deddog said:
Maroon Dawn said:
The biggest head scratcher in all of this is: where is the Russian Air Force? They've basically ceded the skies to Ukraine and their ground forces are being devastated because of it
I'll repeat what i tell folks very often. The US armed forces make complex shi$ look easy.
The RuAF is flying relatively far away from their bases, in hostile air space.
For close support they have Su-25s and Su-34s.
The SU-25s cannot be refueled in the air. The SU-34s are too fast, and cannot loiter. i doubt they practice inflight refueling much, if at all.
Those that loiter have to deal with a tremendous amount of MANPADS . (BTW, i am very skeptical of any Uke AF ops, i dont think Uke air force pilots want to be flying in these conditions either).
Communication between ground troops and the RuAF will be tenuous at best.
All in all, it's a recipe for disaster.
i do think this would have been the case for any country not called the US of A. Our armed forces kick ass.
Overall, you're mostly correct. Just some things based on open source Intel that people that aren't in the biz of air power may find enlightening.
- The Russians are actually operating incredibly close to their bases. It's pretty standard for us to operate hours away from our bases. I had about a 2 hour transit each way to/from Syria on my last deployment. They are probably just out of reach of UKR ballistic missile ranges, which isn't far away at all from the UKR border.
- The Su-34 (and anything from the Flanker family) carries an incredible amount of gas, and they only carry it internally (no external fuel tanks). They carry more internally than any US/western fighter, and more total gas than just about anything but an F-15E with external fuel tanks.
- Most tactical fighter aircraft usually don't worry about MANPADS as they can just operate above the maximum altitude of these and use precision weapons from higher altitudes. Notable exceptions are the A-10 and Harrier (because I know GAC would have something to say about it).
So why are Russian 4++ gen aircraft getting taken out by MANPADS?
1.) Lack of precision weapon employment is forcing them into lower altitudes.
2.) The biggest reason is the RuAF has failed to destroy/degrade UKR's S-300 (SA-10) SAM systems. The S-300 is a bit long in the tooth but it is still a very capable weapons system. As a result, they are forced to operate low to either deny detection, or to minimize the range of the actual missiles. Russia has never doctrinally practiced SEAD (suppression of air defense) or DEAD (destruction of air defense) because the West doesn't rely on SAMs as a primary means of air defense versus aircraft. SEAD/DEAD is probably the most difficult part of gaining air superiority and the RuAF has no background in it.
In general I think you are also overselling how good we are at it as well. I think we are leaps and bounds better than RuAF, but don't sell the UKRAF short either. I have met a few of them and some of my co-workers were part of the Clear Sky 2018 exercise with them in Ukraine. Of the ones that I've met 1 is dead and the other is apparently doing regular interviews on CNN while sitting alert.