The cries for western air defenses around Ukrainian population centers will become much louder after today. Cruise missiles are a challenge though even for modern western air defense systems and if certain developments occur (more on this today), Patriot will be needed...
As we have said for months, regardless of the Kerch Bridge attack, Russia moving to outright widespread 'vengeance weapon'-like attacks on population centers seemed very likely/inevitable.
But people misunderstand what air defenses can and cannot do. They are not an impenetrable shield and must be layered for a greater degree of protection against diverse threats, especially at once. But if Russia will move to break the will of the people via long-range barrages...
(attempt to), and IF they can actually get their hands on the stocks of standoff weapons needed to realize such a sustained operation (they are running low), the western air defense issue will enter a new phase. What's key to remember...
That any system, even ones that can be handed over out of existing inventories, will take months of training for Ukrainian crews and even then they will be major targets themselves once they do arrive. This is a very complex topic, but one that will morph now, there is no doubt.
And yes, US/NATO crews could set up air defense umbrellas around major target areas within days, but that would mean NATO would have to officially enter the conflict. Key is to start training now, regardless if you send the equipment or not in the end...
just as I made the case for on April 2nd when it comes to providing fighter jets to Ukraine: thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4…
One final thing that keeps coming up/asked: Point defenses, like short-range air defense systems (SHORADs) are good at protecting key targets and their immediate surroundings and can operate more independently, they are NOT capable of area air defense...
What this means is that you need to install even a rudimentary integrated air defense system around something like a city, with multiple batteries covering overlapping areas (such as NASAMs) to achieve any kind of a robust area air defense capability...
The Patriot has longer range and anti-ballistic missile capability, but also has some limitations, especially over more distributed systems, and the BM defense coverage is more geographically constrained than its standard counter-air capabilities against air-breathing threats.
As you can see, its not about just shoving in some SAMs and calling it good. Very intricate and resource-intensive problem to solve.
Thanks for reading as always.
Thanks for reading as always.
Oh yes, and really, without a netted/airborne/look-down radar, cruise missiles and slow-flying drones are a challenge, while NASAMS is pretty capable against cruise missiles, the issue is more about early detection/targeting than about post-detection engagement.
This is a common problem for the most well-funded militaries anywhere, including protecting the US homeland. Israel is farthest ahead in this regard right now.
One of our many stories on the cruise missile/drone defense topic specifically about the need for netted look-down sensor capabilities: thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4…
Just an idea of what it takes to protect Washington DC and it's still an imperfect science. Also not a war zone where Russia is fully active militarily: thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3…
Finally, I will leave you with this one. Important reading to better understand these issues: thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2…
From a few years back, some dated info, but the general idea: thedrive.com/the-war-zone/1…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
