Hello everybody! To continue answering your questions… *** 1.) Why do you think is the western media frequently reporting Russian successes and Ukrainian failures? Gauging by my own, first-hand experiences from (trying to) work for that media (arguably, this is some 15+ years ago), there is a combination of reasons.
I do say that the way things are right now, IF Ukraine remains dependent on Western support in form of supplies of artillery ammunition and SAMs... this war is just going to go on like since the summer of the last year.
Is it possible for Ukraine to become completely independent of Western support in ammunition etc. - NO, having in mind Russian capacities. Today the collective West cannot overcome Russia in ammunition production. So Ukraine has to seek other means to achieve progress in this war. IMHO.
Remember that you don't need to outproduce the orcs to achieve the same effect. Accuracy matters, and Ukrainian gunners seem to believe that if they can fire even half as many shells (rather than 10:1 as was the case earlier this year) they'll be fine.
And will Ukraine and its defense industries be able to become independent of the West after the destruction of its energy infrastructures by the Russians ?
Wonderful, but if one wanted Ukraine to come out of this war in a favorable manner and sooner than later, quality but also quantity have to be decisive. And timing. It's like having the best drug, but giving it to the patient too late and in low dose. Maybe you have a calculation to do so. But for the patient it is still a nightmare, and you might lose him, and your best explanation doesn't matter anymore. And moreover, the patient trusts you and he puts his life in your hands.
Thank you for this article-very in depth-I guess the west was flat footed when it came to Russian war against Ukraine in terms of weapons. Were we sleep walking against the thought that we would have to deal with this? I am also frustrated with how Biden has dealt with it and did I hear him say that Ukraine joining NATO was not clear? Maybe just junk from fake media? Either way very frustrating! Clearly now war is murkier than ever and I appreciate your efforts to clear this for us.
The West was indeed flatfooted and probably shouldnt been so naive. But sleepwalking, I think it was simply that the West couldnt fathom the minuset of Russia here. Why should they wage an expensive war and let a lot of its people be destroyed for no gain? The West wouldnt, so they/we assume Russia wouldnt.
Even the Ukrainian government thought that. Let's not forget that the US government were warning for months that the invasion was about to happen. Few people took them seriously. It'll go down in history as a near perfect example of groupthink.
"Moscow proved more flexible and better capable of obtaining ammo from other sources overseas. See: North Korea, India, Sudan etc." - Do you have any source claiming India shipped ammo to Russia? Or, it should be Iran ?
AFAIK Russia has "reimported" some spare parts of military machines delivered to India shortly before the war. But have not heard about ammo deliveries. Can you provide some sources?
It's a matter of range. F-16s can carry nothing that can matches the R37-M. If the Meteor could be adapted to anything the Ukrainians operate that would make a huge difference, perhaps even on a strategic level. But there's no indication it's possible. And it seems inconceivable the Brits, Norwegians, and Ukrainians won't have discussed it.
As usual very useful report. Actually, air war looks the saddest for ZSU, although there are successes in missile war. Out of interest, what do you mean by growing threat from interceptors? Do you mean increasing plane number(like adding r 37 to su 30) or some technology upgrade of r 37 or radars ( I don't know about any). It actually looks that the danger is slightly lower due to losses of 2(3) A 50 in winter.
Talking about SAMs, as you said before, main problem are drones like Zala, that will lead to Iskander or Lancet strike. I personally like the tendency of it's interception by FPV and flying wings last month, but only time shows will it be key solution for all front . I've also seen the destruction of Patriot mockup month ago, so there is still hope to restore travelling Patriot kill streak
Lastly, talking about Swedish Awacs, you claimed that it can detect fighters on 430 km. So, what is problem to fly in about 290 km from front and detect kab carriers in 100-110 km from front and warn travelling Patriot or (quite unlikely but upgraded f 16). Can mig 31 shot if down from 350+ km) , because otherwise it will have to go in range of the same ambush Patriot
Sucks that these effing glide bombs are set to get a range increase to around 90km. I'd say that's just another ruscist bluff except the US has equivalents that fly up to 110km.
Any insight into the Gripen saga? The announcement that Gripen deliveries were being delayed was interesting, given the lack of prior confirmation that any were going at all. Something odd about that. How are Swedes at bluffing? Even half a dozen Gripens with those Meteors of theirs could inflict some nasty attrition on orc air in conjunction with those nifty mini-AWACS.
Yup, Thailand and Brazil are definitely under such constant scrutiny that no Ukrainian pilots could ever have done ground school courses or sim work to speed delivery of the platform once the political decision was made to move. Nope, we know where every asset is and what they’re doing, and the French decision to offer Mirage 2000 training a year after denying that Ukraine was looking into the aircraft is totally irrelevant.
Thank you for the analysis. However the more I read, the more I pessimistic I get. Today it's the 80th anniversary of the D-Day. That was a staggering effort, and it was possible then. Also, in WWII Britain produced 120000 airplanes and USA 300000. And now the entire West can't produce 1 million shells in a year? Something doesn't sum up here. IMHao it's not that we aren't able. I hope decision makers won't mess it up, as many times in history. I don't even want to continue my thought...
Yes, and Germany alone produced 36 million artillery shells in 1916. Still, with their fire wildly inaccurate, no could really soften up and overrun the other side of the Western Front even after truly infernal barrages.
The issue of WWII airplanes is somewhat similar. They were much, very much simpler constructs, suitable to be churned out in the thousands, but also much, very much less effective than those of today. A volume-by-volume comparison of different conflicts (or even different sides of the same conflict) is not necessarily meaningful.
Ty Tom for the explanations and facts given. Does western forces have an equivalent to R-37 missiles? If it is that effective what was the counter theorized by western air forces to counter the distance advantage? Sorry I was a grunt so the air power discussions fascinate me.
European platforms (not the F-16) can launch the Meteor, which is comparable, at least by design. It probably won't be helping Ukraine anytime soon.
There were some earlier articles about Western planes like the F-16 having the advantage of a smaller size, making them stealthier, especially if coated with radar-absorbent paint.
Most F-16s in NATO have a Have Glass I-V iteration, depending when they were last overhauled. Latest is Have Glass V which adds dark grey paint overall and everybody notices it. Look at photos of very worn US, Polish, Romanian, Greek, etc F-16s and you will see under the faded camo paint a semi-shiny teflon like coating. That is also part of Have Glass program, and more important than the top dark grey overall layer.
The Greek F-16s have almost worn out their Have Glass covering already. There are discussions about repairing the complex application of this stuff (but it all costs money, of course)
Jammers, towed decoys and active decoys on F-16s are Ukraine 's only realistic chance against R-37. Or AESA radars retrofitted on MLUs to take full advantage of AIM-120C-8 envelope. Meteor is integrated only on Euro jets. AIM-260 is another equivalent, but still classified and non exportable. Recently there were sightings of SM-6 carried on Super Hornets in the US, doubt they are willing to send it to Ukr, plus its too big for F-16s.
Thanks for the update. Regarding question 1 «1.Why do you think is the western media frequently reporting Russian successes and Ukrainian failures?» I think your points are valid. However they also report them because its easier to understand some of the Russian victories. Russia conquers Bakhmut is relatively easy to report and understand. Ukraine able to ship corn through the Black Sea should be understood but isnt known. Add to that Russian desinformation sources and our unability to understand the cost Russia is paying and we are there.
Thanks for this. Explains why Russia had an S-400 battery so close to the front, so it increased the risks for Ukrainian airforce. I just got much more respect for Ukraine considering they're flying their combat aircraft under such conditions. Also Macron has confirmed France is going to provide Mirage 2000-5 jets.
On this anniversary of the D-Day counter attack on the Nazis, I feel there is widespread agreement that Putin is the new Hitler, an exclusively toxic disreputable menace and gross fascist. What little advocacy Putin has enjoyed in Europe and North America is viewed very negatively, and with disgust. He has no believability features or redeeming characteristics of any kind. Putin and what he represents, the sinister people that are on his page with him, the world is better of without. Nothing besides being a threat. There's not some hope for a better world that includes Putin's team. He's threatened everyone,, and he's threatened everyone enough to be the enemy of the world independent of Ukraine. There isn't a good way of relating with Putin's agenda. I don't want to be thought to be offering false hope that the response will be timely, or that it won't be ugly with failings and disappointments, but Putin's clock has ticked and success is not among his options. He's a dead man walking. Watch him as he goes.
Thanks Tom, could you please explain how/if Mirage 2000-5, might help (so far heard about "amazing" 5 pcs) in cooperation with F16? Or is it just adding more complexity and creates real flying cirkus?
From my POV its clear PR from France as everything else Macron did, but im not an expert of weapon systems
Agreed. It needs to be made clear to people that these that this is the air defence variant. It does not carry the SCALP. Also that the French are very vague about delivery dates. This model is due to be retired between now and 2029. They say it all depends upon Rafale deliveries.
But it is doubtful they will provide them in large enough numbers to balance the complexity of introducing another type that needs crew and engineer training, different spares &&&
As far as I know, it does not carry a long range air to air missile or advanced EW, some people claim it has better radar but with NATO AWACS constantly in the air then so what.
So according to you the chances of Ukraine are low?
I do say that the way things are right now, IF Ukraine remains dependent on Western support in form of supplies of artillery ammunition and SAMs... this war is just going to go on like since the summer of the last year.
Is it possible for Ukraine to become completely independent of Western support in ammunition etc. - NO, having in mind Russian capacities. Today the collective West cannot overcome Russia in ammunition production. So Ukraine has to seek other means to achieve progress in this war. IMHO.
Remember that you don't need to outproduce the orcs to achieve the same effect. Accuracy matters, and Ukrainian gunners seem to believe that if they can fire even half as many shells (rather than 10:1 as was the case earlier this year) they'll be fine.
And will Ukraine and its defense industries be able to become independent of the West after the destruction of its energy infrastructures by the Russians ?
Wonderful, but if one wanted Ukraine to come out of this war in a favorable manner and sooner than later, quality but also quantity have to be decisive. And timing. It's like having the best drug, but giving it to the patient too late and in low dose. Maybe you have a calculation to do so. But for the patient it is still a nightmare, and you might lose him, and your best explanation doesn't matter anymore. And moreover, the patient trusts you and he puts his life in your hands.
Thank you for this article-very in depth-I guess the west was flat footed when it came to Russian war against Ukraine in terms of weapons. Were we sleep walking against the thought that we would have to deal with this? I am also frustrated with how Biden has dealt with it and did I hear him say that Ukraine joining NATO was not clear? Maybe just junk from fake media? Either way very frustrating! Clearly now war is murkier than ever and I appreciate your efforts to clear this for us.
The West was indeed flatfooted and probably shouldnt been so naive. But sleepwalking, I think it was simply that the West couldnt fathom the minuset of Russia here. Why should they wage an expensive war and let a lot of its people be destroyed for no gain? The West wouldnt, so they/we assume Russia wouldnt.
Yes I think it was a lot of that—to assume they would attack was unbelievable and also to loose sooo many people to prop up Putins ideology.
Even the Ukrainian government thought that. Let's not forget that the US government were warning for months that the invasion was about to happen. Few people took them seriously. It'll go down in history as a near perfect example of groupthink.
"Moscow proved more flexible and better capable of obtaining ammo from other sources overseas. See: North Korea, India, Sudan etc." - Do you have any source claiming India shipped ammo to Russia? Or, it should be Iran ?
Iran is not delivering even 10% of what is India delivering to Russia (and - via intermediaries - to Ukraine, too).
AFAIK Russia has "reimported" some spare parts of military machines delivered to India shortly before the war. But have not heard about ammo deliveries. Can you provide some sources?
There are photos of India-manufactured shells in the social media - and then taken on both sides.
Never heard about "made in India" deliveries to Russia. On the contrary, Indian shells were spotted with UA forces (both 155 and 125 mm).
See the link, as a sample:
https://t.me/milinfolive/113603?single
Not direct supplies, of course, but still.
Good business strategy then, selling to both sides. Amoral of course, but why should morals get in the way of money?
Excellent explanation Tom, thanks for sharing your experience and knowledge
Thank you! that is very insightful!
Interesting and informative series, Tom!
Regarding F-16s: they will be just as vulnerable to Russian jets as the MiG-29 and Su-27? Unless they get some R-37 equal to suppress them of course.
Theoretically, F-16s might come together with some very good jamming pods (the kind of stuff not available on MiG-29s nor Su-27s).
....IF the USA decide to deliver these to Ukraine...
I see, thanks! They will probably not deliver the pods and then moan how the ukrainians are using the F-16 in the wrong manner....
Do you know if the PSU have already modified their fleet to use some western jamming equipment?
Also, the old MLU F-16s have AN/ALR-69A(V) radar than outperforms Mig-29 or Su-27 radars and is able to detect incoming missile sooner.
but it not outperforms Mig-31, Su-34 and Su35´s...
I doubt the old ALR-69 is of any use against R-37. PSU's F-16s are going to need a major update for that purpose.
It's a matter of range. F-16s can carry nothing that can matches the R37-M. If the Meteor could be adapted to anything the Ukrainians operate that would make a huge difference, perhaps even on a strategic level. But there's no indication it's possible. And it seems inconceivable the Brits, Norwegians, and Ukrainians won't have discussed it.
As usual very useful report. Actually, air war looks the saddest for ZSU, although there are successes in missile war. Out of interest, what do you mean by growing threat from interceptors? Do you mean increasing plane number(like adding r 37 to su 30) or some technology upgrade of r 37 or radars ( I don't know about any). It actually looks that the danger is slightly lower due to losses of 2(3) A 50 in winter.
Talking about SAMs, as you said before, main problem are drones like Zala, that will lead to Iskander or Lancet strike. I personally like the tendency of it's interception by FPV and flying wings last month, but only time shows will it be key solution for all front . I've also seen the destruction of Patriot mockup month ago, so there is still hope to restore travelling Patriot kill streak
Lastly, talking about Swedish Awacs, you claimed that it can detect fighters on 430 km. So, what is problem to fly in about 290 km from front and detect kab carriers in 100-110 km from front and warn travelling Patriot or (quite unlikely but upgraded f 16). Can mig 31 shot if down from 350+ km) , because otherwise it will have to go in range of the same ambush Patriot
Sucks that these effing glide bombs are set to get a range increase to around 90km. I'd say that's just another ruscist bluff except the US has equivalents that fly up to 110km.
Any insight into the Gripen saga? The announcement that Gripen deliveries were being delayed was interesting, given the lack of prior confirmation that any were going at all. Something odd about that. How are Swedes at bluffing? Even half a dozen Gripens with those Meteors of theirs could inflict some nasty attrition on orc air in conjunction with those nifty mini-AWACS.
I hope you are right.
I don't think that it would be possible to hide training Ukraine pilots on the Gripen
Yup, Thailand and Brazil are definitely under such constant scrutiny that no Ukrainian pilots could ever have done ground school courses or sim work to speed delivery of the platform once the political decision was made to move. Nope, we know where every asset is and what they’re doing, and the French decision to offer Mirage 2000 training a year after denying that Ukraine was looking into the aircraft is totally irrelevant.
Thank you so much for all these explanations.
Thank you for the analysis. However the more I read, the more I pessimistic I get. Today it's the 80th anniversary of the D-Day. That was a staggering effort, and it was possible then. Also, in WWII Britain produced 120000 airplanes and USA 300000. And now the entire West can't produce 1 million shells in a year? Something doesn't sum up here. IMHao it's not that we aren't able. I hope decision makers won't mess it up, as many times in history. I don't even want to continue my thought...
Yes, and Germany alone produced 36 million artillery shells in 1916. Still, with their fire wildly inaccurate, no could really soften up and overrun the other side of the Western Front even after truly infernal barrages.
The issue of WWII airplanes is somewhat similar. They were much, very much simpler constructs, suitable to be churned out in the thousands, but also much, very much less effective than those of today. A volume-by-volume comparison of different conflicts (or even different sides of the same conflict) is not necessarily meaningful.
I didn't make a volume-by-volume comparison. However, it is impressive even looking on today's terms. But everyone sees what he wants, I suppose.
Ty Tom for the explanations and facts given. Does western forces have an equivalent to R-37 missiles? If it is that effective what was the counter theorized by western air forces to counter the distance advantage? Sorry I was a grunt so the air power discussions fascinate me.
European platforms (not the F-16) can launch the Meteor, which is comparable, at least by design. It probably won't be helping Ukraine anytime soon.
There were some earlier articles about Western planes like the F-16 having the advantage of a smaller size, making them stealthier, especially if coated with radar-absorbent paint.
It's called Have Glass and it's more than just paint.
....yup - though rare even in the USAF service.
Most F-16s in NATO have a Have Glass I-V iteration, depending when they were last overhauled. Latest is Have Glass V which adds dark grey paint overall and everybody notices it. Look at photos of very worn US, Polish, Romanian, Greek, etc F-16s and you will see under the faded camo paint a semi-shiny teflon like coating. That is also part of Have Glass program, and more important than the top dark grey overall layer.
The Greek F-16s have almost worn out their Have Glass covering already. There are discussions about repairing the complex application of this stuff (but it all costs money, of course)
Jammers, towed decoys and active decoys on F-16s are Ukraine 's only realistic chance against R-37. Or AESA radars retrofitted on MLUs to take full advantage of AIM-120C-8 envelope. Meteor is integrated only on Euro jets. AIM-260 is another equivalent, but still classified and non exportable. Recently there were sightings of SM-6 carried on Super Hornets in the US, doubt they are willing to send it to Ukr, plus its too big for F-16s.
Thanks Tom ,interesting as ever.
Thanks for the update. Regarding question 1 «1.Why do you think is the western media frequently reporting Russian successes and Ukrainian failures?» I think your points are valid. However they also report them because its easier to understand some of the Russian victories. Russia conquers Bakhmut is relatively easy to report and understand. Ukraine able to ship corn through the Black Sea should be understood but isnt known. Add to that Russian desinformation sources and our unability to understand the cost Russia is paying and we are there.
Thanks for this. Explains why Russia had an S-400 battery so close to the front, so it increased the risks for Ukrainian airforce. I just got much more respect for Ukraine considering they're flying their combat aircraft under such conditions. Also Macron has confirmed France is going to provide Mirage 2000-5 jets.
On this anniversary of the D-Day counter attack on the Nazis, I feel there is widespread agreement that Putin is the new Hitler, an exclusively toxic disreputable menace and gross fascist. What little advocacy Putin has enjoyed in Europe and North America is viewed very negatively, and with disgust. He has no believability features or redeeming characteristics of any kind. Putin and what he represents, the sinister people that are on his page with him, the world is better of without. Nothing besides being a threat. There's not some hope for a better world that includes Putin's team. He's threatened everyone,, and he's threatened everyone enough to be the enemy of the world independent of Ukraine. There isn't a good way of relating with Putin's agenda. I don't want to be thought to be offering false hope that the response will be timely, or that it won't be ugly with failings and disappointments, but Putin's clock has ticked and success is not among his options. He's a dead man walking. Watch him as he goes.
Thanks Tom, could you please explain how/if Mirage 2000-5, might help (so far heard about "amazing" 5 pcs) in cooperation with F16? Or is it just adding more complexity and creates real flying cirkus?
From my POV its clear PR from France as everything else Macron did, but im not an expert of weapon systems
Agreed. It needs to be made clear to people that these that this is the air defence variant. It does not carry the SCALP. Also that the French are very vague about delivery dates. This model is due to be retired between now and 2029. They say it all depends upon Rafale deliveries.
Well, adding more aircraft is always useful.
But it is doubtful they will provide them in large enough numbers to balance the complexity of introducing another type that needs crew and engineer training, different spares &&&
As far as I know, it does not carry a long range air to air missile or advanced EW, some people claim it has better radar but with NATO AWACS constantly in the air then so what.