Russian special military operation in Ukraine #21

PapaDragon wrote:

This didn't stop folks from proclaiming F-15 to be the most successful fighter jet ever based in part on aerial kills against Serbian Airforce (which definitely used old Soviet era planes on a good day and just locally made trainers on average day)

To say nothing of hilarious numerical advantage

Old Soviet planes with expired resource and with vital systems not working many times (radar, comms, etc).
Fanboys are stupid, regardless on which side they are.

Ukrainan breakthrough attempt on Ingulets have not been successful, but they redeploy units from Donbass and apparently will try again to cross the river.

It’s just not the play.

---

Another suicide charge in 3...2..1

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Scorpius wrote:So, at present, the Su-35S is the best fighter of the 21st century, having several dozen victories in aerial combat to its credit. At least one pilot has 12 confirmed victories, including one transport helicopter shot down at extremely low altitude.
I wonder if they write about it on F16.net?

Eh that's subjective it wasn't fighting ,modern aircraft but old soviet era versions in conditions that favored the SU-35

This is the kind of clueless boosting that makes fanboys unbearable.

F-15s and F-16s were up against far better odds. Sanctioned to death 3rd world countries flying some museum pieces such as MiG-21s or MiG-25s, maybe MiG-29As at most but robbed of spare parts, AWACS, ground radar or supporting modern air defense systems. Much less anything close to the sort of intel, technical assistance Kiev is receiving from NATO.

Russian experts found MLRS missiles from the American MLRS HIMARS

Three rockets were found at the site of the shelling in Krasny Luch. They did not explode and therefore experts can fully examine the warheads and hull fragments. All this ammunition was produced in 2019.

In total, 6 such missiles were fired at the city, which clearly indicates the efficiency of one of the latest American MLRS - was 50%.
https://t.me/TheEternalUkrainian2/11942?single



Quick analysis: Russian military specialist recovered unexploded HIMARS shells & fragments.

What happens next: Russian military specialists will order a full size replica of the American missiles to be made. The replica will then be shipped to Russia’s central military district area where air Defense specialists are based who dial in scans of mock-ups of foreign missiles. Russia has previously aired footage which showed a warehouse where Russia has a “gallery” if you will, of US, British and other missiles including American hypersonic missiles from the secretive HARPA program which the U.S. is struggling so hard to develop. Russia already had full size replicas of their missiles

These missiles are then hung onto a specialized crane & suspended mid air in a setting surrounded by lasers & scanning tools. These tech tools then scan the missile from 360 degrees & upload the dimensions to Russian radar networks. This data is then transmitted to Russian military & ensures the detection by Russian Air Defences.
https://t.me/asbmil/3285

owais.usmani wrote:

https://twitter.com/CovertShores/status/1551486377124134913

How does this moron know what russian nuclear subs do during their missionss ?

He brings facts from his ass to make himself look like a specialist with inside data.

Don't quote him here anymore please.

All the boasting and chest bumping is fine and dandy but the fact remains that the front line is still pretty much stuck on the Donbass region. High kill death ratio advantage does not guarantee victory..

Boasting?

No.

The high kill ratio means the longer this takes the better for Russia and the worse for Ukraine so I am suspicious of those demanding a faster end to this...

You are correct on most your points. At the end of the day, getting Russians and Ukrainians to kill each other while the real powers that be sit back in comfortable lounge chairs in private clubs in London or Zurich is such an epic fail as to be almost beyond comprehension.

Can agree, but the situation is what it is and now those with the real powers IN THE WEST will see Russia and China and a lot of other countries rip themselves from their grasp and head in their own direction and I rather suspect the rest of the world will follow because what they are in search of is independence of what the west is trapped by.

Russians are eliminating their enemies on their border and when they are done they will be safer to turn away from the west for good if need be... that is a serious loss for the west who clearly needs their resources which they though was not good enough to get energy so cheap... they wanted it free and they wanted it all and now they have nothing...

But you cry about it AC...

- If ruskies occupy more land, they will need everything more. Surface area is related second power of the dimesion you are advancing!!!

Exactly... when they come to you there is no reason to extend your supply lines.

The Donbass region contains the bulk of their army... it is going to take time to process....

There is no strong indication there is a political will on Russia's part to control most of Ukraine.

There is no need to show their hand, Zelensky might start playing better if he knew their intentions and expectations better... keep him guessing and let him think after his mobilisation and counter attack his forces will be in Crimea by winter...

The current conditions lend more to a ceasefire solution that gets solved only after a long cold war is settled (decades) with the winners established thereafter.

I disagree. The slow dismemberment of Kievs army will continue till all of Donbass territory is freed and then it will be mostly open farmland... tricky to defend really... take the entire Black Sea coast next perhaps and relieve isolated regions in Moldova... once they get that far kill Zelensky and his team and see what replaces them... they have been busy eliminating opposing political groups all this time so very few pro Russian Orcs will remain... so keep fighting.

The western population isn't complaining so much about cost of food (although there is some noise on the issue) there main complaint is energy costs, gas, oil, and fuel at petrol stations. And these issues won't go away with Russia allowing grain to leave Ukraine. However food prices for basic needs such as bread should be reduced for much of the poorer countries. Hence the agreement.

Actually the real reason for the agreements from Russia is that the rules the west is relaxing to get Russia to allow Ukrainian grain to leave via ship will also make it easier for Russian grain to be shipped to the world too. There are no EU sanctions on Russian grain exports but banning western shipping from hauling Russian grain and western insurance companies from insuring the trips and not letting Russian grain on ships enter EU ports has been a bit of a problem to solve quickly.

This was certainly the plan of the west. But now regime changes are accelerating in the West, energy costs are exploding and WINTER IS COMING. Everyone knows the shit is gonna hit the fan.

The real shift is that now Putin is not pushing for cooperation with the west and closer ties with the EU, and that is going to hit the west rather harder than almost anything else they could have done short of actually starting WWIII.

I assume youre talking about the spike er and nlos. Theyre excellent weapons. You guys were using it against ambiet temperature cans. The spike is used against hot AFVs. How tf would it acquire a friendly APC when its warhead has limited FOV that can only acquire targets in front of it? Only a retard would shoot an IR gyided F&F weapon at a friendly AFV. What do you expext an F&F IR guided ATGM go do? Lock lnto a cold target? Tell me how its bad for such an ATGM to lock on to a hot tank.
Tanks simplyy cannot be made ambient temperature. Its a matter of physics,which the spike exploits.

Not true at all... there are plenty of things you can do to reduce the external temperature of a vehicle to match the surroundings and part of the design of the Armata armoured vehicle family is to include a Nakidka type IR and radar covering to make it more difficult to detect.

Those frames over the tops of tank turrets the Russians used... mounting a simple sheet of fabric over them will hide the engine heat and gun barrel heat from a missile lofted up into the air like a Javelin rendering it useless...

The West is continuing to escalate the situation.

Introducing western aircraft would be a ridiculous gesture that is going to get western planes shot down and Orc pilots killed.

It seems indeed that Russia will let native ukranians take care of cleaning up the country of nazis.

I am sure the non nazi ukrainians will have a score to settle over what has been done to them in the last 8 years too.

Perhaps some of the ukrainians that fled to Russia might want to return home and sort those people out.

Modularized pods seems to be the way forward for any modern multiple-launch rocket system (MLRS).

Pods speed up reloads but as we see from this conflict hanging around in place after launching an attack to reload... even just for 5 minutes is an enormous risk.

There was an eastern european version of the Grad that had a complete set of reload rockets on the back of the launcher and it was to reduce the reload time down to about 5 minutes of so and everyone in the west thought it was amazing and what such arrogant idiots the Soviets were for not adopting it too as their standard 122mm calibre launcher but the way the Soviets operated they would get into a position and launch their attack and then move immediately to avoid counter battery fire... their next firing location would have been determined before hand with the range of the rockets and distance to the targets in mind... when the launchers arrived at the new launch position there was normally more than enough time to load the rockets while information about their previous attack was assessed... did it need to be hit again, or move on to a new target, do all the calculations and load the suitable rockets required for the new target.

Pods are not so flexible... hand loaded launchers can have different rocket types loaded and used for specific targets.

HIMARS at least has a respectable range, very good accuracy and can run away quickly to hide which make it nasty if used correctly.

Same as the Soviet equivalents they had and lost already... they can be very nasty but as a support weapon for Ukrainian troops they are useless... they can only be used as a terror weapon like a Scud and they are not so amazing when the enemy has air control.

I would agree with you, but they don't care about the soldiers. And they need virtual victories to keep the money and weapons flowing.

You are right that they don't care about their soldiers, but walking them into artillery and machine guns and air power attacks will not achieve anything and weaken their position even further.

If they keep doing that there is a good chance their conscripts might realise they are on the wrong side and try to defect to fight for anyone who is against the US and the nazis that wanted them to die uselessly in combat.

Wonder why the Western state media chose to make these particular mercs public

Softening the blow that suddenly Zelensky can't win and can't make demands of Putin over territory or anything else really...

According to the official, "technically, Russia may not have violated the deal, since it did not commit to avoid attacks on those parts of Ukrainian ports that are not directly used for grain exports."

RT news reports said it was a ship and a warehouse with Harpoons and other gifts from the west that they hit and they said will continue to hit as they find them. The agreement was about grain and not about Kiev hiding or protecting weapons or fuel or stores for the military effort.

Thats like saying detachable mags are inferior to internal rifle magazines, which is retarded. Loading rockets individually on an MLRS is like loading rifle rounds one by on into a rifle, rather than putting a detachable mag in. Modular rocket pods for MLRS aren't replacements for reload vehicles. They're there to make reloading faster.

It does make loading faster but not so fast you can stay in place and launch another volley of rockets before you leave... you need to shoot and then scoot no matter how fast you can reload.

Plus different target types might require different rocket types... with manual loading you can load specific types of rockets for specific jobs and then launch them in order for best effect... with pods you get what you get.

The russians already have the Uragan-1M, so they're trying to procure MLRS with modular pods, you're just coping.

They are testing new models but the Grad and the Uragan and the Smerch vehicles shown so far are all individually loaded one tube at a time.

The ability to change pods thus able to change armaments and only require one vehicles to use them greatly reduces all the spare parts and such you need when operating various vehicles and makes production a whole gell of a lot easier.

Clueless fanboys alright, but that's you

Yeah well they needed to improve their logistics because the original MLRS the US invented and then fobbed off on its HATO allies to replace their artillery was the M270 which is based on the Bradley IFV which most of their allies don't use. Great idea using a tracked vehicle base for a rocket launcher... slows its mobility and makes it much more expensive to buy and to operate even if you have the base vehicle in service already.

After a few decades they came up with the brilliant idea of putting one pod from an M270 MLRS on the back of a truck which is supposed to be the best idea ever... I mean putting 6 x 227mm rocket tubes on the back of a truck... absolute genius... all the Soviets could come up with was 40 x 122mm rockets on one type of light truck and 16 x 220mm rockets on another type of truck and of course 12 x 300mm rockets on a bigger truck.... all cheap and all highly mobile... but no... they need pods now.

There's no need to compromise when these systems should have a segregated mission

HIMARS carries 6 - 227mm rockets or 1 ATACMS 300km missile

I'd rather keep my 12 salvo Uragan or Tornado, and my 2 round Iskander with 500km capability, and kalibr winged variant for different strike mission

Uragan has 16 launch tubes, not 12.

They can easily just pack 125mm shells around the base or on one portion to create a big hole and at least damage it to make too dangerous for tanks to drive on.

C4 should also be available in good quantity.

A professional would quickly work out the keystone or the weight supporting structure of the bridge.... take those down and the thing will collapse under its own weight.

And as for combining systems to one , I think it's unnecessary

Worse than unnecessary, it is counter productive if you think once you fire your first salvo you have time to quickly load a new pod and fire another salvo instead of leaving the area immediately.

Himmers doesn't need 12 per salvo it can concentrate all its missiles onto a single point and have a 100 percent hit rate.

See that is where the Soviets and West differ... rockets are for area targets... land them all together almost at once so there is no time to take cover.

The US treats them like longer range guns... which they are not.

But Ukraine can mix the Himars salvo with dummy BM-27 or their own Smerch to saturate and confuse the AD systems.

Not sure they have that many at any one time to use in any particular region...

Like.. when Moskva lost.. there were claims of Harpoon, Brimestone, Penguin and TB-2's sinking her also Neptune which more widely accepted.

Claims it was a nazi attack yet not even attempting any attacks since... a bit strange... almost like it was a lie and they didn't hit it with anything.

Eh that's subjective it wasn't fighting ,modern aircraft but old soviet era versions in conditions that favored the SU-35

Yeah, the way the west fights... except in this case the enemy with the full support of HATO that didn't think to help them with their weapons all these years, but is providing C4ISTAR assistance that seems to make some difference... not a whole hell of a lot though.

This is the kind of clueless boosting that makes fanboys unbearable.

I don't agree... the Ukraine has R-77s and on the ground it has BUK and S-300 and a range of other older systems defending their airspace, which is rather more than any country the west has faced has ever had.

You mean Neptune with his trident poking a hole in the hull (like a mine)?

Or possibly the naval equivalent of this...



Shit happens...

SU-35 was operating where it was far more advanced than its enemy and where it had better AD coverage and better trained pilots.

But Ukraine has western trained pilots and they had an IADS and a large number of aircraft to start with and even after its IADS was dismantled it has air defence vehicles around the place that could be coordinated for form SAM traps against Russian pilots.

A Bridge can not be moved , but SAM can be moved . Therefore GPS guided BM , becomes useless . Moved every 10 minutes ! Time to locate by satellite , info given to ground and fired and reach target .

SAM site moving every 10 minutes is a convoy and not a SAM site... take down and set up times for S-300 is about 5 minutes....

Edit : If it takes too long to move SAM and set up in New location , leaving area without cover , then use two or three SAM system in same area . At least one SAM at any one time is set up/ stationary , and covering , while other two are in motion .

S-400s cover the area more efficiently from further back...

Overall, the Russian AD is good in this conflict, but they are not distributed as extensively as one would like. And I'm not sure, but you haven't seen state-of-the-art systems in the category here...have you? That surprises me, because it would be the opportunity to test it almost every day.

The only successful attacks we have seen from HIMARS or Caeser or M777 have been civilian targets... when they attack Russian military forces it seems their shells and rockets get shot down which makes me rather suspect claims this S-300 battery they hit was a dummy was true because why protect a dummy... that would explain why the rounds or rockets got through...

1000,000 Dollars is a lot of money !

It isn't a lot of money if you don't get it... what if they just get you to fly into a SAM trap and shoot you down?

Wouldn't trust them at all.

This didn't stop folks from proclaiming F-15 to be the most successful fighter jet ever based in part on aerial kills against Serbian Airforce (which definitely used old Soviet era planes on a good day and just locally made trainers on average day)

To say nothing of hilarious numerical advantage

There were several HATO air forces boasting about their first aces since WWII or ever after that conflict involving aircraft whose state of repair was described as criminally negligent... yet those pilots still got into those planes and took to the air despite the odds against them.

Old Soviet planes with expired resource and with vital systems not working many times (radar, comms, etc).
Fanboys are stupid, regardless on which side they are.

Su-27s and MiG-29s are not bad aircraft and Su-24s and Su-25s are not bad either and they had access to western resources all this time... no upgrades is on them.

Plus an IADS network that no opponent of the US or HATO ever had anything like before... S-300s and BUKs etc etc.

These missiles are then hung onto a specialized crane & suspended mid air in a setting surrounded by lasers & scanning tools. These tech tools then scan the missile from 360 degrees & upload the dimensions to Russian radar networks. This data is then transmitted to Russian military & ensures the detection by Russian Air Defences.

It creates 3D models in various radar frequencies and also optical and IR so that a library of signatures can be created so in future if a missile or radar detects something it can compare its view in IR or the various different radar frequencies to determine what it is looking at from any angle and automatically ID it.

This would be useful for missiles using MMW radar or IIR seekers like LMUR or 9M100 or other fire and forget weapons...

Its all over the news today (western press) that Lavrov says the goal is to overthrow Zelensky. There has been a lot written about why they don't kill him and speculation of where he actually is. There is clearly significant govt leadership still in Kiev, so why does Russia not start attacking them? There must be spies that can help. Is this "new" goal in the Russian press as well?

Those newly delivered German Gepard tanks don't look very impressive to me. Rather like Shilkas with a modernized equipment. Scholz has feared to send better weapons, because he knows Russian gas is vital for Germany.

SolidarityWithRussia wrote:Those newly delivered German Gepard tanks don't look very impressive to me. Rather like Shilkas with a modernized equipment. Scholz has feared to send better weapons, because he knows Russian gas is vital for Germany.

They should be easy meat for the 305 missile. Bait them with drones and finish them off with missiles from outside their range from a helo.

mnztr wrote:Its all over the news today (western press) that Lavrov says the goal is to overthrow Zelensky. There has been a lot written about why they don't kill him and speculation of where he actually is. There is clearly significant govt leadership still in Kiev, so why does Russia not start attacking them? There must be spies that can help. Is this "new" goal in the Russian press as well?

That's a change, originally I thought they were ignoring Zelensky because they needed him to sign surrender documents, now that doesn't seem to be the case.

Zelensky better do a runner to his $34 million luxury villa in Miami Beach.

flamming_python wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Scorpius wrote:So, at present, the Su-35S is the best fighter of the 21st century, having several dozen victories in aerial combat to its credit. At least one pilot has 12 confirmed victories, including one transport helicopter shot down at extremely low altitude.
I wonder if they write about it on F16.net?

Eh that's subjective it wasn't fighting ,modern aircraft but old soviet era versions in conditions that favored the SU-35

This is the kind of clueless boosting that makes fanboys unbearable.

F-15s and F-16s were up against far better odds. Sanctioned to death 3rd world countries flying some museum pieces such as MiG-21s or MiG-25s, maybe MiG-29As at most but robbed of spare parts, AWACS, ground radar or supporting modern air defense systems. Much less anything close to the sort of intel, technical assistance Kiev is receiving from NATO.

I love how you all use the term intel like that means anything intel don't matter when both parties in the air know you're there.

Ah here we go the excuses, Ukraines airforce was literally flying museum pieces, they haven't upgraded at all just old planes with the same age gaps.

If you wanna sit there and proclaim "Mah plane da best" then have it to against equal foes. SU-35 did not and Sadam had good radar coverage btw

Do you even know about the gulf war? I doubt it if you did you'd know why Iraq's AD did so bad and it wasn't because of their lack of radar coverage.

So yes if you wanna sit there and use that fanboy logic then it works against you because if determining best plane is based on K/D then F15/16 number 1 and I know that will make fanboys foam at the mouth but your using that logic not me

PapaDragon wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Scorpius wrote:So, at present, the Su-35S is the best fighter of the 21st century, having several dozen victories in aerial combat to its credit. At least one pilot has 12 confirmed victories, including one transport helicopter shot down at extremely low altitude.
I wonder if they write about it on F16.net?  

Eh that's subjective it wasn't fighting ,modern aircraft but old soviet era versions in conditions that favored the SU-35

This is the kind of clueless boosting that makes fanboys unbearable.

This didn't stop folks from proclaiming F-15 to be the most successful fighter jet ever based in part on aerial kills against Serbian Airforce (which definitely used old Soviet era planes on a good day and just locally made trainers on average day)

To say nothing of hilarious numerical advantage

Ironic all conditions Russia has going for it in the ukraine air war.

I don't really care what clueless fanboys on f16.net or here say, Kill death ratio against inferior aircraft means nothing.

Goes for both US and Russia fanboys when using this argument both are moronic

Isos wrote:Not really. Those systems have two different roles. I would rather keep ballistic missile launchers separeted from the rocket launchers. MLRS have less range so are closer to the front where they can be destroyed mire easily than BM launchers that are kept further away from enemy.

China has copies of russian MLRS, russian Iskanders, US  MLRS , US missiles... they copy everything. But that doesn't mean everything is in service. They have plenty of projects that went as far as prototypes and are not used by PLA. Thry offer them for export but once ordered there is still lot to do to make them operational.

Trans-loading would go down drastically with a common use Multi barrel rocket launchers (MBRL). Also, a common-use MBRL launcher for different types of rockets also comes with standardized test-equipment, thereby doing away with the need for rocket-specific equipment.

Chinese MBRL rockets like SR-5 are of varying diameters , all of which can be launched from a common launch vehicle. Russia has similar systems thereby allowing them to launch rockets of varying diameters, like 214mm, 300mm & even 800mm BSMs like the ATACMS.

The idea is that you have a unified modular launcher and then based on the mission and condition and location you select the rocket size that best suits and that is the rocket that is supplied... because each rocket calibre has a range of rocket types too so you need to offer a selection of rocket types as well as the volume needed for the mission.

How does this moron know what russian nuclear subs do during their missionss ?

He brings facts from his ass to make himself look like a specialist with inside data.

Don't quote him here anymore please.

[/quote]

Saturnmax, HI Sutton , Jive Turkey and the whole submarine media complex became Ukraine giga shills as soon as the war started. F them all.

They probably do come to this site. Hi shills

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

flamming_python wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Scorpius wrote:So, at present, the Su-35S is the best fighter of the 21st century, having several dozen victories in aerial combat to its credit. At least one pilot has 12 confirmed victories, including one transport helicopter shot down at extremely low altitude.
I wonder if they write about it on F16.net?

Eh that's subjective it wasn't fighting ,modern aircraft but old soviet era versions in conditions that favored the SU-35

This is the kind of clueless boosting that makes fanboys unbearable.

F-15s and F-16s were up against far better odds. Sanctioned to death 3rd world countries flying some museum pieces such as MiG-21s or MiG-25s, maybe MiG-29As at most but robbed of spare parts, AWACS, ground radar or supporting modern air defense systems. Much less anything close to the sort of intel, technical assistance Kiev is receiving from NATO.

I love how you all use the term intel like that means anything intel don't matter when both parties in the air know you're there.

Ah here we go the excuses, Ukraines airforce was literally flying museum pieces, they haven't upgraded at all just old planes with the same age gaps.

If you wanna sit there and proclaim "Mah plane da best" then have it to against equal foes. SU-35 did not and Sadam had good radar coverage btw

Do you even know about the gulf war? I doubt it if you did you'd know why Iraq's AD did so bad and it wasn't because of their lack of radar coverage.

So yes if you wanna sit there and use that fanboy logic then it works against you because if determining best plane is based on K/D then F15/16 number 1 and I know that will make fanboys foam at the mouth but your using that logic not me

What excuses?
The Ukraine can and probably does get real-time radar data from NATO, including ground-based radars in the Czech Republic, Romania, etc... and AWACS flying right up to its border looking for Russian planes
Same goes for ELINT aircraft attempting to snoop on Russian air force communications.
The Ukraine gets EW support; one Russian Su-35 pilot interviewed mentioned a very challenging EW environment in which he nonetheless scored 2 kills - and it's hard for me to believe that this interference was caused only by ground-based Ukrainian Soviet-era systems
The Ukraine shares borders with NATO and can and does get planes, helicopters, UAVs, spare parts delivered, by reports some mercenary pilots too
The Ukraine has Su-27Ps and late-Soviet era MiG-29s at the very least; likely such aircraft did receive modest upgrades in the 90s and 2000s. It's quite possible that they also received some integration with NATO systems and infrastructure - as the Ukrainian air-defenses did
Which brings me to the Ukrainian air-defense network - late-Soviet era technology; S-300 systems and radars, various types of ground based radars, ELINT, EW systems, Buk-M systems, early TORs; in addition to more legacy equipment and vehicles
And all these things were/are available in considerable numbers. They had plenty of pilots as well, many officers which were educated as Soviet air defense specialists. A considerable military-industrial complex.

Name me one foe of NATO/US that had matched the Ukrainians in any of these parameters? Either in outside support, fighter technology and availability, air defense network sophistication, quantity of equipment and pilots?
I'm waiting.
Was it the Taliban air force perhaps with their 2-3 Mi-24s left over from the Soviet operation (and they were last seen flying them in the 90s), or their Zu-23-2s maybe?
The Yugoslav (by that time Serbian) air force with their 12 MiG-29As whose radars weren't working properly due to sanctions and non-delivery of parts for them?
Saddam Hussein's Iraq in 2003 which hadn't had anything delivered for 12 years and still had not recovered from the damage of the 1st Gulf War, armed with mostly 50s and 60s era ground equipment and whose generals defected ahead of the US invasion?
Or was it the great air battle against Gaddafi's Libya? What did Libya have again, MiG-23s or Mirage F1s or something? And how many?

Maybe send more than a Global Hawk into Iran's airspace before making comparisons

Su-27s and MiG-29s are not bad aircraft and Su-24s and Su-25s are not bad either and they had access to western resources all this time... no upgrades is on them.

Without deep modernization they suck. Mig-29 was good only in the 90s but with its short range range r-27 and no datalink it became an easy target for modernized f-16 and new eurocanards.

Su-27 lack a good r-77-1 and has a big RCS. Even su-30 is not modern by modern standards with its huge rcs but has better missiles and more modern electronics eventhough they make better now.

Checkmate, su-57 and su-35 is the way to go.

SolidarityWithRussia wrote:Those newly delivered German Gepard tanks don't look very impressive to me. Rather like Shilkas with a modernized equipment. Scholz has feared to send better weapons, because he knows Russian gas is vital for Germany.

Yes Gepards are not tanks at all. These Cold War relics were actually the best SPAAG NATzo managed to put into service. The US tried but failed dismally with their Sergeant York despite using the F-16's radar.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Ah here we go the excuses, Ukraines airforce was literally flying museum pieces, they haven't upgraded at all just old planes with the same age gaps.

The upgraded Ukrainian Su-27's became known as the Su-27M1 as an example.

https://defence24.com/ukrainian-president-conducts-a-test-flight-in-the-modernized-su-27-tailored-to-the-nato-standards

Mir wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Ah here we go the excuses, Ukraines airforce was literally flying museum pieces, they haven't upgraded at all just old planes with the same age gaps.

The upgraded Ukrainian Su-27's became known as the Su-27M1 as an example.

https://defence24.com/ukrainian-president-conducts-a-test-flight-in-the-modernized-su-27-tailored-to-the-nato-standards

If it got new radar, missiles or datalink then it would have been a different plane.

Getting some nato radios and shit isn't making it any better.

Ukrinian mig,29 and su-27 are shitty compare to russian Su-35. I wouldn't try to fly one to intercept russian planes.

Isos wrote:

Mir wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Ah here we go the excuses, Ukraines airforce was literally flying museum pieces, they haven't upgraded at all just old planes with the same age gaps.

The upgraded Ukrainian Su-27's became known as the Su-27M1 as an example.

https://defence24.com/ukrainian-president-conducts-a-test-flight-in-the-modernized-su-27-tailored-to-the-nato-standards

If it got new radar, missiles or datalink then it would have been a different plane.

Getting some nato radios and shit isn't making it any better.

Ukrinian mig,29 and su-27 are shitty compare to russian Su-35. I wouldn't try to fly one to intercept russian planes.

Didn't say they were any good

But I was merely pointing out Seig's statement "haven't upgraded at all" which is false (as usual).

Mir wrote:

Didn't say they were any good

But I was merely pointing out Seig's statement "haven't upgraded at all" which is false (as usual).

Well their combat capabilities haven't been upgraded. So he is right when he says su-35 destroying old su-27 ust like f-15 destroying serbian mig-29 means nothing. The gap is huge so the results is well known.

Isos wrote:
Well their combat capabilities haven't been upgraded. So he is right when he says su-35 destroying old su-27 ust like f-15 destroying serbian mig-29 means nothing. The gap is huge so the results is well known.

I quite agree they are not up to spec compared to the Su-35's on a one-versus-one basis, but getting back to my original point...NATzo is providing the Ukrs with vital intel from various platforms. These are commonly known as force multipliers. If used correctly you can easily turn a fairly outdated fighter aircraft into a dangerous adversary.

Garry b wrote " SAM site moving every 10 minutes is a convoy and not a SAM site... take down and set up times for S-300 is about 5 minutes.... " ok a convoy we need and a convoy we have . Simply allow all vehicles to hook-up like a train and move like a convoy . Either in straight line , back and forth or zig -zag through the craters ! Alternatively dig a canal filled with water and float all devices on barges , back and forth . No missile can destroy water ! Providing the electronics work , while mobile .

Area cleared from Nazi scum.