don't worry too much about the ukrainians at bakhmut .....

i doubt very much that the ukrainian troops at bakhmut will be encircled and "trapped" at bakhmut.  they have possession of a couple of pieces of high ground which afford them very good fighting positions, and which allow them to exact a very high price against russians who choose to attack them there.

but, who knows?   maybe the russians will do something right for a change, and take more ground such as makes it disadvantageous for the ukrainian troops to maintain their positions.

in such a case, the ukrainians will simply withdraw, in an orderly fashion, to positions which offer them better fighting positions.  my guess is that the ukrainians have already chosen the ground, and have prepared it & made it suitable as a place from which to continue the fight.  and, they will simply retreat some few kilometers, and take up the job of killing russians by the droves once again.

in the meantime, the russians are "pinned," and they have much ability to maneuver in a fluid fight.   which will occur when the ukraine again assumes the offense.

the only real question is whether the ukraine decides that the killing of russians comes as too high a price for them to sustain.

john jay @ 03.07.2023

Comments

[Drew458]

Totally off topic, but I can't find your email so I'll post it here ... just in case you're interested in writing about the Army's XM5 battle rifle fiasco or it's rather idiotic .277 Fury cartridge. (https://www.armytimes.com/opinion/commentary/2023/02/28/the-not-really-next-generation-weapons-program/)

The .277 Fury is a 6.8 bore, a .270 mated with a .308. Then driven to insane pressures, around 80K psi. The BS is that this can drive a 140gr magic bullet at 3000fps from a 16" barrel. Yeah right. One thing nobody seems to notice is that the muzzle blast will be instantly deafening to the shooter unless a massive silencer is used. Another thing is that this kind of zoom requires some sort of magic propellant far beyond any smokeless powder available today. The third thing is that this size cartridge requires an A10 sized rifle, but made much beefier to handle those pressures. And the barrels will wear out mighty quick, even if titanium nitrite lined.

An I'll throw in that the very first version of our favorite old .280 British was a .270; and QL shows that a .277 130gr shooting ".270 Brit" at the original 2.55" OAL and normal magnum pressure can manage over 2750fps with AR15 level muzzle pressure, all powder burnt so lesser muzzle flash. SD is .242, which is pretty darn penetrative. 6.8mm version even better SD and velocity; .266 and >3000fps. That's not fury, that's a white hot drill bit.

So it seems to me like this is typical military pie in the sky, another zillion dollar boondoggle. Oh, the Fury bullets would have to be tungsten core, and China owns most of that metal. So, duh.

Just in case you needed a distraction from Ukraine for a bit.

[jj]

drew:

infantry rifles, or rifles for infantry battle, are pretty interesting.

now, i happen to be a bit of a fan of the .280 british,*** the skinny cased cartridge as opposed to the fat cartridge the brits tried to sell the concept of the cartridge to the cousins.   that one.

instead, the u.s. foisted the 7.62mm nato on the allies.

all of these shenanigans in the face of the fact that for a rifle to kill opposing infantry, something along the line of the .30-30 winchester or the .280 british is just fine.  something along the line of a rifle to be used for killing small deer and the like  .....   that is just fine for dealing with two-legged critters, in the 150 to 200 lb category.  if nato just went back to the original .280 brit (the skinny one) i would be quite happy. one simply doesnt need the .264 winchester magnum as an infantry cartridge, .... , and, not really for much of anything else.

now, one can drive a 140 grain bullet at 3,000 fps from a 26 barrel, with all the attendant problems you point out.   to be able to do that from a 16 barrel  cannot be done, and if it could, it would probably require a 15 or 16 lb. rifle to keep it from being lethal on the shooter.   and, for all the reasons that you set forth, it simply cannot be done.    the end result of all the things you describe as being detrimental is pressure, and huge amounts of heat, such as would strip the leades of rifling, probably destroy the rifling, and in the end would simply prove destructive of all the rifles systems in very quick order.   can you imagine the speeds the rifles action would be subject to, trying to cycle the damned thing?

aint gonna happen in our lifetimes.   laughing.   not without major revolutions in materials and propellants.    enjoyed the letter.   keep em coming.

john

***to the point of having developed a wildcat called jjs brit, simply my version of the .280 brit.   mild mannered, a pleasure to shoot, and not hard on rifles.  whats wrong with that.   who needs all the sizzle?   and, not until they invent the guided bullet could such an abomination hit the broadside of a haystack at 600 yards.