3 ms·

> On paper the Russian missile defense systems should be able to easily defeat 2 missiles like the neptune. Mokva air defence radar only looks one way. They m

> On paper the Russian missile defense systems should be able to easily defeat 2 missiles like the neptune. Mokva air defence radar only looks one way. They made it look away from the coast using a drone, and then launched missiles when it turned away from the coast — this is how I imagine it happened.

TulliusCicero 5y ago
> Mokva air defence radar only looks one way. That seems like a pretty big flaw, given how easy it could be to, y'know, attack from more than one direction at a time.
- sofixa 5y ago
  Indeed, which is why the Patriot air defence system the US has is a joke, and why some countries in NATO ( like Turkey) buy or keep the Russian equivalents (S-300/400).
fer 5y ago
Some sources say the Bayraktar were decoys, some others say that they actually took down the radars on the Moskva before they fired the missiles. But I have a hard time picturing the Moskva having trouble destroying a drone with the performance of a WWI-era plane. It also had two radars, MR-710 and MR-800, but I'm unable to find if they have differences in terms of target tracking and acquisition.
- giantrobot 5y ago
  While the Bayraktars don't have stellar maneuverability they are stealthy and relatively small. They also don't use radar for targeting. For a ship to have good defense against such drones the radar's software needs to understand a drone's signatures and the crews also need to be trained for the same. Given the Russian army's current level of performance and the Russian navy's...entire history, I don't have any trouble believing the Moskva was beguiled by a drone.
  - fer 5y ago
    Disclaimer: Armchair general. They have a small RCS, but they're slow as a dog, and signals at sea are significantly easier to interpret given that there's infinitely less spurious reflection and radio sources. Maybe the bad weather played a bigger role in that than I've seen accounted for. But even with detection at close range, any modern heat-seeking SAM should have absolutely no problem taking it down before it drops anything funny on target.
    - giantrobot 5y ago
      Search radars have to handle a lot of noise and signals from a number of sources. The radar systems need to be programmed to understand returns from different target types and their operators need to be trained to understand the readings. My point is based on the Russian navy's ignominious history it's unlikely their radars and operators have adequate capability to detect any aircraft or weapons that didn't exist in the 1970s when they were first designed. Additionally even if drones were detected the Moskva may not have been equipped with heat seeking munitions. Even if they had them, a drone at stand-off distance can easily be out of range of their targeting. The drones also only need to occupy the ship's attention long enough to distract it from the incoming anti-ship missiles. Even if the drones are shot down it's a small price to pay to disable or sink the Russia's biggest naval asset in the Black Sea. Finding things even in calm seas is hard. Aiming at those things is harder. Hitting those things with a fast moving thing is harder still. Poor equipment increases those difficulties as does poor crew capability. All of those combined makes for single use submarines.

TulliusCicero 5y ago

> Mokva air defence radar only looks one way. That seems like a pretty big flaw, given how easy it could be to, y'know, attack from more than one direction at a time.

sofixa 5y ago
Indeed, which is why the Patriot air defence system the US has is a joke, and why some countries in NATO ( like Turkey) buy or keep the Russian equivalents (S-300/400).

fer 5y ago

Some sources say the Bayraktar were decoys, some others say that they actually took down the radars on the Moskva before they fired the missiles. But I have a hard time picturing the Moskva having trouble destroying a drone with the performance of a WWI-era plane. It also had two radars, MR-710 and MR-800, but I'm unable to find if they have differences in terms of target tracking and acquisition.

giantrobot 5y ago
While the Bayraktars don't have stellar maneuverability they are stealthy and relatively small. They also don't use radar for targeting. For a ship to have good defense against such drones the radar's software needs to understand a drone's signatures and the crews also need to be trained for the same. Given the Russian army's current level of performance and the Russian navy's...entire history, I don't have any trouble believing the Moskva was beguiled by a drone.
- fer 5y ago
  Disclaimer: Armchair general. They have a small RCS, but they're slow as a dog, and signals at sea are significantly easier to interpret given that there's infinitely less spurious reflection and radio sources. Maybe the bad weather played a bigger role in that than I've seen accounted for. But even with detection at close range, any modern heat-seeking SAM should have absolutely no problem taking it down before it drops anything funny on target.
  - giantrobot 5y ago
    Search radars have to handle a lot of noise and signals from a number of sources. The radar systems need to be programmed to understand returns from different target types and their operators need to be trained to understand the readings. My point is based on the Russian navy's ignominious history it's unlikely their radars and operators have adequate capability to detect any aircraft or weapons that didn't exist in the 1970s when they were first designed. Additionally even if drones were detected the Moskva may not have been equipped with heat seeking munitions. Even if they had them, a drone at stand-off distance can easily be out of range of their targeting. The drones also only need to occupy the ship's attention long enough to distract it from the incoming anti-ship missiles. Even if the drones are shot down it's a small price to pay to disable or sink the Russia's biggest naval asset in the Black Sea. Finding things even in calm seas is hard. Aiming at those things is harder. Hitting those things with a fast moving thing is harder still. Poor equipment increases those difficulties as does poor crew capability. All of those combined makes for single use submarines.