Russian action: “Incompetent and ridiculous at first glance, but…” Soyuz capsule launched on unusual rescue mission

Exploding tanks, city battles, shelling. War images have never been shared so directly and unfiltered as during the current Russian invasion of Ukraine. New videos appear on social media timelines every day. And thousands of living room generals give their verdict in the comments.

The disastrous (and hitherto unsuccessful) Russian attempt to attack Wuhledar was met with particular derision. In fact, the many destroyed tanks give the layman a picture of poorly organized Russian troops. But are these impressions correct?

It’s not that simple, says Peter Mertens. We submitted five scenes from Ukraine to the combat control expert for review. At the Military Academy (MILAK) of ETH Zurich, Mertens researches, among other things, historical and current questions about tactics and operational leadership.

Before going into the individual cases, Mertens highlights some general points that should be taken into account.

Warning: the videos show maneuvers with a presumed fatal outcome.

Tank convoy in front of Wuhledar (1st scene)

Analysis by Mertens:

The disaster could have been avoided if:

The hectic pace could be explained if fire was expected (see a: the impact craters in the area, b: the dismounted infantry seeking cover) and did not want to offer stationary targets.

Tank drives into the same minefield (same video, 2nd scene)

Analysis by Mertens:

Panzer (apparently) deliberately runs over mines

Analysis by Mertens:

Tank happened exploded vehicle

Analysis by Mertens

Tank convoy tries to retreat

Analysis by Peter Mertens

Recurring errors

Summary of Mertens

“At first glance, the behavior of the soldiers in the video sequences indeed seems partly nonsensical, partly incompetent, partly ridiculous. Upon closer inspection, the videos also reveal recurring errors indicating a lack of training, lack of experience and overwhelmed management staff. However, not everything that masquerades as a mistake was really avoidable. For example, (camouflaged) mines are hardly visible to the naked eye – especially from a moving tank with closed hatches. Mine detectors also do not respond to all types of mines. In addition, in some situations shown in the videos, the areas where the mines were buried are additionally covered with a layer of snow. In addition, long-range laying systems allow, among other things, the rapid placement of mines in places previously reported as mine-free, so that trailing or advancing troops are surprised in blind spots. This statement of course applies even more explicitly to the use of self-righting mortars (in Switzerland: mine throwers) or artillery ammunition.”