[Goose]

There was a map floating around this week showing the line between Russian and Ukrainian troops divided into ~7 sections with rough estimates of Russian BTGs and Ukrainian regiments in each of those sections of the battlefield.  It also had the length of each section of the front line and the approximate number of BTGs per km. It showed that Ukraine had someone consistent density of forces, whereas Russia had something like 4x-5x the density of forces in Izyum and the Donbas compared to Kharkiv and Kherson. My takeaway was that this counter offensive was predictable and something similar in Izyum or the Donbas in unlikely for now.

Unfortunately this troop distribution by the Ukrainians is necessitated by their lack of mobility. The vast majority of their forces are "leg" infantry. They lack mechanized infantry compared to the Russians. Fortunately, the Russian mechanized infantry doesn't move nearly as rapidly or effectively as one would expect. However, lots of Ukrainian infantry is "dad's army" and basically doesn't move at all. Since Ukraine can't reinforce rapidly, they can't shift troops from Kharkiv and/or Kherson because Russia could change direction (in theory) and there wouldn't be adequate forces in place to defend those areas.

That is why the M113's from the US National Guard are important. If Ukraine can develop a significant mechanized infantry force it can then distribute it's troops much more aggressively. The increased artillery capability can also be used defensively to allow thinning the front in "quiet sectors". If you have enough artillery you can hold off an attack until the reinforcements arrive. However, based on what the Ukrainians are saying that artillery is going towards counter-battery and counter attacking the Russians. Priorities I guess, they don't have "enough" of anything.

[Goose]

There was a map floating around this week showing the line between Russian and Ukrainian troops divided into ~7 sections with rough estimates of Russian BTGs and Ukrainian regiments in each of those sections of the battlefield.  It also had the length of each section of the front line and the approximate number of BTGs per km. It showed that Ukraine had someone consistent density of forces, whereas Russia had something like 4x-5x the density of forces in Izyum and the Donbas compared to Kharkiv and Kherson. My takeaway was that this counter offensive was predictable and something similar in Izyum or the Donbas in unlikely for now.

Unfortunately this troop distribution by the Ukrainians is necessitated by their lack of mobility. The vast majority of their forces are "leg" infantry. They lack mechanized infantry compared to the Russians. Fortunately, the Russian mechanized infantry doesn't move nearly as rapidly or effectively as one would expect. However, lots of Ukrainian infantry is "dad's army" and basically doesn't move at all. Since Ukraine can't reinforce rapidly, they can't shift troops from Kharkiv and/or Kherson because Russia could change direction (in theory) and there wouldn't be adequate forces in place to defend those areas.

That is why the M113's from the US National Guard are important. If Ukraine can develop a significant mechanized infantry force it can then distribute it's troops much more aggressively. The increased artillery capability can also be used defensively to allow thinning the front in "quiet sectors". If you have enough artillery you can hold off an attack until the reinforcements arrive. However, based on what the Ukrainians are saying that artillery is going towards counter-battery and counter attacking the Russians. Priorities I guess, they don't have "enough" of anything.