“The Ukraine counter offensive is supposed to use mechanized units to exploit weak points and drive around static defenses.”
It’s always been the case for maneuver warfare.
But it has always required air superiority. I don’t know of a case where it has succeeded without it. Armor moving beyond ground-based air defense are just targets for tactical aircraft.
As for static defenses, that’s always been a requirement for holding ground. Ukraine is the prime modern example. They employed it brilliantly.
If Russia controlled the airspace they would have won this war a year ago.
Ukraine is using a lot of anti aircraft munitions and that could be a problem if they run out.
However I see lots of reports of new Patriot systems and others being moved up to the front in preparation for the counter offensive.
Also I don’t think the use of the old tanks is a plus it’s the result of the newer tanks being lost at a high rate.
I have a friend who’s retired military who believes the new Ukrainian armored forces will be enough to start to push the Russians back.
However this being a war I wasn’t totally convinced.
There are signs of Ukraine wearing out and there are signs of Russia wearing out let’s see what happens with this offensive whether it fizzles or makes big gains.
As for the static defense I guess the question is whether you can get through it and around it sufficiently to outflank it.