine would have no interest in using them.

      There are many ways this conflict could become complicated, but I don’t think Ukrainian use of nuclear weapons is one of them.

      • d74 says:

        Sorry for the delay.
        You’re right about that. I’m just amazed at the ease with which this nuclear idea is being bandied about.

        Perhaps, I could do the same if I resided several thousand miles away from the nuclearized place. Maybe not, not out of Christian charity, but because I’ve always observed that solving a problem with big hooves gets you nowhere. In this case, we’ll have to make peace with our Russian adversary, who else? or exterminate them all, an impossible task.

        My grandmother’s saying: “Cou de taureau, tête de moineau” (bull’s neck, sparrow’s head).
        Let’s avoid these stupid extremes. We’re clever enough to rise to the challenge.

  4. F & L says:

    I was reading a daily telegraph article about the Queen’s green coat being bitten by a Welsh goat.
    Goat nibbles the Queen’s green shirt on royal visit to Wales
    King Charles and Camilla meet freshly shaved alpacas Caleb and Reg on Brecon visit.
    And then got to thinking about my old joke about a Kamala – Camilla Camarilla, which noone appreciated. I was rephrasing it as “The two number twos are Kamala and Camilla!” That’s very very low brow of me, admittedly, and sorry, no hints, but you really must click on the link to see how the alpaca resembles a camel in case you forgot. Is Caleb a biblical reference or are they referring to a California lesbian? Sorry. I can’t think of who Reginald might be, though his name ends in “nald” and he’s rather a witless creature.
    Desperate for further funniness I wondered to myself how far back this mysterious parallel might go. Even though I knew Elizabeth II wasn’t Queen till later I thought about Prince Phillip. And Harry Truman’s VP. So for a refreshing refresher – who was Harry’s Vice President? Answer – from 1945 till 1949 the United States of America didn’t have a Vice President. Interesting isn’t it? For a grand prize – name his VP between 1949 and 1952 (I couldn’t).

    But King George VI, who preceeded Elizabeth II, was married to a lady named Elizabeth, who was Elizabeth the Second’s mother. And Harry Truman’s wife was:

    “Elizabeth Virginia “Bess” Truman was the wife of Harry S. Truman and First Lady of the United States from 1945 to 1953. She served as her husband’s secretary and was known for often voicing her opinions.”

  5. Whitewall says:

    Betting on the fall of Putin is like a bet on drawing to an inside straight. Meantime, Putin is betting on the weakness of western democracies—elections. A dictator like Putin knows how to watch his back therefore everyone around him is expendable.

    • Muralidhar Rao says:

      I hear and read a lot about Putin dictator so on and so forth. So kindly tell me how does he have approximately 80% of approval rating by his people. Now you might say it is all propoganda, have you watched the MSM here? Constantly talking about Russia bad, evil etc and no political leader has anywhere near 50% approval of their people. How many of these democratic leaders resigned voluntarily when their electorate doesn’t approve of their actions. Oh I forgot the sheeple are ignorant and don’t know the intricacies of international relations, so they have to be constantly led to believe that the leaders work for their benefit. However it so happens when they are off the stage they end up with multimillion dollar estates with great book deals.

      • JamesT says:

        Muralidhar Rao

        The fact that the leading opposition candidate in the USA is currently being prosecuted by the sitting government is not a great look either. Navalny has about the same amount of support among the Russian electorate as Noam Chomsky has among the US electorate.

      • Mishkilji says:

        One can be a dictator and be popular with the masses.

  6. English Outsider says:

    No disrespect to a great American, but I don’t spend a lot of time with Colonel Macgregor. I should do, I suppose, because he’s the leading authority on a vast range of subjects, but when he’s talking to me he’s preaching to the choir. I know roughly what he’s going to say, with a few minor reservations I agree with it, and when it comes down to it he’s telling us what’s been obvious since February 2022.

    So obvious that it needed none to point it out. We managed – finally! – to get the Russians moving on February 21st of that year, that date, rather than the 24th, being the crucial date. That enabled us to deploy those “Shock and Awe” sanctions that were to do for Russia. The sanctions failed. And here we are, scrabbling around to get out of the resultant debacle. Obvious back then that February. Obvious now. What else is there to say?

    Well, a few corners to be filled in, I suppose. A few questions still to be asked.

    One of them’s about how we should handle the Balts and the East Europeans. In an extreme form these countries, and my own, England, in an even more extreme form, exemplify the fault apparent in the US/European relationship generally.

    A common view of that relationship is that it’s the Big Bad Giant across the Atlantic horning in on European affairs, bossing us around, and generally using us as pawns on the Grand Chessboard in the Great Game against the Soviet Union. Not being anachronistic there, by the way; for many of us in Europe the formidable USSR never really went away and modern Russia is just pretending it did.

    So for many of us, and well before 2022, the song was “Ami go home” and we’re still many of us singing it. Out of tune and a bit ragged in the videos I’ve seen, but sung with aggrieved conviction. We are the innocents, the uber-civilised and peaceful Europeans, led astray by the fire-eating Neocons from Washington.

    And as the current debacle unfolds that song will top the charts. What a mess the Americans have got us into, dragging us into dereliction for their crazy schemes. And now – I’m already seeing this theme emerge and Macron expounds it from time to time – they’re going to suck us dry and turn us into another colony.

    I see many American commentators singing much the same song. Scholz, the key figure with his coalition partners and his Brussels sidekicks, was the new boy on the block who was half coerced, half cozened into the venture by Biden and his neocons. The mug who got sold a pup.

    Bullshit. Utter, complete, absolute nonsense. Whether that song’s sung in Europe or sung in the States.

    If one examines what the Europeans were up to, well before February 2022, if one looks at the general level of hostility to Russia in the various European populations, and particularly when one examines the actions of Scholz and Macron before the fateful date, it’s impossible to avoid quite a different conclusion. This venture was closer to the hearts of the Europeans than it ever was to Washington and the big bumbling giant across the Atlantic was, for those European politicians, no more than a tool to accomplish the venture. An indispensable tool and a willing, but merely a tool for all that.

    That, in fact, is one of the few reservations I have on Macgregor’s take. In the video he says “He (Scholz) and Macron allowed themselves to be dragged along.” That’s the story they’ll be telling now. That’s the story that many Europeans will sheepishly adopt and that some are already adopting. If we Europeans swallow that story, if we don’t get the story right and admit that it was us who were foremost in this venture as it will be us who take the most blowback, then we in Europe will go down without ever knowing why – and without ever being able to find remedy for our foolishness.

    Illustrating that, the part of the video where Macgregor points to the danger of our getting embroiled in the tribal animosities of old Europe – a danger for us in the UK as well as for those in the US – starts with the words “We didn’t bother to point out that many nations in Eastern Europe have agendas”. I’ve tried to set the video for that time. (27.50 approx.)

    • F&L says:

      From an Ria news service Telegram channel today. ⬇️ I guess the WSJ has an article on it today. Haven’t checked. That said, does it mean things are being checked up on in realms of interest to the Wall Street Urinal?
      Back in 1994, former US President Nixon described the situation in Ukraine as “explosive” in a declassified letter to Clinton, writes the Wall Street Journal. As a result of visiting Russia and Ukraine, the 37th US President noted in a document that “if we allow the situation to get out of control, then Bosnia will seem to us like a matinee in kindergarten.”

      • TTG says:


        It was explosive well before 1994. On the heels of the fall of the USSR, independent trade unions began organizing across Eastern Europe and FSU largely under the leadership and guidance of Poland’s Solidarność. Outside of Poland, where Lech Wałęsa was already elected president, these trade unions were not part of any of the newly forming governments. But they talked among themselves and collectively, by late 1991, knew that the Kremlin was not at all happy with the situation and would would soon be on the march to resurrect some form of the old days. They figured Belarus would be the first to go and that Moscow would then work to bring Kyiv back into the fold.

        • F&L says:

          Sure TTG, I remember it well. You seem to think we are all third graders.

          • JamesT says:


            I did not take what TTG wrote seriously until you wrote “I remember it well”. So some of us really are third graders and we appreciate the opportunity to learn stuff.

  7. voislav says:

    This really brings home a key point, that without air superiority (let alone supremacy) Ukraine is very unlikely to make significant gains. Diminished state of Ukrainian air force and air defenses means that Russians can freely operate their rotary aircraft in a fire-brigade role, shifting them along the line of contact as needed.

    I wonder if this was behind the decision to shift offensive operations to Bakhmut area, flat terrain in the south is gives Russian helicopters clear firing lines for miles, while terrain in the east is hillier and more densely populated, so it provides more cover.

    • Jimmy_w says:


      Can a post-war Ukraine afford the air force necessary to contest the current air superiority.

      The real lesson is that the existing Anti-Access / Air-Denial networks such as S-400/Buk and Patriot/NASAM-SLAMRAAM means that air superiority will be but a forgotten tale from now on.

      Just like Afghanistan could not afford the ANA we built them, Ukraine cannot afford the Air Force it dreams of. Remember that pre-war, most of the planes were unflyable, despite the 2014 war.

      • TTG says:


        I agree that AD/A2 capabilities are putting an end to anybody’s air superiority, much less air dominance. It’s been a year and a half and Russia still can’t fly forward of their lines. Nor can Ukraine. I don’t see F-16s or even F-35s changing that. In the late 70s our then fairly new AH-1 Cobras would also stay behind our lines and snipe at enemy armor with the wire guided TOWS from the treetops. That pretty much what Russia’s Kamovs are doing now.

        • PeterHug says:

          We’re still making AH-1s. The current version is the AH-1Z – no idea what they’ll call the one after this. Perhaps the AH-1AA?

          • TTG says:


            I remember when the 25th Aviation Battalion got Cobras back sometime in the late 70s. The pilots were so proud of them, referring to them as Battlestar Galactica.

            I’m surprised theres little talk about supplying the Ukrainians with Cobras. Armed with Sidewinders and Hellfires, I think they’d be pretty effective on the frontlines.

          • PeterHug says:

            TTG –
            I’m certainly no subject matter expert here, but I would love to see AH-1s, AH-64s, and for that matter UH-60s in Ukraine. Not sure about V-22, though.

    • PeterHug says:

      Flat terrain would also give Manpads a free field of fire as well, right?

  8. drifter says:

    The reference in 12 to “deep battle” reminds me of a cartoon – Custer being reassured that everything’s OK because Reno’s engaging the second echelon. Deep battle has been around f o r e v e r. It’s described in an article by Deborah Shapley in NYT Magazine – “The Army’s New Fighting Doctrine”, 28 Nov 1982. Idea was to buy a little more time before a hypothetical European war went nuclear.

  9. cobo says:

    We’ll wait and see. All those with agendas are dripping spittle onto their chins. The Ukrainian Army will win or lose – all the rest is up to them. And then there are the other inconvenient facts on the ground. Those will also be addressed, as they will never be forgotten.

  10. walrus says:

    Gady, Koffman and Lee are all associates or employees of right wing think tanks. Don’t expect anything new or unorthodox from them.

    The lack of Ukrainian training and employment of NATO taught ”combined arms”(tm) operational tactics is the latest excuse for Ukrainian inability to break the Russian lines.

    In other words, Ukraine failed “big push” is Ukraine’s own fault because they didn’t do what we taught them hard enough.

    Which begs the question; What would America or any NATO country know about fighting an essentially equal opponent in terms of technology, training and resources? The answer is SFA. If anything, the Ukrainians should be teaching NATO..

    To put it crudely, NATO and the U.S. have been fighting sand n**&6ers and rag heads for the last twenty years and it shows.

    ……And I don’t buy the line that the Russian army is composed of drunken idiots officered by corrupt and foppish retards.

    If that were true, then can somebody please explain the Russians superlative missile arsenal, their extensive EW capabilities and the performance of their fighter aircraft that apparently run their software on Chinese washing machine controller chips.

    In my opinion, we have deliberately and stupidly manufactured a war against a very formidable foe. We are bound to lose that war if we persist. Denigrating our enemy and refusing to face the truth are going to make things much worse for us – and that is without any nuclear detonations.

    Our smartest course of action would be to make the Ukrainians stop fighting. Begin the process of developing a mutual security infrastructure that satisfies the major players, remove ourselves and our bases from Europe and then ask ourselves how we let our European foreign policy be manufactured by a bunch of first generation highly emotional Eastern European immigrant americans with chips on their shoulders.

    • TTG says:


      Ukraine’s failed big push has reclaimed more territory in six weeks than Russia’s offensive did in nine months, but that’s not the yardstick used to measure Ukraine’s success or failure in this counteroffensive. A major collapse of Russian defenses would be a success, but I don’t see a collapse as imminent. The West wants to see another Kharkiv counteroffensive. Instead we’re getting another Kherson. That took four months over a smaller front.

      I wouldn’t categorize Russia’s missile arsenal as superlative. In a year and a half, they have failed to take out Ukraine’s rail or power system. Formidable, yes but not superlative. Their EW systems have failed to stop the Ukrainians from communicating. Their S-300 has proven very effective in the hands of the Ukrainians. I’m sure this system along with the entire family of Russian AD weapons would be formidable and maybe even superlative. Their fighter aircraft have also remained effective in the hands of the Ukrainians. They’re rugged. I’m not sure we can say the same about the F-16. The Swedish Grippen might be a better choice for Ukraine.

      One of the things our military has to worry about is that the Russians are learning lessons and adapting out of necessity. It will eventually be a better military because of their experience in Ukraine. The US and other western militaries better learn those lessons just as fast.

      I agree with your assessment of our fighting capabilities. We have a lot of learning to do. If

      • Fred says:


        By territory Russia actually possesses your analysis is a bit off. Yes all those weapons have been proven in combat, so has the attrition element. However, this is a multi-front war. The first, financial isolation against Russia failed. The second, diplomatic isolation of Russia, has failed. The third, oil market isolation has also failed. But Ukraine took a back a great deal of black Earth, now soaked mostly with their own blood.

        Europe is in deep trouble, especially the Deutsche Bundesbank, which is essentially bankrupt. The ECB will be raising rates again (unlike the US fed) as their effective bond interest rates are still negative. Who wants to put their money there? The latest trips to China by Yellen, followed by Christine Lagarde and other EU leaders, followed by Macron (who really wants to business deal to keep his domestic political coalition in line) makes interesting news reading, if you can find it in the ‘press’. I for one am waiting for the news of the obvious: the creation of a BRICS central bank. Fun times. Thanks global neocons. (The Borg as Col. Lang called them.)

      • drifter says:

        When you say “our military”, who do you mean exactly? The U.S. Government military?

        • TTG says:


          By our military, I’m referring to the US military, my military, the one I’m still part of as a retired Army officer.

      • Muralidhar Rao says:

        TTG, sir may I remind you the ancient chinese philosopher Sun Tzu once said something like ” know your enemy you win some battles, know yourself and your enemy you win the wars”. What I have noticed is we American’s flatter ourselves as the greatest under the sun, and have not won a war in the last 50 years. Hell we can’t even get out of a place called Afganistan without making ourselves look pathetic. Compare that to USSR’s orderly withdrawl from Afganistan. By the way we still can’t get our act on the Hypersonic missiles where as Russia has them under serial production. Just think about 150mm shell production we plan to produce them in a year what Russia produces in a month. With such a situation how in the world are we supposed to take on China?

        • TTG says:

          Muralidhar Rao,

          The Soviets lost 15,000 men killed in ten years of fighting compared to our 2,400 killed in 20 years. Neither country covered themselves in glory in Afghanistan. I’m hoping our military is taking a hard look at itself in light of the war in Ukraine. Our equipment seems to be doing pretty good, but how we fight against the new emerging threats is something we best address quickly. Russia thought their military was invincible and found they were sorely lacking across the board. I have no doubt they are learning bloody and humiliating lessons and are taking corrective actions. Russia’s hypersonic missiles have proved not to be invincible either and they don’t have enough to even stop the Ukrainian trains. Their tanks and IFVs are deathtraps while ours allow the Ukrainian crews to survive and fight another day. Russia has to produce more artillery shells. They have to fire many more shells to achieve the results of very few shells fired through our artillery pieces. This does leave a worrying question about any future war with China. Watching this war, I sure China is also having worrying questions.

    • Jimmy_w says:

      “Their EW systems have failed to stop the Ukrainians from communicating.”

      That is debatable. By all accounts, AUF is completely dependent on Starlink, a directional microwave system, for everything beyond LOS company level comms (VHF/UHF). And those radios are vulnerable to jamming and unreliable, despite Harris waveforms. No info on how well mesh networks are working (probably not well, see Starlink). And that is because of Russian EW.

      The lesson here is that space-to-earth microwave links are hard to jam, but not terrestrial microwave links. And all space powers are probably now working on space-borne comm jammers. And also everyone will want persistent space-based tactical comm, until they reach total spectrum saturation. And orbital saturation on the lower-LEO.

      And then, of course, mobile free-space optical will finally have a demand signal.

      • TTG says:


        The Ukrainian air defense system is still tracking and downing Russian missiles and drones. Ukrainian drones are still flying and relaying info back to Ukrainian units and HQs. Russian are recently complaining that the Ukrainians have largely overcome Russian anti-drone EW capabilities. And yes, thanks to Starlink, Ukrainian C&C is maintained across the theater. Sure Russian EW has made all thise things more difficult for the Ukrainians, but it hasn’t stopped any of those functions. Many of us, including myself, were led to believe Russian EW was far more formidable than it has proved to be.

    • English Outsider says:

      Walrus – “Our smartest course of action would be to make the Ukrainians stop fighting. Begin the process of developing a mutual security infrastructure that satisfies the major players …”

      Only way to go. Not sure about this though – ” … remove ourselves and our bases from Europe.”

      One of the reasons the Russians have been slow walking the SMO is related to that “Willow Run” video you linked to recently. The Americans exploding into action and turning out aircraft like shelling peas. And having no difficulty using them.

      Within a couple of years the US moved from being a relatively insignificant military power in the ’30’s to the industrial and military colossus that was one of the two significant Allied powers.

      OK, that US industrial base is nothing like it was. It’d take a few years to gear up this time round. But the potential is there, and the expertise and the people. And US logistics are in a class of their own and that capability hasn’t atrophied.

      Don’t want to go into the merits and demerits of “The Vax” but just looking at that as an example of fast mobilisation of resources it was stunning. A lot of stuff got produced and distributed very fast and at scale . There were similar efforts in Europe, but nothing to that level. The American military looks a bit of a dead loss at the moment – a “boutique military” as it was referred to recently – but no certainty it would stay that way long term.

      If it didn’t? “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve”, said Yamamoto. Whether the Russians could cope with another awakened giant – I’ve no idea. But they certainly don’t want the bother of having to do so.

      Short term it’s not a consideration, the US coming in decisively in Europe. It has neither the gear nor the men. So short term the future’s predictable. The Russians have Ukraine in the bag. Presumably they’ll go after their 2021 European security demands afterwards.

      But one of the reasons Putin is slow walking the SMO, in spite of increasingly impatient demands from his electorate to move in and finish the job fast, is that he is in fact thinking long term. He doesn’t want to leave his country with the Ukraine pacified, Europe put back in its box, but facing a US gearing up for the next “Willow Run” transformation.

      The hawks in Moscow – they have them there too! – are thoroughly fed up. Fed up with Germany, sending their Panzers over for the second time in a century and backing a viciously Russophobic bunch of neo-Nazis. Fed up with HMG, and all the dirty tricks and strutting around talking big.

      We in Europe have only been able to poke the Bear as hard as we have because we could rely on US military and financial power. Were Putin out of the way and those hawks given their heads, one of the things stopping the Bear poking back hard is that fear of the US gearing up for real war again.

      So “… remove ourselves and our bases from Europe” might not give the West the happy ending looked for.


      As for the UK gearing up for defence, here’s one of the Norths – they take a keen interest in UK defence – looking at how that’s going. I see in one of the comments a German writing in and saying a heft chunk of Bundeswehr money has to go on pensions. And the French are now really only fit for bombing mud huts. Having got the Russians good and mad it might be safer if Uncle Sam were to stick around for a while.

      • TTG says:


        It’s a damned good thing there are cooler and more cautious heads in both Washington and Moscow who are not excited about greater confrontation between the two, especially direct confrontation. That’s why Biden drew the line at Ukraine’s immediate entry into NATO and, I think, Moscow has never struck at the Polish border crossings or beyond in any meaningful way.

        I’m still confident Russia will come out of this militarily chastened. Their supposedly unstoppable military machine was stopped by an army of mostly territorial defense reservists. But they will also come out it militarily much wiser. Western militaries best wise up to those lessons as well. A lot of countries should realize that they can’t create militaries to fight this kind of war, but they can produce some meaningful contributions to a NATO force like their doing now to Ukraine. It will be interesting to see what China learns from this war.

        • billy roche says:

          Russian security needs, Russian security needs … Russia needs to be protected from invasion by the west. That’s no more so than any other nation. Since Napoleon, Russia has been invaded twice – in over 200 years. I just did a little look up to see how many nations Russia has invaded in those two hundred years. You don’t have enough fingers on both hands. Putin and Xi have referred to each other as good friends and confidants. When the Russian invasion of Ukraine is done will Xi indicate growing interest in the Amur/Ossuri area? A militarily exhausted Russia might be willing to redraw some of its far eastern boundries to please Emperor Xi w/o firing a shot. Can Putin count on Russia’s good friends and confidants in Turkey and Persia. Persians and Turks may have some old scores to settle with Russia. Ukraine d/n threaten Russia’s west. Russia was not threatened by latent Nazis marching around in Odessa. Ukraine’s existence denied Russia’s Empire in the west. Russia should look to its east and south for real danger. Xi, Edoguan, and the Ayatollahs are learning a lot from this war.

          • TTG says:

            billy roche,

            I know India and China are taking full advantage of Russia’s predicament by requiring cut rate pricing on their oil and gas purchases.

          • Fred says:


            Russia isn’t losing on those deals. The West is certainly experiencing comodity price driven inflation due to these sanctions. Since one target is the middle class, especially in Europe, they are partially successful.

          • TTG says:


            Russia is still making a profit on those deals, but significantly less than before the war and certainly less than the early war panic prices. India’s price now averages $51 per barrel.

        • English Outsider says:

          Dunno how you put up with a contrarian like me, TTG. Drop me a hint if it gets to be a bore. The nicest thing I’ve ever read on the internet was just two words, written by the Colonel from his sick bed. Welcome back. I do feel very strongly about certain aspects of this war but don’t want to abuse that welcome.

          As for being contrarian, I’m even more so with what I term the Mearsheimer brigade, courageous though the man is. And incandescent about what Scholz et al got up to. My connections with Germany are rather closer than I’ve let on. And my previous admiration for the country naively high. Fool me once …


          • TTG says:


            Your comments about the war really don’t bother me. I do give an occasional eye roll over your seemingly religious belief in Moscow’s inevitable eventual victory, but you offer reasons for your statements. I think they add to the discussion. Besides, I like you. Any man who can appreciate a good hatchet is fine with me.

      • Muralidhar Rao says:

        EO sir you say “OK, that US industrial base is nothing like it was. It’d take a few years to gear up this time round. But the potential is there, and the expertise and the people. And US logistics are in a class of their own and that capability hasn’t atrophied.” The talent you refer to is almost 90 years ago. For the potential to be there there should be work ethic, do you know the people in US are used to getting the freebies, hell in major cities they are giving out free syrenges and needles and creating safe places to shoot if you know what I mean. With that kind of population how do you expect people to show up for work? The Financiers starting in late 80’s ruined the industrial base. Then on top of that you have schools I mean starting at the primary level teaching about many sexual preferences. Sometimes I scratch my head thinking did I know what sex was till I was may be 12. Who ever planned the development of society they did a great job. Any way thanks

        • English Outsider says:

          Muralidhar Rao – but the potential’s there! In England there’s a huge reservoir of engineering talent and I can assure you, no shortage of people who’d jump at the chance of a proper job again. Or who have done so, when there’s one going.

          I’m meeting them all the time. So too over your way. Automation has changed the equation, but no reason we have to condemn our workforce to consuming stuff made elsewhere while they have to scrabble around serving coffee or doing fake degrees. Carry on like this and we’ll all be pensioners of the productive countries – and no reason why those countries should continue to pay the pension.

          Bring industry back home. That’d soon give you back your industrial base, and a bit over for making things that go bang if you’re so inclined,

          And don’t worry if Trump’s got a funny hairstyle or gets a bit mouthy sometimes. Like it or lump it he’s the only practicable way back to reindustrialisation. Grab it and stop looking for a better that isn’t there.

      • Yeah, Right says:

        “Within a couple of years the US moved from being a relatively insignificant military power in the ’30’s to the industrial and military colossus that was one of the two significant Allied powers.”

        Isn’t the important point that the USA was already an industrial colossus before it entered WW2, and therefore was able to leverage that industrial power to transform itself into a military colossus within a few short years.

        Compare and contrast with now: the USA may have a huge GDP, but so much of that GDP is made up of financial shenanigans rather than industrial production capacity.

        I suspect that if the USA attempted a “Willow Run” now it would resemble the German and Japanese attempts to expand military production in WW2 more than it would resemble the corresponding USA and Soviet efforts.

        As in: the mind may be willing…..

  11. Babeltuap says:

    Only thing left is to settle is which corrupt system takes the hill. I guess I will root for Joe and Hunter lining their pockets selling me out but that’s only because I live in the US and I have skin in this game. If I was upper middle class in Russia or China I would not.

    I’m not happy we weaponized the dollar and committed and act of terrorism against a NATO country blowing up that pipeline but I also kinda get it. Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do in this life or at least buy enough time to live in comfort before your life expires.

  12. VietnamVet says:


    I was in the third grade but I remember how unpopular the Korean War was in suburban Seattle. General Eisenhower was elected President to end Truman’s war. In the fourth grade I did duck and cover drills in case an atomic bomb was dropped on Boeing Field. That year (1954) the Soviets ignited a deployable hydrogen bomb that made civil defense pointless. The Korean armistice and DMZ have prevented a nuclear war until this moment.

    A 100-year-old realist, Henry Kissinger, just visited Beijing and met Chairman Xi. He should visit the White House too. But they won’t listen to reality. The one and only thing that matters to the current western corporate/state (the Empire) is money — profits for managerial bonuses and stockholder value. There are only two outcomes left. Either Russia or NATO collapses or there is a nuclear war.

    Instinctively the Ukrainians and Russians will defend their homelands to the last man. But there will be no total mobilization by either side to be able to conduct maneuver warfare like WWII unless the ruling oligarchs are stripped of their wealth to pay for a victory. Just like WWI, Empires will collapse.

    Society and culture are real. The current calamities show that their loss is deadly. If humans are to continue to inhabit the Earth, democratic republics and peace will have to be restored. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness must again be the law of the land.

    • Fred says:


      If Kissenger is really sharp and all together enough to handle international diplomacy at 100 years of age then Joe Biden and the rest of the D leadership must be good for a few more decades.

  13. Sam says:

    The arrest yesterday of Igor “Strelkov” Girkin may be the start of a crackdown on jingoistic “hurrah-patriots”, according to an apparently leaked report which is said to have led to his detention. It also denounces many others including broadcaster Vladimir Solovyov.

    It looks like the knives are out for those Russians who criticize Putin’s handling of the invasion.

  14. leith says:

    “Such operations may be possible if those combined arms forces could maneuver under a robust AD/A2 umbrella that moves with the combined arms force,…”

    Gepards, Avengers, and Starstreaks could be that mobile air defense umbrella. But unfortunately NATO has only provided those systems in small numbers. Nowhere near enough to cover all brigades involved in the counter-offensive. And some of those systems are needed to protect against Putin’s cruise missile & Shahed drone attack on cities.

    Regarding combined arms, the Ukrainians are reinventing the concept. Doing stuff on the battlefield never seen before. But for a breakthrough they will go slow and cautiously. Ukrainian generals in their youth studied the same Eastern Front battles that Gerasimov and Teplinsky did. There ain’t no way they are going to blunder into fortifications-in-depth like von Manstein and von Kluge did at Kursk in 1944. Plus they are keeping one eye on the Kupiansk front where there are rumors of a potential major Russian counter-counter-offensive until they figure out whether that is real or misdirection. Kady is missing that in his analysis.

    • jld says:

      those systems are needed to protect against Putin’s cruise missile & Shahed drone attack on cities.

      I am pretty sure missiles and drones are not operated by Putin himself.

    • walrus says:

      The Russian video of a couple of de mining Leopards and attendant Bradley’s destroying themselves in a minefield sure looked stoopid to me.

      Then, allegedly, the Russians stopped a Ukrainian armoured attack in a textbook example of defence in depth with the AFV’S engaged by drones, then arty, then A/T weapons before running onto mines and then the Alligator attack helos finished off what was left.

      Characterising Russians as dumb stupid corrupt Orcs is a great way to get yourself killled.

      Furthermore, exactly what can NATO teach Ukrainians? Advanced button pressing ? Parade ground maintenance? Gender equity rules? It is the Ukrainians who should be teaching NATO. There is one photo I’ve seen of a bogged Leopard that has lost a track on a mine as well. The Ukrainians who recover that cripple will know more about recovery by the end of it than most NATO engineering squadrons – and more about the Leopard than the germans who built them.

  15. F&L says:

    Do you often check your bank balance only to reassure yourself that the amount, expressed in dollars, is the product of perfect cube with the square of an everyday number such as ten?
    (2x2x2 x 10×10 = ?)

    Is Fort Knox in Kentucky? (Y or N).
    Kentucky man finds ‘hoard’ of civil war gold coins worth millions in cornfield
    The 800 gold coins date back from 1840 to 1863 and may have been buried as a result of state’s declaration of neutrality during war.

  16. F&L x F&L = F^2 + 2FxL + L^2 says:

    Answer to F&L,

    You need to complete the post graduate course.

    800 = 2x2x2x2x2 x 5×5.

    That’s 2 to the 5th times 5 to the 2nd. Or (2^5) x (5^2)

    What are the odds of that? And the author of an article on wealth named Maya? Don’t leave us Yanging like this in the future, please.

    • F&L says:

      2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, 101, 103, 107, 109, 113, 127, 131, 137, 139.
      Prime numbers less than 145. Why 145? Because I figured no one lives more than 145 years. Now I’m going to figure out in which years my age was a prime number. Meanwhile I might superstitiously check which number Presidents were
      prime and compare them with ones whose order in the rank was composite. Adams = 2, example.
      [On this site – Why is Madison listed 4 times? This is a) Confusing to children especially who are using the internet to inquire about their nation’s history. b) a government site. c) Is it an example of woke or liberal nonsense “let’s make it debatable? Open for discussion? Ok, fine. In that case how about a teacher who dresses in pink every day and tells 4th graders that Madison spelled backwards is Nosi Dam, while speaking in a lisp while wearing a moustache? ]

      1777 1783 1787 1789 1801 1811 1823 1831 1847 1861 1867 1871 1873 1877 1879 1889 1901 1907 1913 1931 1933 1949 1951 1973 1979 1987 1993 1997 1999 2003 2011 2017 2027 2029 2039 2053 2063 2069 2081 2083 2087 2089 2099 2111 2113 2129 2131 2137 2141 2143 2153 2161 2179 2203 2207 2213 2221 2237 2239 2243
      Years which are prime numbers since the founding of the republic and 2250. Ridiculous, right? Related question: How many begin with 1, how many with 2?

      The sum of prime numbers between 1776 and 2250 is 1.2049 × 105.

      The average of prime numbers between 1776 and 2250 is 2008.2.

      The product of prime numbers between 1776 and 2250 is 1.284 × 10198.

      Note: this calculator also includes the starting and the ending number, which form the interval, if they are primes.

      • mcohen says:

        I like numbers in their prime.Does 15/8/23 fit in to the moon phase triangulation of your calculation

        • F&L says:


          It would appear that either your dating habits expose you as one of ‘them yurpeens’ or you’re one of those guys who says ‘Foctor Droid’ instead of ‘Doctor Freud.’ No matter. It took me years myself to learn that a mild case of dyslexia prevented me from being able to poot shool as well as the guys upstairs from that old theatre. Well, it never prevent me from deaching for a rink. Mea with tilk these days.

      • Momentarily (e*power (i*Pi)=-1), Pcc D74 says:

        e*power (i*Pi)=-1
        ‘e’ is the base of natural logarithms,
        ‘i’ is the imaginary number such that i*i=-1,
        ‘Pi’ is the ratio between circumference length and diameter of any circle.

        In all your calculations, your numbers are written in base 10. Now, express your numbers in another base, for example 3, or 7, or 11, or ‘e’. Assuming that reality equals truth, only the expression of truth will changed. But for the false for most of your results in a base other than 10.

        I suggest abandoning base 10 in numerology, as there’s nothing universal about it, unlike ‘e’.

        • JamesT says:

          What is natural about 10 is that we have 10 fingers.

        • F&L says:

          Base 10 is of enormous ➡️ practical use for people ⬅️.
          Euler’s constant e is an irrational, transcendent number with an expansion in ANY base, whether base 2, 10, 16, or 60 of infinite length exhibiting no predictable regularity. You can only tell me what e is either approximately, or by writing it as a limit of a sequence of rational (or other) numbers such as (1 + 1/n)^n as [n ➡️ ♾].

          So “base e” is at present a meaningless concept except in the most formal sense. For base X, X has to be an integer, and the integers 0,1,2…,X-1 are used as possible entries in the base X expansion, whether finite or infinite. I imagine there are extended systems based on Fourier analysis and function theory, where an “extended number” can be represented as an integral over a spectrum, either finite, discretely infinite or with continuous spectrum of functions.
          e = 2.71828 18284 59045 23536 02874 71352 66249 77572 47093 69995 95749 66967 62772 407..
          So if it’s base e, what are the digits which run from 0 to e-1 which I need to write 17 or 54 (base 10 or base 18 or base 55) in base e?

          Anyway, of course your point has some validity. There’s nothing sacrosanct or inevitable about 10, though base e is a reach. You also could have mentioned that there are other calendars which render Anno Domini or Common Era years such as 2023 presently, as arbitrary Anno Mundi:, or whatever the Naval Observatory (at Annapolis?) says the time is right now. And due to the finite value of the speed of light, ‘what “time” it is’is kinda weird to an astrophysicist. There is a mathematical conceit though or algorithmo-legal fiction, that there’s something rather absolute about the prime numbers.

          Peace Brother. I prefer spelling the Rithm in Algorithm rearranged as Mirth and expressed as Rythm. I enjoy math about as much as I do wrestling crocodiles, which isn’t much.

          Filatov & Karas with Alida & Sveta: Live Concert

          • d74 says:

            All your numerical demonstrations are represented in base 10. There’s nothing universal about them, just habitual, I admit.

            ‘e’ in base ‘e’, represented by ’10’, is not an irrational. Conversely, any whole number in base ten becomes irrational when expressed in base ‘e’. This should make you think about the relativity of 4nrepresentations. For the same number, true below the Pyrenees, mistaken beyond.

            So, peace for all, even crocodile. As long as he’s a well-behaved boy. Otherwise, boots and handbag.

  17. Mark Logan says:

    I suspect these think-tankers have been conditioned to abhor attrition warfare. It’s not sexy. They subconsciously refuse to acknowledge it’s a valid tactic because it’s ugly. People don’t want to hear about it and there’s no predicting when the last straw on the camel. I see in point 4 he says he can see no pulling apart of Russian defences, and then in point 7 he says attrition is hitting the Russians hard. Contradicted himself there.

    What, besides an excellent name for a punk rock band, are “kinetic kill chains”? Kill chains can be googled, but what does the kinetic part mean in the context of cyber war?

    I suspect Arty is doing a bit of a sales job. He has only done an interview every few months but here there are two in a week. They are right to be worried about some nattering nabobs, I suppose. I wonder if his Prigohzinology is a ploy to get Prigo offed, he knows the Russians are listening.

    The importance of the F-16s, as reported by Arty, are those KA52 helicopters, which have been a problem. The difference is range and detection, airborne radar capable of detecting choppers from a long ways away and air-to-air missiles with a range of 80 miles. “F16” is just a bird, talons are what matters.

    • TTG says:

      Mark Logan,

      That whole paragraph about kinetic kill chains reminds me of descriptions of the active defense doctrine taught in my Infantry Officer Advanced Course. Back then, we pinned our hopes of stopping the Soviets in Europe was the TOW. The goal of the active defense was to keep close to maximum TOW range (3,000 meters) between the TOWs and the Soviet tanks. The instructors kept repeating the phrase “servicing targets from a stable firing platform” to describe this use of TOWs. We gave the instructors, fellow captains and a couple of majors, a ration of shit over that phrase.

      We also had two Egyptian colonels in our advanced course. They were products of Soviet military schools and veterans of the Six Day War. One was a motorized infantry company commander at the battle of Chinese Farm. He was part of the massive fire pocket where Israeli armer was hammered by dug in Sagger gunners. We asked them how this active defense strategy would do against a Soviet attack. They didn’t have a lot of faith in our defense strategy.

      • PeterHug says:

        I’m just really glad we never got a chance to test the question. (Which in fact would have greatly surprised the 18-yo me in 1982, honestly.)

      • Yeah, Right says:

        TTG: “battle of Chinese Farm”

        That was the Yom Kippur War, not the Six Day War.

  18. Fred says:

    On a leadership related note Col. Lang’s fellow alums managed to get a DEI ‘professional’ fired at VMI:

    • F&L says:

      Try an image search on Jamica Nadina Love VMI. One looks like a {can’t say} and another like a {can’t say either}. Certainly diverse. But smiling in either unmentionable case. Next up – awards for most amusing answer to deciphering the acronym VMI. I go first:
      Very Many ______.
      Clues. Begins with I. Might end in s because ‘Very Many’ suggests a plural.

  19. aleksandar says:

    “Tens of thousands of losses” – The New York Times analyzes the situation at the front after a month of finding its journalists on the front lines.

    The conclusion is that “the fighting has basically reached a stalemate, and Ukraine has faced many obstacles against a determined enemy.”

    Several factors:

    1. High losses when “small territorial acquisitions cost too much.”

    “Ukrainian infantry is increasingly focusing on trench attacks, but after tens of thousands of casualties since the start of the war, these ranks are often filled with less trained and older soldiers,” the article says.

    “We’re exchanging our people for their people, and they have more men and equipment,” says a Ukrainian commander whose platoon has “taken 200% casualties” since the start of the Russian invasion (that is, the platoon has changed twice already).

    Many Ukrainian formations had problems replenishing with qualified soldiers capable of conducting successful assaults.

    Replenishment sometimes represents age-mobilized recruits.

    “You can’t expect a 40-year-old to be a good infantryman or machine gunner,” says a Ukrainian commander whose platoon lost “dozens of men.”

    Another factor in the high casualties is “when the Russian forces move out of position, they begin to skillfully bombard it with their artillery, ensuring that the Ukrainian troops cannot stay there for long.”

    Ukrainian casualties have increased not only in the south but also recently around Bakhmut – as part of “Ukraine’s strategy to pin down Russian forces around the city in addition to a counter-offensive in the south of the country.”

    The reason for the losses is that the Russian Federation transferred more artillery to this area.

    2. The second factor is the shortage of ammunition. And also “a mixture of ammunition sent from different countries.”

    At the same time, the accuracy of different projectiles varies greatly. In addition, some old shells and rockets sent from abroad damage equipment and injure soldiers. “Now this is a very big problem,” said Oleksiy, the commander of the Ukrainian battalion.

    3. In the summer months, camouflage and green vegetation give an advantage to the defending side, allowing you to cover not only soldiers but also EW artillery.

    4. “Lancets”. These Russian loitering munitions forced Ukrainian artillery and mechanized formations to take extensive measures to hide their positions.

    Some tankers even welded makeshift armor to their turrets to try and stop the Lancets.

    “It was impossible to drown them out, at least not now,” Ukrainian electronic warfare experts commented. Also, Lancets are hard to shoot down because they look more like guided bombs than drones.

    5. When the Armed Forces of Ukraine attack, they cannot fully use Starlink, moving away from their main positions. When trying to take a satellite installation with them, the Russians begin to hit its antenna.

    The broader part of this problem is that Russian forces often target Starlink Wi-Fi routers to hit them with artillery.

    They can also detect mobile phone signals and jam GPS, and radio frequencies, which deprives advancing groups of stable communications.

    Note that this is published by one of the most Western newspapers, one of the heavyweights of the media. It turns out that everyone knows everything and does nothing to rectify the situation. And not because they can’t, but because they understand – it’s USELESS.

    CNN told more and less the same story.
    Seems that reality is hitting back and hard.

  20. Yeah, Right says:

    “Some tankers even welded makeshift armor to their turrets to try and stop the Lancets.”

    Hmmmm, I do seem to remember much laughter regarding the Russians welding “cope cages” onto their T-72 turrets.

    Apparently its no laughing matter now.

Comments are closed.