so they're telling em to keep patriots away from the buildings? in Kiev? the most looked-at capital from spy sats of the world?
The War in the Ukraine
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Well, if the Kinzhal was heading at the battery, they might as well throw ammo rationing out the window since if the thing gets through, all your missiles are toast anyways.
Patriots are long range SAMs designed to go after launch platforms rather than missiles. The 100 a month is almost certainly modelled on the assuming the Ukrainians would be using them against Russian aircraft.
It's the guys opinion to not deploy launchers so close to buildings if you want to avoid roof debris.
It was 6 kinzhals, 9 kalibrs and 3 iskanders all arriving at the same time that were going after the two launchers deployed in the airfield.
The only PAC missile that has long-ish range are the PAC 2 GEM which have a 160km range. The PAC-3 CRI those intercept ballistic missiles pretty much on top of you.
It's not Russian aircraft that threaten Ukraine it's Russian missiles and drones Ukraine has plenty of S300's to take care of Russian aircraft which is why Russian air force stays away from Ukranian airspace. Ukraine wanted Patriots to intercept missiles.
That must be why the dude needed to use a picture from a Patriot battery in Poland from March 2022
People really need to watch what they say on Twitter. Whether you like it or not, when you choose to make yourself a public figure, you reflect on your family, workplace, and anyone else you collaborate with.
The fact that a Janes' Intel makes such strong off-the-cuff remarks, really makes me feel sad for Janes. I don't know if Janes has always been awful, but their reputation in my eyes has gone done a lot in the last several years. Same with the Institute of War. If you have people this opinionated and incapable of impulse control on your team... it really makes me question who they are looking for and what qualities are required to work at such publications/think tanks.
Someone who is more than happy to perpetuate an echo-chamber?
Comment from Russian Telegram "Readovka":
“We will defend Kyiv, but don’t give a damn about the rest” - night strikes by the RF Armed Forces showed that Ukraine’s air defense has taken on a focal character.
Today's successful defeat of objects in the Odessa, Kharkiv and Khmelnytsky regions speaks not only of the qualities of Russian missile weapons, but also that the enemy has concentrated all his efforts on protecting the capital, the office on Bankova and other decision-making centers, leaving the regions without proper cover.
Apparently, in the near future we will witness the fact that the unified airspace defense system, inherited from the USSR, will finally die, which is facilitated by the defeat of anti-aircraft missile systems and the ending stock of missiles for them. Anti-aircraft missiles are not artillery shells, and it will not be possible to launch them quickly. Moreover, they were never produced in the Warsaw Pact countries.
It can, of course, be assumed that Western countries will continue to pump up Ukraine with their air defense systems, but this will clearly not be enough to build a new air defense system. First, air defense includes not only launchers, but also means of radar detection, automated control systems, communication and data lines, and so on and so forth. Secondly, all this Soviet legacy is difficult to match with the new complexes of NATO countries, and modernizing a unified air defense system in Ukraine is comparable in terms of costs to building a similar one from scratch for a country the size of France or Germany.
Therefore, the new Western complexes still have to be used autonomously. The enemy concentrated them around Kyiv, and the conditional Odessa or Khmelnitsky remain covered by Soviet air defense systems, which are less and less every week, and even the missiles to them are rapidly evaporating.
At the same time, it is not worth relaxing and burying Ukrainian air defense: the tragedy in the Bryansk region showed that autonomous mobile complexes and systems can operate very successfully from ambushes, causing damage even over Russian territory.
“We will defend Kyiv, but don’t give a damn about the rest” - night strikes by the RF Armed Forces showed that Ukraine’s air defense has taken on a focal character.
Today's successful defeat of objects in the Odessa, Kharkiv and Khmelnytsky regions speaks not only of the qualities of Russian missile weapons, but also that the enemy has concentrated all his efforts on protecting the capital, the office on Bankova and other decision-making centers, leaving the regions without proper cover.
Apparently, in the near future we will witness the fact that the unified airspace defense system, inherited from the USSR, will finally die, which is facilitated by the defeat of anti-aircraft missile systems and the ending stock of missiles for them. Anti-aircraft missiles are not artillery shells, and it will not be possible to launch them quickly. Moreover, they were never produced in the Warsaw Pact countries.
It can, of course, be assumed that Western countries will continue to pump up Ukraine with their air defense systems, but this will clearly not be enough to build a new air defense system. First, air defense includes not only launchers, but also means of radar detection, automated control systems, communication and data lines, and so on and so forth. Secondly, all this Soviet legacy is difficult to match with the new complexes of NATO countries, and modernizing a unified air defense system in Ukraine is comparable in terms of costs to building a similar one from scratch for a country the size of France or Germany.
Therefore, the new Western complexes still have to be used autonomously. The enemy concentrated them around Kyiv, and the conditional Odessa or Khmelnitsky remain covered by Soviet air defense systems, which are less and less every week, and even the missiles to them are rapidly evaporating.
At the same time, it is not worth relaxing and burying Ukrainian air defense: the tragedy in the Bryansk region showed that autonomous mobile complexes and systems can operate very successfully from ambushes, causing damage even over Russian territory.
You actually thought he was claiming the launcher in his tweet was the Ukraine one? Why?
Try to clarify it for you.
Because of the aerodinamic penalty the Patriot has smaller range and kill area in EACH version compared to the oldest S-300.
You arguing about after launch the angle of the tracking and illumination radar restricted , shown in the picture .
Which is more of an academic interest for the S-300, but serius penalty for the PAC, because the S300 using separated radar for tracking and for surveillance/detection, so even if the flap lid turned to one target, the big bird still detecting targets.
But the patriot use ONE radar for both purpose.
Again, the patriot is INFERIOR and BACKWARD compared to the earliest S-300.
Your resaoning saying, the patriot is better even if the range, killzone, ttracking and engagement capability completely inferrior, I presume because it has 5.1 sound system compared to the mono speakers in the S-300 .
So, it is way easier to destroy a Patriot battery in the middle of Kiew compared to an S-300 battery, even the 80s vintage, because the later is MORE CAPABLE.
He makes no effort to clarify the picture is just there for reference, and out of the hundred of pictures of Patriots out there, he made the deliberate choice of using one that can easily pass as being taken in Ukraine.