In what ways are the Armed Forces of Ukraine superior to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation?
In an article by the Ukrainian edition of Obozrevatel in the article "In what way the Armed Forces of Ukraine are superior to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation: 5 main shortcomings of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and 5 advantages of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation" the author Yuri Butusov considers “the clash of two armies in a big war, that is, in the course of large-scale ground combat operations” (quotes from the source text will go in quotes and in italics - approx.). Naturally, between Russia and Ukraine.
I agree, by the way, in terms of the fact that yes, in the clash of two armies with different tactics and strategies, it makes sense to consider one’s own and other people’s strengths and weaknesses, and based on such analyzes build a vision of at least a local, at least a large-scale war.
We went to consider the Ukrainian point of view.
I'll start at the end of the quote. Of course it is. Ground operation - this is the final moment of any episode. The only question is how the initial part of this operation will go.
Ukrainian opponents believe that “You can’t win a war only with air strikes - because aviation cannot detect and hit all suspicious objects and all targets, and cruise missiles are effective only at strategic targets, and all this does not work well if the battle takes place in urban areas, at close range, and it is difficult to determine where one's own and where others are".
I think that the Syrian terrorists would not agree with this point of view. In fact, three-quarters of the country was under them, but what is there, Assad practically had a capital with suburbs. And then the aircraft arrived. And then the rockets. And what happened next? It's worth remembering, it's worth it.
If we talk about Ukrainian realities, then in addition to aviation and tactical missiles, which, by the way, have more than good accuracy, we can add cannon artillery, MLRS and TOSs that the Russian army has. Maybe not in such quantities as we would like, but for the Armed Forces of Ukraine it will be more than enough.
Actually, applying all this together, as it should be in a normal offensive operation, it remains only to estimate how many Ukrainian troops in a certain area will be able to resist after a massive authorized strike.
You can talk for a long time, but since the time of the Second World War it has been clear - who controls the air, he controls the initiative. Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, Syria - yes, the outcome of any conflict was decided in the air.
What is happening on the territory of modern Ukraine and the republics of Donbass is, excuse me, an exception. The conflict in the Donbas almost immediately began to resemble the First World War, its initial phase. Without aviation.
Excuse me, but who said that the Russian army would fight on the principles of a century ago?
Surprisingly, today in Ukraine, many people think so. And further along the text such a carnival begins that we will start laughing line by line.
1. The absence of infantry capable of conducting independent maneuverable combat operations in isolation from armored vehicles. The motorized rifle and airborne squads of the SV and Airborne Forces of the RF Armed Forces are tied to their infantry fighting vehicles, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers.
In general, already at the beginning of the Second World War, infantry was planted on Tanks (we) or tanks and armored personnel carriers (USA, UK, Germany). That is, 80 years ago, commanders already realized that success depended on speed and maneuver.
"Tied to their armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles" ... Well, yes, because armored vehicles are armor and fire. Of course, a large-caliber machine gun, an automatic cannon, the ability to save strength before a decisive throw, additional ammunition, protected by some kind of armor and moved by an engine - all this is not for Ukrainian "cyborgs". The infantry must go on foot.
Experts and those who know will not let you lie, but in recent conflicts, Russian motorized infantry rode on armor from above. It is a fact.
Undermining a mine inside an armored box is sad, because from above. But who said that the BMP / BTR armored box should be empty? There, excuse me, everything you need for combat operations. Water, food, additional ammunition. And in such quantities that you want - you will not climb.
But this is the autonomy that ordinary infantry of a century ago will never have.
I would like to ask: Mr. Butusov, do you know how many people from the valiant Armed Forces of Ukraine became fertilizers in the area of Izvarin and Debaltsevo precisely because they did not have an armored personnel carrier or at least a truck? And there was no way to heroically escape?
Well, yes. And the employees of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, who do not need armor, have three lives? And the failure of a fighter of the APU branch will not change anything at all? Well, yes, cyborgs are fighting there, I forgot ...
Deuce. Forgive us that we simply do not have the so-called "light infantry". Yes, we don’t have heavy infantry either. We don't have anything like that at all. There are motorized rifle troops that have no problems participating in modern combined arms combat. But there is MTR, but where does the combined arms battle? It is doubtful that we will follow the Ukrainian path, when, due to a shortage of personnel, openly police tasks were assigned to airmobile units.
In general, stupidity, which I don’t even want to discuss due to lack of interest.
"Infiltration into enemy battle formations" is not modern infantry. This is the work of the DRG. And the fact that modern combat is impossible without effective infantry is indisputable.
But speaking seriously, it’s sad for me to imagine myself in the place of a Ukrainian semi-partisan, forced to drag everything on his hump and go into battle against a Russian soldier, behind whom an infantry fighting vehicle / armored personnel carrier with a machine gun and an automatic cannon still looms. Wouldn't want to.
But if we are talking about “infiltration” and shooting in the back… Well, as an option for using the army, this looks peculiar, but this is Ukraine…
2. Next we have tanks.
And the opinion on this topic is no less interesting than on the infantry. "Expert" believes that the main problem of the Russian tank forces is “lack of effective protection of military equipment from anti-tank weapons of the 2nd and 3rd generation. It is impossible to guarantee the protection of Russian tanks from being hit by a tandem warhead "Stugna", "Barrier", "Corsair".
I wonder if Ukrainian tanks have such protection? Well, at least from the "Cornet" and "Competition", I'm silent about the "Chrysanthemum" and special warheads for the MLRS "Smerch". The situation turns out to be very interesting.
About how “easy” life is for ATGM operators, our resource has been talked about more than once. We can agree that the Stugna is a good ATGM, but there are nuances. Yes, “any Ukrainian ATGM, even an old Soviet-made ATGM, can easily hit any other types of military equipment, trucks, and above all infantry fighting vehicles, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers”. Undoubtedly, but only in one case: if Russian tanks and infantry fighting vehicles march like in a parade.
And that is unlikely to happen. But we will talk about the tactics of the Russian army at the very end. Now it’s worth adding that despite the fact that the Armed Forces of Ukraine have many more ATGMs than the Russian army has tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, the Russian army has something to offset this “superiority”.
In general, it is somewhat unclear how Ukrainian tanks will feel on such a battlefield? Here, of course, the case if they are. But not a word about the use of Ukrainian armored vehicles.
3. Low saturation of troops with optics and thermal imagers.
If we discard the nonsense about the use of French thermal imagers by some “groups of special forces of the FSB of the Russian Federation” in the Donbass, then the essence of the multi-line speech is as follows: the Ukrainian operator of the Javelin, using modern equipment, will be able to easily and naturally hit a Russian tank at night. And the Russian side will not be able to oppose it, especially in winter, when the daylight hours are short and the thermal imager will play a downright decisive role.
Yes, here the author has well brought out the weaknesses of Russian tank thermal imagers. Yes, they will badly "take" the infantry. The same heroic Ukrainian infantry, which will, without the use of armored vehicles, get close to Russian tanks at a distance of confident missile launch and destroy our tanks.
Doesn't this remind you of anything? But it popped up in my memory, I took it and checked it. Yes, it was like that. There are no planes, no tanks, no fuel, the enemy is at the gate. But there is a miracleweapon"... Anti-tank ...
In general, Ukrainian "experts" do not see how everything reminds them of those days of 1945. It's a pity. Because just the army will act against the wonderful independent Ukrainian infantry with modern anti-tank systems. With army aviation, motorized rifles, artillery and other necessary components.
Of course, if Russian tanks were perlied in columns, without any cover, then the Ukrainian soldiers would have shown themselves. But we're not so into science fiction hit, right?
4. Lack of effective air defense systems to cover forward combat formations from modern drones type "Bayraktar".
Here we have to make room for a big quote.
I didn’t understand a little why Bayraktar needed to highlight the enemy’s battle formations, especially to such a depth. Okay, okay, translation difficulties. Let them make an interactive map based on the UAV data and send it somewhere to the headquarters. What's next? What can such a card give? Use tactical weapons in battle formations? Which? "Tochka-U", of which there are still a couple of dozen in the Armed Forces of Ukraine? MLRS? Artillery?
Let's look further.
Let's be mature. "Bayraktar" is good when nothing can be opposed to it. Yes, you can cite Libya, Syria, Karabakh and so on as much as you like. What unites all these countries? No army. Not trained, not skillful, not equipped. And most importantly, it does not have normal aviation and air defense.
In such conditions "Bayraktar" - yes, "wunder-weapon". In the conditions of the use of normal divisional air defense, it will “deflate” quite quickly. "Shilka", "Tunguska", "Shell" are worthy opponents. I would say - more than worthy.
Yes, we saw how the Bayraktars attacked the same Pantsirs in Syria. But the complexes were not in a combat position, why not attack? But if the “Shell” worked in a combat way, then, you know, with all the shortcomings of the complex, the grandmother said in two who was who.
And then, no matter how good the drone is, it has one drawback: it cannot take many weapons. So "Bayraktar" is a sword that can stab, even fatally. But Ukraine does not yet have and will not have, due to the lack of money, hundreds of Bayraktars capable of somehow slowing down the advance of Russian troops. But the Su-34, which can dump several tons of bombs at a time, is a cudgel.
Yes, the club weapon is not so elegant and innovative, but, as they say, with a great stunning effect.
5. Unpreparedness of the RF Armed Forces to conduct long-term intensive combat operations.
Funny. Very funny. In general, Hitler also thought so that with the capture of Moscow everything would end with us, but how it turned out. I'm sorry, but we don't need an advantage in people. On the contrary, we will try to save them by putting them in equipment. And we will fight with technology.
90 BTG is a decent number. I would say even overkill. Why Ukrainian "specialists" want to fight in this way, we will leave behind the scenes. In general, he has a fad for some kind of sabotage and partisan actions, obviously due to the fact that the Armed Forces of Ukraine are simply not yet capable of something more sane.
It is worth noting here that BTG is not from a good life. Especially in the realities of Ukraine, where the APU is full of seams with a complete set.
After all, the creation of battalion and even company tactical groups within the Armed Forces of Ukraine is the norm, since understaffing is the scourge of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
But why should Russia suddenly do this, because here you can simply move several divisions to the west and thereby solve all problems in general. But let the APU as it wants, and get out of this situation. And even those very BTGs are in the RF Armed Forces, but they are not being created because of a shortage of personnel. BTG is generally an interesting idea and, if executed correctly, is very effective. But this is the subject of a separate discussion.
Masterpiece, right? I just give a standing ovation. I would never have thought of this myself, to be honest.
In Ukraine, it is probably not known that Russia is doing an excellent job with the production of equipment and ammunition. Maybe we have problems with new samples, but as for the old ones, sorry. Yes, I do not argue, something remains in the same Ukraine, but what does the sanctions have to do with it? All that we bought in the West were engines for ships that were lost in the Ukrainian showdown. But everything else... It's sad, but for a couple of weeks the "war" with Ukraine will definitely be enough.
A long war ... I wonder how many independent information troops plan to fight? Many understanding people there believe that 1-2 months is all. Ukraine will become part of Russia, God forbid, of course.
But we go further.
Advantages of Ukraine:
In general, one gets the impression that all the problems of Ukraine are simply taken and the names of the countries are changed. I want to scream: are you serious?
Mobilization of civilians into infantry in the face of a suitable Russian army? Good luck. I imagine how the inhabitants of Eastern Ukraine will rush ... from the military registration and enlistment offices. Forgive me, but what kind of rabble the Armed Forces of Ukraine completed in the same 2015, what a cool outflow was observed after Debaltsev - just a surprise of the highest order. And it was the militia plus the rumors about the "special forces of the FSB." It is not difficult for me to imagine what will happen if the Russian army really goes. I still communicate with Ukrainians.
But the problem of finding Russian troops in the Donbass has not been resolved. There is complete information about all movements, but no Russian troops have been found. And what is the use of such data?
If this is an advantage, then it is so-so. Yes, there are really a lot of anti-tank systems in the Armed Forces of Ukraine now. What does it say? Only that the area in which the offensive of the Russian army will take place will be processed more carefully. Aviation, artillery, MLRS, TOS.
Lots of ATGMs? Okay. And we have a lot of artillery pieces and attack aircraft that will simply plow the entire area. Tested by Americans in the Pacific Islands, works just fine. If you hollow the island with shells and bombs, sooner or later all the defenders will shoot back there.
It's just that the Ukrainian fighters will have more losses. And the losses will be solely on the conscience of the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which will simply expose its fighters to bombs and shells.
And tall buildings are subject to adjustment - sorry, this is also not a problem from the word "absolutely".
Well, when the Armed Forces of Ukraine will have three hundred "Bayraktars", then we'll talk. As long as there are ten of them, you can sleep peacefully.
Well, here's the finale. What interesting conclusions did Pan Butusov make and how can one answer his conclusions.
The conclusions of the Ukrainian side are as follows:
1. A quick large-scale offensive operation of the RF Armed Forces against the Armed Forces of Ukraine is impossible even in the event of air and missile strikes against bases. It is impossible to suppress the infrastructure and defense system only from the air, all the more so in the presence of various air defense systems and maneuvering, with a significant number of troops.
Just the operation against Ukraine will be large-scale and very fast.
Air defense systems (by the way, quite ancient) of Ukraine are cut down by the Iskander OTRK or something simpler in the first place. As did all the "civilized armies" in the same Yugoslavia and Iraq.
Air and missile strikes are carried out on airfields and bases of the much-adored Bayraktars.
Russian aviation in the sky makes life as difficult as possible for fans of war. And we have learned to do it.
Artillery treatment of areas where the offensive is to be.
So the incoming motorized rifle and tank troops will not meet such full-fledged resistance of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
And the “significant preponderance” of the people of the Armed Forces of Ukraine will end very quickly. It is clear that the clever men in Ukraine want to fight with rifles and machine guns, as in the First World War, but the Russian army, if necessary, will use its entire arsenal.
The fact that there is no Air Force left in Ukraine is not our problem. The fact that the Armed Forces of Ukraine do not have cruise missiles, heavy flamethrower systems, the latest MLRS, artillery - well, this is again not our headache.
Of course, you can count on American and British ATGMs. As well as Turkish drones. And we will bet on missiles, shells and aircraft.
I would look at it with pleasure if all those who write “overcoming” today were in the trenches with these weapons. In order to oppose at least something to the Russian army, the under-army of the Armed Forces of Ukraine must have somewhat greater means than anti-tank systems and UAVs.
And here I am once again ready to applaud Pan Butusov. And, seriously. He's right! He is really right! In order to enter the war with Russia and hold out there for more than a week, the Armed Forces of Ukraine must be reformed and equipped, as if it were the army of a decent country. We need a strategy, we need tactics, we need modern weapons and people trained to work with these weapons.
If you comply with all this, and even add a normal military budget to this, then the Armed Forces of Ukraine will really be able to become an armed force capable of something more than mastering handouts from the West.
It is a pity that I will not live to see this significant and important event.
Information