80 seconds is neither consistent with a computer controlled electronic countermeasures system nor with Russian friendly fire incident as Buk, S-300, S-350, and S-400 missile travel to between Mach 6.7 to Mach 7 within their engagement envelope.
2/
We saw flares in the video, but it is certain that radar chaff was also released, but was unseen in the dark.
As a 5V28 missile of the S-200/SA-5 has a radar signature rivaling a Mig-25 Foxbat.
This extended A-50 countermeasures release _is_ consistent with a S-200 3/
...engagement with radar warning receiver blaring at a VKS pilot that a 5N62M SQUARE PAIR was in its initial fine tracking to get accurate range and angle for a Mach 3 missile at over 250 km.
4/
The A-50 crew would start toggling expendable countermeasures when SQUARE PAIR radar dropped range finding modulation into pure 'monochromatic' carrier wave illumination.
The full S-200 engagement sequence is at the link ⬇️
By way of comparison, the Late Cold War era EF-111A Ravens and EA-6B Prowler's had the S-200/SA-5's measure during Operation El Dorado Canyon in 1986.
Could there be something else going on here?
8/
Air Power Australia reported that the S-200 was exported to Belarus, Uzbekistan, Bulgaria, the Ukraine, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, India, North Korea, Libya, Syria, and more recently Iran.
...were available for the S-300PMU2 Favorit / SA-20 Gargoyle & S-400 Triumf / SA-21 to control the S-200 Vega/SA-5 Gammon and its 5N62 Square Pair engagement radar so the latter would only illuminate/update the 5V28 missile.
See⬇️
11/
Given that Ukraine has been provided Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) Battle Command System (IBCS) Engagement Operations Center (EOC) from the USA.
It's likely IAMD was plugged into the SQUARE PAIR for an illumination/uplink only kill.
One the DCMA quality inspectors on my team worked at an EMALS contractor in Texas.
I can't say more than the Chinese tested their EMALS at subsystem level (unlike the USN) with the knowledge the four catapults needed to be independent of each other for operations,
...based on how the USN f--ked up their EMALS design.
That is, when any single EMALS catapult on the Ford class goes down for any reason. They all can't be used.
2/5
As strategypage dot com put it in 2019:
"EMALS proved less reliable than the older steam catapult, more labor intensive to operate, put more stress on launched aircraft than expected and due to a basic design flaw if one EMALS catapult becomes inoperable,
3/5
While much has been said about US targeting support for these past Ukrainian oil strikes, and future Tomahawk strikes, much of this appears to be "role inflation" and grandstanding by Deep State parties briefing US media.
The inability of Western elites to understand how Putin regime reflexive control propaganda locks everyone there into "WW2 Russian exceptionalism" just boggles the mind.
The Putin Regime lives in a George Orwell 1984-like present, with no past or future.
and in September, 1,202 KIA and 649 WIA, i.e. 1.85:1.
These numbers strongly exceed any previous campaigns dating back to the Crimean War, and do not include non-combat deaths due to disease or exposure."
2/3
Late 20th Century combat saw one dead for every four wounded.
Russia is suffering between one and 3/4 to one to something like one and 4/5ths to one killed to wounded at Povrovsk.
Gosh, remember all those 2023 US Navalist accounts that denied - DENIED, I tell you - that drones from containerships would ever, ever, be a threat and that I personally was delusional for saying so publicly.
One in every five US Naval vessels are defenseless to Chinese drones, surprise launched from Chinese merchant & fishing vessels, because the
every CNO since 1989 didn't want USN logistical officers to get a captaincy and compete for flag ranks.
Instead of dealing with reality, the USN flags send out minions on X to say "de-lu-lu" things like this⬇️
Because the USN Flags from the Aviation, Surface and Sub communities don't want to have logistical officers get flag ranks and spotlight their professional delusions🤮🤮 3/3
The missile is currently active aboard Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers, Nimitz-class aircraft carriers, Wasp-class amphibious assault ships, America-class amphibious assault ships, San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ships,
2/3
Whidbey Island-class dock landing ships, Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ships, and littoral combat ships (LCS).[6]"
This was a US Navy procurement disaster in the age of drones.
3/3