Isn’t Inperial Aero-Vatnik still relatively intact? But mostly for the reason that they can’t use it due to AA missiles, so they have the airframes, but using them carries an unacceptable risk even for ziggers.
>Isn’t Inperial Aero-Vatnik still relatively intact?
Relatively intact from Ukrainian actions, yes.
Intact from decades of Russian style maintenance? I would not be surprised to find out that grand majority of Russia actually air-capable frames have already been shot down or driven into russian aparment buildings.
That was true for a long time, but Russia has successfully flown an entirely new airframe (not a USSR leftover) last year and India wants to buy some from them. That said, they're very expensive and I doubt we'll see them get used for that since they're an important nuclear triad piece. The Tu-95s are more likely, but probably not for some time as long as Ukraine still has BUKs in supply.
>finally restart production of """new""" airframes, now with 60% fewer parts reused from the old unfinished airframes >get one plane finally flying >right in time for sanctions to hit and all your skilled workforce to be conscripted because of monke chimpout, with sanctions leaving no hope of servicing the production equipment in the future ever again
such is life in vatnikistan
After a sudden smoking accident their Tu-95's were relocated to another one of like 6 total airbases that can service these planes, in the far east
The one part of Russia's military that is (relatively) undamaged is the RuAF. They've been too scared to use them because there are sufficient AA systems to deal with them. Why do you think they resorted to throwing lawnmover drones at them and are now using gliding bombs? They don't want to risk the airframe being yeeted by something.
But if the leaks are true, the AA capabilities of Ukraine are massively reduced and possibly could become a weak spot. Why more AA isn't being sent I don't know. Even a M163 VADS would be a boon. Why we aren't sending them I have no idea. The USA doesn't use them en masse (they do use them still iirc) and 20x102 mm rounds are produced in large quantities and I believe can be used by the VADS (though they aren't supplied with them). So why not?
This is why I will forever dislike the Swiss who destroyed perfectly usable Rapier batteries. OK they're Cold War tech and aren't comparable to modern systems but if it is the Rapier 2000 variant you slap one of those on a truck and it is yet another air defence ring something has to by pass. I will never understand why they did that and then said the dumbest shit of 'Swiss weapons cannot be used in wars'. Well fine, lets invade Switzerland then. Or do they get around that by using German and French weaponry? But that can't work because Rapier was a British weapon so it immediately becomes 'Swiss' when they use it?
Yeah but if there wasn't AA, they would be doing more conventional stuff. It's all rather moot. The bombing campaigns have been largely ineffective. The question is what will they use these gliding bombs for. Regardless, if Ukraine didn't have any AA, things would be A LOT different as Russia would make damn sure they were bombing targets. It is the biggest threat to the counter-offensive - that RuAF gains control of the skies.
So, I say again, send them more stuff. M163 VADS at least can be used in a dual role. Mk 149 will penetrate side armour of a BMP-2. Not sure about front. I don't think so. Plus can be used as a support vehicle anyway (which is what the US used it for because it was kinda poo as AA. Likely why the GAU-8 AA tank never got off the ground, sadly).
Is it really massively reduced? These are gliding bombs, they're either going to be pretty slow or will lose altitude very fast.
The leaks said that Ukraine was extremely low on AA missiles and AA systems in general. Now whether that is true or not is another question. I don't think Russia wants to risk it. But if a counter-offensive comes, one of the only things that Russia has over Ukraine is theoretically more aircraft. Which could really dent any advance IF there isn't AA cover. Which Russia, in their infinitely callousness, might be willing to risk aircraft to see if that is true. After all, if Russia gets kicked out of another huge chunk of Ukraine (sorry, Russia™) then they might not have a choice.
At 40km drop range they’re Patriot bait. They’ll have to fly high to get optimal range out of them too. This is pretty fricking moronic.
Ukraine doesn't have hundreds of Patriots. It would be nice if they did.
One close to Kharkiv could deny release of these across a very wide area of the front. Patriots are theater level assets practically speaking. For that matter, strike packages this far from base over hostile airspace will have to be escorted else a funny little Fulcrum can pop up from the weeds and take down a Tu-22M.
Yeah but we don't know how many missiles they got and all that jazz. That's why MORE need to be sent. More of everything. We can't slack off. Sadly only the USA is able to actually provide the numbers needed. UK is spent. Poland is spent. Germany has 'given enough'. France doesn't give anything but say they have. Spain, Portugal etc don't give a shit.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Glowie pls go
1 year ago
Anonymous
Poortugal gave their three working Leo2A6
please understand
people are fat because food in America is too inexpensive and there is no pressure for even the poorest Americans to live hungry (or make good choices) when the payout from begging on street corners s high enough to afford some supercaloric junk food instead
the US suffers a bit from high demand in rice and low supply, but the other healthy starches - which were key pieces of pre-fat USA's diet (beans & lentils) - are incredibly cheap, and US salaries are often 2x+ other countries yet the cost of high value foods (ex fruits) are the same, only slightly higher, or less than most of Europe
you are too stupid to live, how are you even posting here? where do you people come from? certainly not America, or you're so sheltered you've never been to any market but Whole Foods
Fat looking for a glide bomb
Using what airframes?
First thing i thought of too.
SU-57 HATO destroyer 9000
Isn’t Inperial Aero-Vatnik still relatively intact? But mostly for the reason that they can’t use it due to AA missiles, so they have the airframes, but using them carries an unacceptable risk even for ziggers.
>Isn’t Inperial Aero-Vatnik still relatively intact?
Relatively intact from Ukrainian actions, yes.
Intact from decades of Russian style maintenance? I would not be surprised to find out that grand majority of Russia actually air-capable frames have already been shot down or driven into russian aparment buildings.
The Tu-22M can be deployed with the FAB-3000, but only the Tu-95 and Tu-160 (both with modifications) are large enough to drop a FAB-5000.
>Tu-160
I wish a homie would, there's like 9 of those left in existence and they're lost technology like the Moskva. Knocking one down would be huge.
That was true for a long time, but Russia has successfully flown an entirely new airframe (not a USSR leftover) last year and India wants to buy some from them. That said, they're very expensive and I doubt we'll see them get used for that since they're an important nuclear triad piece. The Tu-95s are more likely, but probably not for some time as long as Ukraine still has BUKs in supply.
>finally restart production of """new""" airframes, now with 60% fewer parts reused from the old unfinished airframes
>get one plane finally flying
>right in time for sanctions to hit and all your skilled workforce to be conscripted because of monke chimpout, with sanctions leaving no hope of servicing the production equipment in the future ever again
such is life in vatnikistan
After a sudden smoking accident their Tu-95's were relocated to another one of like 6 total airbases that can service these planes, in the far east
At 40km drop range they’re Patriot bait. They’ll have to fly high to get optimal range out of them too. This is pretty fricking moronic.
The one part of Russia's military that is (relatively) undamaged is the RuAF. They've been too scared to use them because there are sufficient AA systems to deal with them. Why do you think they resorted to throwing lawnmover drones at them and are now using gliding bombs? They don't want to risk the airframe being yeeted by something.
But if the leaks are true, the AA capabilities of Ukraine are massively reduced and possibly could become a weak spot. Why more AA isn't being sent I don't know. Even a M163 VADS would be a boon. Why we aren't sending them I have no idea. The USA doesn't use them en masse (they do use them still iirc) and 20x102 mm rounds are produced in large quantities and I believe can be used by the VADS (though they aren't supplied with them). So why not?
This is why I will forever dislike the Swiss who destroyed perfectly usable Rapier batteries. OK they're Cold War tech and aren't comparable to modern systems but if it is the Rapier 2000 variant you slap one of those on a truck and it is yet another air defence ring something has to by pass. I will never understand why they did that and then said the dumbest shit of 'Swiss weapons cannot be used in wars'. Well fine, lets invade Switzerland then. Or do they get around that by using German and French weaponry? But that can't work because Rapier was a British weapon so it immediately becomes 'Swiss' when they use it?
>are now using gliding bombs
JDAM glide bomb kits have existed for a long time now, it's just a smart move to avoid air defense period
Yeah but if there wasn't AA, they would be doing more conventional stuff. It's all rather moot. The bombing campaigns have been largely ineffective. The question is what will they use these gliding bombs for. Regardless, if Ukraine didn't have any AA, things would be A LOT different as Russia would make damn sure they were bombing targets. It is the biggest threat to the counter-offensive - that RuAF gains control of the skies.
So, I say again, send them more stuff. M163 VADS at least can be used in a dual role. Mk 149 will penetrate side armour of a BMP-2. Not sure about front. I don't think so. Plus can be used as a support vehicle anyway (which is what the US used it for because it was kinda poo as AA. Likely why the GAU-8 AA tank never got off the ground, sadly).
The leaks said that Ukraine was extremely low on AA missiles and AA systems in general. Now whether that is true or not is another question. I don't think Russia wants to risk it. But if a counter-offensive comes, one of the only things that Russia has over Ukraine is theoretically more aircraft. Which could really dent any advance IF there isn't AA cover. Which Russia, in their infinitely callousness, might be willing to risk aircraft to see if that is true. After all, if Russia gets kicked out of another huge chunk of Ukraine (sorry, Russia™) then they might not have a choice.
Ukraine doesn't have hundreds of Patriots. It would be nice if they did.
One close to Kharkiv could deny release of these across a very wide area of the front. Patriots are theater level assets practically speaking. For that matter, strike packages this far from base over hostile airspace will have to be escorted else a funny little Fulcrum can pop up from the weeds and take down a Tu-22M.
Yeah but we don't know how many missiles they got and all that jazz. That's why MORE need to be sent. More of everything. We can't slack off. Sadly only the USA is able to actually provide the numbers needed. UK is spent. Poland is spent. Germany has 'given enough'. France doesn't give anything but say they have. Spain, Portugal etc don't give a shit.
Glowie pls go
Poortugal gave their three working Leo2A6
please understand
Is it really massively reduced? These are gliding bombs, they're either going to be pretty slow or will lose altitude very fast.
>But if the leaks are true
Yes ;). Bring out the irreplaceable strategic bombers.
Belgorod bros?
How the hell is that thing a glide bomb
uh-oh, American tier education detected
You guys really are obsessed with us, huh?
When it lands with the airframe still attached
Why are Americans so fat?
No food shortages here
Processed foods. In some cases, that's literally all people can afford to eat.
people are fat because food in America is too inexpensive and there is no pressure for even the poorest Americans to live hungry (or make good choices) when the payout from begging on street corners s high enough to afford some supercaloric junk food instead
the US suffers a bit from high demand in rice and low supply, but the other healthy starches - which were key pieces of pre-fat USA's diet (beans & lentils) - are incredibly cheap, and US salaries are often 2x+ other countries yet the cost of high value foods (ex fruits) are the same, only slightly higher, or less than most of Europe
you are too stupid to live, how are you even posting here? where do you people come from? certainly not America, or you're so sheltered you've never been to any market but Whole Foods
People are fat because their lives suck and lack meaning, so they compensate for it by eating junk food.
homie lower the brightness of your phone
That's a nice bomb. Would be a shame if someone... smoked on it.
>bomb falls off over russian territory
>5k kg
Just say tons you stupid Black person