Good example?! I only see a bunch of lies, the missile he talks about is supersonic (mach 1.8 ), the occasion he describes did not end with a miss but with the vehicle destroyed as you can see here:
Not to mention the fact that he didn't present any evidence of "this misses A LOT in the Syrian war" because he hasn't seen anything, and is just pulling this information out of his own ass.
I will admit, I didn't read his full wall of text.
I don't think I berated VKS, I said that all airforces would face the same issue.
Low-value opportunistic targets on the battlefield waste precision weapons. One can even say that ATGM is an overkill, especially wasting two of them on such target. These munitions were never designed to destoroy a moving cars going 60+ km/h. For such soft targets there is solution - cheap drones that can disable or destroy vehicles. Using brimstones makes even less sense.
New modification of Ka-52 was tested with UAV integration so it's not like the Syrian experience or new trends weren't addressed. Tanks, bunkers and etc. are not a problem. Easy targets that require powerful missiles and both Ataka and Vikhr are good for them. But Ukrainians are increasingly going light on vehicles and soon they will be riding technicals or civvie cars like they do in their recent retreats. And I think that helicopters are the perfect platform for suicide drone/loitering munitions as they have an advantage in detection and opportunities. Lancet-3 apparently can engage targets with no or minimal operator input so it shouldn't be hard for the gunner to designate multiple targets and let the auto-tracking do the work. Yes, it would be even slower than "subsonic" munitions, but fast enough to engage moving targets if used from heights (diving speeds are over 300 kmh), especially when anti-drone weaponry is at it's infancy.
Sanctions or not, Kronstadt expanded their production line during this conflict, and according to some Russian sources they were hiring people to work in the factory, 4 new shifts if I recall correctly. Who knows what they are producing. It will be interesting to see (if we will ever see that is, Russian side is very secret about weapons being used) Sorry if I come across as a fanboy of drones, but I saw a conflict where drones played a bigger role. Russian artillery is crushing Ukrainian troops thanks to cheap ass Orlan drones, I never imagined that such symbiosis can have evident results like that. Russian usage of drones is insane and there goes my opinion that "it won't be effective in conventional warfare". I was part of "drones are just a fad" crew, but this was based on expensive UCAVs. Even Igla/Stinger/Strela/Martel operators who should have an easy life countering them are one-time use, when they shoot down a drone they invite an artillery barrage on their perimeter.
Regarding al mighty western weapons, just remember the stories how Javelin would be a game changer. We didn't see much of it....
More than 100 Switchblade drones were supplied to Ukraine and where is the result?
I think there are waaaaay more switchblade than 100. They did deliver 500 launchers with 10x or more suicide drones each.
But then again, for bad dancer, even his own balls are in the way. I have a feeling that most of it end up captured, look at NLAWs. Give Russians these weapons and you might see different results. Russian suicide drones were filmed taking out artillery pieces and unit formations with little issues, not to mention how many of them were not filmed. We also seen Russians using Javelins against UA armor. If you actually want to hear how they perform, don't ask Ukrainians, but Russians.