Vks get a batch of 4, but they lose 3
They make what they think they need and always try to keep losses to a minimum... you can cry and claim they are stupid, but at least they are doing something to stop US occupation of Russia. Your moaning on the internet on a website of people who support Russia is doing more for your enemies... I am sure more than a few Russia supporters read your pussy whining and complaints and wonder why they care if Russia gets fucked over again or not.
You are moody like a woman, and don't understand why others don't follow your special pattern of moods... simple... because we aren't fking mental.
It's already poor quantity they have of fighters,
Their fighters appear to be doing a great job, and their air defence is something the west is really going to struggle with.
A drone with a tiny RCS is actually harder to deal with than a stealth fighter or stealth bomber that uses coatings and shapings to hide its RCS, because different frequencies render stealth useless, but that doesn't really help with tiny targets and other solutions need to be found... while under fire...
But you know what? by MOD logic, it's dangerous for the plane to be in the hangar, because it might collapse
So if it gets taken out by a drone, at least we saved money on the hangars guys
Spending billions on all these hangars is only worth while if they are kept shut all the time so drones cannot fly in to them... and that is not going to happen.
Planes spend most of their time on the ground so yeah hangars are a must have.
Even in airfields in the west that have all sorts of hangars, most of the time operational aircraft spend their time out on the flight line where there are no hangars and hangars offer no protection at all.
This tinny window for attacks when it is accessible can be overcome by increasing patrol around airfield and turning on jammers to forbid the access to operators or drones.
But for every aircraft you are going to need lots and lots of hangars because aircraft can be redeployed at short notice to forward airfields that don't have hangars, or don't have enough.
These are opportunist attacks... they don't care what they hit... they just want to hit something, so hitting anything is their goal... so spending billions on new hangars will result in them occasionally hitting an aircraft or two and pussies whining that they need more hangars and better hangars... after they already spend billions on new hangars... and all for the cost of a few cheap drones... talk about value for money.
Long range drones don't have camera and man in the moop.
Long range weapons like Iskander and Kh-101 have a camera and in the terminal part of their attack they use image processing software together with their location from their INS navigation system and any working GLONASS signals and they can target buildings and vehicles and locations in their field of view.
Most of the drones we are talking about, that the air defences have trouble with are tiny so their payload is going to be tiny.
The reason they use tires is not just to hide their radar signature, but also a tiny drone with a tiny bomb hits an unprotected aircraft wing and blows a hole in the outer layer and sets fire to the fuel inside... which starts a fire that destroys the aircraft. Put a couple of tires on top and the rubber absorbs the small explosion and prevents the skin of the aircraft from being ruptured... no fire no plane destroyed.
Protect the aircraft,
Very simple concept,
Very true, but protecting your car from damage by putting it into a garage is spending a lot of money considering most of the operational time that garage will have its door left open...
But that's what conscripts are for, to be used for base security, the VKS needs security at bases, personnel to assist with bringing planes in and out of the hangars
Stop being ridiculous... have you never seen a drone before? They are tiny and the area of an air base is enormous... having men standing out in the airfield with rifles or even machine guns would be a terrible waste of man power and as we see with Gerans hitting targets in Ukraine even with Gepards there they are not effective most of the time...
And il78 is needed, but MOD don't want to spend money on fuel tankers, in their logic is better to base tu22m3 close by, with tires on the wings, and lose them in drone attacks
It is not just about money... the German attacks on London failed because of the distance the German aircraft had to fly to reach the target area... if they could have been based closer they could have performed rather more attacks and delivered vastly more ordinance and spent less time just flying to the target area... which is vulnerable dangerous time that is not damaging the enemy.
But it's laziness a very persistent bad habit of the MOD
Those missiles do not fly direct routes and their ranges are for long range attacks where most of their flight time is spent at altitude... for attacks deep inside Ukraine it has to fly low level most of the way which means routing the flight path around known locations of SAM defences...
As for friendly fire, I thought PVO was supposed to be subordinate to VKS now, so wtf?
Yeah, a flick of a switch and everything is fixed... it is a problem for everyone... remember those allied aircraft the Patriot shot down, and the allied aircraft that took out a Patriot in the process of shooting it down?
Hangar is not a do all, it just represents one step in better protection of planes that are worth tens if not hundreds of millions.
So spend like the west and do like the west because the west really knows how to run a war on the cheap?
Not to mention that hangars protect planes from inclement weather, which is known that it can be very harsh in those parts.
Aircraft inside hangars are useless... the equivalent of aircraft in the hangars on an aircraft carrier... on a land airfield the hangars are normally enormous distances from the runway... it would probably take 5 minutes just to open the bloody heavy protected doors, and then you arm and fuel them outside the hangars and then you get them to the flight line and then they sit and wait for their time to take off... sounds like the ideal time to attack them where their heavy strong expensive powerfully build hangars become bloody useless.
You cannot stop 100% of enemy attacks, that is impossible, no one has ever done it and no one will. If you think that if Russia strictly follows a script on how to conduct a military operation made by you, casualties will end, you are sadly mistaken. No one has ever fought a war without suffering losses, and this applies not only to those who lose the war but also to those who win the war.
Totally agree... these are occasional slips through gaps in the protection, it is not like they are losing aircraft at the rate of Kiev, or their rate of loss of soldiers every day... this is a fringe loss that is not worth spending billions on.
Especially when you talk about saving money... each hanger to protect each aircraft would cost more than some of the aircraft are even worth if you want them made right.
Too much thunderbird syndrome with secret underground hangars for all your aircraft.
Solid airplane shelters and military vehicle parks have been obsolete for decades.
Every single army in the world is building its modern infrastructure with modular, soft skinned, and light prefabricated elements.
It is about cost return... spending trillions of rubles to save a few million rubles in aircraft that are in serial production where the pilots and crews are not injured or put at risk means not building lots of heavy concrete monuments to MIC corruption like they did in the west makes sense.
Of course for Russia you could argue that the concrete piercing weapons that are the real threat to aircraft inside hangars are quite big and would not get through Russian air defences... it is the tiny drones with the tiny payloads that essentially set aircraft or fuel storage tanks on fire that are the problem and hangers would help with that.... as long as you kept all your planes in there and kept the door shut all the time... because any time it rolls out of that hangar a tiny drone can land on it and go boom and the enemy get their one burned plane hit every 18 months to prove Russia is weak and nazism always wins in the end.
Maybe you are looking at this the wrong way... Ark and Caveat... have you guys just invested in a shed making company that wants to expand to aircraft hangars?
It makes absolute sense to protect aircraft, only a cultist would argue otherwise
On an aircraft carrier in combat the aircraft are stored on the deck ready to fuel and arm and be used, the only aircraft that are taken down into the hangars are damaged or in need of repair or upgrade.