Latest Thread
That's a shame, but I'm not sure Ukraine would have had enough trained pilots to fly them all anyway. It would be nice if NATO would get involved against Belarus though.
There is all kind of will in Türkiye to do just that but we need to be able to support that capability with delivery capability. We need 7 years to be completely prepared for it.
NATO should turn Minsk to glass and rubble as retribution for Belarus participating in this conflict. They have no business being there. Simply a puppet of Russia.That's a shame, but I'm not sure Ukraine would have had enough trained pilots to fly them all anyway. It would be nice if NATO would get involved against Belarus though.
Putin wouldn't risk nuclear war even if NATO started fighting Ukraine in Russia. Russians, to their credit, have been very, very averse to using nukes in the past so if Putin said "fire", he'd probably get shot by his own soldiers. Putin might not care about Russia being vaporized over Ukraine, other Russians do. In fact, I'm 90% sure that the US and the EU know this but for some reason keep refusing to call the Russian bluff.NATO should turn Minsk to glass and rubble as retribution for Belarus participating in this conflict. They have no business being there. Simply a puppet of Russia.
Putin would abandon them instantaneously and NATO should prove that. No way Putin risks nuclear war over Belarus. NATO should teach the. A lesson for sticking their nose in where they don't belong.
Ballistic and even cruise missiles are fairly bad tool for SEAD. Not only they have a relatively long flight time to their target, they also are extremely dependable on very accurate intel, since the missiles don't have any ability to track mobile SAM targets. Only static radars and installations are truly vulnerable. However most of theater level spotting and guidance level is mobile. There are many dozens of systems, most of them modified in the previous years, plus new models, deployed as a part of various SAM brigades. These will be extremely hard to catch with the missiles. Note that while the destruction of large static radars will hurt (they mostly cover long-range spotting), it won't spell doom, since not only individual battalions can operate separately if required (this is not a completely centralized system ala Iraq), but also one has to count on the US providing intel using their AWACS and reconnaissance assets.Unless Ukraine has something that can knock down theater ballistic missiles the Ukrainian AA network will be targeted by a combination of tactical ballistic missile strike
Russian Air force has little experience in SEAD. They also lack pretty much any coherent system and training for this kind of a task. Look at the orchestra of assets used by the Coalition in Iraq 1991. Multi-echelon reconnaissance, beyond the horizon guidance systems, entire squadrons of dedicated EW assets, a massive amount (1,200+) of strike and air superiority aircraft, including dedicated SEAD Wild Weasel units, heavy bomber squadrons with precision weaponry, stealth aircraft, hundreds of tankers and extremely efficient ground support network at the airfields, as well as a very sharpened doctrine and tactics at both squadron and individual pilot level.and SEAD by the Russian Army. Leaving Russia with superiority over the sky.
I know Ukraine had S-300s in the past but I'm not sure about their current capabilities.
NATO in general has very limited SAM availability. Almost all systems are naval based. Standard NATO doctrines focus on aircraft based air dominance, and only recently some new SAM systems were developed for anti-missile defense, still in small numbers.The US probably doesn't have the resources to bolster SAM numbers so it would probably be another NATO aligned nation willing to ship them SAMs and trainers.
Is this confirmed? Because that seems like a pretty hot flame under the pot of internal russian troubles