The Migs that Ukraine is receiving are very welcome, but they are seriously outclassed by the more modern fighter jets in Russian service. F-16s wouldn't be. I very much doubt that China has made any such threats, though. A similar theory was floated here as to why the US wasn't supplying Ukraine with tanks, and that didn't hold up.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Russia/Ukraine conflict
- Thread starter amolina
- Start date
I think it is because Ukraine needs air defense missiles and not aircraft. Russia has formidable anti air that would greatly limit the aircraft’s usefulness over the battlefield. So the USA needs to do a ways to suppress Russian attacks but so it in a manner that keeps f16s from being shot down.
Just my guess and worth what we all just paid for it
BitJam
Active Member
Build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across.
-- Sun Tzu
This video shows civilian traffic backed up trying to flee Crimea after the big oil storage fire:IMO, from the comfort of my armchair, I think they should wait to cripple the Kerch bridge again until after the offensive is well underway.
- Don't telegraph the start of the offensive
- Let everyone flee who wants to flee
- Maximize the amount of time both the land bridge and the sea bridge are out of commission
Right- just about time. Give the civilians who want to leave a few weeks to flee. If a span or two of the three were damaged again, that would motivate many more to make haste.
The heat from the files likely weakened the tanks. Also fires likely did a lot of damage to the pumps and pipes used to transfer the fuel oil.
Weakening the tanks could leave more of a mess than if they burnt to the ground. If they are damaged beyond repair, then there is more work to remove the old tanks before building new ones.
In any case, the Black Sea fleet lost it's primary fueling station in Crimea. That will hinder operations.
It isn't coddling, it's weighing the pros and cons. Russia is in a lot of trouble because they are short of many of the resources they need to continue the fight. They are short of ammunition, weapons, and all sorts of gear. If China starts supplying Russia like NATO is supplying Ukraine, then Russia could end up with the resources to drag this war out much longer.
50 F-16s will help Ukraine, but they won't end the war by themselves. If Russia gets a million artillery shells, guns, and tanks from China, the Ukrainian offensive will be a nightmare.
The problem is NATO doesn't have the air defense missiles or systems. There are quite a few short range and short-medium range systems and Ukraine has been given those. There just aren't all that many systems though.
The NASAMS is the standard medium range AD for NATO, but not all that many have been built. The US provided two systems last fall and Raytheon is currently building another 6. The good thing about the NASAMS is it can take an array of missiles that are in NATO arsenals.
The Patriot is the longest range system, but it was designed to intercept ballistic missiles and there are not that many missiles for them. About 1000 Patriot launchers have been built and about 10,000 missiles. Each launcher has 4 missiles. So there are enough missiles in existence for 2 1/2 salvos per launcher.
NATO doctrine is built around a large, powerful air arm and ground based AD is just there to plug the gaps. The Soviets/Russians, knowing this built the opposite system. They have lots of SAMs with a number of different ranges. Their airpower is secondary to their air defense.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
You wanna talk false flag? Okay, Russia is placing AA kit on top of Zaporizhia NPP reactor bldgs. You don't put on a condom unless you plan to *-
The Ukrainian Offensives are Coming (Part 2)
What Might Success and Failure Look Like?
mickryan.substack.com
His second on measuring the success of the upcoming counter.
@wdolson it is clear the nato doctrine has created a bit of a gap in capabilities but what is also clear is that the Russian anti air defense should work very well indeed in suppressing f16s. Out delivery of harms non withstanding, it will be a dangerous place. We should scout globe for s300 operators willing to ditch. Give them f16s, give Ukraine reloads
Not militarily significant , but enjoyable nonetheless -
U.K. looking to procure longer range missiles for Ukraine:
Long range strike - open until 4 May 2023, 23:00BST
Essential requirements:- Missiles or Rockets with a range 100-300km; land, sea or air launch. Payload 20-490kg
- Low Probability of Intercept (LPI)
- Includes Mission Planning Capability;
- Assured navigation (with hardened Global Navingation Satellite System capability) in the face of advanced countermeasures and EM spectrum denial;
- Air defence penetration methods to increase probability of successful strike.
- Technical Readiness Level of at least 8.
that really is funny, you have 4 weeks to submit a rocket for purchase. So this is something that already exists. Mostly likely from BAE and most likely it will be in ukraine by the end of May.
I look at all the missile attacks as a desperate Russian ploy to have Ukraine use up air defense assets prior to counteroffensive so that the Russian Air Force can become involved. If Ukraine still has s300 then the planes must fly low and Ukraine has shoulder launchers
Officially there are only a handful of Avenger AD systems in Ukraine, but I've seen rumors that there may be many more. It's the kind of system that can be snuck into the country without a lot of fanfare. It's a Humvee with something mounted in back. The news is focusing on the bling weapons like the tanks and APCs.
I read several months ago that the US was also sending Avenger kits to Ukraine which are just the launchers and they can be mounted on the bed of any truck-like vehicle. The US may have send a lot of those.
The Avenger has a range of 275 miles with carried 4-8 Stingers with some sensor equipment. The max altitude is around 12,000 feet. Those will probably be with the mobile forces during the break out. The Ukrainians still lack a lot of longer range AD, which is a problem if the Russians use ranged weapons like the smart bombs they started using a few weeks ago. The Russians have been poor at holding back their resources, so they may have spent their supply of them already. We'll know when the offensive starts.
For everything except ballistic missiles the western AD Ukraine has is taking a toll on Russian attacks. The Russians were able to do damage in central Ukraine, but all the missiles aimed at Kyiv were shot down in the latest attack. The gun AA like the Gepard is very effective taking out the kamikaze drones and systems like the Avenger are probably being used to take out the cruise missiles. Ukraine can't cover every city with these systems, so smaller cities are vulnerable, but the major cities in the country are probably covered by fairly effective defense now.
Russian air power has proven to have some effectiveness against fixed targets, but they have not done well at hitting anything that is moving. Most of their air targets have been buildings rather than anything capable of being mobile. That's going to be a problem for them once the offensive starts because they will be trying to hit forces on the move, possibly moving very quickly (for ground vehicles).
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
A reminder of what kind of a country Russia was in 2002...
"...] An independent investigation of the ['Moscow theater hostage crisis' (My edit.)] was undertaken by Russian politicians Sergei Yushenkov, Sergei Kovalev, journalist Anna Politkovskaya, Hoover Institute scholar John B. Dunlop, and former FSB officers Aleksander Litvinenko and Mikhail Trepashkin. According to their version, the FSB knew about the terrorist group's arrival in Moscow and directed them to the theater through their agent provocateur Khanpasha Terkibayev ("Abu Bakar"), whose name was in the list of hostage takers and who left the theater alive.[53][89][90][91] In April 2003 Litvinenko gave information about Terkibayev ("the Terkibayev file") to Sergei Yushenkov when he visited London. Yushenkov passed this file to Politkovskaya and she was able to interview Terkibayev in person.[92] A few days later, Yushenkov was assassinated by gunfire in Moscow. Terkibayev was later killed in an apparent car crash in Chechnya.[citation needed]
In June 2003, Litvinenko stated in an interview with the Australian television programme Dateline, that two of the Chechen militants involved in the siege—whom he named "Abdul the Bloody" and "Abu Bakar"—were working for the FSB, and that the agency manipulated the terrorists into staging the attack.[93] Litvinenko said: "[w]hen they tried to find [Abdul the Bloody and Abu Bakar] among the rotting corpses of dead terrorists, they weren't there. The FSB got its agents out. So the FSB agents among Chechens organized the whole thing on FSB orders, and those agents were released".[94] "Abu Bakar" (presumably Terkibayev) was also described as an FSB agent and organizer of the theater siege by Anna Politkovskaya, Alexander Khinshtein and other journalists.[95][96][97][98][99][100] Sanobar Shermatova and a co-author had pointed out in "Moskovskie novosti" that Terkibaev had for a number of years been involved in "anti-Wahhabi" activities.[101] [..."
"...] Politkovskaya was found dead in the lift, in her block of apartments in central Moscow on 7 October 2006, Putin's birthday.[50] She had been shot twice in the chest, once in the shoulder, and once in the head at point-blank range. [..."
Credit goes to:
Next Year in Moscow – A Podcast about Russia's future [from The Economist]
www.economist.com
It's seemingly an 8-part podcast. I'm on this fourth episode.
"...] An independent investigation of the ['Moscow theater hostage crisis' (My edit.)] was undertaken by Russian politicians Sergei Yushenkov, Sergei Kovalev, journalist Anna Politkovskaya, Hoover Institute scholar John B. Dunlop, and former FSB officers Aleksander Litvinenko and Mikhail Trepashkin. According to their version, the FSB knew about the terrorist group's arrival in Moscow and directed them to the theater through their agent provocateur Khanpasha Terkibayev ("Abu Bakar"), whose name was in the list of hostage takers and who left the theater alive.[53][89][90][91] In April 2003 Litvinenko gave information about Terkibayev ("the Terkibayev file") to Sergei Yushenkov when he visited London. Yushenkov passed this file to Politkovskaya and she was able to interview Terkibayev in person.[92] A few days later, Yushenkov was assassinated by gunfire in Moscow. Terkibayev was later killed in an apparent car crash in Chechnya.[citation needed]
In June 2003, Litvinenko stated in an interview with the Australian television programme Dateline, that two of the Chechen militants involved in the siege—whom he named "Abdul the Bloody" and "Abu Bakar"—were working for the FSB, and that the agency manipulated the terrorists into staging the attack.[93] Litvinenko said: "[w]hen they tried to find [Abdul the Bloody and Abu Bakar] among the rotting corpses of dead terrorists, they weren't there. The FSB got its agents out. So the FSB agents among Chechens organized the whole thing on FSB orders, and those agents were released".[94] "Abu Bakar" (presumably Terkibayev) was also described as an FSB agent and organizer of the theater siege by Anna Politkovskaya, Alexander Khinshtein and other journalists.[95][96][97][98][99][100] Sanobar Shermatova and a co-author had pointed out in "Moskovskie novosti" that Terkibaev had for a number of years been involved in "anti-Wahhabi" activities.[101] [..."
"...] Politkovskaya was found dead in the lift, in her block of apartments in central Moscow on 7 October 2006, Putin's birthday.[50] She had been shot twice in the chest, once in the shoulder, and once in the head at point-blank range. [..."
Credit goes to:
Next Year in Moscow – A Podcast about Russia's future [from The Economist]
4. Hostages
In episode 4 of our podcast, Arkady Ostrovsky talks to the actor Chulpan Khamatova whose work has brought her up close with Russia’s leaders
It's seemingly an 8-part podcast. I'm on this fourth episode.
Last edited:
constant HIMARS attacks in Tokmak zap province. I was moving equipment this morning but saw several clips of multiple himars launches 6 missiles each from 2 launchers. They had mostly been saving these so figure only a short time now. May 9 is an important day, maybe then.
BitJam
Active Member
This month's (paywalled) cover story for the Atlantic by Anne Applebaum and Jeffrey Goldberg is a terrific tour de force about the war in Ukraine . I encourage everyone here to read it. I sometimes lose the big picture when I focus in on the details. This article was a timely reminder of what is really at stake here.
www.theatlantic.com
Zelensky’s Plan to Defeat Russia—And Take Back Crimea
The future of the democratic world will be determined by whether the Ukrainian military can break the stalemate and drive Russia out of its territory.
www.theatlantic.com
This is a war over a fundamental definition of civilization, Zelensky says, a battle “to show everybody else, including Russia, to respect sovereignty, human rights, territorial integrity; and to respect people, not to kill people, not to rape women, not to kill animals.”
[...] Everyone—not just Ukrainians, but Belarusians, Venezuelans, Iranians, and others around the world whose dictatorships are propped up by the Russians—is waiting for the counteroffensive.
This month's (paywalled) cover story for the Atlantic by Anne Applebaum and Jeffrey Goldberg is a terrific tour de force about the war in Ukraine . I encourage everyone here to read it. I sometimes lose the big picture when I focus in on the details. This article was a timely reminder of what is really at stake here.
Zelensky’s Plan to Defeat Russia—And Take Back Crimea
The future of the democratic world will be determined by whether the Ukrainian military can break the stalemate and drive Russia out of its territory.
This is a war over a fundamental definition of civilization, Zelensky says, a battle “to show everybody else, including Russia, to respect sovereignty, human rights, territorial integrity; and to respect people, not to kill people, not to rape women, not to kill animals.”[...] Everyone—not just Ukrainians, but Belarusians, Venezuelans, Iranians, and others around the world whose dictatorships are propped up by the Russians—is waiting for the counteroffensive.
This war is defining for the world and for Ukraine just what it means to be Ukrainian. Centuries of occupation by Russia and other powers have diluted the Ukrainian identity to a point where before the war they couldn't agree on who they were.
I have had a feeling for some time that when Ukraine wins, Lukashenko's grip on power in Belarus will also slip. The Belorussians are more interested in being like Ukraine than a puppet state controlled by the Kremlin. Lukashenko has been able to keep that contained, but it can't last.
Thanks for posting; The Atlantic has good stories.This month's (paywalled) cover story for the Atlantic by Anne Applebaum and Jeffrey Goldberg is a terrific tour de force about the war in Ukraine . I encourage everyone here to read it. I sometimes lose the big picture when I focus in on the details. This article was a timely reminder of what is really at stake here.
Zelensky’s Plan to Defeat Russia—And Take Back Crimea
The future of the democratic world will be determined by whether the Ukrainian military can break the stalemate and drive Russia out of its territory.
This is a war over a fundamental definition of civilization, Zelensky says, a battle “to show everybody else, including Russia, to respect sovereignty, human rights, territorial integrity; and to respect people, not to kill people, not to rape women, not to kill animals.”[...] Everyone—not just Ukrainians, but Belarusians, Venezuelans, Iranians, and others around the world whose dictatorships are propped up by the Russians—is waiting for the counteroffensive.
