nativewolf
Active Member
They gave them 40 river crossing boats....which can cross the black sea from Kherson or Odessa to Crimea on most days just fine. I do wonder if they wanted them for that or for crossing the reservoir and attacking just north or south of the nuke plantThe Sea of Azoz freezes over most winters. The Russians have ice breakers in the area, but only a few.
The Russians supply conundrums have gotten much more complex. With rail logistics end to end, they load supplies on a train somewhere in Russia, then the train drops it off near the depot close to the front. Now they have to unload the train in Russia near the Kerch Strait onto a truck, then the truck has to wait for the ferry (the Russians only have a couple, they scrapped most of them after the Kersh St Bridge was complete), once ferried across the truck goes to a nearby rail depot where the supply is put back on a train. Much more labor and more time to move each ton of goods.
Additionally their capacity to move fuel is drastically worse. I've seen pictures of the trucks waiting for the ferries and there are few tanker trucks in the line. They were moving fuel by tanker car in trains, but now they have to put it on trucks and it doesn't look like they have all that many tanker trucks.
The Russians don't have the kind of bulk hauler ships needed to move a lot of cargo in the Black Sea/Azoz region. They have some landing ships left, but those would likely carry trucks loaded with supplies.
If the Ukrainians reach the Azoz coast they will be within Neptune range of all the Russian ports that would service Crimea. With the fall of Kherson they are in control of land points that put all of western Crimea in Neptune range.
The entire south is dependent on supply flowing into Cirmea and with that cut down, the southern front is drastically supply starved. The Russian offensive that went horribly wrong was an attempt to push the Ukrainians back from HIMARS range of the one rail line between Donbas and the south. They lost thousands battering a brick wall of Ukrainian defenses.
The Russians are probably moving small amounts of supply along southern roads, but their ability to do that is poor.
Putin is doing an outstanding job of that.
The bridges are probably out until after the war is over. At minimum until the Russians are pushed well back from the left bank of the river.
The Russians blowing the bridges on the way out made it clear that despite what they say, they have given up hope of taking back Kherson.
I'm skeptical about the rumors that western powers are pressuring Ukraine to settle. There are a lot of rumors, but the sources are not the most reliable. There may be some pressure, but I expect the pressure from the US is diminished now that the MAGA caucus lost in the election. Those were the bulk of politicians who were pro-Putin. 90+% of the rest want to see Russia eliminated as a threat to anyone.
The Russians can make the northern border to Crimea difficult to breach. It's a narrow isthmus, but the Russians have poor supply and poor quality troops vs an ever better Ukrainian force.
Towed artillery is pretty much obsolete. The US uses very little of it anymore, which is why there were so many M777s to give to Ukraine. There are so many threats, including drones to stationary artillery that can't be moved quickly. Most SP guns need to drop some kind of blade to stabilize the chassis when they fire. They can move more quickly than towed guns, but it still takes time to move. HIMARS can stop, shoot, and be on the move again within a minute or two.
By the time the Ukrainians get to Crimea, the rest of the south will have likely collapsed leaving a large chunk of their army available to go after Crimea. Both sides are stretched thin right now with a very long line of contact. The fall of right bank of the Dnipro frees up the Ukrainians quite a bit. They can put just a blocking force to the north in case the Russians want to raid the north and shift most of their sources east.
To keep the Russians tied down on the left bank of the Dnipro the west should give Ukraine some amphibious vehicles. That would pose a constant threat to the Russians of a Ukrainian crossing and force them to keep forces on the bank of the river.
The Russians are now a lot less mobile than the Ukrainians. The Ukrainians can keep some mobile reserve on the right bank to counter any Russian incursions, but the Russians, not having the ability to deploy mobile reserves would have to station more troops in static positions on the left bank to achieve the same blocking ability against the Ukrainians. With static positions, the Russians will also be more vulnerable to enemy artillery.
The Russians can harass cities and towns like they have been doing, but their ability to hit the Ukrainian army is much weaker than the ability of the Ukrainians to hit their troops.
A good overview of the 18 boats already furnished, at least one of which has been hit by a lanclet loitering drone.
Last edited:
