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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Usually for stuff like this 20-25 years, though some stuff might be a lot less. My dad went to an event once where they were using up MILAN missiles which were coming up on the end of their shelf-life!
I think every Milan I fired was close to end of life - which does make sense, they were expensive and better to use them for training than scrapping them. It was the thermal battery that would die first and we did seem to have quite a few failures and almost always caused by the thermal battery, never saw the gas generator or rocket motor fail.
 
They are replacing them with a modified version of the SU-34M, there is a total of 40 on order (not sure what the breakdown of variants is) with between 5 and 10 delivered this year depending on source. Manufacturing isn't currently keeping up with losses.
That may be what they say they're doing, and even what they want/plan to do, but realistically an Su-34 (modern replacement for the Su-24) cannot adequately fulfil the role of an Su-25. This was the reason they tried (and failed) to develop a modernised Su-25 replacement in the first place, and the reason they're upgrading the ones they have left to the "new" Su-25SM model.

This would be like the USAF saying that their F-15E Strike Eagle (modern replacement for the F-111) is going to start replacing the A-10 too, except that if the USAF said it then there would actually be a realistic chance they might find a way to pull it off.

*EDIT*

In fairness, I suppose it is a tad presumptuous of me to mock Russia for upgrading existing airframes and calling them a "new" model of plane, when that's essentially what we're paying Germany to do with "our" Challenger 3 program.
 
Russia has been found using artillery shells made in 1947. So clearly the shell life on many types of ammunition is very long!
Non explosive ammunition, be it shells or bullets can generally speaking last indefinitely as long as it's stored correctly, this is why commercially available ammunition doesn't have an expiration date.

Of course the important part of that is "stored correctly". Ammunition kept in military grade storage boxes kept in a climate controlled facility or even a properly insulted warehouse should be expected to last 100 years or more. Ammunition kept in corroded boxes in a Russian warehouse where rain and snow come in through holes in the roof, not so much :p
 
Last edited:
That may be what they say they're doing, and even what they want/plan to do, but realistically an Su-34 (modern replacement for the Su-24) cannot adequately fulfil the role of an Su-25. This was the reason they tried (and failed) to develop a modernised Su-25 replacement in the first place, and the reason they're upgrading the ones they have left to the "new" Su-25SM model.

This would be like the USAF saying that their F-15E Strike Eagle (modern replacement for the F-111) is going to start replacing the A-10 too, except that if the USAF said it then there would actually be a realistic chance they might find a way to pull it off.

*EDIT*

In fairness, I suppose it is a tad presumptuous of me to mock Russia for upgrading existing airframes and calling them a "new" model of plane, when that's essentially what we're paying Germany to do with "our" Challenger 3 program.

The US has been trying to do it for years - replace the A-10 with multirole aircraft. In Russia's case they are probably having to work with what is left after the dissolution of the USSR in terms of facilities, skills/knowledge base and now sanctions.
 
Wouldn't be surprised if we see the locals in Russia dropping a few bombs on the weapons factory's sooner rather than later. Especially when they are trying to ramp up production.
 
"Red lines" is a concept designed to prevent wars, so that countries can operate without creating new wars, in this case it would be lines that if USA or Russia crossed, the other side would attack.

The problem is that the concept of red lines only work if you assume all actors involved are rational and honest, and unfortunately in dictatorships that's not usually the case - so Russia, China and others frequently abuse the system by stating everything is a red line in hopes that USA will do nothing.

The problem with the abuse is that it makes wars more likely because now the USA knows that when Russia says something is a red line it's a 90% chance they are lying. And if you don't know where the real red line is because the otherside keeps lying then it becomes easier to cross it
 
Last edited:
It looks like the US supplied the block 1a version of the ATACMS which has a range of 165km, that still means airfields in Crimea are out of range the M270/HIMARS. At least that was the version that was used in yesterday's attack, I guess time will tell if the US will send them the full 300km missiles.
 
Comments have been made about how its Western surplus that has been wrecking Russia, I don't think ATACMS is exempt from that from that, even if they did get the missile it was going to be some of older missiles to start with.

I'm sure its the storm shadows that didn't go through the mid life upgrade we sent to Ukraine, this is just more of the same. Plenty of targets within range, anything more they still have storm shadow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom