3 ms·

Most of russian launched missiles are either airborne or launched from ships in Black Sea or Kasipan Sea. Also a bunch of iranian drones. The "only" land missi

Most of russian launched missiles are either airborne or launched from ships in Black Sea or Kasipan Sea. Also a bunch of iranian drones. The "only" land missile batteries in russian is S300 in Belgorode area that shoot at Kharkiv direction.

jeffbee 4y ago
That only tangentially answered the specific form of the question. Why not equip Ukraine with anti-aircraft weapons that can threaten aircraft over Russia or anti-ship weapons that can harass targets in the Black Sea?
- simplyaccont 4y ago
  they shoot missiles from strategic bombers from hundreds miles away. caspian sea is even further (like thousand miles). Anti-aircraft systems or anti-ship "coast defence" systems do not work at those distances. Ukraine did bomb strategic bombers air-base that is around 350miles away, a couple of times recently, what made them relocate planes further away.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > That only tangentially answered the specific form of the question. Why not equip Ukraine with anti-aircraft weapons that can threaten aircraft over Russia Russian ALCMs have ranges of over 1,000 miles, and are launched from bombers that fly from bases hundreds of miles from Ukraine. There are no surface-to-air missiles that can shoot them down in flight from Ukraine. Ukraine is attacking the bombers on the ground with their own Tu-141 drones converted to cruise missiles. The only thing that can practically be shot down in flight (short of a sufficient air combat capability to challenge control of airspace over Russia, which isn’t happening short of a general war with the West, sending equipment to Ukraine won’t do it) are the missiles themselves, which is why Ukraine is being supplied systems like Patriot and NASAMS. > or anti-ship weapons that can harass targets in the Black Sea? Ukraine’s domestically-developed land-launched Neptune missile has longer range to the US’s longest-range dedicated anti-shipping that currently have a surface launch system, and only slightly shorter range than the ATACMS, which isn’t AFAIK, designed for anti-shipping use but might be pressed into such use, or the LRASM, which is currently only integrated with certain US air platforms. The only thing the US might be able to transfer that would provide this coverage is the just-introduced Maritime Strike Tomahawk, which I gather there are very limited numbers of in US service.

jeffbee 4y ago

That only tangentially answered the specific form of the question. Why not equip Ukraine with anti-aircraft weapons that can threaten aircraft over Russia or anti-ship weapons that can harass targets in the Black Sea?

simplyaccont 4y ago
they shoot missiles from strategic bombers from hundreds miles away. caspian sea is even further (like thousand miles). Anti-aircraft systems or anti-ship "coast defence" systems do not work at those distances. Ukraine did bomb strategic bombers air-base that is around 350miles away, a couple of times recently, what made them relocate planes further away.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> That only tangentially answered the specific form of the question. Why not equip Ukraine with anti-aircraft weapons that can threaten aircraft over Russia Russian ALCMs have ranges of over 1,000 miles, and are launched from bombers that fly from bases hundreds of miles from Ukraine. There are no surface-to-air missiles that can shoot them down in flight from Ukraine. Ukraine is attacking the bombers on the ground with their own Tu-141 drones converted to cruise missiles. The only thing that can practically be shot down in flight (short of a sufficient air combat capability to challenge control of airspace over Russia, which isn’t happening short of a general war with the West, sending equipment to Ukraine won’t do it) are the missiles themselves, which is why Ukraine is being supplied systems like Patriot and NASAMS. > or anti-ship weapons that can harass targets in the Black Sea? Ukraine’s domestically-developed land-launched Neptune missile has longer range to the US’s longest-range dedicated anti-shipping that currently have a surface launch system, and only slightly shorter range than the ATACMS, which isn’t AFAIK, designed for anti-shipping use but might be pressed into such use, or the LRASM, which is currently only integrated with certain US air platforms. The only thing the US might be able to transfer that would provide this coverage is the just-introduced Maritime Strike Tomahawk, which I gather there are very limited numbers of in US service.