Policemen in Kiev recorded on bodycams getting out of their cars, breaking out AK-47s and shoot down an Iranian suicide drone that was targeting civilian areas:
Another quality video from Perun. Some takeaways:
- Despite occasional lapses and a barrage of internet mockery, Russian air defense and Russian air defense systems have for the most part done what they're supposed to.
- In this area, the attrition game seems to actually favor the Russians as things are, meaning that there's no guarantee Ukraine can keep denying Ukrainian airspace for perpetuity, which is obviously a potential problem in the future. While they've lost more systems, Russians can also afford to lose more, and Ukrainians aren't being resupplied with captured air defense systems.
- (Relatively) cheap drones and high performance rockets have proved to be problems for current air defense systems. In the case of HIMARS for example, those fast, those small and really fast rockets have simply proven to be quite hard to counter. Cheap, plentiful drones on the other hand create an attrition/cost problem, as the ammunition used to shoot them down is often a lot more expensive/valuable than the drone. Both are issues that require some technological advancement to solve.
Personal, tangentially related comment:
- While I don't want to be overly pessimistic, this video just reminds that it's very premature to suggest that the Russian military is all but beaten in Ukraine, and that a Ukrainian victory in the battlefield is all but inevitable. It's possible, but Russia is just so damned big, and while Ukrainians are extremely motivated, there's likewise no signs of there being a limit to what the Russian population is ready to put up with when it comes to fighting this war. The question of popular support seems to be mostly irrelevant when a dictator has such an iron grip over his people.
As long as Russia just keeps pouring men and resources into Ukraine without consideration for the country's future (let alone moral implications), they are very likely to stay in the fight, and they will learn from their mistakes, no matter how slowly. We might mock and/or stare at horror at the Russian way of feeding untrained and poorly equipped men to the grinder, but it does work to some extent.
Personal, tangentially related comment:
- While I don't want to be overly pessimistic, this video just reminds that it's very premature to suggest that the Russian military is all but beaten in Ukraine, and that a Ukrainian victory in the battlefield is all but inevitable. It's possible, but Russia is just so damned big, and while Ukrainians are extremely motivated, there's likewise no signs of there being a limit to what the Russian population is ready to put up with when it comes to fighting this war. The question of popular support seems to be mostly irrelevant when a dictator has such an iron grip over his people.
As long as Russia just keeps pouring men and resources into Ukraine without consideration for the country's future (let alone moral implications), they are very likely to stay in the fight, and they will learn from their mistakes, no matter how slowly. We might mock and/or stare at horror at the Russian way of feeding untrained and poorly equipped men to the grinder, but it does work to some extent.
This war is very far from over or decided.
The Shahed drones that Russia has been using on civilian targets are no more effective then V2 rockets in WWII.
Quote:
According to a 2011 BBC documentary,[6] the attacks from V-2s resulted in the deaths of an estimated 9,000 civilians and military personnel,
You would iook at this number and think, wow those V2s were amazing
The Shahed drones have killed what, a few dozen people so far?
They are largely using GPS to aim at soft targets, but those targets are all civilian in nature. Are they a big problem. Yes very much so as Ukraine (and most countries) don't have the ability to counter this new type of warfare well.
But this has zero impact on the tides of battle. The first wave caused the most damage due to how many were sent and Ukraine was not ready for such an attack, but the missile barrage a few days prior did far more damage then the drones did despite most being shot down.
If you read between the lines on what is occuring in Kherson right now, the city proper is likely to fall within days to weeks.
Also...the fact that we are even talking about Ukraine having difficulty controlling airspace 8 months into the war...which is an area that Russia was expected to have not only air superiority right away, but air supremacy within weeks, is a testament to how well prepared Ukraine has been, and how poor Russia has been.
Again...Russia is supposed to be invading here and they are barely hanging on to what they still have left, dug in or retreating everywhere except Bakmut where they stubbornly have been trying to take since May, while the tactical reasons to capture it are all gone.
The tides of war in WWII was clear by early 1943 that Germany would lose, yet it took 2 years. Even the Pacific theatre, despite US being near the main island and Japan being clearly beaten, it was estimated that the invasion of Japan itself would have taken hundreds of thousands to millions of more lives, with the US suffering minimum 50K casualties by conservative estimates and the actual invasion of Japan (Kyushu) was planned in November 1945, a full 3 months later then what we now know as the atomic bombs which forced the surrender of Japan.
Eventually Russia will lose. It's only a matter of when and how much damage/murder/rape they cause until they are forced to quit. Pretty clear cut that with NATO/Western support, the Russians simply don't have the capability to win. Dropping a nuke isn't winning. Annexations and fake signings aren't winning. Putin can spit out whatever lies he wants and Russians can lap it up like thirsty dogs, but reality is still reality; Russia ain't getting Ukraine.
I will say though that it will still take a Herculean effort to clear out the invaders and keep them out. Russia is big, has a lot of junk to use, and simply does not care for civilian casualties on either side. People living there are too disorganized/lazy to have any kind of meaningful protests to depending on them to put pressure on Putin is not happening.
I'm also not a fan of this boil the frog approach. Russia seems to be adjusting in small increments. I wish the west would let Ukraine deliver a knockout blow, as Ukrainians are literally paying in blood for this slow bleeding approach. Now that critical infrastructure is being targeted and Ukraine is still not allowed to target Russian assets in Russia with Western weapons (stupid IMO), Ukraine's hands are very much tied and they are doing this in hard-mode. Really wish the West would take the gloves off and really help to end this bull####. Getting pretty fed up with Russia being allowed to escalate in all areas and the West being reactionary instead of proactive.
I'm also a guy who knows SFA what goes on behind the scenes so perhaps there is a solid reasoning to this method. Just frustrating watching this stupid war continue for literally no reason other then a mad men hell-bent on murdering a specific group of people and people in his country being stupid enough to follow him. Can't wait for the day Russia is no longer a geo-political entity.
Last edited by Huntingwhale; 10-20-2022 at 08:49 AM.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Huntingwhale For This Useful Post:
The Shahed drones that Russia has been using on civilian targets are no more effective then V2 rockets in WWII.
You would iook at this number and think, wow those V2s were amazing
The Shahed drones have killed what, a few dozen people so far?
They are largely using GPS to aim at soft targets, but those targets are all civilian in nature. Are they a big problem. Yes very much so as Ukraine (and most countries) don't have the ability to counter this new type of warfare well.
But this has zero impact on the tides of battle. The first wave caused the most damage due to how many were sent and Ukraine was not ready for such an attack, but the missile barrage a few days prior did far more damage then the drones did despite most being shot down.
If you read between the lines on what is occuring in Kherson right now, the city proper is likely to fall within days to weeks.
Also...the fact that we are even talking about Ukraine having difficulty controlling airspace 8 months into the war...which is an area that Russia was expected to have not only air superiority right away, but air supremacy within weeks, is a testament to how well prepared Ukraine has been, and how poor Russia has been.
Again...Russia is supposed to be invading here and they are barely hanging on to what they still have left, dug in or retreating everywhere except Bakmut where they stubbornly have been trying to take since May, while the tactical reasons to capture it are all gone.
The tides of war in WWII was clear by early 1943 that Germany would lose, yet it took 2 years. Even the Pacific theatre, despite US being near the main island and Japan being clearly beaten, it was estimated that the invasion of Japan itself would have taken hundreds of thousands to millions of more lives, with the US suffering minimum 50K casualties by conservative estimates and the actual invasion of Japan (Kyushu) was planned in November 1945, a full 3 months later then what we now know as the atomic bombs which forced the surrender of Japan.
Clearing Russians will take time, and no one has ever claimed this will be a quick Ukrainian decisive win.
But winter is coming, and the Russian emperor has no winter clothes
Maybe watch the video?
Cheap/cheapish drones isn't just Shaheds, delivering payloads isn't the only thing drones do (reconnaissance might even be the primary use), both sides have the same problems with them, and both sides very strongly disagree with you on the significance of drones on the battlefield, proven by how badly both sides want more of them. (Discussed more on previous Perun videos.)
Also, you're confusing air defense and air superiority. Related but not the same. And yes the video also discusses the failure of Russian SEAD and suggests reasons for it (training, not equipment), but also how Russian/Soviet military tradition/history/doctrine is in some ways just different when it comes to the issue of air defense/superiority.
EDIT:
Both NATO and Soviet Union kind of agreed during the Cold War that if those two would ever fight, Russia would have the upper hand on the ground level (those massive tank armies for starters). Which is one reason why NATO decided to invest heavily in air superiority, and in response to this the Soviets decided that's not a fight they're likely to win, but they could even the playing field by investing heavily in air defense which would limit the significance of that NATO air superiority.
Now in Ukraine we have two militaries with the same tradition, and kind of an obvious result is that the airspace over Ukraine is kind of just a big no-fly zone for both sides. Which obviously is a loss for Russia since they have the bigger airforce. But that doesn't mean that the Russian air defense isn't doing what it's supposed to be doing: keeping the skies mostly clear of enemy aircrafts.
Air defense and air superiority are fully related. You cannot achieve air superiority when you can be knocked out of the sky easily. Knocking out air defense (whether other planes or surface to air missiles) is part of achieving air superiority / supremacy. Russia has never achieved air superiority or supremacy despite having a massive advantage, as was seen at the very onset of the war when Russia lost the majority of their jets and helicopters in their 'blitzkrieg' while Ukraine hid most of their fighters. On paper Russia should have had air superiority and eventually air supremacy within weeks with an effective plan. They failed.
Shaheds aren't winning the war for Russia. Orlans certainly aren't winning the war for Russia.
While drones as a whole are a significant factor for reconnaissance as well as attacks, the Shaheds which are basically cheap homing missiles will not shift the tides. Similar to the drones dropping grenades on Russian soldiers they are psychological more then effective.
Ukraine has had very little problem with Russian made drones while consequently using drones for effective reconnaissance for their ground units.
The battles still remain on the ground as a part of combined arms, which drones play a part. Russia sending lone tanks all over the place instead of fighting as a combined force is why it is losing the war. Russia sending VDV to take Hostomel Airport without any proper support is why it is losing the war. Russia losing their flagship to a country without a fricking navy is why Russia is losing the war.
We'd have a very different thread had Russian been remotely competent in their military doctrine..
Last edited by Firebot; 10-20-2022 at 03:19 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Firebot For This Useful Post:
Air defense and air superiority are fully related. You cannot achieve air superiority when you can be knocked out of the sky easily. Knocking out air defense (whether other planes or surface to air missiles) is part of achieving air superiority / supremacy. Russia has never achieved air superiority or supremacy despite having a massive advantage, as was seen at the very onset of the war when Russia lost the majority of their jets and helicopters in their 'blitzkrieg' while Ukraine hid most of their fighters. On paper Russia should have had air superiority and eventually air supremacy within weeks with an effective plan. They failed.
Shaheds aren't winning the war for Russia. Orlans certainly aren't winning the war for Russia.
While drones as a whole are a significant factor for reconnaissance as well as attacks, the Shaheds which are basically cheap homing missiles are not will shift the tides. Similar to the drones dropping grenades on Russian soldiers they are psychological more then effective.
Ukraine has had very little problem with Russian made drones while consequently using drones for effective reconnaissance.
But you didn't respond to the argument that the 20k shahed drone might take significantly more in anti-air missiles to take them down. They have caused damage to infrastructure.. they're for sure an issue. Not sure I follow you here. Ukrainian anti-air assets aren't limitless
But you didn't respond to the argument that the 20k shahed drone might take significantly more in anti-air missiles to take them down. They have caused damage to infrastructure.. they're for sure an issue. Not sure I follow you here. Ukrainian anti-air assets aren't limitless
I did
We know they are a problem is we are talking about defending Kyiv from losing more civilians. Ukraine is exhausting air defense to protect its civilian population, because people cannot be brought back from the dead or repaired. The cost is very high to do so.
That has no bearing on the war situation. As grim as it may be, Russia bombing a civilian apartment with kamikaze drones isn't going to make Russia win and them resorting to killing civilians means they cannot win as Ukraine will never submit to terrorism.
The Russian occupiers dismantled the Monument to Victims of Holodomor and Political Repression, erected in the centre of Mariupol in 2004, on the morning of 19 October.
Yevhenia Krotova, a Russian-installed puppet governor and representative of the "central headquarters" of Molodaya Respublica (Young Republic) public organisation, has said that the occupiers were not at war with the monuments, but were removing the symbol of "disinformation at state level".
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterJoji
Johnny eats garbage and isn’t 100% committed.
The Following User Says Thank You to nik- For This Useful Post:
Taking out infrastructure (including what Russia is doing with mining the dam upriver of Kherson) will sure do damage but it won’t win the war. These drones are taking out soft targets which is mostly power plants and water filtration and such. It’s infrastructure yes but since most military hardware Ukraine is getting is coming from out of country it’s more just going to make the Ukrainian people suffer more. Isn’t some repairs and such as well being handled out of country at other Eastern European depots?
They can terrorize Kyiv for months if they want but it does very little for their conscript forces at the front getting their butts handed to them. That plus relying on 40+ year old tech because sanctions means their best tech is what they’re importing from Iran. Unless either of those change in a significant way (first won’t Russia is top down in military and always has been and sanctions cripple the second) the war is losing for Russia.
The Following User Says Thank You to Kasi For This Useful Post:
And let's understand. Russia has nukes. If it decided to, it can unleash thousands of nukes on Ukraine today.
But that in itself would not get Russia a win. There is no winning scenario here anymore for Russia. Their Iranian kamikaze drones isn't going to do it even if they are effective at bombing a house.
Air defense and air superiority are fully related. You cannot achieve air superiority when you can be knocked out of the sky easily. Knocking out air defense (whether other planes or surface to air missiles) is part of achieving air superiority / supremacy. Russia has never achieved air superiority or supremacy despite having a massive advantage, as was seen at the very onset of the war when Russia lost the majority of their jets and helicopters in their 'blitzkrieg' while Ukraine hid most of their fighters. On paper Russia should have had air superiority and eventually air supremacy within weeks with an effective plan. They failed.
Shaheds aren't winning the war for Russia. Orlans certainly aren't winning the war for Russia.
While drones as a whole are a significant factor for reconnaissance as well as attacks, the Shaheds which are basically cheap homing missiles will not shift the tides. Similar to the drones dropping grenades on Russian soldiers they are psychological more then effective.
Ukraine has had very little problem with Russian made drones while consequently using drones for effective reconnaissance for their ground units.
The battles still remain on the ground as a part of combined arms, which drones play a part. Russia sending lone tanks all over the place instead of fighting as a combined force is why it is losing the war. Russia sending VDV to take Hostomel Airport without any proper support is why it is losing the war. Russia losing their flagship to a country without a fricking navy is why Russia is losing the war.
We'd have a very different thread had Russian been remotely competent in their military doctrine..
Yeah, and you seem to making comments that I see as only vaguely related and arguing against something no one said.
The basic issue with drones is fairly simple: if you need to constantly use million dollar AMRAAMs to shoot down 20k drones, that's going to become a problem over time, because you're going to run out of money or missiles before the other side is going to stop sending more drones. It's not an insurmountable problem, but it's still a real issue currently.
