If you’ve read this previously linked article, you know that Russia is having real problems with air operations in their invasion of Ukraine. Here’s a short video that covers some of the highlights:
Key takeaways:
Thus the documented record of Ukrainian forces shooting down Russian airplanes:
#Ukraine: A Russian Su-25 jet managed to successfully land on an airfield after being hit with a Ukrainian MANPADS missile.
Guessing by the damage, the plane is likely to be decommissioned or at least will require serious repairing. pic.twitter.com/Ljv2gNkJ4m
— 🇺🇦 Ukraine Weapons Tracker (@UAWeapons) March 14, 2022
This morning Ukraine Army shot down a plane of Russian occupiers near Izyum, the pilots were ejected.#Ukraine #Russia #poland #BreakingNews #breaking #war #ukrainawar #UkraineKrieg #putin #StopPutin #stopwar pic.twitter.com/swQtMlwAwT
— Mateusz Sobieraj (@MateuszSobiera3) March 13, 2022
Helicopters too:
Russian helicopter shot down by missile in Ukrainehttps://t.co/AQ14UTxfFw pic.twitter.com/KasgRgNtmO
— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) March 5, 2022
(Usual propaganda cautions apply.)
Not only has Russia not achieved air superiority, these problems make it unlikely it will achieve it before the war ends.
Tags: aircraft, Foreign Policy, helicopters, Military, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian War, Ukraine
Ya don’t s’pose dual US AWACs going 24/7 and relaying the Rusky’s every move down to the Ukrainians has anything to do with it?
^It most likely does.
Nice propaganda. Your first poster has it correct. NATO AWACs, flying in NATO airspace have been providing long range radar for Ukrainian AA which allows the Ukrainians to keep their targeting radar turned off until the last possible minute.
This is also just one reason why NATO trying to enforce a “no fly” zone is a bad idea… the Russians could do the exact same thing to NATO pilots…
…and CERTAINLY… NATO has much less appetite for casualties then the Russians do.
It could just as easily be German AWACS, i.e. NATO. German AWACS were deployed off the US East Coast after 9/11.
The US has no AWACs flying Ukraine. But it has been reported that lots of other aerial intelligence is being released to them, though not in real time and not raw.
Surely Russian commanders anticipated this. They routinely provided warning to US adversaries. But no, they thought it would all be over in days.
Russia owns this.
I wish for Taiwan’s sake the same is true for the ChiComs.
I suspect not though.
If China doesn’t start moving in the next two weeks, they’ve missed their chance until October, and missed their chance to act in concert with the best and biggest distraction they’re likely to get, and they’re not going to get a better one any time soon. And they probably know that.
Also, if they don’t start moving in the next two weeks, it’s a sign they understand just how badly Putin has screwed up.
That Su-25 is a tough bird, but yes I don’t see that one being repaired.
Agree with Steve White– that Su-25 is probably going to be written off and cannibalized for spares…
…but it did bring home the most important and hard-to-replace component in one piece: the pilot. One for Sukhoi.
For the Chinese to cross the streets in October they would have had to start massing ships months ago. The window is already closed.
But it was never really open in the first place. They don’t have the sealift capacity to move the number of troops that would be required and then keep them in supply.
Against the known size of the Taiwanese military, with entrenched defenses, they would at least need 12 Normandy-invasions worth of troops, then they’d need to ship them over 16 times the cross-channel distance. They can’t do it.
Comments indicating no AWACs or no data sharing are off-base. DOD and other US official statements on the subject are pointless to refute. Those familiar with the flying saucers can ‘see’ them as well.
AWACs are not in or over Ukraine. It’s not needed or safe, and full sensor coverage from outside their legal airspace. (Wiki) says 3 platforms cover all central Europe, and no doubt 1 or 2 can cover Ukraine.
Airborne Warning and Control System is that; it includes ground control. An obvious conclusion of use is ground anti-aircraft’s radar on-time now reduced to seconds. Too short a time for radar-detecting munitions to find or lock on, and Ukraine AA survival rates reflect that.
[…] Why Russia Can’t Achieve Air Superiority […]
Indeed. I covered that topic here and here.
Update from Bronk
https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/ukraine-no-fly-zone-would-be-ineffective-dangerous-and-gift-putin
If the Russians don’t have air supremacy, why wasn’t the 40 mile convoy bombed?
If the Russians don’t have air superiority, why is everyone — including Ukraine — pushing for a no-fly zone? You don’t put a no-fly zone over a place you can operate in.
The Soviets lost a couple of Su-25s in the early Stinger days in AFG.
They added some armor in the rear fuselage and a fuel tank, no more loses, all Stinger hits survivable.
Russian labor costs are much lower, so the repair/scrap decision will be made based more on whether they think they need to get the aroicraft back in service.
Question:
If NATO AWACS aircraft are providing real-time data to Ukraine air defence to assist their activity, would this not cross the line between passive support for Ukraine (arms transfers, etc.) and active participtaion in the conflict by direct cooperation wuth Ukraine air defence to shoot down Russian aircraft?
Despite this, after discounting propaganda driven exaggerations, Russian aircraft losses appear to be quite moderate.