This is to continue (and, I hope: to conclude) my analysis of the latest in air/missile warfare between Russia and Ukraine (and thus not only the ‘Part 1’ of this feature, but also the story of ‘SAM-corridors’….
That map appears to show western Crimea uncovered by air defence, so I assume the map is Indicative. Or maybe Russia only thinks eastern Crimea is important now, to preserve the transport links to occupied Ukraine.
For my amateur brain, the idea of building a "wall" along the border with SAMs seems so obvious and "easy" (for someone who does have enough SAMs) that I can't help wondering why they didn't try it in the first place (or did they?). However, will this be as effective against any potential ballistic missiles (if/when Ukraine has some of our own to deploy without asking permission from Trio Fantasticus et al)? And I assume it makes the SAMs themselves more vulnerable due to more "obvious" locations?
I think to build the S-300, S-400 wall they have to weaken the protection elsewhere (Crimea?, left bank of Dnipro, Far East, NATO borders, ... ) And that's why they hesitated to do it.
(I think only decoys would remain along NATO borders soon. Because who fears of NATO?)
Well, Crimea can and must be part of that wall, if the idea is to simply deny all directions from which our UAVs or cruise missiles can enter their airspace.
A radar cannot see low-flying targets from afar. Thus, there should be many smaller AD systems in between those long-range S300 to make the thing work. And, probably, a couple of A50 patrolling behind the line. Thus, it's not that easy. And all those radars are vulnerable to HARM missiles.
Makes sense. But how far can something like a UAV realistically "fly low" through the covered space? I imagine that might also not be as easy as it sounds?
Is satellite imagery (taken from "very high" altitudes) really high-res enough for comparison with what a low-flying UAV sees? This probably involves some pretty advanced recognition algorithms / neuronets...
Yes, the task is non-trivial. Especially because the map images were taken from above and in different seasons. However, you actually need only roads / railroads / rivers which should be easier to recognize in the images.
Such a "wall" doesn't work against ballistic missiles, as these fly over the atmosphere for the longest part of their flight, and they don't have to run the gauntlet of multiple air defences
So this basically means that with today's technologies, being the largest country in the world is an unsolvable security conundrum: either you are vulnerable to ballistics, or to drone swarms, never safe from both.
Someone should tell Pudding that he can still go down in history as the Savior of Mother Russia by promptly decolonising it himself...
This "wall" protects only against cruise missiles and airplanes, as I mentioned.
If you have to protect important strategically important locations (eg airports) against ballistic missiles (which Ukraine doesn't possess, yet), you have to install area defense systems near the possible targets as well, with antiballistic capabilities
Maybe a stupid question, but: would massing the air defences closer to the border make it viable for the PSU to try knocking out the radars with HARMs (if they still have any, I think they did last year). Or would that be suicidal for the fighters/pilots involved?
Theoretically, it would. Problem: that would also expose them to superior Russian air power and Iskanders. That's why the PSU has to primarily act in form of 'point defence'.
"We'll build a big beautiful SAM wall!" Which Ukraine will help demolish perhaps 👍
Nice idea that comes with one big problem. Once you're through the SAM wall, you've free rein. I can see russian SAM operators in one particular area getting overwhelmed with UAV's then a large swarm maraudering across Russia to do some serious damage. Let's see.
(Cooper) What is the actual issue with Poland not being allowed to/restrained to shoot things down in their aerospace/cross border. For the umpteenth I read articles about it and though everyone plays the obvious political card I’m slowly starting to think that due to the way the cat lately walk around the hot pot there is there something else, like maybe something ‘more’ then just Russian missiles and drones that passes the Ukr Pol borders back and fourth that don’t have transponders or is hard to ID (say stealthy enough), or off the record things that can cause issues if someone on the lower end of the not need to know list is allowed to press a fire button that can explain it? (It smells like Laos again.)
Ukraine has lost several planes while shooting down drones and rockeys. Poland might also loose some planes or radars, people die and other people start asking questions. Poland is left to handle the issue without triggering a war and this is complicated.
So Poland and România let the drones crash în uninhabited regions and make some diplomatic proteste.
This is ridiculous. Poland should be shooting down Russian missiles and drones that come within 10 or 20 miles of their border. Of course they would have to coordinate with Ukraine. But this is something they should be learning to do. And increasing the range over time. Really they should be protecting Lvov and freeing up Ukrainian air defenses for use elsewhere.
if I interpret your map with the SAMs correctly, there will be no threat to Ukrainian aircrafts from the ground anymore on high altitude (of course not talking about the Russian fighters in the air) or are there still enough BUKs and Pantsirs around to threaten the Ukrainian airforce?
Not only their S-300/400/500s: others too. I'm sure it's other systems, too. I just do not have evidence for that on hand, right now. Is likely to change, sooner or later.
Own air defense systems? As far as we know, this F-16 was on a mission to destroy drones and was shot down. Maybe it still happened as you expected, that during the hunt for drones he would be caught on the Р -37m? If these idiots cannot even coordinate their own actions and shoot down their own planes, then what else can we talk about? And just recently these idiots boasted that they had successfully integrated the «Delta» system into the army.
I quote: "The Delta
situational awareness system was put into operation for all units of the security and defense sector of Ukraine". As I understand it, the result of these “successful” actions was this F-16. Situational awareness...
Cheers to us autistic types who distrust the pronouncements of the powers that be! Endless work, but it *is* kind of satisfying to publish analysis that certain American policy professionals could only dream of generating on their own.
Excellent argument about how Ukraine fudges the air defense numbers. Kyiv doesn't outright lie, but it understandably likes to let people believe what they will on some topics. One wonders what counts as a "detection" for the purposes of public reporting.
Wonder how many of the new ballistic missiles and jet drones Ukraine can churn out? Sullivan et al are going to look extra stupid if in six months Ukraine doesn't need ATACMS because it can make more than the US will ever deliver.
What a joke NATO is in this war... Its so disappointing and depressing. By now we should have Kerch bridge non-operational, NATO air force helping defending UA airspace and ATACAMS smashing Russian military airfields - but we get the Tri Fantasticus making dumb mistakes and wrong choices after another, thus bleeding UA. Get your shit together West, you are repeating 1939 mistakes.
I don't believe at all an actual nuclear strike would happen in that case or even if NATO would interfere to greater extent as with only their Air Force. It is what Putin would like you and the whole world to think, but without Kremlin or Russia as such being under the danger of being seized, there is absolutely no need to use nuclear weapons. As an attack weapon nuclear weapons are useless, they are however a very good weapon to deter someone from trying to occupy you.
Perhaps. But using nuclear weapon as an attack/strike weapon would have huge negative consequences for Putin and Russia on a world scale. If NATO would start active itnervention in this war (small or big), Russia would of course bark, threaten and talk a lot about nuclear stuff, but I highly doubt they would actually use it. And if they would, what would they use and what would they gain? Tactical or stretegic? Which place would they attack? Ukraine with tactical? What would that achieve - nothing - only more agressive response from NATO and perhaps others? Strategic on USA? That would be the absolute doomsday for Russia.
Its Putin "being bully" tactic to constantly talk about nuclear threat, and end goal of this is to scare western politcians (and people like you and me) to more actively support Ukraine and to be afraid of him. We've seen that Russia cannot do absolutely nothing when their so called red lines are crossed - they talk a lot, but do nothing (for example; HIMARS, ATACAMS, Finlands&Sweden in NATO, western tanks, IFV, F-16s - Putin barked a lot, but did nothing).
So, I stopped being afraid of Putin nuclear talk a long time ago, and so should others. We need strong and brave stand against Putin and ironclad support for Ukraine, stop fearing Putin and stop being afraid of his words - if we are afraid, it gives him power, as fear is what fuels bullies and gives them confidence.
The nuclear weapons are about being scared. Because otherwise someone will detonate one weapon to show he îs serious.
Putin is an old man with an arrest warrant on his head. He has seen the deaths of Milosevici, Saddam and Ghaddafi. He will not be nice and rațional to accept a defeat.
No person în Rusia of power or wealth has any benefit from a Russian defeat.
So everybody în Russia will agree that those pesky NATO pilots în Ukraine need some tactical X-rays. Probably better near the Polish border and Odessa.
Russia would not be defeated in any scenario because they have nuclear weapons.
They could however be pushed out of Ukraine if NATO finally seriously steps up, and perhaps intervene by lets say closing UA air space. Russia would bark like hell with threats, nuclear weapons, red lines, 3rd world war, but eventually they would either be pushed out of UA or Putin would order retreat to avoid shame.
Anyway, this is my last reply, as that kind of "nuclear" discussions are exactly what Putin wants us to talk about.
So I am done for now, as I don't believe at all he will ever use it (unless Russia would be under threat of being occupied - but this will never happen), and therefore I see those discussion helping him fearmongering us into abandoning Ukraine. And I don't want to help him with his agenda.
Putin does not fire the missiles. Even the red button that he's got must be confirmed by two other people in the government. Anf then the command goes to generals. And if they confirm it - to the staff of the rocket launcher. It's secure from mistakes or suicidal decisions.
You see that they did nothing even when Ukraine invaded the Kursk region. That means that there are reasons not to use the nuclear weapons you don't know about.
This is the kind of drawing up «red lines» that Russia has created so many times. Dont send hand guns, dont send grenades, dont… or there will be escalation. Always when these Lines have been crossed nothing happens. But THIS Line, next time… sorry. Doesnt believe your statement.
Thanks Tom, And Storm Shadow or SCALP can’t be used in Russia because the Americans won’t give targeting data!?! Zelenskyy should be shouting about this!
Ehm, sorry? Storm Shadow and SCALP-EG are British and French systems. I don't think they need American data to be targeted. Last I know of, they have their own reconnaissance satellites.
One morning the west Will lift another ban on "longer-range-than-before weapons" by Just saying "ukraine has the right to defend itself" that "said ban just never existed".
The west did that right before giving himars to ukraine, and It wirked because Putin fell for It.
Then the west did the same just before giving atacams to ukraine, and Putin fell for It once again.
That map appears to show western Crimea uncovered by air defence, so I assume the map is Indicative. Or maybe Russia only thinks eastern Crimea is important now, to preserve the transport links to occupied Ukraine.
Have added a caption that, I hope, might help understand what's the purpose of that map.
Hmm, that means I am autistic and a weirdo, too. You saved me bucks for a shrink :D
For my amateur brain, the idea of building a "wall" along the border with SAMs seems so obvious and "easy" (for someone who does have enough SAMs) that I can't help wondering why they didn't try it in the first place (or did they?). However, will this be as effective against any potential ballistic missiles (if/when Ukraine has some of our own to deploy without asking permission from Trio Fantasticus et al)? And I assume it makes the SAMs themselves more vulnerable due to more "obvious" locations?
I think to build the S-300, S-400 wall they have to weaken the protection elsewhere (Crimea?, left bank of Dnipro, Far East, NATO borders, ... ) And that's why they hesitated to do it.
(I think only decoys would remain along NATO borders soon. Because who fears of NATO?)
Well, Crimea can and must be part of that wall, if the idea is to simply deny all directions from which our UAVs or cruise missiles can enter their airspace.
A radar cannot see low-flying targets from afar. Thus, there should be many smaller AD systems in between those long-range S300 to make the thing work. And, probably, a couple of A50 patrolling behind the line. Thus, it's not that easy. And all those radars are vulnerable to HARM missiles.
Makes sense. But how far can something like a UAV realistically "fly low" through the covered space? I imagine that might also not be as easy as it sounds?
That's what it does when navigating by computer vision, as GPS is usually jammed. Satellite images from Google maps are used as input.
Is satellite imagery (taken from "very high" altitudes) really high-res enough for comparison with what a low-flying UAV sees? This probably involves some pretty advanced recognition algorithms / neuronets...
Yes, the task is non-trivial. Especially because the map images were taken from above and in different seasons. However, you actually need only roads / railroads / rivers which should be easier to recognize in the images.
Such a "wall" doesn't work against ballistic missiles, as these fly over the atmosphere for the longest part of their flight, and they don't have to run the gauntlet of multiple air defences
So this basically means that with today's technologies, being the largest country in the world is an unsolvable security conundrum: either you are vulnerable to ballistics, or to drone swarms, never safe from both.
Someone should tell Pudding that he can still go down in history as the Savior of Mother Russia by promptly decolonising it himself...
This "wall" protects only against cruise missiles and airplanes, as I mentioned.
If you have to protect important strategically important locations (eg airports) against ballistic missiles (which Ukraine doesn't possess, yet), you have to install area defense systems near the possible targets as well, with antiballistic capabilities
Maybe a stupid question, but: would massing the air defences closer to the border make it viable for the PSU to try knocking out the radars with HARMs (if they still have any, I think they did last year). Or would that be suicidal for the fighters/pilots involved?
Theoretically, it would. Problem: that would also expose them to superior Russian air power and Iskanders. That's why the PSU has to primarily act in form of 'point defence'.
"We'll build a big beautiful SAM wall!" Which Ukraine will help demolish perhaps 👍
Nice idea that comes with one big problem. Once you're through the SAM wall, you've free rein. I can see russian SAM operators in one particular area getting overwhelmed with UAV's then a large swarm maraudering across Russia to do some serious damage. Let's see.
Good reporting again 👍
(Cooper) What is the actual issue with Poland not being allowed to/restrained to shoot things down in their aerospace/cross border. For the umpteenth I read articles about it and though everyone plays the obvious political card I’m slowly starting to think that due to the way the cat lately walk around the hot pot there is there something else, like maybe something ‘more’ then just Russian missiles and drones that passes the Ukr Pol borders back and fourth that don’t have transponders or is hard to ID (say stealthy enough), or off the record things that can cause issues if someone on the lower end of the not need to know list is allowed to press a fire button that can explain it? (It smells like Laos again.)
https://kyivindependent.com/allies-caution-poland-to-hold-back-air-defense-pm-tusk-says/
Ukraine has lost several planes while shooting down drones and rockeys. Poland might also loose some planes or radars, people die and other people start asking questions. Poland is left to handle the issue without triggering a war and this is complicated.
So Poland and România let the drones crash în uninhabited regions and make some diplomatic proteste.
This is ridiculous. Poland should be shooting down Russian missiles and drones that come within 10 or 20 miles of their border. Of course they would have to coordinate with Ukraine. But this is something they should be learning to do. And increasing the range over time. Really they should be protecting Lvov and freeing up Ukrainian air defenses for use elsewhere.
Not a very technical comment but thanks for resurfacing Alan Ford (and yes, pretty sad comparison, then)
Thanks Tom,
if I interpret your map with the SAMs correctly, there will be no threat to Ukrainian aircrafts from the ground anymore on high altitude (of course not talking about the Russian fighters in the air) or are there still enough BUKs and Pantsirs around to threaten the Ukrainian airforce?
Have added a caption that, I hope, might help understand what's the purpose of that map.
Thanks, so they are basically completly relocating their most potent asset.
Not only their S-300/400/500s: others too. I'm sure it's other systems, too. I just do not have evidence for that on hand, right now. Is likely to change, sooner or later.
There are new that an F16 crashed in Ukraine on Monday
https://x.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1829186805750751351
There is a leak that it was hit by a Patriot.
...if Ukrainian F-16s have got two engines: yes...
Мне нравится ваш ответ
Sadly, I do not: seems that one F-16 was shot down indeed... by own SAMs.
Own air defense systems? As far as we know, this F-16 was on a mission to destroy drones and was shot down. Maybe it still happened as you expected, that during the hunt for drones he would be caught on the Р -37m? If these idiots cannot even coordinate their own actions and shoot down their own planes, then what else can we talk about? And just recently these idiots boasted that they had successfully integrated the «Delta» system into the army.
I quote: "The Delta
situational awareness system was put into operation for all units of the security and defense sector of Ukraine". As I understand it, the result of these “successful” actions was this F-16. Situational awareness...
Cheers to us autistic types who distrust the pronouncements of the powers that be! Endless work, but it *is* kind of satisfying to publish analysis that certain American policy professionals could only dream of generating on their own.
Excellent argument about how Ukraine fudges the air defense numbers. Kyiv doesn't outright lie, but it understandably likes to let people believe what they will on some topics. One wonders what counts as a "detection" for the purposes of public reporting.
Wonder how many of the new ballistic missiles and jet drones Ukraine can churn out? Sullivan et al are going to look extra stupid if in six months Ukraine doesn't need ATACMS because it can make more than the US will ever deliver.
What a joke NATO is in this war... Its so disappointing and depressing. By now we should have Kerch bridge non-operational, NATO air force helping defending UA airspace and ATACAMS smashing Russian military airfields - but we get the Tri Fantasticus making dumb mistakes and wrong choices after another, thus bleeding UA. Get your shit together West, you are repeating 1939 mistakes.
NATO airforce defending Ukrainian airspace will make it a part of the war and bring everyone close to nuclear strikes
I don't believe at all an actual nuclear strike would happen in that case or even if NATO would interfere to greater extent as with only their Air Force. It is what Putin would like you and the whole world to think, but without Kremlin or Russia as such being under the danger of being seized, there is absolutely no need to use nuclear weapons. As an attack weapon nuclear weapons are useless, they are however a very good weapon to deter someone from trying to occupy you.
This what you think about NATO involvement and nuclear weapons. You probably have a rosy picture about cancer or global economic crisis.
Putin is under imense pressure for 2.5 years and his generals are also not relaxed. I will not trust them to be benevolent or absurdly rational.
Nuclear warfare is like toxic mushrooms. You can be right many times but one mistake is sufficient.
Perhaps. But using nuclear weapon as an attack/strike weapon would have huge negative consequences for Putin and Russia on a world scale. If NATO would start active itnervention in this war (small or big), Russia would of course bark, threaten and talk a lot about nuclear stuff, but I highly doubt they would actually use it. And if they would, what would they use and what would they gain? Tactical or stretegic? Which place would they attack? Ukraine with tactical? What would that achieve - nothing - only more agressive response from NATO and perhaps others? Strategic on USA? That would be the absolute doomsday for Russia.
Its Putin "being bully" tactic to constantly talk about nuclear threat, and end goal of this is to scare western politcians (and people like you and me) to more actively support Ukraine and to be afraid of him. We've seen that Russia cannot do absolutely nothing when their so called red lines are crossed - they talk a lot, but do nothing (for example; HIMARS, ATACAMS, Finlands&Sweden in NATO, western tanks, IFV, F-16s - Putin barked a lot, but did nothing).
So, I stopped being afraid of Putin nuclear talk a long time ago, and so should others. We need strong and brave stand against Putin and ironclad support for Ukraine, stop fearing Putin and stop being afraid of his words - if we are afraid, it gives him power, as fear is what fuels bullies and gives them confidence.
The nuclear weapons are about being scared. Because otherwise someone will detonate one weapon to show he îs serious.
Putin is an old man with an arrest warrant on his head. He has seen the deaths of Milosevici, Saddam and Ghaddafi. He will not be nice and rațional to accept a defeat.
No person în Rusia of power or wealth has any benefit from a Russian defeat.
So everybody în Russia will agree that those pesky NATO pilots în Ukraine need some tactical X-rays. Probably better near the Polish border and Odessa.
Russia would not be defeated in any scenario because they have nuclear weapons.
They could however be pushed out of Ukraine if NATO finally seriously steps up, and perhaps intervene by lets say closing UA air space. Russia would bark like hell with threats, nuclear weapons, red lines, 3rd world war, but eventually they would either be pushed out of UA or Putin would order retreat to avoid shame.
Anyway, this is my last reply, as that kind of "nuclear" discussions are exactly what Putin wants us to talk about.
So I am done for now, as I don't believe at all he will ever use it (unless Russia would be under threat of being occupied - but this will never happen), and therefore I see those discussion helping him fearmongering us into abandoning Ukraine. And I don't want to help him with his agenda.
Putin does not fire the missiles. Even the red button that he's got must be confirmed by two other people in the government. Anf then the command goes to generals. And if they confirm it - to the staff of the rocket launcher. It's secure from mistakes or suicidal decisions.
Too many people are involved in the nuclear command chain - exactly for that very reason - to nullify the possibility of human mistakes.
Those people will accept the orders for tactical strikes. The West has burned too many bridges and the Russians have little sympathy now.
You see that they did nothing even when Ukraine invaded the Kursk region. That means that there are reasons not to use the nuclear weapons you don't know about.
This is the kind of drawing up «red lines» that Russia has created so many times. Dont send hand guns, dont send grenades, dont… or there will be escalation. Always when these Lines have been crossed nothing happens. But THIS Line, next time… sorry. Doesnt believe your statement.
"Another Russian EW-system, this time Sapfir, as seen while tracked by a Shark UAV of the Ukrainian SSO"...
Could it be... "OUR" Shark? 🥹
We contributors want a special video compilation with its achievements
Thanks Tom, And Storm Shadow or SCALP can’t be used in Russia because the Americans won’t give targeting data!?! Zelenskyy should be shouting about this!
Ehm, sorry? Storm Shadow and SCALP-EG are British and French systems. I don't think they need American data to be targeted. Last I know of, they have their own reconnaissance satellites.
One morning the west Will lift another ban on "longer-range-than-before weapons" by Just saying "ukraine has the right to defend itself" that "said ban just never existed".
The west did that right before giving himars to ukraine, and It wirked because Putin fell for It.
Then the west did the same just before giving atacams to ukraine, and Putin fell for It once again.
Thanks Tom
Then I am misinformed, and hope the United Kingdom and France have no problem hitting targets in Russia.