I can assure you if any nato member would be attacked, NATO would be at war with the attacking country and do anything in its power to stop them.
No matter what foe.
Why is it so difficult for Ukraine to provide any visual evidence of their numerical claims? like 12 russian aircrafts shot down in 2 weeks and the only visual evidence was some grass on fire by farmers. They were able to show satellite data of aircrafts that get hit by drones with what airbase they were in but why are they having difficulty with that now?Initial reports indicate that the overnight drone swarm attack on the Morozovsk air base in Russia destroyed 6 aircraft stationed there and damaged a further 8. Russian military personnel were also killed and injured in the attack.
I'll wait for coroborating satellite imagery before I fully believe the reports, but it does appear that the attack was at least partially successful.
There is absolutely nothing in that post confirming that Russian aircraft were not damaged and towed off the airfield into hangars. I'm not making the claim that Ukraine's reporting was accurate. Reporting from the Ukrainian Government is often inflated and exaggerated for propaganda purposes. But the exact same thing is true of Russia. They do everything in their power to exaggerate their battlefield success and they try to hide any significant damage done to their armed forces. They literally employed mobile crematoriums early in the conflict so that they wouldn't have to ship thousands of dead soldiers back home to Russia in body bags and spook the population.No aircraft destroyed/damaged from last night attack on Russian airbase
Russia has successfully fielded a satellite that offers high resolution from a 500km altitude orbit that was domestically made from them without asking for other countries for parts or electronics before 2014.
View attachment 67119
They are going to launch a 5th one that will be alot better in 2025. Since this satellite went into service in late march this probably explains the F-16 doom posting articles all over the web now since this resolution would be enough to identify an airfield in Ukraine.
I mean I never had any high expectancy for their current electronics but the reason the news is considered significant is they domestically made that satellite without any kind of western assistance. Its like I dont expect a very certain country to immediately make 3 stream cycle engines for their 5th gen but a low bypass ratio engine would be good enough for them and their airspace to defend against any kind of aerial threats at high altitude performance. The goal is more towards to good enough for a conflict and then you can improve those conditions whenever you want.70cm resolution is not that good actually, the U.S is believed to have sub 10cm resolution for their KH series satellites, European vendor like Thales Alenia recently sold us 50cm resolution optical imagery satellite.
Thales Alenia Space to Supply Spy Satellites for Indonesian MoD
JAKARTA --- Thales Alenia Space, the joint venture between Thales (67%) and Leonardo (33%), has signed a multi-mission contract with PT Len Industri to...www.defense-aerospace.com
So if Europe could sell 50cm satellite for export, their version for domestic use is gonna be considerably better. And Ukraine prolly has access to those as well.
I mean I never had any high expectancy for their current electronics but the reason the news is considered significant is they domestically made that satellite without any kind of western assistance. Its like I dont expect a very certain country to immediately make 3 stream cycle engines for their 5th gen but a low bypass ratio engine would be good enough for them and their airspace to defend against any kind of aerial threats at high altitude performance. The goal is more towards to good enough for a conflict and then you can improve those conditions whenever you want.
Russia had some satellites. Just not enough to have frequent coverage over the target. The West has a lot of "commercial" recon satellites. Including whole constellations. So they have more timely data. Russia unfortunately never got into the recon constellation business. They only have a couple large recon sats like other governments. Since its a LEO and based on its height estimates that will go around the earth for 36 minutes so the plan of getting more satellites now is better than never.
The resolution is not the best but its enough to give intel of where columns of military vehicles are heading in a specific direction in the battlefield, identify airfields, and you cant hide a carrier or a destroyer from it, transfer of military equipment from trains and where they are heading, Intel on NATO countries and what amount of equipment and soldiers they have. I am very sure Ukraine had some amazing eyesight and coordination from the west but Russia is getting some eye surgery done.
since this is the 3rd tweet for today.
View attachment 67122
I can't decide if they are going into strike mode these last 2 weeks because, 1.is it better satellite to coordinate strikes, 2. a planned offensive since the weather will dry up. The west didn't even give the F-16s a chance to prove themselves and are downplaying them these last few days from their articles. I am assuming the last hype weapons they are going for is long range cruise missiles or long range land to land missiles.
36 minutes could be enough for their targetted interest in Ukraine like incoming military formations or identifying any supply houses with military equipment. Of course one satellite wont be able to predict missile and drone strikes because they can hit russian targets in less than 30 minutes but air defenses seem sufficient enough to deal with them based on the we ukrainians just launched 40+ drones news and seeing the end results that they amounted to nothing.It's still commendable what the Russians are doing, but, satellites orbit are predictable and you need like 100 of them to maintain continuous coverage of the area. There's some issue when it comes to F-16s that you would want to consider:
I mean do they really have to care if there is a dummy F-16 or a F-16? Aircrafts need airfields to fly from and the Geran and missile production is enough to target them throughout ukraine. Also a simple google search told me there are like 12 airfields in Ukraine that are suitable for F-16s, Russia has enough missiles or drones for that.At 70cm resolution, you wouldn't know if what you're seeing is an actual parked F-16 or a dummy F-16
I mean it will be hard to move F-16s around if your airfields are all destroyed, airfields just dont walk around with legs. I mean I have seen F-16s land on car roads but eastern europe is not known for having the best road condition where one little pot hole at high speed landing might fuck up the entire aircraft and considering its Ukraine we are talking about with a major war going on for 2 years and barely that great economically, in which yeah I am not betting on that..... Even if they do somehow have the best car road conditions. They will have to keep constant communication coordination with trucks that specifially carry its fuel and ammunition. those trucks have to be constantly moving around to not get targetted by Gerans and even they need to resupply on fuel assuming the gas stations dont get targetted and you will need to constantly swich comms with other fuel and ammo trucks. All the F-16 landing on car roads all looked pre-coordinated by the military in those videos which means you will need more than truckers that will tell you what highway they are like I am in interstate 70 will not be enough for the F-16 pilot to where you are are in interstate 70 and if you did get lucky seeing those trucks parks and land nearby they will need to reposition themselves towards you with the fuel and the ammunition to be loaded which will be a timely process assuming you dont get hit from a missile or drone.The Ukrainians will move their F-16 around, start a deception operation to fool optic based imagery