17 ms·

The curious case of Russia's missing Air Force

92 points by cols 5y ago

option 5y ago
the article reads like too much wishful thinking. I am from Ukraine originally and like most sane people I want this war to end ASAP with Russia's failure and Ukraine emerging stronger. But I do hope Western militaries are not counting on Russia's "incompetence and inexperience".
- thematrixturtle 5y ago
  I don't see much "wishful thinking" in the article? It points out a surprising fact (that Russia is not using the air power to the extent that everybody expected) and posits some possible explanations: intentionally holding back (but why?), inability to pre-emptively destroy Ukraine's air defences, lack of guided munitions, etc.
  - gattilorenz 5y ago
    I haven't read this article, but a few days ago another article was explaining how Russian air tactics are different from the US ones, and how they see the air power in a war, which is something you're not considered in your explanations. The gist was that the US goes immediately for dominating the sky. Russia sees ground forces as the main engine of the army, and the Air Force only supports the advancement of ground forces near the border, without bombing far into enemy territory (which is a task for the army's missiles).
    - jazzyjackson 5y ago
      How do they expect their ground forces to advance when Turkish drones are allowed to circle overhead? Keeping control of the skies is not unique to US tactics...
      - gattilorenz 5y ago
        Tbh I have no idea, I'm no military expert. I could not find the source article I read, and I guess there's a non trivial chance it might even have been based on Russian propaganda... as usual, take everything with a grain of salt. I just find it hard (and reassuring) to imagine that Russia's army and air force are in such a terrible state.
        zppln 5y ago
        No, you're right, there has been a difference in doctrine. The Russians put much more emphasis on SAMs traditionally, to enable their ground forces to operate even if they their airforce doesn't own the sky. That's why they have everything ranging fro Iglas to S-400s. They seem to have missed developing a good counter for the Bayraktars though. :)
        rmbyrro 5y ago
        I don't find it hard to believe, but agree the safest option is to assume they're not incompetent and do our best to fight them off as if they were the best. Maybe that's what parent comment is concerned about when saying "I do hope Western militaries are not counting on Russia's 'incompetence and inexperience'"
    - sofixa 5y ago
      That wouldn't make sense though: First as a doctrine, it would be a stupid one - they tend to use paratroopers for surprise taking of advanced positions, and air support is vital to help them keep their position until reinforcements can arrive. Point in case, the failure at Hostomel. Their doctrine emphasises anti-air defenses because air superiority against a superior enemy ( NATO) isn't certain, but that doesn't mean the Air Force shouldn't be used at all, especially against an inferior enemy Second, they don't seem to be even doing that - there are small scale ( 1-2 planes) raids deep in Ukrainian territory, and neither their planes nor their SAMs can deal with the drones Ukraine fields, even over Russian held territory
    - wolverine876 5y ago
      I've read many times that the major Russian military reforms over the last decade or so - successful or not - included combined arms, including air and infantry.
- atoav 5y ago
  I think everybody has been surprised by just how bad Russia is doing. They have been overestimated by magnitudes, it seems. Their gear is in a much worse condition than anybody would have guessed, they have logistical problems all over the place etc. This is not a reason to relax, but one can certainly observe that.
  - muro 5y ago
    They may have logistical problems, but they are also encircling/taking major cities, now with many more civilian casualties than early in the war. I would take the (sadly looks more like wishful thinking) incompetence over the current destruction.
    - raverbashing 5y ago
      Incompetent armies can still do damage But yeah let's hope they keep like that
      - kergonath 5y ago
        If the point is to take a country, competent armies minimise damage. Otherwise at the end you’re just king of the ruins and have trouble extracting all the resources you came for. Mass bombings is almost the bluntest last-resort weapon you can use. A bloodless coup followed by a (probably quite bloody) purge would have been the best outcome for the Russians.
    - atoav 5y ago
      > I would take the (sadly looks more like wishful thinking) incompetence over the current destruction. You get me wrong there. The current destruction is a result of the incompetence, not an alternative to it. If they were a well organized well maintained troup going full Blitzkrieg they would have overwhelmed the Ukrainian forces so fast they already would have taken the capital more than a week ago. This is what they intended to do. Now if they can't get forward because the majority of their transport can only happen on roads they are definitely in dire need of air superiority, because air superiority would keep the convoys safer. They started shelling civilian infrastructure because they want to break the unexpected fighting spirit and they have no other ways to do it. But this was definitly not what the leading heads in Russia would have preferred, they thought they would go in full Blitzkrieg and after 3 days the capital would have fallen due to overwhelming force.
- sterlind 5y ago
  one hypothesis from the article is that Russia is saving its good bombs for a bigger war, which is troubling. but by doing so they're wasting planes, right? it doesn't make sense to me.
  - _kbh_ 5y ago
    they are also wasting a much more precious resource than planes, pilots.
    - jazzyjackson 5y ago
      And the most precious resource of all, the purchasing power of their own currency.
      - sprusemoose 5y ago
        energy?
        atoav 5y ago
        I think the parent means that Russia's biggest income source is oil and gas. Now that he demonstrated to it's biggest customer (Europe) just how problematic this is, the demand is not going to go up. Other than in the US where russian Oil is like 3% of the used oil and russian gas is basically not used, in Europe no russian gas means cold houses and problems in the industry.
      - shmerl 5y ago
        That is already gone.
      - xdennis 5y ago
        Unfortunately this is being ameliorated by us paying them hand over fist for their oil and gas.
  - Mountain_Skies 5y ago
    Russia borders something like sixteen different countries. They have to keep in mind all of those other avenues of potential attacks which might account for some amount of holding back.
synergyS 5y ago
It seems that Ukrainian S300 air defenses are still operational thus making air raids quite risky for Russians.
- trhway 5y ago
  Seems to be enough of the losses inflicted by MANPADs and "Strela". Beside naturally helicopters the planes are also shot down this way. Russia doesn't really have high-precision weapons, especially battlefield level ones, (i mean they have very small number of them and have already pretty much exhausted the stores) and thus the planes forced to come closer to dump their unguided bombs - FAB-250/500, ie. 500lbs and 1000lbs, the same like in Syria - to get any result. One can enjoy this official Russian TV glorifying report (a good link seems to be taken private https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrekdY2FgD0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrekdY2FgD0 so one can go here https://rutube.ru/video/4b400cbcfbbd6c1b730b5e80138fe598/ https://rutube.ru/video/4b400cbcfbbd6c1b730b5e80138fe598/ at the starting timestamp 24:40 and at 24:56 there is the plane's payload full frontal. These links are 2 different Russian official TV channels slightly different edits of the same propaganda scenario) on supposedly a "high-precision" strike carried out by a plane loaded only with unguided bombs (FAB-250) where they call those bombs "missiles of point-precision" and even show a video of supposed launch of a ground attack missile from that plane - a Russian propaganda miracle of an unguided bomb conversion to the missile while in flight :) The S-300 do seems to be working as Russian planes are forced to fly all the way over Ukraine to their targets at extremely small altitude.
fuoqi 5y ago
There are several main factors in my opinion: - The Ukrainian ground forces are saturated with MANPADs after 8 years of continuous pumping (to the point of untrained personnel getting them), which has significantly accelerated at the end of the last year. So the Russian Air Force can not operate easily on low-mid altitude far from their ground forces. - The remaining Ukrainian anti-air missile systems (like S-300, but there are also older ones) are heavily supported by NATO radar infrastructure in Poland, so it's risky for Russian planes to stay long on high altitudes. - The Kalibr missile is quite sufficient for striking stationary objects, so you don't need planes for those. It's hard to strike mobile forces, because they quickly get intelligence from NATO about planes in the area and thus able to hide in cities, thus making it hard for RAF to strike them (the Russian forces have enough firepower to level cities to the ground, but they have orders to minimize damage if possible). - Air supremacy is already achieved (almost all Ukrainian war planes and strike drones have been shot down), so it does not make much sense to patrol the air space too much, since operating a plane is far from being cheap.
- trhway 5y ago
  >thus able to hide in cities, thus making it hard for RAF to strike them (the Russian forces have enough firepower to level cities to the ground, but they have orders to minimize damage if possible). that is pure Russian propaganda. Most of the videos of destroyed armor in cities is Russian armor - i.e. it is Russian armor hides in cities (yet it doesn't help them against Molotov cocktails and RPG and high-precision strikes https://youtu.be/D5WoCUqNWIs?t=13 https://youtu.be/D5WoCUqNWIs?t=13). Russian airforce and artillery indiscriminately bomb and shell Ukrainian cities using unguided bombs and unguided missiles (from "Grad" and "Smerch" systems), and among the huge amount of videos of Ukrainian cities destruction by Russians there is no videos with Ukrainian armor inside destruction - ie. Russians attack residential areas without any Ukrainian hardware there. On March 5 Ukrainians shot down such a Su-34 when it was bombing Chernigov and captured the pilot. The pilot confessed to the order of bombing the city (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkszHkNoQNo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkszHkNoQNo, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWrxX_gpNjM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWrxX_gpNjM). That pilot has been doing similar unguided bombing of Aleppo 6 years ago (https://www.unian.net/war/bombil-mirnyy-gorod-letchika-so-sbitogo-v-chernigove-samoleta-rf-doprosili-video-novosti-donbassa-11730376.html https://www.unian.net/war/bombil-mirnyy-gorod-letchika-so-sb...) for which he was celebrated by Putin and Assad. Russian bombing of cities is done to force Ukrainians out. That is ethnical cleansing, a part of the announced by Putin destruction of Ukrainian ethnical and national identity. >Air supremacy is already achieved (almost all Ukrainian war planes and strike drones have been shot down), so it does not make much sense to patrol the air space too much. that just doesn't make sense, especially given how many Russian ground hardware is being lost to drone fire and to drone guided fire.
Giorgi 5y ago
I keep seeing all these "experts are perplexed" type of articles pop up everywhere on the internet, the West fails to understand that Russians are just incompetent, they have only few capable pilots and those are afraid of fly missions in the skies that are saturated with Stingers and various USSR era SAM batteries.
- arc-in-space 5y ago
  I think it's safer to assume the worst and have alternative explanations beyond mere incompetence
  - actionfromafar 5y ago
    Incompetence can be the worst scenario. "If all else fails, grind down civilian population with medieval siege and artillery."
- laichzeit0 5y ago
  Well... take a look at one of the pilots they shot down. This guy was apparently also flying missions in Syria. If this one guy's physical condition is any indication of the type of pilots Russia is putting in the field, they are seriously fucked. And before "propaganda", "fake news" etc. There are interviews with him after he was captured, while he's still got that bandage around his neck. It's actually a hilarious interview, basically he says he didn't know what he was doing there, didn't know he was bombing civilians and the Ukranian asks him if he didn't see the cars driving around, or if he thought they were driving themselves like Elon Musk wanted. [1] https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/russian-su-34-shot-down-pilot-captured-and-identified.6709689/ https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/russian-su-34-sho...
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    Where are some interviews with credible sources? Also, this person's life is in the hands of their captors; they will say whatever is most likley to keep them alive, including what their captors tell them to say. Generally, it's illegal to put POWs in that position. I verymuch support Ukrainians, their freedom, and their democratic government, but POW interviews are propaganda.
DeWilde 5y ago
Michael Kofman, an expert in Russian mil., claims that one of the reasons for this is that Russia's military doctrine accounts for cases where air supremacy or superiority cannot be achieved. Shelling a city with Grad and artillery is far cheaper.
belter 5y ago
Article with similar title, different content ( but published earlier ): "The Mysterious Case of the Missing Russian Air Force" https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/mysterious-case-missing-russian-air-force https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentar... and follow up under the same subject: "Is the Russian Air Force actually incapable of complex operations?" https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/world/is-the-russian-air-force-actually-incapable-of-complex-operations https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/world/is-the-russian-air-... "Russian and Chinese Combat Air Trends - [PDF]" https://static.rusi.org/russian_and_chinese_combat_air_trends_whr_final_web_version.pdf https://static.rusi.org/russian_and_chinese_combat_air_trend... It looks like the Oligarchs stole most of the money that should go for effective logistics. The Russian Air Force probably cannot supply enough spare parts. Military jets need hours of maintenance for each hour of flight.
ilaksh 5y ago
My theory is that originally they decided not to do a fast, comprehensive bombing/missile shock-and-awe campaign because even if it was aimed at military targets, it would be very easy to perceive (or describe) a comprehensive deployment like that as "carpet bombing", "brutal", etc. In other words, they were trying to avoid bad press and having the population immediately perceive them as being indiscriminate or blowing up their entire country etc. There would just be so many videos on TV and the internet of so many bombs and missiles. Its actually kind of like the discussion about LIDAR on Teslas. People always come up with these supposed scientific reasons that they decided not to use it. But the biggest reason was, it doesn't look good, or fit in at all with the sleek design of Teslas. Teslas would go from the sexiest car to the dorkiest overnight. Anyway, pretty rough analogy, but similarly, the Russians probably decided not to operate in the most effective way, deliberately, due to "optics".
- glogla 5y ago
  The Russians are murdering, kidnapping, looting and raping. The destroyed multiple cities. They deliberately target hospitals. They deliberately target refugees and journalists. Terror is their way. The claims they are trying to minimize damage are misguided.
  - ptidhomme 5y ago
    You know, there's information war on both sides, so all your assertions might have to be nuanced. And even if the facts are 100% true, it doesn't mean automatically that they want terror. They might just be helpless about it (doesn't excuse it of course).
    - glogla 5y ago
      I think Russian actions in Chechnya, Syria and Ukraine and USSR actions everywhere they went are very good proof they want terror. I mean how do you accidentally destroy maternity ward of a hospital? How likely is that to be an accident and opposed to deliberate terror bombing? And then there's the kidnapping of Ukrainian officials and replacing them with collaborants. That is deliberate terror tactics as well. Watching them in action makes me thing their approach didn't really change since their Katyn days. But I live in a place Russians visited in 1968 leaving in the 90's so you could say I'm biased.
phtrivier 5y ago
> There may be a lesson for nato. Russia’s initial failure to gain air superiority could be explained away by the Kremlin’s secrecy over the decision to go to war and a lack of planning time, says Mr Bronk. But in his view, the air force’s passivity could also reflect inexperience or incompetence. Where is the line between "objectively assessing an enemy's weaknesses" and "blatant wishfull thinking" ? While we're discussing how bad the russian air force is doing, cities are being bombed constantly, and the ukrainian governement is imploring for a no-fly zone that no one will enforce given it would mean engaging with, guess what, the air force. Oh, and starting a nuclear war at the same time. Maybe it's an operationnal failure on Russian's side - but if so, they carved themselves a situation where they can't really _lose_, even if they can't win quickly. Hopefully something will change the game - but I doubt "hoping for the other side to secretly be stupid" will cut it.
- raverbashing 5y ago
  > cities are being bombed constantly Yes but apparently not by the Air Force. Mostly by ground based missiles (and maybe some Ship based ones) The No-Fly zone won't fix these and will come at a significant cost.
  - Pelic4n 5y ago
    Enforcing the No-Fly zone actually means running SEAD missions to take care of those, including in russian territory. That's why it would bring WW3.
  - hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
    It is estimated that Russia performs 200 air raids a day - hence the relatively high number of aircraft shot down by the Ukrainians.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      And to add some more perspective: Desert Storm started off with > 1000 sorties / day.
  - 5y ago
NohatCoder 5y ago
Or maybe the lesson to learn is that modern military aircraft are simply not particularly useful weapons. Fighters are way too expensive relative to the cost of ground-based AA systems, while a combination of missile and shell-based artillery can do most bombing jobs way cheaper. In general modern military seems to be focused on delivering as much power as possible in a single unit, never bothering to ask if multiple lesser units could do a better job combined. And so we get destroyers and cruisers that look mighty, but can nevertheless be rendered inoperable, if not outright sunk, by a single torpedo.
- tim333 5y ago
  Or that they need to be stealth.
  - NohatCoder 5y ago
    That is even more expensive, with less payload capacity, trading every other quality for a gamble that the enemy does not posses decent radar systems.
    - tim333 5y ago
      I guess maybe drones are the way forward.
    - wolverine876 5y ago
      You understate the capabilities of stealth, at least according to any expert I've seen, but yes, like any measure and counter-measure, it is not flawless. Stealth is designed to work against the best radar and other detection systems. > less payload capacity Not much is needed with precision guided muntions (which the Russians don't seem to be using, if they have enough).
tim333 5y ago
In other news: >Pentagon says some Russian jets are avoiding Ukraine's airspace during sorties to avoid being shot down >The Pentagon believes Russia is flying about 200 sorties every day, although many never enter Ukrainian air space. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/pentagon-says-russian-jets-avoiding-224243670.html https://uk.news.yahoo.com/pentagon-says-russian-jets-avoidin... Can't say I blame them really.

92 points by cols 5y ago

the article reads like too much wishful thinking. I am from Ukraine originally and like most sane people I want this war to end ASAP with Russia's failure and Ukraine emerging stronger. But I do hope Western militaries are not counting on Russia's "incompetence and inexperience".

thematrixturtle 5y ago
I don't see much "wishful thinking" in the article? It points out a surprising fact (that Russia is not using the air power to the extent that everybody expected) and posits some possible explanations: intentionally holding back (but why?), inability to pre-emptively destroy Ukraine's air defences, lack of guided munitions, etc.
- gattilorenz 5y ago
  I haven't read this article, but a few days ago another article was explaining how Russian air tactics are different from the US ones, and how they see the air power in a war, which is something you're not considered in your explanations. The gist was that the US goes immediately for dominating the sky. Russia sees ground forces as the main engine of the army, and the Air Force only supports the advancement of ground forces near the border, without bombing far into enemy territory (which is a task for the army's missiles).
  - jazzyjackson 5y ago
    How do they expect their ground forces to advance when Turkish drones are allowed to circle overhead? Keeping control of the skies is not unique to US tactics...
    - gattilorenz 5y ago
      Tbh I have no idea, I'm no military expert. I could not find the source article I read, and I guess there's a non trivial chance it might even have been based on Russian propaganda... as usual, take everything with a grain of salt. I just find it hard (and reassuring) to imagine that Russia's army and air force are in such a terrible state.
      - zppln 5y ago
        No, you're right, there has been a difference in doctrine. The Russians put much more emphasis on SAMs traditionally, to enable their ground forces to operate even if they their airforce doesn't own the sky. That's why they have everything ranging fro Iglas to S-400s. They seem to have missed developing a good counter for the Bayraktars though. :)
      - rmbyrro 5y ago
        I don't find it hard to believe, but agree the safest option is to assume they're not incompetent and do our best to fight them off as if they were the best. Maybe that's what parent comment is concerned about when saying "I do hope Western militaries are not counting on Russia's 'incompetence and inexperience'"
  - sofixa 5y ago
    That wouldn't make sense though: First as a doctrine, it would be a stupid one - they tend to use paratroopers for surprise taking of advanced positions, and air support is vital to help them keep their position until reinforcements can arrive. Point in case, the failure at Hostomel. Their doctrine emphasises anti-air defenses because air superiority against a superior enemy ( NATO) isn't certain, but that doesn't mean the Air Force shouldn't be used at all, especially against an inferior enemy Second, they don't seem to be even doing that - there are small scale ( 1-2 planes) raids deep in Ukrainian territory, and neither their planes nor their SAMs can deal with the drones Ukraine fields, even over Russian held territory
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    I've read many times that the major Russian military reforms over the last decade or so - successful or not - included combined arms, including air and infantry.
atoav 5y ago
I think everybody has been surprised by just how bad Russia is doing. They have been overestimated by magnitudes, it seems. Their gear is in a much worse condition than anybody would have guessed, they have logistical problems all over the place etc. This is not a reason to relax, but one can certainly observe that.
- muro 5y ago
  They may have logistical problems, but they are also encircling/taking major cities, now with many more civilian casualties than early in the war. I would take the (sadly looks more like wishful thinking) incompetence over the current destruction.
  - raverbashing 5y ago
    Incompetent armies can still do damage But yeah let's hope they keep like that
    - kergonath 5y ago
      If the point is to take a country, competent armies minimise damage. Otherwise at the end you’re just king of the ruins and have trouble extracting all the resources you came for. Mass bombings is almost the bluntest last-resort weapon you can use. A bloodless coup followed by a (probably quite bloody) purge would have been the best outcome for the Russians.
  - atoav 5y ago
    > I would take the (sadly looks more like wishful thinking) incompetence over the current destruction. You get me wrong there. The current destruction is a result of the incompetence, not an alternative to it. If they were a well organized well maintained troup going full Blitzkrieg they would have overwhelmed the Ukrainian forces so fast they already would have taken the capital more than a week ago. This is what they intended to do. Now if they can't get forward because the majority of their transport can only happen on roads they are definitely in dire need of air superiority, because air superiority would keep the convoys safer. They started shelling civilian infrastructure because they want to break the unexpected fighting spirit and they have no other ways to do it. But this was definitly not what the leading heads in Russia would have preferred, they thought they would go in full Blitzkrieg and after 3 days the capital would have fallen due to overwhelming force.
sterlind 5y ago
one hypothesis from the article is that Russia is saving its good bombs for a bigger war, which is troubling. but by doing so they're wasting planes, right? it doesn't make sense to me.
- _kbh_ 5y ago
  they are also wasting a much more precious resource than planes, pilots.
  - jazzyjackson 5y ago
    And the most precious resource of all, the purchasing power of their own currency.
    - sprusemoose 5y ago
      energy?
      - atoav 5y ago
        I think the parent means that Russia's biggest income source is oil and gas. Now that he demonstrated to it's biggest customer (Europe) just how problematic this is, the demand is not going to go up. Other than in the US where russian Oil is like 3% of the used oil and russian gas is basically not used, in Europe no russian gas means cold houses and problems in the industry.
    - shmerl 5y ago
      That is already gone.
    - xdennis 5y ago
      Unfortunately this is being ameliorated by us paying them hand over fist for their oil and gas.
- Mountain_Skies 5y ago
  Russia borders something like sixteen different countries. They have to keep in mind all of those other avenues of potential attacks which might account for some amount of holding back.

synergyS 5y ago

It seems that Ukrainian S300 air defenses are still operational thus making air raids quite risky for Russians.

trhway 5y ago
Seems to be enough of the losses inflicted by MANPADs and "Strela". Beside naturally helicopters the planes are also shot down this way. Russia doesn't really have high-precision weapons, especially battlefield level ones, (i mean they have very small number of them and have already pretty much exhausted the stores) and thus the planes forced to come closer to dump their unguided bombs - FAB-250/500, ie. 500lbs and 1000lbs, the same like in Syria - to get any result. One can enjoy this official Russian TV glorifying report (a good link seems to be taken private https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrekdY2FgD0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrekdY2FgD0 so one can go here https://rutube.ru/video/4b400cbcfbbd6c1b730b5e80138fe598/ https://rutube.ru/video/4b400cbcfbbd6c1b730b5e80138fe598/ at the starting timestamp 24:40 and at 24:56 there is the plane's payload full frontal. These links are 2 different Russian official TV channels slightly different edits of the same propaganda scenario) on supposedly a "high-precision" strike carried out by a plane loaded only with unguided bombs (FAB-250) where they call those bombs "missiles of point-precision" and even show a video of supposed launch of a ground attack missile from that plane - a Russian propaganda miracle of an unguided bomb conversion to the missile while in flight :) The S-300 do seems to be working as Russian planes are forced to fly all the way over Ukraine to their targets at extremely small altitude.

fuoqi 5y ago

There are several main factors in my opinion: - The Ukrainian ground forces are saturated with MANPADs after 8 years of continuous pumping (to the point of untrained personnel getting them), which has significantly accelerated at the end of the last year. So the Russian Air Force can not operate easily on low-mid altitude far from their ground forces. - The remaining Ukrainian anti-air missile systems (like S-300, but there are also older ones) are heavily supported by NATO radar infrastructure in Poland, so it's risky for Russian planes to stay long on high altitudes. - The Kalibr missile is quite sufficient for striking stationary objects, so you don't need planes for those. It's hard to strike mobile forces, because they quickly get intelligence from NATO about planes in the area and thus able to hide in cities, thus making it hard for RAF to strike them (the Russian forces have enough firepower to level cities to the ground, but they have orders to minimize damage if possible). - Air supremacy is already achieved (almost all Ukrainian war planes and strike drones have been shot down), so it does not make much sense to patrol the air space too much, since operating a plane is far from being cheap.

trhway 5y ago
>thus able to hide in cities, thus making it hard for RAF to strike them (the Russian forces have enough firepower to level cities to the ground, but they have orders to minimize damage if possible). that is pure Russian propaganda. Most of the videos of destroyed armor in cities is Russian armor - i.e. it is Russian armor hides in cities (yet it doesn't help them against Molotov cocktails and RPG and high-precision strikes https://youtu.be/D5WoCUqNWIs?t=13 https://youtu.be/D5WoCUqNWIs?t=13). Russian airforce and artillery indiscriminately bomb and shell Ukrainian cities using unguided bombs and unguided missiles (from "Grad" and "Smerch" systems), and among the huge amount of videos of Ukrainian cities destruction by Russians there is no videos with Ukrainian armor inside destruction - ie. Russians attack residential areas without any Ukrainian hardware there. On March 5 Ukrainians shot down such a Su-34 when it was bombing Chernigov and captured the pilot. The pilot confessed to the order of bombing the city (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkszHkNoQNo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkszHkNoQNo, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWrxX_gpNjM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWrxX_gpNjM). That pilot has been doing similar unguided bombing of Aleppo 6 years ago (https://www.unian.net/war/bombil-mirnyy-gorod-letchika-so-sbitogo-v-chernigove-samoleta-rf-doprosili-video-novosti-donbassa-11730376.html https://www.unian.net/war/bombil-mirnyy-gorod-letchika-so-sb...) for which he was celebrated by Putin and Assad. Russian bombing of cities is done to force Ukrainians out. That is ethnical cleansing, a part of the announced by Putin destruction of Ukrainian ethnical and national identity. >Air supremacy is already achieved (almost all Ukrainian war planes and strike drones have been shot down), so it does not make much sense to patrol the air space too much. that just doesn't make sense, especially given how many Russian ground hardware is being lost to drone fire and to drone guided fire.

Giorgi 5y ago

I keep seeing all these "experts are perplexed" type of articles pop up everywhere on the internet, the West fails to understand that Russians are just incompetent, they have only few capable pilots and those are afraid of fly missions in the skies that are saturated with Stingers and various USSR era SAM batteries.

arc-in-space 5y ago
I think it's safer to assume the worst and have alternative explanations beyond mere incompetence
- actionfromafar 5y ago
  Incompetence can be the worst scenario. "If all else fails, grind down civilian population with medieval siege and artillery."
laichzeit0 5y ago
Well... take a look at one of the pilots they shot down. This guy was apparently also flying missions in Syria. If this one guy's physical condition is any indication of the type of pilots Russia is putting in the field, they are seriously fucked. And before "propaganda", "fake news" etc. There are interviews with him after he was captured, while he's still got that bandage around his neck. It's actually a hilarious interview, basically he says he didn't know what he was doing there, didn't know he was bombing civilians and the Ukranian asks him if he didn't see the cars driving around, or if he thought they were driving themselves like Elon Musk wanted. [1] https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/russian-su-34-shot-down-pilot-captured-and-identified.6709689/ https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/russian-su-34-sho...
- wolverine876 5y ago
  Where are some interviews with credible sources? Also, this person's life is in the hands of their captors; they will say whatever is most likley to keep them alive, including what their captors tell them to say. Generally, it's illegal to put POWs in that position. I verymuch support Ukrainians, their freedom, and their democratic government, but POW interviews are propaganda.

DeWilde 5y ago

Michael Kofman, an expert in Russian mil., claims that one of the reasons for this is that Russia's military doctrine accounts for cases where air supremacy or superiority cannot be achieved. Shelling a city with Grad and artillery is far cheaper.

belter 5y ago

Article with similar title, different content ( but published earlier ): "The Mysterious Case of the Missing Russian Air Force" https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/mysterious-case-missing-russian-air-force https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentar... and follow up under the same subject: "Is the Russian Air Force actually incapable of complex operations?" https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/world/is-the-russian-air-force-actually-incapable-of-complex-operations https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/world/is-the-russian-air-... "Russian and Chinese Combat Air Trends - [PDF]" https://static.rusi.org/russian_and_chinese_combat_air_trends_whr_final_web_version.pdf https://static.rusi.org/russian_and_chinese_combat_air_trend... It looks like the Oligarchs stole most of the money that should go for effective logistics. The Russian Air Force probably cannot supply enough spare parts. Military jets need hours of maintenance for each hour of flight.

ilaksh 5y ago

My theory is that originally they decided not to do a fast, comprehensive bombing/missile shock-and-awe campaign because even if it was aimed at military targets, it would be very easy to perceive (or describe) a comprehensive deployment like that as "carpet bombing", "brutal", etc. In other words, they were trying to avoid bad press and having the population immediately perceive them as being indiscriminate or blowing up their entire country etc. There would just be so many videos on TV and the internet of so many bombs and missiles. Its actually kind of like the discussion about LIDAR on Teslas. People always come up with these supposed scientific reasons that they decided not to use it. But the biggest reason was, it doesn't look good, or fit in at all with the sleek design of Teslas. Teslas would go from the sexiest car to the dorkiest overnight. Anyway, pretty rough analogy, but similarly, the Russians probably decided not to operate in the most effective way, deliberately, due to "optics".

glogla 5y ago
The Russians are murdering, kidnapping, looting and raping. The destroyed multiple cities. They deliberately target hospitals. They deliberately target refugees and journalists. Terror is their way. The claims they are trying to minimize damage are misguided.
- ptidhomme 5y ago
  You know, there's information war on both sides, so all your assertions might have to be nuanced. And even if the facts are 100% true, it doesn't mean automatically that they want terror. They might just be helpless about it (doesn't excuse it of course).
  - glogla 5y ago
    I think Russian actions in Chechnya, Syria and Ukraine and USSR actions everywhere they went are very good proof they want terror. I mean how do you accidentally destroy maternity ward of a hospital? How likely is that to be an accident and opposed to deliberate terror bombing? And then there's the kidnapping of Ukrainian officials and replacing them with collaborants. That is deliberate terror tactics as well. Watching them in action makes me thing their approach didn't really change since their Katyn days. But I live in a place Russians visited in 1968 leaving in the 90's so you could say I'm biased.

phtrivier 5y ago

> There may be a lesson for nato. Russia’s initial failure to gain air superiority could be explained away by the Kremlin’s secrecy over the decision to go to war and a lack of planning time, says Mr Bronk. But in his view, the air force’s passivity could also reflect inexperience or incompetence. Where is the line between "objectively assessing an enemy's weaknesses" and "blatant wishfull thinking" ? While we're discussing how bad the russian air force is doing, cities are being bombed constantly, and the ukrainian governement is imploring for a no-fly zone that no one will enforce given it would mean engaging with, guess what, the air force. Oh, and starting a nuclear war at the same time. Maybe it's an operationnal failure on Russian's side - but if so, they carved themselves a situation where they can't really _lose_, even if they can't win quickly. Hopefully something will change the game - but I doubt "hoping for the other side to secretly be stupid" will cut it.

raverbashing 5y ago
> cities are being bombed constantly Yes but apparently not by the Air Force. Mostly by ground based missiles (and maybe some Ship based ones) The No-Fly zone won't fix these and will come at a significant cost.
- Pelic4n 5y ago
  Enforcing the No-Fly zone actually means running SEAD missions to take care of those, including in russian territory. That's why it would bring WW3.
- hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
  It is estimated that Russia performs 200 air raids a day - hence the relatively high number of aircraft shot down by the Ukrainians.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    And to add some more perspective: Desert Storm started off with > 1000 sorties / day.
- 5y ago

NohatCoder 5y ago

Or maybe the lesson to learn is that modern military aircraft are simply not particularly useful weapons. Fighters are way too expensive relative to the cost of ground-based AA systems, while a combination of missile and shell-based artillery can do most bombing jobs way cheaper. In general modern military seems to be focused on delivering as much power as possible in a single unit, never bothering to ask if multiple lesser units could do a better job combined. And so we get destroyers and cruisers that look mighty, but can nevertheless be rendered inoperable, if not outright sunk, by a single torpedo.

tim333 5y ago
Or that they need to be stealth.
- NohatCoder 5y ago
  That is even more expensive, with less payload capacity, trading every other quality for a gamble that the enemy does not posses decent radar systems.
  - tim333 5y ago
    I guess maybe drones are the way forward.
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    You understate the capabilities of stealth, at least according to any expert I've seen, but yes, like any measure and counter-measure, it is not flawless. Stealth is designed to work against the best radar and other detection systems. > less payload capacity Not much is needed with precision guided muntions (which the Russians don't seem to be using, if they have enough).

tim333 5y ago

In other news: >Pentagon says some Russian jets are avoiding Ukraine's airspace during sorties to avoid being shot down >The Pentagon believes Russia is flying about 200 sorties every day, although many never enter Ukrainian air space. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/pentagon-says-russian-jets-avoiding-224243670.html https://uk.news.yahoo.com/pentagon-says-russian-jets-avoidin... Can't say I blame them really.