>Russia can barely supply troops within 90 km of its border

Why do the Russians not invest in trucks in sufficient numbers? I know they're not as sexy as tanks and IFVs but you need them to actually have ammunition and fuel for your soldiers to fight along with food so they don't starve to death. They're also not that hard to manufacture, so why do their BTGs barely have any?

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I still don’t understand how that garden gnome Hitler managed to lose to these subhumans

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Sadly. That was our fault. As an American I apologize.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Sadly. That was our fault. As an American I apologize.

      Americans are losing to them in Bakhmut right now.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >We're fighting US American Nazi hohols!
        proofs

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          /k/ope

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Did the good shills get mobilized?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The perfect demonstration of the Russian mind, where such scholarly concepts as "proof" and "evidence" is taken to be cope.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This is certainly a most bizarre NATO-Russia war that I've seen, exactly 0 NATO forces have been deployed to fight vatniks yet the Asiatic mongoloids have suffered 100k dead.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nazis are morons and fascism is an even worse system. Wild, isn't it? Even the soviet union was better run.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Nazis had absolute dogshit logistics and nowhere near enough fuel to fulfill their ambitions. They had to demotorize infantry units just to make it to Stalingrad.
      Meanwhile lend lease provided the Soviets with everything they needed and basically built up their entire logistical transport capabilities from train tracks to trucks.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >muh lend lease
        only shortened the war. this is like saying america couldn't of beat japan without the soviet invasion

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >only shortened the war
          Not according to Zhukov, Khrushchev and allegedly Stalin though there are only second-hand attestations to his opinion on the matter.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          "I know no lend lease would mean we would only have less than a quarter of the food, in a time when we were already starving to death, practically no industry, no shoes, belts, clothes, engines, or new railroad tracks, but don't worry bro, we'll URRAAAA out way out"

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Hitler was pretty retarded himself because breaking alliances with the Soviety Union just to invade them in the middle of WWII was a good idea somehow.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The USA provided most of the USSR's trucks and train cars so they could focus on producing weapons. Ironically this myopic focus on weapons development and production ended up being the USSR's undoing and one of the reasons Russia can't fight offensive wars very well. That and the macho man culture where things like logistics and maintenance are considered tasks for bitches.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Russia is a amateur army, hence amateur-tier logistics.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The US and to a lesser extent the UK did all their logistical thinking for them including designing their entire manufacturing system pre-war. Left to their own devices, they can't keep any post-industrial-revolution technology working for more than a few years without some corrupt general or oligarch letting it fall into complete disarray to shave some rubles off the top. And it turns out efficient manufacturing and logistics matter more than pretty much anything else in war.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I think he’s more like Mussolini than hitler

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Russia is big. Russia is empty. Russia has never had a population density high enough, or enough wealth not stolen by oligarchs, to justify a national road network.
    So their logistics system is almost entirely rail based.
    I'm not kidding. This is literally true.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Honestly that's not too much of a problem. If the US could get away with sending stuff everywhere via rail, it would too. Armored vehicles are already sent domestically via rail.

      The problem is Russia's inability to get things off the railhead and across the last 100 km. It's simply inexcusable.

      Like if the US was able to fly Strykers and Bradleys from the east coast to Germany, get them off the plane, but then was suddenly unable to truck, drive or train those vehicles/ammo/etc to the Polish border, people would be stunned. They'd demand to know why Strykers were being abandoned without fuel 20km short of the front. That's the level of dysfunction we're seeing with Russia.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Russian logistics is literally 19th century.
        They don't have pallets or forklifts. They have to unload and hand stack everything.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          PALLET? FORKLIFT?

          Why need?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            imagine if there was a drone with a grenade nearby...

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              It needs HEAT grenade though. Frag grenade would just scratch paint on bomb case.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                40mm grenades are usually HEDP which has both a frag jacket and a shaped charge with copper liner. At least western ones are, I would assume Russian/Ukrainian ones are too.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >so why do their BTGs barely have any?
    soviet/russian and i guess a large part of ukie logistics is based primarily on railroad. this is why that crimea bridge explosion was so significant and this is why everyone is fighting over towns like backhmut and kupyansk.
    and this is the reason they're melitopol is key to the south of ukraine

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >so why do their BTGs barely have any?

    BTGs are chopped down Soviet brigades and logistics elements existed mainly on brigade level that was eliminated when Russians decided to maximize zoom and boom in their unit structure. Such is life.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They do/have. There are several issues. First is distance. Second is infrastructure. Third is russian prep for the operation was trash. Fourth is that the BTG organization eats way too many resources given the logistical support it has for the tactical impact it has. Which is why they have basically dropped it after the opening fiasco.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >soldiers to fight along with food so they don't starve to death.
    They just don't care, mobiks got no time to starve, they die in a useless attack after 3 days anyway.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >so why do their BTGs barely have any?
    See, John from Omaha oblast, if you discard trucks and infantry you can get more artillery with same amount of troops. More artillery = more firepower. Smart.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous
  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Russia's logistic system is based on using trains which is great when you control the train lines. Not so great when you don't infact the first thing Ukraine did was blow all the connecting train lines and then focused on taking out logistics vehicles at the start of the war. This why Russia wasn't able to mount an assualt on Kiev.

    Second reason is trucks aren't as sexy a new tank or jet when you're competing for an already tight budget.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ukraine needs to hit Russia's trucks and locomotives without mercy.

    Cripple their Logistics & Transport.

    No supplies = no invasion force.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Russia’s army is just for show. Trucks don’t look good on parade in Red Square.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I can just see a post-war russian cargo cult parading pallets and trucks through red square to show their strength.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why do the Russians not invest in trucks in sufficient numbers?
    because they're harder to drive while drunk than a train.

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    you know whats crazy, USA army, the most powerful army in the world, capable of deploying anywhere on the globe, its logistics backbone is just 120k 5ton trucks and 13k 10ton heavy trucks. Its not about how many "mules" you have, it really just about organization.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It really is amazing how much use you get out of a 5 ton

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That's a ton of trucks though
      Pun not intended

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They don't have big road network because they are poor, and also little roads they have are absolute shit. As this winter is crap in Europe, you can expect mud season to last until May. During the mud season they won't plan any big actions, they'll just throw bodies at Ukrainians to keep them busy.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *