Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Agree, I think we have two things to watch, in regards ammo type stuff, its the Wests really rather limited stocks. They cannot give everything to Ukraine but I really hope its been a massive eye opener into how much of everything even a relatively minor conflict can burn through.

Secondly I think by now all sides see Ukraine has grown into this war. They are not operating NATO doctrine, but something kind of in between NATO and Soviet from what reports give away.
As such the best weapons and what can be supplied will probably change a bit, but there is plenty more available that suits what they are doing now. Bonkers amounts of Abrams etc.
Click to expand...

Aside from the financial side of it, I think the West has kind of sleep walked into the notion that if anything nation state wise did kick off then a demonstration of our combat superiority would result in the war quickly ending - so not needing large amount of ammo, etc., the reality unfortunately might not be like that.
 
Last edited:
jigger said:
The Ukrainians are operating SU25 now in uncontrolled air space. The A10 would offer a fresh fleet capable of carrying a much wider range of weapons.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Ukrainians have lost some good pilots flying those planes in uncontrolled airspace, they're vulnerable even to basic manpads

en.wikipedia.org

299th Tactical Aviation Brigade - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Scroll down and you can see the losses they've unfortunately taken, the men lost in those planes are not easily replaced
 
steve45 said:
I see the hesitance of the ATACMS being given more down to the limited number held and lack of production. When you look at the relatively low number that were produced, and the number used in recent conflicts. I can understand the hesitance to hand them over especially with the PRSM not being delivered or in production yet, rather than it being an issue of range provided or escalation.
Where as JASSM in its various versions is likely still being produced/improved on. There is also precedence with other similar capabilities like StormShadow/SCALP and the possibility of the German/Swedish equivalent coming soon.

Absolutely just opinion though, I could very well be wrong, and maybe the ATACMS, JASSM are a step too far for US.
Click to expand...

Every ATACMS user hasnt got many at all - Poland have 75 missiles at a cost of $1.4 million each, whereas GMLRS is $160,000 each. The GLSDB has a range of 150km the SDB costs $40k and the M26 rocket motor is retired from use (USA has something like 90,000 of them)
 
No chance you'll see F117's in Ukraine unless NATO suddenly becomes involved and the US decided to unretire them. That plane was developed back in the 70's using computers with hardware and software that was a lot more primitive then what's available today, if you want stealth and are prepared to go to all that trouble of training the crews and building the facilities to look after such aircraft you may as well get the F-35 which has a much lower rader profile (I know one's a bomber the other is a multi role Jet but if stealth is your priority then get the most modern gear available).
 
Last edited:
Roar87 said:
Yes, the Ukrainians have lost some good pilots flying those planes in uncontrolled airspace, they're vulnerable even to basic manpads

en.wikipedia.org

299th Tactical Aviation Brigade - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Scroll down and you can see the losses they've unfortunately taken, the men lost in those planes are not easily replaced
Click to expand...

All planes are vulnerable to anti air and I’m not sure I’d call man portable systems basic.

The Ukrainian Air Force is limited in its numbers of planes and I’d imagine the wear/tear has made a lot of the Ukraines fleet unserviceable.
 
Last edited:
Harlequin said:
lol? Not even Iran and Russia can do that. making 2.6 million a month, is 1 per second, every second for a month.
Click to expand...

Dunno if comparable but I worked for a company producing something vaguely similar - the production line from end to end was ~7 minutes at full tilt - so you'd have to be producing ~420 at a time to hit that.
 
Abraxaz1 said:
Not cheap enough.

A proper company could mass produce the Lancet and shadid in there millions per month
Click to expand...
That's ridiculous, even if China done the manufacturing they wouldn't be able to get anywhere near that number. At such a rate you would be redirecting parts and spares from other industries to fullfil those orders to a point where your whole economy would probably collapse within a month or two.

Lancet's are probably Russia's best weapon but there not great by any means. The Lancet is slow, ponderous can be shot down with AK's and lacks punching power, it's ok for soft targets but anything with a bit of armour has generally survived.
 
Freddie1980 said:
No chance you'll see F117's in Ukraine unless NATO suddenly becomes involved and the US decided to unretire them. That plane was developed back in the 70's using computers with hardware and software that was a lot more primitive then what's available today, if you want stealth and are prepared to go to all that trouble of training the crews and building the facilities to look after such aircraft you may as well get the F-35 which has a much lower rader profile (I know one's a bomber the other is a multi role Jet but if stealth is your priority then get the most modern gear available).
Click to expand...

The problem is the availability of planes, although I’d think planes like the F-35 would be a lot more topical even if they could be made available.
 
Freddie1980 said:
That's ridiculous, even if China done the manufacturing they wouldn't be able to get anywhere near that number. At such a rate you would be redirecting parts and spares from other industries to fullfil those orders to a point where your whole economy would probably collapse within a month or two.

Lancet's are probably Russia's best weapon but there not great by any means. The Lancet is slow, ponderous can be shot down with AK's and lacks punching power, it's ok for soft targets but anything with a bit of armour has generally survived.
Click to expand...

Frustratingly it is the lack of being prepared for that kind of threat that is the problem - Lancets can be readily knocked from the skies in the mostly open terrain of Ukraine with fairly basic means if you have that means - they aren't difficult to detect and especially on the final run in are predictable in flight.
 
Freddie1980 said:
No chance you'll see F117's in Ukraine unless NATO suddenly becomes involved and the US decided to unretire them. That plane was developed back in the 70's using computers who's hardware and software were a lot more primitive then what's available today and if you want stealth and are prepeared to go to all that trouble of training the crews and building the facilities to look after such aircraft you may as well get the F-35 which has a much lower Rader profile (I know one's a bomber the other is a multi role Jet but if stealth is your priority then get the most modern gear available).
Click to expand...

The F-117 is being used as an aggressor at the minute, so still flying and capable of being brought into service, it's just not the best option for Ukraine. It needs way more hours of maintenance to keep it in the air than an F-16 or almost anything else, the only people who can perform that specialist maintenance required are a small team in the USAF, and it basically only carries 2 bombs - so doesn't really bring much in the way of actual offensive capabilities for the time and money you're investing into it. If you wanted to bomb a couple of radar stations in North Korea then it might be capable of that, but not suited for close air support or anything Ukraine would want it for.
 
Last edited:
Roar87 said:
The F-117 is being used as an aggressor at the minute, so still flying and capable of being brought into service, it's just not the best option for Ukraine. It needs way more hours of maintenance to keep it in the air than an F-16 or almost anything else, the only people who can perform that specialist maintenance required are a small team in the USAF, and it basically only carries 2 bombs - so doesn't really bring much in the way of actual offensive capabilities for the time and money you're investing into it. If you wanted to bomb a couple of radar stations in North Korea then it might be capable of that, but not suited for close air support or anything Ukraine would want it for.
Click to expand...

The F117 can operate deep into defended enemy air space without the need to first take out defences and gain air superiority, that’s the big difference between it and something like the F16. The use off F16’s in close air support roles will also be limited. The F117 is not a long range bomber and not suited at all for attacking North Korea.
 
Last edited:
I don't think we/the US would bother these days sending a manned flight into somewhere like NK to bomb radar stations, etc. anyhow, with the distances involved there are plenty of missiles which can do the job.
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
I don't think we/the US would bother these days sending a manned flight into somewhere like NK to bomb radar stations, etc. anyhow, with the distances involved there are plenty of missiles which can do the job.
Click to expand...

The UK definitely not, our bomber capabilities are long gone. The US would have no problem at all sending long range bombers.
 
Harlequin said:
The F117a is still a day 1, knock down the door aircraft. It is still in service. BUT, it wont go near Ukraine unless russia start on NATO, and then the B2 would do the job a lot better anyway
Click to expand...

The F117 works best as you say as a day 1 aircraft, when the enemy is not expecting you and is least prepared for air defence

And then of course their payload is small so you have to send a lot, a single B2 can carry as much ordinance as several entire squads of F117. I think in the gulf war the US sent 8 F117's into Bagdad, and a single B2 has a higher payload capacity than 8 F117's
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom