The Ukrainian air force has reportedly used a missile, believed to be a British-supplied Storm Shadow, to destroy a Russian naval vessel in the Crimean port town of Feodosia.

Commander Mykola Oleshchuk of the Ukrainian air force announced the strike on Feodosia, leading to the destruction of the Russian Navy’s Novocherkask ship.

In his statement on Telegram, Oleshchuk said, “And the fleet in Russia is getting smaller and smaller!”

Grant Shapps, UK Defence Secretary, tweeted:

“This latest destruction of Putin’s navy demonstrates that those who believe there’s a stalemate in the Ukraine war are wrong! They haven’t noticed that over the past 4 months 20% of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet has been destroyed. Russia’s dominance in the Black Sea is now challenged and the new UK & Norway led Maritime Capability Coalition is helping to ensure Ukraine will win at sea.”

The Russian Ministry of Defense stated that the missiles fired by the jets were Storm Shadow cruise missiles, with reference to ‘BROACH’ warheads, something later confirmed on Ukrainian Telegram channels. They also claimed to have shot down two Ukrainian jets, a statement that has been denied by Ukraine.

Sergei Aksyonov, the Russian-appointed governor of Crimea, reported on the human toll of the airstrike: “one person has been killed and two injured.” He further stated, “All relevant emergency services are on site”.

Visual evidence of the attack, including footage of explosions and fires, was shared on multiple news outlets.

Crimea’s strategic value in the Black Sea region has been a focal point since its annexation by Russia in 2014, an action met with international condemnation. Ukraine, under President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has expressed a clear intent to regain control over Crimea, especially in light of recent advancements by Ukrainian forces.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

132 COMMENTS

  2. Would love to know the relative results of StormShadow strikes as compared to the much hyped Kinzhal. (Much hyped by Putin anyway). SS has certainly been a thorn in the side to the Russians.

    • Don’t think the Russians have shot down a storm shadow yet. And as for the Russians saying it only got damaged is a slight misrepresentation of the truth according to the photo now circulating of around 4 ft of the masts above water

        • I mean technically for once that isn’t untrue. Ukraine has had to stop its offensives due to the US delaying its aid and Russia has capitalises on it and has advanced across the front line, advances measured in mere meters but still.

    • The much feared S400 has apparently been virtually impotent against Storm Shadow, as it cruised merrily into it’s engagement zone totally unnoticed and punched a hole right through it’s target.

      • If you have deployed your assets correctly, S400 should be used to take down the Launch Aircraft, when SS are let loose Pantsir would be better suited for them.

        • The problem is Paul, if they moved an S400 system forward, it would rapidly be picked up and geo location by NATO assets, it’s position reported to Ukraine and it would become a key target.

          • Ukrainian special forces have done a number of commando raids on the Crimean coastline. Specifically targeting first a S400 battery. Then the replacement S300 unit.

            This air defence gap allowed a previous Storm Shadow attack on Sevastopol. Taking out the Minsk and Rostov on Don.

          • If I was guessing Ukraine will be thinking very carefully how many Storm Shadows to hold back so that they can be used in conjunction with the F16s to mash up the high value targets.

            I do see that with F16 (with laser guided munitions) and a dribble of Storm Shadow Ukraine will control the air domain.

            Russia has a very limited number of S400 systems and a good number have already been mashed up.

        • Pantsir was unable to lock on to storm shadow as well despite having a partial track on it. SS likely has counter measures we are unaware of.

    • The Kinzhal accuracy seems to be pretty poor. It hits in the general vicinity of a target within a range of 1-2 miles as far as OSINT sources can tell. Also Kinzhal is not very stealthy and has been successfully detected, tracked and intercepted by the US patriot systems.

      • Just found a EurAsian Times (Pro China Indian paper, no idea why it thinks I want to read it) explaining, in no uncertain terms, why it is physically impossible for a Patriot to intercept a Kinzhal (something about nonexistent target points). The whole article is pseudoscience but funny nevertheless.

        • Something something about it can move in flight so is unpredictable as it’s moving around the sky. Don’t believe it is invincible or does what it’s been advertised to do.
          It’s an iskander strapped to a mig31, developed in soviet times.

          • I would think those in-flight movements if they’re possible would be pre programed and not reactive. So fairly ineffective. Probably used in the terminal phase as they approach a target but Patriots are able to intercept them way before this.

  3. The Ukrainians certainly put storm shadow and scalp to good use,I know they do not have loads of them and we could not give many due to cost etc, but they do use them well with some good results.For a country with no navy they sure have done some effective damage to the black sea fleet

    • “I know they do not have loads of them and we could not give many due to cost etc, but they do use them well with some good results.”

      This is frustrating. The Ukrainians are making good use of what are relatively old missiles for us. We’ve been happy to ‘gap’ capability due to finances so why not drop down in reserves for something that is providing tangible results. Its existential for Ukraine but not exactly against our own interests and why we have the things in the first place.

        • Do we actually know how many of these have been given by either France or the UK? I’ve not seen any real numbers, just speculation.

          We don’t even know for sure how many each country had before, though I suspect it was a fair number (combined, about 1500?) and, given the good use Ukraine is making of them, both countries should donate more.

        • The French seem to be playing the long game by not sending too much stuff so as not to annoy Ivan if peace ever breaks out. Typical and they call us Perfidious Albion. Do they call that Transference?

      • Which is why accelerating the replacement program became a priority from being on the back burner.

        I would be unsurprised if the subsonic version became available sooner.

        This maybe at the expense of upgrading existing SS – just thinking how the money shuffle might work as that upgrade has a budget line.

        Also going into a new missile production keeps the same pairs of hands busy. So no skill losses.

        I don’t think you could easily make new SS as some of the components are NLA. Maybe this was addressed in the midlife upgrade program?

    • We should be donating more, just as long as the production of replacement SS can be done. Are the production lines still open? If yes, then an order of a thousand more would seem sensible. If production line not open, can it be reopened?

      • Us ordering hundreds more SS would also send a clear message to Russia. At the moment, Russia seems to be taking great comfort from the antics of US Republican party. Ronald Reagan must be spinning in his grave.

        • It’s incredibly odd that party of Reagan is so soft on Russia now. The old GOP establishment seemed have a better grasp of what was in America’s interest and what the nation’s ideals were.

          • They were tough on the USSR because it was an ideological rival.

            Russia is very Christian, nationalistic and corrupt ie a Republican dream model for the USA, particularly Trump who seems to see himself as a Putin style President for life. It is his supporters an clones who are blocking aid.

            They also signed the USA up for the Afghanistan pull out.

          • The US is hardly being soft on Russia, they have donated huge volumes of money and weapons. The issue is Israel, the republicans are trying to make the Democrats look bad by blocking aid and support for the 2 countries has got interwined. Let’s hope they manage to split the topics and restart the aid as the rest of the west is following their lead and it means Ukraine is currently at serious risk of having to conserve its ammo to a point of losing large areas of territory.

        • Behaving disgracefully and it wont be forgotten either nor it should be. Discrediting their country as effectively as Biden running from Afghanistan. Sad.

      • It was a one-off buy that ended years ago so we can’t easily make more.

        The replacement, Angl0-French (now plus Italy) Future Cruise / Anti-Ship Weapon is supposed to start production in 2025 with deliveries in 2028 – not long to re-start Storm Shadow production but a substantial gap. What we could do to bridge that gap in the event of giving a lot of missiles to Ukraine is a tricky one.

      • The problem with stockpiling munitions is the shelf life. SS can be stored for 12 years after which it is scrapped. The more sophisticated the missile, generally the shorter the shelf life.
        The only answer is continued low rate production that could be expanded reasonably quickly.

  4. This is a good result for UkR, especially as the size of the explosion suggests that this ship was carrying munitions and was struck before they could be offloaded. It seems that Storm Shadow has again proved it’s worth. There are pics now online on YouTube channels which show that the ship has now sunk and is in three pieces.

    Looking to 2024, it would seem that UkR needs a way to quickly break through the extensive minefields that held up their counter-offensive this year.

    • Answers on a postcard to that one. Ukraine may be thinking a more practical advance might be into Crimean from a bridgehead across the Dnipro near Kherson. We have given them a number of Vikings and inflatable raiders.

      • Problem is, all the Ukrainian artillery support is on the left bank of Dnipro,if they advance from the krnky bridgehead they leave that support behind. Ukraine would have get lots of heavy equipment to the east bank, but currently everything they have is needed to hold the front lines.

        • You are right enough there. The bridgehead does push the Russian artillery further away from Kherson I suppose. Ukraine is on the back foot now. Russia has taken Mariinka and is encircling Adviivka. The arrival of the F-16s will help in the short term, but those will likely be used to improve the cities air defences against drones and air launched cruise missiles rather than to support any Ukrainian advance. I read somewhere that the Russians have closed some technology gaps; they have learned to make and use precision guided bombs and to jam the small Ukrainian drones. Our best hope for 2024 might be girl power; the mothers and wives of Russia may take on Putin.

    • Novocherkassk was damaged by a missile strike in March 2022 at the same time as the sinking of the Saratov. Subsequently it was reported out of action along with sister ship Caesar Kunikov due to lack of spare parts. If it was carrying munitions, I suppose they must have got around to fixing it. It doesn’t sound like it will be an easy patch up this time!

    • Where’s Johnski from Milton Keynes, then the Faroe islands , reality being Moscow, when you need him?
      He would kindly explain the ship wasn’t hit and hasn’t been destroyed and the fire was just the crew lighting a honking big bonfire to celebrate Christmas and the sight of munitions exploding is just firecrackers and fireworks being let off.

      • He will be hanging around with Alex Salmond, the leader of the Alba party in Scotland. After winning his sexual assault case in the Scottish courts, Salmond immediately decamped to Moscow, where he learned Russian.

        Salmond then worked for the (official) Russian television station RT for several years, producing anti-British pro “independence” programming

        • Latest satellite images show a warehouse missing, damage to other buildings, another ship missing that was near by. Just some old training ship.
          Those 500,000+ Russians that moved to crimea since 2014 must be having second thoughts.

      • Russians don’t celebrate Christmas on the same day as us, so do you Johnski could lie that much?

        There are porkers and then Johnski, but even so…

    • It was carrying Iranian suicide drones pre loaded with explosives. Several hundred apparently. This attack should therefore have a beneficial effect on the frontline, reducing suicide drone activity.

  5. Could the Sampson radar on Portsdown Hill be used in the defence of Portsmouth Harbour? It does seem very vulnerable now.

    • That radar was used for the development of Sampson and is owned by Qinetiq rather than the Navy (check Google maps). Agree, its high position probably allows it to see everything that floats in the Solent and probably nearly to France. I spend time around the Solent and the sheer quantity of clutter produced would make spitting even an enormous Russian missile near-impossible.

      • Yes, the site itself is ( I think ) the LBTS “Land Based Test Site” which is owned by the MoD and the site includes parts of the MWC who are next door.

        So I too had often hoped it could, if it came to it, be utilized in some way?

    • The simple answer is yes. Its primary use is training. But it is also used to validate software updates before loading onto the ships.

      It has along with the ship’s CMS and S1850M sited there, full functionality. The only thing missing are the Sylver silos for Aster (and soon to be CAMM). There could be a cheap fix for that though. Which is via data-link control from Portsdown to a moored T45.

      Portsdown is 130m higher than Portsmouth and the Sampson tower is some 30m higher still. This gives a radar horizon of 52km (32 miles). A significant advantage over a ship moored in Portsmouth, that has its viewed blocked by Portsmouth and Gosport.

      However, practically this may actually preclude launching from the harbour, due to height of the surrounding buildings. Though the CMS can be programmed with safe launch lanes. It may be easier in this respect, to give Portsdown its own Sylver/Mk41/CAMM farm.

      Though we are still therefore considering using air defence missiles to be used over heavily populated built up areas. Which is not only a political decision but also a moral one!

    • Why is it more vulnerable now? If it’s cause Ukraine used U.K. weapons the Russians have a cheek moaning. Imagine the west protesting about Soviet/ Russian weapons used against them. The list would be massive.
      I doubt a Russian ship could get close enough undetected.

  6. I really hope we are learning lessons here and making sure our primary bases have the necessary air defences in place.

    in the unlikely event we are attacked, it really is relatively easy to take out the majority of our military given the reduction in bases.

    nothing wrong with consolidation, as long as these super bases are protected with iron dome, thaads or similar, which I doubt they are.

    • Totally Pacman, the UK is too slow with its GBAD. Where the hell’s all the land based CAMM, in a car park lot somewhere?!

      • In a car park?
        All with 16 Regt RA, Thorney Island. The Regt deploy on orders to provide GBAD for a deployed force. It is not used to protect installations in the UK.

        • Evening Graham, I was trying to be sarcastic. They should also be part of some default GBAD/CAMM network protecting the very ports, bases, airfields, and infrastructure of the UK. Dual purpose.

          • I can’t see HMG taking the threat seriously – they probably consider the presence of the nuclear deterrent will deter such attacks.

    • Sadly I am sure that is not the case. MPA in the Falklands is protected by RA-manned GBAD, Land Ceptor, which replaced Rapier.
      I can’t think of any other established bases (Joint, RN/RM, Army or RAF) in the UK or overseas that are permanently protected by GBAD.

      • Maybe the next thing is more a mobile anti air/drone like a Boxer based Sky guard, cannon and Starstreak to replace the Stormer and to complement the Sky Sabre?

        • Is it time to replace HVM Starstreak? The army has the latest A5 (5th Gen) missile.
          But the Stormer chassis may be pensioned off soon as per other CVR(T) variants. So maybe you are right. Boxer is hugely bigger and very expensive though.

      • Truly unfortunate that repeated missile attacks on UKR population centers have not provoked serious consideration of GBAD in various European capitals. Obviously, few in positions of influence w/in the UK have absorbed the historical lessons of the bombing of Coventry or the London Blitz (or the V1 and V2 campaigns), but surely some in Germany remember the Allied air campaign of 1942-1945, including the fire-bombing of Dresden? Wonder whether politicians truly believe wars will be waged more humanely in the future?!? 🤔😳

      • Maybe we can get an update on the UK GBAD in the new year? Daniele did mention previously that there is something going on behind scenes which will hopefully manifest sometime.

    • Not many, crucially not many left in the Black Sea. By my reckoning just 2 large amphibious ships out of an initial 5 ship flotilla.
      At the start of the Ukraine war it was estimated the Russians could lift and land circa 6000 troops and 100-200 armoured vehicles as an amphibious assault using those units in the Black sea at the time war began.
      Now the Russians are decidedly weakened and the amphibious forces are not going to be a viable capability soon.

      • The early Russian naval threats were an amphibious assault on Odesa, sub launched cruise missiles and interruption of the grain traffic. Ukraine has worked hard and inventively to neutralise all of these. Interesting that the landing ship was not in Sevastopol; it was being used to transport drones, presumably to be launched from Crimea. Good intel for the strike. SS can target a stationary ship with GPS. But it think I recall reading somewhere that SS may also be fitted with an IR image seeker. Either way, good result.

        • Hi Paul, Storm Shadow is a purely passive missile, until it gets its SPEAR CAP 4 upgrade, with its datalink upgrade. It uses target recognition software, that is fed imagery information from an infrared seeker. This compares what the seeker sees against library imagery of the target.

          The combined inertia navigation and GPS, is literally used for navigation to get it to the target area. If the missile gets to the target location but the software cannot confirm the target’s imagery. The missile will abort the attack, fly off to a safe area and self-destruct.

          Storm Shadow is so accurate, that a following missile will fly in to the hole made by a previous missile.

          • Cheers for the Info DaveyB but now you’ve made me think iSS Actually has more utility on mobile unit that we give it credit. If it requires visual cues too and you only
            need to tell it to get close and it finds a suitable imagery target 750Meters would it still attack if it does we’ve all been under estimating it

          • I’d be very surprised if following its use in Ukraine. This is not seriously looked at. I know SPEAR 4 was replacing obsolescent components to extend its service life. Along with increasing range and giving it a two way data-link, so it can be reprogrammed once released.

            But having a low observable missile that can punch through a ship’s structure and straight through its bottom. Is something that cannot be overlooked. MBDA already produce an imaging infrared guided anti-ship missile with the Sea Venom. How difficult would it be to include its targeting software in Storm Shadow. If Storm Shadow uses a targeting recognition library to make sure it recognizes its designated target and this is used on stationary ships. Then why can’t it be used against ships under steam?

  8. There are lessons to be learned about the vulnerability of naval vessels, especially those alongside in port, from such weapon systems. A country, essentially without a Navy, has damaged or destroyed 20% of an opposing large Fleet.

    • Agree USVs and cruise missile strikes against docked naval vessels and subs have torn the heart out of the Russian black sea fleet reducing it down to almost insignificance.
      Serious lessons for the MOD to learn from.

    • 21st century pearl harbour with threat being missiles launched from subs lurking in the Hebrides and the Western Approaches. Lossie, faslane, Plymouth Portsmouth et al all highly vulnerable.

      • Russia does not have the capability to attack the UK mainland. Not in the way you described. Plus. Russia has nothing to gain from declaring war on NATO. It can’t even invade its neighbour. And it certainly wouldn’t try and attack a nation with an independent nuclear deterrent. That’s the best protection we have available. That’s why we have it. It’s doing its job every single day.

  9. These strikes highlight a few really important points that you’d think the MOD would capitalise on.
    1) storm shadow is very effective and the RAF/FAA should be maximising the numbers in service and generating a war reserve
    2) dockyards and docked ships are vulnerable. In reality a ship in dock rarely moves and is therefore able to be precisely targeted
    3) anything the RN can do to rotate shipyards used or better yet repair and replenish ships at sea and in a mobile state is going to be vitally important in a war. Ergo a replacement (or 2) for RFA Diligence, ensuring floating docks are available and when a naval dockyard has to be used then that dockyard has layered air defences and a guarding military force that is alert to the danger.
    The UK mainland definitely needs much better GBADs.

    • Russian black sea fleet down to 3 frigates, 2 Ropucha class type 1, landing ships, 1 Ropucha class type 2 landing ship and 2 Alligator class landing ships.
      Another corvette and frigate were allowed to transit through into the Med but are are militarily insignificant and massively overmatched by NATO forces.

    • AFAIK, the UK essentially has no GBADs at all. 16 Regt RA (Thorney Island) is the only Uk-based unit with land based GBAD – they deploy on orders to protect a deployed force. Their kit is not used to protect UK installations, bases, airfields etc.

      • Correct. 12 RA is also located at Baker Barracks, they too deploy with the field army.
        I would support money spent to give us a home based GBAD capability, but what is cancelled to pay for it?

        • Next years pension increase should cover it. Pension credit should increase as it’s poorer households that receive that.
          Ask for donations from large profitable companies or make sure they pay tax due.
          Off licence alcohol tax increase.
          Legalise cannabis and tax.
          Lots of options.

        • Difficult to know what bits of the UK to protect by GBAD. I bet HMG doesn’t see that there is a serious threat, so I doubt any money will go to this ‘project’ – their rationale is probably that the nuclear deterrent will ensure that the UK homeland will not be attacked by missile/drone – and RAF will take care of attack by enemy aircraft.

          Also, what do other nations do? US and USSR had ABMs to protect just Washington DC and Moscow, but it was never comprehensive, some doubted its effectiveness and I don’t think they are in service now.
          Israel is a different and special case – they can justify GBAD/SAM including Iron Dome.

          • Agree. We’ve made lists of locations on here before and it is comprehensive.

            Unsure of other nations, but I’ve studied the old Soviet Voyska PVO at length, the Russians went to extreme lengths to counter SAC, which went towards bankrupting them.

            But they had a genuine threat to counter. Til recently, we have not, and as you know, are expeditionary.

          • Believe there are approximately 44 interceptors on alert between Ft. Greeley, AL and Vandenberg AFB, CA for GBAD of CONUS. P(k) for one interceptor judged to be 56%, salvo of four 98+%. Obviously, an insufficient quantity to defeat a major attack. Deployment of USN Aegis ABM assets and existing THAAD units probably a direct function of warning time afforded.

    • StormShadow is being upgraded under the SPEAR 4 project. (Selective Precision Affects at Range capability 4) Longer range, loitering capability, retageted in flight capability, greater accuracy and survivability. These will then be replaced with the FC/ASW at the end of the decade.

    • We have the best defence available. An independent nuclear deterrent. Knobody is going to get in a position to fire conventional weapons at Portsmouth Plymouth or any other UK military or civilian installation. We have a lot of NATO and American forces in the way of any attacker. It just isn’t going to work like that. Our threats are overseas. We need/have the capability to defend our interests far from our shores.

      • I don’t disagree to be honest, but I do think there needs to be more consideration of deployment of land based defences if unrestricted warfare becomes a reality, and the way geopolitics is going we are potentially looking a reasonable risk of a world war within a decade. Russia kicking off on its own against NATO is not likely but the pacific exploding and causing contagion is possible.

          • Indeed, also if you have the right level capabilities for out of area deployment you can always deploy at home if needed. Personally I think there needs to be focus on deployable anti ballistic missile defences…..everyone and their brother are able to hurl Ballistic missiles around now…Iran has seen to that, so not having at least short range ABM defences for the army navy and deploying airforce units is a big hole.

            You have a good Christmas and new year as well mate.

      • Hi pal.
        I agree with all that, we know the militaries expeditionary stance and need to influence elsewhere.

        “But” I’m also starting to put a foot in the other camp that home based needs more consideration.

        No money as yet for it. To be fair we had Bloodhound in the Cold War and MAD was as relevant then as now.

        • Hi mate. I do think BMD should be looked at. I think i was looking at some of the scenarios discussed that I think are a tad unrealistic. Like a conventional attack against Portsmouth, for example, with conventional weapons. 👍

          • It’s more likely going to be an asymmetric attack using a swarm of drones. Iran has already shown it can bang off 10 Shahed drones from the back of a box body truck. How many could be carried in a 40ft TEU? This would be the easiest way to use against us. By transporting them in a TEU by ship. Have them picked up and sent to a holding yard. Then they are activated by mobile phone to attack their programmed targets. Admittedly 50kg of HE won’t destroy a ship. But it can make a right mess of radar and other expensive sensors. Similarly it would right off an aircraft if attacked. Or cause absolute panic by targeting the power grid.

            The Ukraine War has shown how easy it is to use drones. Iran has shown that is more than willing, to give its drones to anyone who wants to use them against Western interests. Just needs a nut job with an agenda to make it so!

      • Umm…perhaps, but that may not remain the case into the future. Admittedly, MAD doctrine has enjoyed an admirable past track record, however, the doctrine depends upon the conduct of rational nation-states. Could envision future scenarios w/ either non or religiously zealous nation states (e.g., Hezbollah or Iran), which are not deterred by a second strike capability. Confidently predict that both GBAD and space-based AD will eventually become AUKUS Pillar 2 initiatives.

        • Good reply, mate. Hope you had a great Christmas. I guess a terrorist group with one, abd the will to use it is just as big a threat as Russia with thousands.

          • Thanks, despite the general tenor of my comments, am guardedly optimistic that NATO and the Indo-Pacific democracies will have sufficient time to remedy serious deficiencies before conflict is initiated. 🤞🤞

            In any event, best wishes for 2024! 😊

  10. Hope Mr Shapps doesn’t blow the “UK trumpet” too loud and too long. Don’t forget British understatement, modesty, grit, determination, courage and support. Ukraine needs any military advantages it can get. No need to tell the world what’s being used and how many every time and especially if stocks are running low… only if it’s misinformation… Lol 😁 . The “enemy” doesn’t need know the real stuff. There’s still 80% of the Russian navy left, that’s still quite a bit. Need to knock off more of their subs missile frigates and hopefully Ukraine can reconnect with the Asov sea again. Good to see the SS has anti-ship ability, albeit when stationary. Hope the restocking of UK armaments is happening in the meantime.
    .

  11. Merry Christmas Ivan. Glad to see some of my taxes have been well spent for a change 👍. Takes a foreign country to manage it though 🤣

  12. I wonder what it is about these missiles that make them so effective. They are not stealthy and as glide bombs I assume relatively slow moving, you would think they would be easy picking for air defence. Clearly Russian Air defences aren’t as good as advertised buy they are demonstrating to be semi effective against other missiles.

      • How is it stealthy? It doesn’t include radar blocking material etc unless I’ve missed something or is it stealthy by the same term they used for the eurofighter which meant reduced radar cross section

        • It isn’t a glide bomb as you originally called it. It’s not really slow for it’s class, probably ~ the norm. There are lots of high subsonic missiles & cruise missiles e.g. Exocet, Harpoon, NSM, AGM158, future offensive surface missile etc.) I would hazard that there are more types of subsonic cruise missiles than supersonic and/or hypersonic.

          • They are all marine missiles that don’t gain the benefit of height and speed of launch vehicle and do suffer from turbulence from the ocean. On the flip side they benefit from low height / horizon and radar clutter from the ocean.

          • No, they are not all missiles that don’t gain benefit of launch vehicle height & speed (but I can also give you many other examples of subsonic alcm). Extra launch energy (height/speed) will give you extra range compared to static sea level launch (all other things being equal) but at 300km range initial launch speed isn’t going to help you much in terminal speed.

          • Fair enough. Mainly just curious why these are so effective, alhtough i guess we don’t know how many are fired vs how many get through, as Russian reporting of facts is highly unreliable and Urkaine tends to only report successes.

          • Basically all slower manoeuvring cruise missiles are by nature pretty stealthy..unless you have a very effective look down radar looking in their direction or a ground based radar just in the right place you will miss them in the ground clutter or as they use terrain to hide under the radar horizon…it’s the high Mach missiles that are easier to detect…the challenge with nigh Mach missiles is to engaging them in time when you have detected them but with the subsonic cruise missiles the challenge is finding them in time.

          • Correct. There’s a video of a storm shadow flying overhead in Ukraine and it’s low and fast. The topography of crimea will be used to storm shadows advantage also.

  13. the Russian navel logistics and amphibious capabilities are taking a real hit in the Black Sea. It’s not even like they can replace the losses due to Turkey closing the strait to warships…every loss is effectively permanent.

  14. It appears that the Black Sea Fleet is now just an Onlooker/Sitting Duck…….. Good to see the UK has an amazingly effective ASM though….

  19. If this information is correct (I have no reason to believe otherwise George) the UK should give all of its missiles to Ukraine, where they will be put to good use.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here