I thought we already had a "first" ... anyway most impressive 
The War in the Ukraine
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
It's an old video of artillery.I thought we already had a "first" ... anyway most impressive
That’s a hell of an expensive way to do SEAD. I don’t think they’re using million+ $ cruise missiles to just get the Ukrainians to use up their interceptor stocks. Anyway, they will just be equipped with new western designs like Patriot as they use up their old Soviet stocks. The only reasonable way this could be done is if the Russian have a large amount of old missiles that will soon be decommissioned.
Both sides have often reported that the Russians are using S-300s in land-attack mode. My guess is that they’re using up old 5V55s by launching them and forcing the Ukrainians to try to shoot them down. The same cost benefit analysis doesn’t apply to these missiles as they’ve long been out of production and will have to be retired anyway.
The last point I want to make is that the campaign against electricity hasn’t worked out very well, much like the attacks against fuel depots earlier into the war. In both cases, when capacity goes down the Ukrainians just shift supplies to the military at the expense of civilians (remember the long gas lines early in the war). That’s why the strikes don’t affect Ukrainian rail logistics that much and in case they have no other choice, they could just fall back on diesel trains. Using their missiles on actual significant targets like the Dnieper bridges probably would’ve been more fruitful (and they had enough to do that).
I would imagine shahed to be much slower?
And who will operate the Patriot? Plus even assuming you could train people on such a short notice the missiles are really expensive. A single interceptor costs like $4 million. I think NASAMs is way more viable, but it is short legged. It is more of a replacement for the Buk than the S-300.
No. The Russians have claimed they have not used it in land attack mode. Plus all the missiles we have seen from analysis of the wreckage show they are older types no longer in use in Russia. The Russians either upgraded or retired all their Soviet S-300 systems the past decade.
Nope. They were taken out of service probably over a decade ago. All the Russian S-300PT and PS systems were taken out of service back then. And the S-300PMU and S-300V1 systems were all upgraded to use new missiles.
It pretty much ground their industry to a halt. So I think it is serving its purpose.
If Russia actually bothered to cut the oil flow to the pipelines that would help tremendously, but they have not seen fit to do this.
They still have enough. Either the Kinzhal or the Iskander are probably enough to take out the bridges. I do know back in the Cold War some of the largest bridges were considered to only be possible to take out with tactical nukes though. I do not know if that is the case for the bridges over the Dnieper.
russia has no conventional means to destroy the bridges over the dnieper. there is no other explanation why they have not already done it, especially considering that ukraine hit russia's bridge. even to destroy all rail links would help russia a great deal.
If they destroy the bridges, there will be a new army forming on the other side of the Dnieper with no means to defeat it.
With the bridges open, that equipment is flowing to the frontlines to be destroyed and Russia have the option to go to the other side of the Dnieper without passing by Belarus if the bridges remains in relative good order.
I cannot see other good reasons than that for not blowing the bridges or at least trying to hit them. Recycling old ICBM first stage to toss a 10t warhead would be awesome for that kind of target...