it is time for western governments to start being honest. every soviet era base has a vast underground bunker, sometimes the size of a small city. Highways in the lmd go nowhere. My predictions are 50/50 on a ground battle between Russian troops and nato in the next few weeks. DlSatellite images are available of highway upgrades with random junctions all over western russia.
time for this guy.
Soviet-era hardened underground facilities (bunkers, depots, former missile silos, command bunkers, industrial caverns) can and have been reused to house infantry, armour, logistics and command nodes. P(useful/feasible) = 0.78
---
WHY IT'S PRACTICAL
Existing hard structure (concrete, rock-cut halls) reduces need for field fortification.
Concealment from over-head ISR (reduced thermal / visual signature, harder to image at medium resolution).
Protected POL/munitions storage and ready vehicle shelters shorten survivability time against strikes.
Prewired utilities (rail spurs, power, fuel lines) in many sites speed sustainment.
Cold-weather sheltering in LMD and Baltic zones reduces attrition.
---
LIMITS / CONSTRAINTS (what prevents large-scale underground use)
Space & egress constraints: many Soviet bunkers have limited internal clearance — heavy MBTs may not fit or manoeuvre easily. P(limit) = 0.60
Ventilation & CBRN resilience: long-term occupation needs filtration, power, and resupply; sustained use strains these systems. P(limit) = 0.55
Logistics choke points: bulk fuel, ammo and food still need above-ground transfer — supply lines are vulnerable. P(limit) = 0.70
Detection by multi-sensor ISR: modern SAR, multispectral, persistent HUMINT and SIGINT degrade concealment over time. P(limit) = 0.65
---
WHAT WOULD BE HOUSED vs WHAT WOULD NOT
Likely underground: infantry units, light armoured vehicles (APCs, IFVs), command posts, POL/munitions storage, med nodes. P=0.8
Less likely / impractical underground: large formations of MBTs, large fuel/maintenance bays for heavy armour, sustained air ops. P=0.65
---
OPERATIONAL TRADE-OFFS
Survivability up, tempo down. Underground basing increases survivability vs strike but slows reaction and sortie generation.
Defendability vs mobility. Bunkered forces are static — useful for holding axes, staging short thrusts, not for sustained deep offensives without secure supply corridors.
---
SIGNS THEY ARE USING THEM (observable indicators)
1. Rail & road flows into small, non-commercial yards at off-hours; frequent covered freight wagons. (rail trackers, spotters).
2. Concentrated POL/Ammunition offloads at nearby ports/railheads with short transfer distances to known bunker coordinates. (AIS, satellite).
3. Temporary berms, vehicle ramps and concealed entrance portals in imagery; camouflage netting over openings. (commercial satellite, Planet/Maxar).
4. Short-duration vehicle emissions at portal mouths at dawn/dusk (thermal anomalies on high-res IR).
5. SIGINT chatter about fixed strongpoints, C2 traffic from hardened sites (comm interception).
6. Local social posts/geotagged photos showing heavy equipment parked near rural industrial caves.
7. Engineering unit activity and contractor plant visible near known Soviet sites (imagery / procurement).
8. Reduced visible tank columns but increased quick local sortie footprints—i.e., sudden short local armored sallies from known sites. (ADS-B sparse; ground spotters).
Presence of ≥3 independent indicators → High confidence of active use. (Rule-of-thumb: mixed-source confirmation required.) P(confident detection|3 indicators) ≈ 0.8
---
VULNERABILITIES / COUNTERMEASURES
Sealing/denial by precision strikes on access nodes (rail bridges, portal infrastructure) — more efficient than trying to destroy interiors. P(effective) = 0.7
Targeted ISR: high-res SAR, thermal, wide-area EO over multiple passes + SIGINT to correlate movement windows. P(detection over time) = 0.75
Sabotage / special forces interdiction of ingress/egress points and logistic links. P(disruptive) = 0.6
Electronic & cyber targeting of local C2 and logistics manifests to reveal supply schedules. P(useful) = 0.5
---
QUICK FIELD DIAGNOSTIC (3-minute check)
1. Pull latest satellite thumbnails over known Soviet bunker coords. Look for new vehicle shadows or disturbed earth.
2. Check rail/AIS feeds for unexpected freight into small yards near those coords.
3. Monitor SIGINT/comms for spikes in chatter tied to grid squares.
4. Scan social feeds for geotagged pictures from nearby towns.
— If 2+ positive → escalate to tasking higher-resolution imagery and human intel. P(actionable) = 0.72
---
CONCLUSION (one line)
Soviet underground bases are operationally useful as survivable staging and sustainment nodes for infantry, light armour and logistics — but they do not remove the logistic tail and are detectable if you fuse ISR, SIGINT, geospatial and human sources. P(meaningful operational use now) = 0.68
> WOPR//END OF LINE
50/50.
That’s dreadful.