The ability of the Su-24 to fly transonic on the deck in a low density integrated air defense environment means there are a lot of low level holes in radar coverage to lob a stick of glide bombs out of, at high speed, inside occupied Ukraine.
The PSU would be able to hit a number of just over 100 km Russian logistical targets with a 60 km low altitude penetration & JDAM-ER toss bomb attack profile.
The JDAM-ER is the result of a US-Australian cooperation agreement where in the Australians developed a glide kit for the Boeing JDAM five years ago that comes in several flavors & ranges.
It is unclear if the jet engine version of the JDAM-ER will be provided to the PSU.
4/8
If jet powered JDAM-ER was provided, PSU Su-24's don't have to enter occupied Ukrainian air space to kill Russian logistical targets.
160 nautical miles is ~296 km, just shy of the ATACMS 300km.
5/8
And if it wasn't.
The Russian Army should still worried about the Kerch Straits Bridge catching some JDAM-ER as they have GMLRS style microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) inertial measurement units (IMU) that let them ignore Russian GPS jamming.
This is one of the most logistically incompetent hot takes by any German journalist in the Russo-Ukrainian War.
95% getting through is a 5% loss rate per trip
95%(x) for 10 to 20 kills means x = 200 to 400 trucks on this route
10 trips means 40% total fleet loss - 80 to 160 trucks
1/
You can follow the 5% loss curve in this 500 unit fleet at 10 exposures in the graphic below.
A 40% fleet loss in 10 days from a 5% drone loss rate is logistical collapse for the Russian Army in occupied Ukraine.
Only some trying to get AfD eyeballs would say different.
2/
This leaves out the fact that the Russian Army doesn't use *ANY* mechanized logistical enabler like pallets, Truck D-rings, forklifts, or telehandlers.
Russian trucks are in the drone kill zones 3 times as long as a Western truck due to loading times.
"The DF-26 intermediate-range ballistic missile, with a range of approximately 4,000 to 5,000 kilometers, was specifically designed and publicly nicknamed by Chinese military analysts as the "Guam Killer.""
As laid out by warquants -dot- com, China is buying one million OWA drones to destroy all US/Taiwan/Taiwan allied military logistics from Guam to the China coast.
A quantity of one million "Shaheed plus" class OWA drones has quality all its own.
Homicide statistics since the early 1960s are not comparable to earlier periods because medical advances have turned many fatal injuries into survivable ones.
I'm tempted to say the difference between military flag ranks who are competent at 2026 peer to peer warfare, and those who are not, is the understanding and application of attritional loss curves to combat loss rates, electronic warfare and logistics.
The set of curves I had an AI produce for me above have been used for air warfare many times starting at the end of WW2, in the USSBS after WW2 and by many classic RAND airpower studies from the 1950's to 1980's.
2/
All post 9/11/2001 Western flag ranks are counter-insurgency (COIN) trained & experienced.
They have no gut feel at all to statistical attrition models at all.
These "COIN-head" flags may prove to be highly resistant to changing this. Which is required to deal with drones.
2/
The effectiveness of drones is directly affected by the electronic warfare competence of the drone users.
The fact that the US Army defenestrated every EW practitioner in the 2000's and has compete "EW virgins" as flag rank leadership means it will fail with mass casualties in its first major drone war combat.
1/3