31st Separate Air Assault Regiment After Action Report: Ivanovka Region Operations

 RESTRICTED//OPERATIONAL SECURITY

31st Separate Air Assault Regiment After Action Report: Ivanovka Region Operations

TO:
Major Vyacheslav Abyshkin, Regimental Commander, 31st Separate Air Assault Regiment
Colonel Irina Volkova, ChCOG Senior Staff Engineer Analyst
Vice Admiral Boris Kravchuck, Deputy Commander, ChCOG
Rear Admiral Igor Kasatonov, Commander Intelligence, ChCOG

FROM:
Captain Ilya Kostritsa, Deputy Head of Intelligence Staff, 31st Separate Air Assault Regiment

DATE: 7 March 2026

CLASSIFICATION: RESTRICTED//OPERATIONAL SECURITY

---

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report analyzes three consecutive air assault operations conducted by 2nd Battalion, 31st Separate Air Assault Regiment in the Ivanovka region between late February and early March 2025:

• OP2602-27-3 (Troitskoye) — Catastrophic losses; nearly 90% infantry and helicopter casualties

• OP2602-28-7 (Ryakovo) — Successful clearance; enemy logistics destroyed; prisoners' hit lists recovered

• OP2603-06-1 (Belorovka) — Successful rescue operation; civilian prisoners recovered; minimal casualties

The operations demonstrate the Regiment's ability to adapt and learn from catastrophic failure. Following the near-destruction of the task force at Troitskoye, tactical and intelligence lessons were applied immediately, resulting in two successive victories at Ryakovo and Belorovka. However, the current defensive line from Belorovka to Ryakovo remains thin and is not expected to hold in the coming weeks without reinforcement.

---

1. OPERATION TROITSKOYE (OP2602-27-3)

1.1 Intelligence Preparation

43rd Mountain Rifle Corps intelligence staff compiled information from multiple sources:

Source Type	Intelligence Gathered
Local friendly agents	Scattered reports across northern tier villages in corps AO
Drone overflights	Incidental surveillance of enemy positions
Social media	Civilian and military accounts indicating enemy movements
Prisoner interrogations	Confirmation of enemy operational planning

Key Finding: Separatists planned a series of operations to push their front line southward 3-4 kilometers. However, enemy command staffs remained uncertain of our frontline positions despite heightened reconnaissance. To resolve this uncertainty, separatist command ordered an operational-level probe into Troitskoye.

Enemy Tactical Pattern: Past experiences at Troitskoye demonstrated the enemy's preference for pushing vehicles directly into town to eliminate any forces encountered.

1.2 Friendly Forces & Limitations

• Unit: 2nd Battalion, 31st Separate Air Assault Regiment

• Composition: Primarily light infantry

• Challenge: Anti-tank weapons less effective against heavy armor

• Air Support: 2x Su-25 ground interdiction fighters, 2x Mi-24 gunships

1.3 Battle Plan

The task force commander ordered:

1. Insertion: Transport helicopters land 500 meters south of village; infantry advances into town

2. Deployment:

   • 3rd Squad designated as fire brigade

   • 2nd and 4th Squads positioned near main north-south road

   • Six infantry anti-tank teams inserted into village to establish ambush positions for inbound enemy armor

3. Final Preparation: Command Squad ordered to dig in and prepare to intercept inbound enemy vehicles

1.4 The Battle

Phase 1: Infantry Engagement

• Enemy committed multiple squads of special forces, including:

  • Wagner Group operators

  • Russian naval infantry special forces

• All were highly motivated and prepared to breach the village's defensive cordon

• All three rifle squads performed well, driving back enemy infantry attacks to the north

• Friendly casualties: Moderate

Phase 2: Armor Engagement

• Enemy committed both wheeled and heavy tracked armor into the village

• Infantry anti-tank teams destroyed many vehicles

• Three enemy tanks could not be stopped

• These tanks completely suppressed our infantry deployment

Casualties:

• Infantry: Approximately 90%

• Helicopters: Approximately 90%

• Additional Factor: Battalion command failed to make reinforcing infantry available for Troitskoye

1.5 Enemy Losses (Troitskoye)

Cause	Vehicles Destroyed
Infantry anti-tank	5
Air support (Su-25/Mi-24)	7 damaged or destroyed

1.6 Outcome

Remnants of the task force retreated to base. The operation was a catastrophic failure in terms of friendly losses, though it absorbed a significant enemy assault that might otherwise have been directed elsewhere.

---

2. OPERATION RYAKOVO (OP2602-28-7)

2.1 Intelligence Preparation

Immediately following the Troitskoye operation, intelligence staffs at corps and regiment level began collecting on subsequent enemy plans:

Source Type	Intelligence Gathered
Tapped/recorded cell phones	Confirmed enemy intentions
Local friendly agents	Reported enemy takeover of Ryakovo

Key Findings:

• Enemy had occupied Ryakovo

• They were establishing a logistical base

• Village was reinforced with armor (specific types unknown)

Engineer Support: Corps-level engineer commanders attached a small engineer unit to the infantry, equipped with anti-vehicle mines. Their mission: plant mines along ingress routes to create mobility problems for enemy heavy armor and destroy light wheeled armor.

2.2 Battle Plan (OP2602-28-7)

1. Insertion: Troops landed in a straight line as close as possible within 500 meters of village

2. Initial Assault: All four rifle squads penetrate enemy defensive cordon

3. Defensive Position: Squads occupy north-facing positions and prepare to hold against enemy attack

4. Command Squad Insertion: Transport bird lands less than 250 meters from southern edge of village

2.3 Critical Incident

• Two of four transport birds were hit and shot down nearly immediately by enemy heavy tracked armor

• The other two transport birds were seriously damaged and unable to continue

• All four rifle squads survived intact due to proximity to village edge and began penetration operations

2.4 The Battle

Command Squad Actions:

• Advanced from southwest into village

• Located and eliminated two civilian criminal command operatives

• Intelligence Recovered: Critical documents including a pair of hit lists targeting local civilians

Logistics Destruction:

• Command Squad marched north

• Located enemy logistics assets:

  • 2x ammunition vehicles

  • 1x fuel vehicle

• Destroyed all three, completely eliminating enemy logistics in the area

Mine Deployment:

• Commander moved to main north-south road west of AO

• Planted series of M6 SLAM mines

• Withdrew forces back into village and established defensive cordon

Withdrawal:

• Battalion command staff issued order to withdraw and return to base

• Enemy counterattack did not materialize before extraction

2.5 Outcome

Successful clearance operation. Enemy logistics destroyed. Critical intelligence recovered.

---

3. OPERATION BELOROVKA (OP2603-06-1)

3.1 Intelligence Preparation

Intelligence on enemy deployment at Belorovka was limited. Primary intelligence came from local friendly agents reporting that 3-4 civilians were being held prisoner in the village by an enemy counterintelligence unit.

Prisoner Identification (Post-Operation):

• Female village chief from nearby village

• Her husband

• Her sister

• A fourth female prisoner discovered tortured and killed

3.2 Battle Plan

Based on lessons from Troitskoye:

• Insertion: Transport birds required to land no closer than 500 meters from village edge

• Terrain Advantage: Surrounding terrain enabled covered penetration of enemy defensive cordon

3.3 The Battle

Penetration:

• Task force encountered Wagner Group operators during advance

• Enemy cleared away efficiently

• Remainder of task force moved into defensible positions within village

Command Squad Actions:

• Continued push north

• Deployed M6 SLAM mines to cover approaches

Enemy Response:

• Counterattacks were scattered and light

• Quickly defeated

Extraction:

• Battalion command staff ordered withdrawal

• Task force boarded transport birds

• Village secured by reinforcing forces

3.4 Casualties

Category	Losses
Infantry	Very light
Transport birds	Zero
Gunships	Zero

3.5 Outcome

Successful rescue operation. Village secured. Civilian prisoners recovered (one deceased, tortured).

---

4. ENEMY LOSSES (AGGREGATE)

Operation	Vehicles Destroyed (Infantry)	Vehicles Destroyed (Air)	Notes
Troitskoye	5	7	Heavy enemy special forces commitment
Ryakovo	Unconfirmed	Unconfirmed	Logistics vehicles destroyed
Belorovka	Light	None	Scattered counterattacks

---

5. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1 Operational Progression

The three operations demonstrate a clear learning curve:

1. Troitskoye (Failure):

   • Over-reliance on anti-tank teams against heavy armor

   • Insufficient reinforcing infantry

   • Catastrophic losses: 90% infantry and helicopters

2. Ryakovo (Success):

   • Mine warfare integrated effectively

   • Logistics destruction achieved

   • Intelligence recovered (hit lists)

3. Belorovka (Success):

   • Proper insertion distance (500m)

   • Minimal casualties

   • Civilian rescue accomplished

5.2 Critical Success Factors

1. Intelligence Adaptability: Immediate collection on enemy follow-on plans after Troitskoye

2. Engineer Integration: Mines proved decisive at Ryakovo

3. Tactical Flexibility: Commanders adjusted insertion distances based on lessons learned

4. Air Support Coordination: Su-25 and Mi-24 effectively engaged armor at Troitskoye despite friendly losses

5.3 Critical Failures (Troitskoye)

1. Reinforcement Failure: Battalion command did not make infantry available

2. Armor Vulnerability: Light infantry insufficient against heavy armor without adequate support

3. Insertion Distance: 500 meters proved too close with enemy armor present

5.4 Current Situation

• Friendly forces hold a thin line from Belorovka to Ryakovo

• Assessment: Line is not expected to hold in coming weeks without reinforcement

---

6. RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Immediate Actions

1. Reinforce the Line: Commit additional infantry to Belorovka-Ryakovo sector immediately

2. Minefield Expansion: Deploy additional engineer assets to layer minefields along approaches

3. Intel Collection: Aggressive drone coverage to detect enemy buildup

6.2 Future Operations

1. Air Assault Doctrine Update: Mandate 500m minimum insertion distance when enemy armor confirmed

2. Anti-Tank Enhancement: Issue additional disposable anti-tank weapons to light infantry units

3. Reinforcement Protocol: Establish clear chain for requesting reinforcing infantry

6.3 Long-Term Recommendations

1. Develop dedicated anti-armor platoons within air assault battalions

2. Pre-position mine stocks at battalion forward operating bases

3. Integrate prisoner rescue protocols into standard operating procedures

4. Document and disseminate lessons from Troitskoye to all air assault units

---

7. COMMANDER'S COMMENTS

The Troitskoye operation was a catastrophe. We lost good people and valuable equipment. But the Regiment did not break. Within days, we returned to Ryakovo and Belorovka and accomplished our missions with minimal losses.

This is what adaptability looks like. This is what learning looks like.

We have identified the failures at Troitskoye. They will not be repeated.

The line from Belorovka to Ryakovo is thin. But it is ours. We will hold it until reinforcements arrive.

— Major Vyacheslav Abyshkin
Commander, 31st Separate Air Assault Regiment

---

8. DISTRIBUTION

• Regimental Commander, 31st Separate Air Assault Regiment (Maj. Abyshkin)

• ChCOG Senior Staff Engineer Analyst (Col. Volkova)

• Deputy Commander, ChCOG (Vice Adm. Kravchuck)

• Commander Intelligence, ChCOG (Rear Adm. Kasatonov)

• 43rd Mountain Rifle Corps Intelligence Staff

• 2nd Battalion, 31st Separate Air Assault Regiment

---

Captain Ilya Kostritsa
Deputy Head of Intelligence Staff
31st Separate Air Assault Regiment
Chernarus Defense Forces

CLASSIFICATION: RESTRICTED//OPERATIONAL SECURITY