Current Affairs Ukraine

[Spadge Vernacular]

 

[bcblue1878]

?

There really are no words when you watch that, utterly heartbreaking !

 

[Martin Alvito]

So:

- Mariupol' has a peacetime population of 400,000
- They're letting some 6,000-9,000 out
- They are driving into another warzone, where it does not appear there is a ceasefire

Small wonder that serving in the French Resistance probably helped inspire Beckett.

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

@Mutzo Nutzo or anyone else with relevant experience would appreciate thoughts on this piece

Is the Russian Air Force Actually Incapable of Complex Air Operations?

More than a week into the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Russian Air Force has yet to commence large-scale operations. Inactivity in the first few days could be ascribed to various factors, but the continued absence of major air operations now raises serious capability questions.

t.co

I’d say that Russian air warfare doctrine had always been that, in a potential war against NATO they would not achieve air superiority so they invested heavily in SAM defence systems.

NATO on the other hand relies on high tech fighter aircraft to achieve air superiority and does not tend to depend heavily on SAM defences in its air warfare policy.

Therefore the RuAF have very little capability and experience of SEAD (suppression of enemy air defences). Based on NATO’s strategy.

Now we have a situation whereby they are unable to suppress or defeat Ukraine’s AD capability. Also Ukraine is now armed to the teeth with high tech MANPADS (man portable air defence systems). Making the airspace dangerous for RuAF aircraft.

Essentially if they fly - they will probably die

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

Putin Lost the Digital War Abroad. Will He Lose at Home?

Its diplomatic efforts in tatters, its agencies beset by cyber vigilantes, the Russian government is still choking off the information that fuels its homegrown protest movement.

www.defenseone.com

 

[Martin Alvito]

How bizarre is it that in this “Russian made” situation they actually even have a veto on the council?

Short version - they have it as the successor state of the USSR, which was specifically enumerated in the UN Charter as a permanent member of the Security Council with a veto. Legally speaking, that's slightly dubious, but questioning it entails also throwing the PRC's seat into question as the entity governing territory previously controlled by the ROC. It also would threaten the UK's permanent seat should Scotland secede.

Therefore, the Russian Federation isn't going anywhere.

 

[tsubaki]

I didn't realise (or at least it doesn't seem to be mentioned in reports) that there are 30,000 additional NATO troops and two carrier battle groups (one US, one UK) due to arrive in Norway mid-March for an exercise.

Two NATO carrier groups will sail north for exercise Cold Response

As Russia deploys the new 3M22 Tsirkon anti-ship hypersonic missile in the Barents Sea, NATO has decided to send two of its most potent naval weapons to the Norwegian-led Exercise Cold Response, the aircraft carriers 'HMS Prince of Wales' and the 'USS Harry S Truman'.

thebarentsobserver.com

 

[Martin Alvito]

I’d say that Russian air warfare doctrine had always been that, in a potential war against NATO they would not achieve air superiority so they invested heavily in SAM defence systems.

NATO on the other hand relies on high tech fighter aircraft to achieve air superiority and does not tend to depend heavily on SAM defences in its air warfare policy.

Therefore the RuAF have very little capability and experience of SEAD (suppression of enemy air defences). Based on NATO’s strategy.

Now we have a situation whereby they are unable to suppress or defeat Ukraine’s AD capability. Also Ukraine is now armed to the teeth with high tech MANPADS (man portable air defence systems). Making the airspace dangerous for RuAF aircraft.

Essentially if they fly - they will probably die

Former military guy: Technically speaking, they lose
IR guy: The prospective gains are not worth the risks

Good job summing up the differences in our respective languages there.

 

[Paulie]

Wow

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

Former military guy: Technically speaking, they lose
IR guy: The prospective gains are not worth the risks

Good job summing up the differences in our respective languages there.

Bringing balance to the forum

 

[everton fan number one]

I’d say that Russian air warfare doctrine had always been that, in a potential war against NATO they would not achieve air superiority so they invested heavily in SAM defence systems.

NATO on the other hand relies on high tech fighter aircraft to achieve air superiority and does not tend to depend heavily on SAM defences in its air warfare policy.

Therefore the RuAF have very little capability and experience of SEAD (suppression of enemy air defences). Based on NATO’s strategy.

Now we have a situation whereby they are unable to suppress or defeat Ukraine’s AD capability. Also Ukraine is now armed to the teeth with high tech MANPADS (man portable air defence systems). Making the airspace dangerous for RuAF aircraft.

Essentially if they fly - they will probably die

Fascinating- where'd you read it? ( genuine question )

 

[TheSouthernBlue]

Evacuation of Mariupol has been postponed.

Russians did not honour the times and continued to shell residents apparently.

 

[PhilM]

I’d say that Russian air warfare doctrine had always been that, in a potential war against NATO they would not achieve air superiority so they invested heavily in SAM defence systems.

NATO on the other hand relies on high tech fighter aircraft to achieve air superiority and does not tend to depend heavily on SAM defences in its air warfare policy.

Therefore the RuAF have very little capability and experience of SEAD (suppression of enemy air defences). Based on NATO’s strategy.

Now we have a situation whereby they are unable to suppress or defeat Ukraine’s AD capability. Also Ukraine is now armed to the teeth with high tech MANPADS (man portable air defence systems). Making the airspace dangerous for RuAF aircraft.

Essentially if they fly - they will probably die

As evidenced here.



And here.

While the Russian army has the manpower to sustain attrition, you'd struggle to find anyone to not acknowledge they're losing a high rate of equipment.

A correction on before, unless you're Russian the attrition can't be ignored.

 

[peteblue]

Russia's second biggest oil company calls for an end to Putin's war

Russia's second largest oil company has broken ranks with President Vladimir Putin.

edition.cnn.com

 

[PhilM]

Perhaps testament to how successful the Ukrainian army and SDF have been at ambushing convoys, while putting more air assets at risk.