The UK has sent Storm Shadow long-range cruise missiles to Ukraine, and this action has elicited a stern warning from Russia, threatening a “proportionate response”.
The ins and outs of the Kremlin’s stance on this issue were dissected on the Daily podcast, featuring expert analysis of President Vladimir Putin’s recent Victory Day speech.
The news first surfaced in Russian media, provoking an immediate response from Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin’s spokesperson. His remarks were broadcasted by RIA Novosti, Russia’s state-controlled news agency.
Peskov conveyed Russia’s vehement disapproval of Britain’s move, stating, “Russia views the UK’s decision to provide Kyiv with Storm Shadow long-range cruise missiles extremely negatively. A proportionate response is inevitable.”
The reported supply of multiple Storm Shadow cruise missiles to Ukraine is seen by Russia as crossing a “red line”, a term frequently employed by Russian authorities to denote actions that would compel a robust retaliatory reaction from the nation but never do.
The Ministry of Defence has remained silent on the matter, withholding any official statements or comments on these reports.
More sound bites from Moscow. Its invading forces have made a mess of overpowering what on paper is a third rate military which spent less in 20 years on its Military, than Moscow does in one year . if Moscow is unable to run ramshod over the Ukraine after 15 months, what does it expect it will achieve by attacking a member of NATO. No doubt this is aimed at the usual suspects in the West:
Unions
NGOs
Religions
Members of Parliament (looks at Labour, Lib-Dems, SNP, Green Party)
The media
In which to galvanise them into action into keeping the Red Flag flying. (But not Bud light drinkers, who will never see a red flag )
It’s the tories that are well documented to have accepted Russian money in recent years. Not saying the other parties are squeaky clean, but you can’t point a finger at them and exclude the tories
That’s an interesting subject, which the anti-tory crowd have used in which to slander the Tories. To that end want to name me any tory policy which has been exposed which has benefited Moscow. Meanwhile we have those I listed as openly supporting Moscow in one way or another. Who have gone well out of their way in which to peddle the:
This is not our fight
The Ukraine is full of Nazis
Why are we handing the Ukraine weapons
The Ukraine started this war
Jan 2022 when the present Tory gov handed over around 2000 NLAWS, before the invasion started everybody went out of their way , in which to accuse the Tory Government of war mongering.
That is the Tory party whom the left of the political centre (and those with an axe to grind) accuse of been in the pay of Moscow. The same Tory party which started the ball rolling with aid to Kyiv and has continued to do so. Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t be surprised if the odd Tory MP is found to be dirty, but the simple fact remains there are a lot more on the other side of the house who are a lot dirtier, and who in power would have no problem dissolving the UK links with Europe, NATO and getting into bed with those who openly hate us. You know like Magic Grandpa, his fat bit of stuff, that green MP who flies across the Atlantic once a month to visit her son in the states, That one who who has never seen a policeman around, that one who is on record of wanting to stab magic grand pa, that one who played the race card, because somebody got her name wrong and lets not forget the washing machine salesman. Would you like me to continue?
Yes please. 😆👍
and me
I generally agree with that, but it mustn’t be forgotten a decade ago Boris (and the Party generally) was very keen to kickstart a new relationship with Russia and Putin which I am sure was not unrelated to all the useful dirty money and characters who were feeding both the National and in particular London economy back then. If it took Crimea to on the surface change minds then it’s pretty scary to imagine they were oblivious to the reasons, dangers and threat that ‘openness’ caused here and the fact perhaps it was deliberately locked away from consciousness because the benefits gave the Party and no doubt individuals a better chance of profiting from it in various ways.
Agree 100%
Spy wrote:
“”I generally agree with that, but it mustn’t be forgotten a decade ago Boris (and the Party generally) was very keen to kickstart a new relationship with Russia””
Just like every other nation across Europe at the time, be it Germany, France, italy or even Cyprus. However the Uk’s relationship with Moscow these past 20 years has been on a downward spiral Chatham House wrote a most illuminating article on the subject
Thanks Farouk for the Chatham House link. Impressive width and depth.
“To that end want to name me any tory policy which has been exposed which has benefited Moscow.”
Well, the most obvious one is Brexit.
Same oft repeated chuff in a certain left wing echo chamber! They are all at it, but generally the Tories have been more robust and responsive than the rest of Europe (initially) and most certainly more robust that the left would have been under a Corbyn Government!
Suprised Jonsky hasn’t been crying in the comments…
Why would I be crying, seems an obvious decision to have made. I do have a different take on it though.
This war is an obvious opportunity to test weapons under very realistic conditions and it seems that drones are getting most of the attention.
One weapon type as yet untested by NATO there are cruise missiles and how they perform against the current generation of AD systems. Whilst it is politically impossible, due to a multitude of reasons, to supply the obvious one, Tomahawk, we have just shown that it is acceptable to supply a lessor known and more limited alternative, Storm Shadow. It is clear from their comments that the Russians are not underestimating the capabilities and challenges of the SS, especially if fired in salvos.
So, what if the covert objective of this is to do just that, test the viability of subsonic cruise missiles? If sufficient get through, continue on with the SS successor as planned, if they don’t, its back to the drawing board with a new sense of urgency.
The implications of the later are profound. It was a very brave decision but probably had to be taken.
JIMK wrote:
The Storm Shadow came into service around 2003 (So its around 20 years old) since then it has been used in:
Iraq 2003
Libya 2011
Syria 2015 and 2016 (French version)
Iraq 2016
Yemen 2015 onwards (Saudi use)
Syria 2018 (both French and Uk use)
Iraq 2021.
I think we can all agree that Storm shadow is a proven (and effective weapon system, which will remain in service for a good few years yet. So i dont think the supply of such to the Ukraine is to test to see if its works ok.
You missed my point. I didn’t question if it worked OK as it clearly did in those countries you mentioned. What I do question is how well it will “perform against the current generation of AD systems”? Non of the countries you mention had such a system in place, let alone using current technology.
“The current generation of AD systems2, those systems at this time are the Russian ones. Regardless if they are modern or old, they are still operated by incompetent, half trained, badly commanded and logistically inept crews, with a fast dwindling manpower and (limited) skill set pool.
Yes maybe but his point is valid the situation in Ukraine is very different to those other environments, otherwise both airforces would be flying much more freely in the others territory. A US pilot already has said he would not wish to fly an F-16 anywhere near or over the contact line and no doubt if he were doing so against Ukraine he would feel likewise. Far different I suspect, despite mostly older systems in both environments, than his view of flying in those other conflicts.
That said I don’t think he really got the fact that Ukraine for the most part anyway, wants F-16s to take out incoming cruise missiles, drones or protect against any decision by Russia to more proactively use its airforce, rather than any primary strike over occupied positions, at least unless and until air defences could be suppressed which with HARM they are getting quite good at but some way to go.
Disagree, his point has no validity due to him being a Putin supporting troll who has pushed out pro invasion pro Putin and anti Ukraine propaganda for the last 16 months. Just because he has reduced his guff, certainly since the failed Russian cluster fuck of an offensive has gone pear shaped (as expected) due to looking more of a fascist dickhead than normal, does not mean his posts are any more reasoned and relevant! He is playing the waiting game and thinks we haven’t noticed mate. And as I previously mentioned, regardless of the kit, if your people are shit, it’s all shit. Cheers.
Airborne wrote:
“”And as I previously mentioned, regardless of the kit, if your people are shit, it’s all shit.””
Aka, “All the gear, no idea”
I’m not so sure. When we, France and the US decided to take out the Syrian chemical storage sites and the airfield used to deliver them. Russia had in place both their S400 along with a Tor and some Pantsirs. Meanwhile Syria had been given the latest version of the S300 and upgrades to its Buk systems, which could be networked into the S400 system. Plus they’d been given a large number of new Pantsirs as well.
Russia stated that the majority of both TLAM and Storm Shadow/Scalp missiles had been shot down by the “Syrian” air defences. Yet photographic and video evidence suggested otherwise. All the targets had been hit, as shown on satellite imagery,
Therefore, the evidence suggests that the majority of these missiles got through unhindered.
Leap forward to the Ukraine War. Russia has finally learnt its lessons of overlapping and intermeshing a layered air defence system. Where they have successfully denied the airspace over the occupied areas to both manned and unmanned aircraft.
Yet they now face the HARM missile, which has been very successful by all accounts. Even though its full capabilities can’t be used by the Ukrainians.
I have to really careful about what I say next. Storm Shadow has a number of capabilities against air defence systems that are not public knowledge. It should have a very high success rate against its intended target. Though with the number of Russian air defence systems, I would expect some to get taken out.
Thanks, interesting comment. In my original post I suggested two outcomes, that SS gets through or it doesn’t, I didn’t say which I thought it might be, just suggested that problems would be manifest if the latter.
Like you imply, I have little doubt that the SS, as do the Kh-22/32 and Iskander/Kinzhal on the other side, has hardware and software that allows it to respond to threats on their journey.
As to your Syrian comment, it is a large country. The Russian S-400 and 2x S-300 were positioned to protect Hmeimim AB not Damascus and the location of the SyAF S-300 was hard to track. It is unknown what AD that site had, if any as Syria probably had much more important sites to protect. This is an almost identical scenario that likely to play out now in Russia.
The Russians have their own equivalents to the SS so will be fully aware of how difficult it will be to track and hit. That is why how it performs over the next few weeks will be of so much strategic significance given how NATO depends on subsonic CM for a big part of its strike capabilities..
Wonderful! A complete grasp of theoretic knowledge from the man/group/cell that had the Moskva tied up alongside when it had sunk in an attack that wasn’t successful.
Can you confirm you condemn Putins war against Ukraine? I can. Will you? If you cannot please feel free to explain.
Just a sad muppet coward who has no answer to reasoned and informed posts! SOP is to ignore them, hope they go away and post generic diversionary comments! But I’m sure Johnny bot will answer once more with chuff, or, will he feel double bluffed and think no answer is best! Johnskie boy, decisions decisions eh?
More guff, more yaaaawn and more zero experience posts! Do you still support the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Putin and are you still to afraid to back up your pro Russian support, or still to cowardly? No guff, no evasions, no ignorance of the question, do you still support the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Putin? Yes or no, stop being a spineless coward for once!
Oh dear, quite startling how much chuff you post and yet proven to know so little! Yet again Farouk has taken you to task, you have failed, and then as per normal ignored his response and reply! And, any condemnation of Putins illegal invasion of Ukraine yet, how about condemnation of Putins use of cannon fodder citizens, the use of convicted criminals, use of white phos, use by Nazi troops of rape, torture, murder…..still a coward to defend your last 16 months of fascist propaganda.
Yeah we are desperate to test a 20 year old missile that’s just about to go out of service against a bunch of radars run on old washing machine parts.
You got us well done 😂
With an ignorant comment like that, plus some of your others, I am very pleased that you are unlikely to be on the payroll protecting the UK from airborne attack.
The airborne attack that you would no doubt support and praise.
Not likely, being too close for comfort to a probable attack site.
Yeah. Civilian housing being a regular target of Russian targeting. No more than you deserve though.
😂😂😂👍
What, a hospital or children’s home! Nob jockey Saville fan!
What’s ignorant about that comment, I’m guessing new handler isn’t eh troll farm today 😀
New handler, old one currently in a Bakhmut weed bed, after 3 hours intensive infantry training course!
The only airborne attack round here my little troll is from a low level T72 turret, with attached crew!
Storm Shadow has been tested many times in Libya and Syria, Iraq and Yemen. You will be delighted to know that it works just fine.
You missed my point. It did indeed work well when faced with what AD systems were in place then. What I do question is how well it will “perform against the current generation of AD systems”?
Yes I think you have a point I like to think I am objective enough to separate that from my opinions about your other proclivities. SS might be 20 years old but it’s no older than some other missiles we use (only relative updating is the issue between them) and many missiles like Stingers and Hellfire are ancient by comparison. Many aspects of SS will be relevant to new projects including the obvious one particularly when used against a more representative air defence environment both in terms or potential tactics, strategy, improvements and adjusting design factors for replacement platforms. Theory and even computer simulations can only go so far so a range of environments will be important in perfecting systems, design and future conceptualising. Be naive to think Important answers won’t be gained here, as they no doubt have with Brimstone, HIMARS, Martlet, NLAWS, Starstreak et al. Certainly given the Karl Gustav a new lease of life. Clearly the Russians have used Kinzhals totally unnecessarily to test their adequacy in real life scenarios so gaining added info from the supply of very necessary missiles on our side seems a perfectly valid equation too me.
Who knows, those Russian systems can’t even stop Ukrainian propeller powered drones from hitting the kremlin according to the Russian military so their is no point in testing something as lethal as storm shadow against them. 😀
If you weren’t a fascist you’d have no problem condeming Putins invasion of Ukraine, something you’ve been unable to do for over a year.
Ergo: Fascist. Not libel. Fact.
Indeed Russia is by any logical definition run on classic Fascist/Nazi lines economically and politically, with a little Stalinism thrown in to keep those addicted sympathisers onside too. A clever ploy I guess to unite far left/right nationalist elements to a single cause, so anyone actively supporting that Govt’s policies and actions on a broad scale by definition has to be a Fascist sympathiser or a hypocrite though a fair measure of delusion (as we see with the likes of Corbyn) always helps to deny such accusations to make themselves feel better about themselves.
Yes I suggested something similar in another comment. On this very site the discussion about the next joint UK/France attack missile over whether it should prioritise stealth or high speed (hypersonic or high subsonic) with it seems a balance variation between experts in the two Countries. Whatever the other validations for supplying these missiles ( and they are strong to support the Counter Offensive) it won’t be lost on those making these decisions that a real time test of the former slower but stealthy proposal would be invaluable to that final commitment, be it in the end one or two variants in or the timeline for that initial former so designed to eventually become the latter through development over time as has been suggested too.
Not libellous if it’s true. Or honest belief.
Ha ha !! So what then was Russia’s invasion supposed to demonstrate? How not to invade a country?
Thank you my socialist friend for your contribution🙄
I much prefer judging parties by their policies and how likely they are to be able to deliver them. The tories reacted quickly to bolster the Ukrainian forces with weapons without which Ukraine might well have colapsed quickly. Would the lawyer in Starmer have meant that his first actions would have been the UN and the ICC – by which time it would have been too late for Ukraine.
The truth is that our weakness standing up to Russia and in particular the Biden administration weakness caused this war. Putin is what he is. The US almost gave him a green light at first. The Russians are bullies ; most of our politicians on both benches are too woke. It will bite us on the backside one day. Let’s up we do not end up paying a big a price for Western weakness as the Ukrainians and indeed many Russians are today !
Its all parties, look at who was taking russsian ‘donations’ before russian invasion of Ukraine.
😂
Start thinking like a KGB/STASI trained Colonel. A proportional quid pro quo response would be Russia supplying one of our enemies with weapons to attack us. We should expect ISIS, Al Qaeda, IRA etc terrorist activity with dirty bombs. Perhaps laden with Russian radioactive isotopes or chemical and biological weapons. Blatantly obvious where they came from to our security services. But if supplied via Iranian Hezbollah/Hamas/MB groups. Completely deniability by Putin at the UN.
I’m actually surprised it hasn’t already happened. Either here in GB or one of our interests elsewhere. Cyprus, Gibraltar, various embassies etc. Even BAE factories around the globe would be fair game. Lets be honest, it’s well with Putin’s track record/SOPs.
I assume you mean since the outbreak of the war as it’s happened twice in the last 15 years or so when we were supposedly ‘friends’. I remember during the various Middle East crisis everyone was expecting a dirty suitcase bomb to go off somewhere but never happened. Never knew quite why but certainly if ISIS and AQ were allowed to develop further that would or would soon have happened. Let’s hope enough sanity remains to restrict such escalatory actions from Russia as there are plenty of elements who would exploit opening that particular Pandoras Box to turn that back on them as we see in the present conflict and Putin despite his bravado is a very scared individual when it comes to his own existence.
I meant since we became involved with Ukrainian anti-Russian factions 2014 onward. Certainly since we started training and supplying Kiev with some very effective modern weapons. A huge escalation compared to the links we had with the anti-Soviet underground in Ukraine during the Cold War.
There was some cooperation during initial phases of the war on terror with the Russians. For a while we were pushing in the same direction.
Putin was trained to be cautious, along with devious, ruthless and unpredictable. He likely thrives in the current environment. A real nasty piece of work.
It’s the Republicans in America and elements of the far and hard right in Europe that seem to have either have the problem supporting Ukraine or are pro Russia
Yet in the UK it seems to be the hard left and the pro Russian, pro terrorist Corbynistas.
Far right and far left have far more in common than separates them it’s like what colour football shirt you support in Manchester and the hatred in generates. The classic differences ie Captalist against Communist but with both having powerful central control of the economy and output is no longer a defined as neither Russia or China actually can be defined in that way anymore. Nationalism was supposed to a definer but never really was and is a prime mover again in those regimes. Immigration? Well Russia it has been argued by a Russian Political Scientist against the regime has invaded Ukraine and is stealing its children (sound familia?) to increase the Slavic identity in Russia where such features are now deemed defined in under 50% of the population.
There are endless other examples in Russia to hit upon but fact is the. concept of right and left really only remains in liberal democracies amongst a relatively moderate constituency and even here we see similar movement with the US in particular showing extreme right wingers like Taylor Greene being very pro Putin even though without the actual name he is the same person he was as a devout KGB Communist. It’s an increasingly confused and conflicting dynamic.
On reflection you are right in saying that Russia have been really quite poor. Ok the west have helped Ukraine with weapons etc. but even so ……
How much dirty Russian money has the Tories taken since 2000? Who has been in government while reducing our forces to a level that didn’t deter their invasions of Ukraine? I doubt no more than a tiny fraction of the groups you list have any sympathy at all with Putin.
The Russians on Twitter have been spitting their dummy out all day about Storm Shadow😂
Meanwhile Ukrainian have been gaining ground in counter-offensives done over the past day.
Good choice to make it official even though it’s been going on for a while👍
Did they think we would forget Salisbury?
The good thing about this announcement is that a huge proportion of Russian high performance air defence assets must now be deployed to protect critical infrastructure. So Kerch Bridge, airbases, rail heads and C3 known sites. All now able to be hit with pin point accuracy.
The redeployment of air defences must surely open up new opportunities to Ukrainian military.
A very good point.
I’m sure Johnski Miltonkinski will pop up and say the S400 will solve all those problems!
It won’t. The challenge that the Storm Shadow represents needs the full rescources of an IADS, from an intercepter with look down/shoot down radar to a MANPAD, to defeat it. Not forgetting AWACs of course.
Well said it’s a great weakness for Russia to back up what are effective missiles otherwise, but I’m sure the mad tv pundits will have all the answers to counter matters, if only in their delusionary minds. Can’t wait to see the outtakes.
Mr Bell wrote:
That’s very interesting because when France and the UK (along with the US) decide to blatt a number of Syrian sites based in the centre of Damascus in 2018. They all got through. Now Damascus is one of the most heavily defended cities (From Air Attack) in the world which includes Russia S400 (well did as they relocated it on the quiet last year to the Crimea) Around Damarcus airport, the Syrians have knitted together a very impressive AAA system based around a Chinese JY-27 “Wide Mat” radar linked into other Russian (and possibly Iranian) Radars and missile systems and yet like the Israelis do on a regular basis, the 2018 strike got through, which whilst the Russians and Syrians claim they shot down the majority of incoming , like the numerous Israeli strikes, they failed to stop certain building from going bang. Oh and just for the info, that all singing and dancing JY-27, designed to spot stealth aircraft such as the F35. The IDF used a F35 to take it out in 2019.
Dont get me wrong, I’m not saying the Russians have a weak AAA system, far from it, but we forget that the entire western remit for their long range PGMs (since the Vietnam war) is to get by such systems with ease.
https://i.postimg.cc/zfM4j8wk/Opera-Snapshot-2023-05-11-224910-defence-pk.png
Regards Russian air defence, around the Kerch Bridge, they have deployed bouys with radar reflectors in which to try to entice and deflect incoming
I think Storm Shadow (what launch platform????) Will be able to pretty much get past all Russian defences, it’s got a low radar signature, a low infrared signature and multi sensor terminal homing…
So it’s goodbye to the Bridge, goodbye to the Naval base and goodbye and good night to airfield infrastructure in Crimea…
This shit just got terrably real Mr Putin, who was it who said revenge is a dish best served cold?
I do hope at least one bares the name
“Sainsbury’s Reply”
It will be interesting to see how they launch stormshadow since it is such a large missile. My bet is they come up with another ingenious land vehicle launcher.
Early speculation centred on the SU-24, which I believe they still possess?
Salisbury reply?
Absolutely, Sainsbury’s in Salisbury had to close for weeks after the attack!😂😂
My typo …. Flapping auto correct 😂
As in Short Stirling ” MacRoberts Reply” for those who care to loo it up….
Storm Shadow uses an imaging infrared “camera” to search for and then lock on to the target based on library imagery. Good luck trying to decoy it by using radar reflective buoys.
‘Don’t panic Mr Mainwaring’ … how’s that translate into Russian as Jack Jonesky Drives his T34 towards the front line across the Kerch Bridge?
That is a very good point the threat itself will require a redeployment of the russian IADS…meaning a weakening across the front lines and more opportunities for the rest of the Ukrainian air assets to be used. Sometime we forget how potent just the threat of something can be if it forces a change in behaviour to the detriment of your enemy..without ever using the thing…..
Well said which is why the drone attacks in Russia are so important the damage they do are secondary to that prime mission of weakening air defence where it matters.
Whereas and a big maybe, if nothing had been said or said afterwards then more of a breakthrough might have happened?
The information had got out, it’s been whispered for a few months but this past week or so it was being reported almost as fair so little point in denying it.
Exactly. Don’t forget that the war criminal Putin and his equaly unpleasant flunkey Medvedev will now have to move their bunkers further east – just in case
Have any of the Russian leadership actually had any military experience, even their generals, that we know of? None of them seem to be putting up their hands to go to the frontline either. Ukraine will be waiting for them.
Shoigu the Defence Minister has no military experience, he is just one of Putin’s old chums. Those Russian generals who had experience of either the Georgia war or Syria have either been killed or replaced. Lots of them, over 40 I gather
SS is to be used only in UKR territory. Even if it weren’t, it would not threaten their bunkers. Have you heard of Metro 2, Kaminsky Mountain, and Yamantau as just 3. Too deep. We are in nuke territory there and not going there thank you.
Yes, I know Metro 2 isn’t a bunker but an example.
The Curious Droid youtube channel has a very good one on bunker busting ordnance but mainly considering the Iran nuclear complexes. I would post a link but I expect Lisa would moderate it because it’s right up-to-date on concrete advances
👍
What do you mean with the last part here, David?
They’ve always prioritised such AD, back to Cold War times when the threat of SAC hung over them. Even then, the wests tech advantage would have negated their massed defences, like in Syria as F outlined. They also have a disadvantage at the huge area they need to defend, even if most is concentrated around the Moscow Bastion.
They have lost at least 130 high end defence systems during the war as referenced by Onyx up to the beginning of April. They can’t easily replace those and they have to cover a wide area both in Russia (which is why Ukraine is employing drones there) but more significantly around the horseshoe of their occupied Ukrainian territory and Crimea. Ukraine has apparently lost a 100 but have new often superior systems to them, coming in as replacements but more importantly being inside the horseshoe can far more effectively use what they have. This is only going to get worse now for Russia (though still hardly great for Ukraine) as they seem to be losing systems daily to Harm and drones and Crimea is beginning to look very vulnerable. SS just complicates matters massively.
i guess ill be the first fool, how will ukraine launch storm shadow, the bbc web site says there are soviet aircraft that can launch it, testing seems to usually take a long time. is this a case of its war, get it done and live testing?
couldnt even make that lol
If mig 29’s can launch Harm, am pretty sure they can get Storm Shadow to launch from an Su24.
Amazing what you can jury rig when necessary 😉
The updated version of StormShadow (Spear4) can be launched in different modes. In the case of Typhoon, it will have the full fat mid course guidance capability with two way datalink, mid course guidance and re-targeting in flight modes. The version supplied to Ukraine will probably be the fire and forget version. All the targeting information Is programmed on the ground before launch. Once it’s on its way, that’s it, it’s on it’s own. So pretty simple-ish to integrate. It is an extremely capable weapon.
Hi Robert
In 2018 during a joint attack with France and the Americans on a chemical weapons facility in Syria, 8 Storm Shadow were fired from a Tornado. Subsequently, Russia announced that all 8 missiles launched from the Tornado were shot down by Syrian Air Defence Forces, which was denied.
It does have a terminal maneuver where it climbs up and searches for it’s target. The UkR have been shooting down Russian missiles with a similar terminal mode. I expect the defence industry will be interested in how they perform
I don’t know if you saw Lewis Page in the Rantograph slagging off Storm Shadow?
The guy looks and sounds like he spends most of his time in the pub.
Total tosh written by someone who I can confidently say knows nothing about missiles….
Yes, certainly made me laugh to read. Thought it would be ground launched, got the range wrong, and ignores important facts like it’s stealth or that there are plenty of subsonic missiles that are effective.
Rantograph… not heard that one before…I like it.
Isn’t he the guy who’s only interested in the army and the other services are stealing their budget?
I don’t read that Telegraph.
Probably in the same way and from the same aircraft as the UAF launches its AGM-88 HARM missiles.
StormShadow is pretty much self contained, just needs to be taken to a launch point and off it goes.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ekw9S0oXIAEJ-l2.jpg
Whenever a question like this comes up I think of this memo.
Love it!
Hilarious, so relevant and so up to date 😂👍
Surely even the Russians must be losing track of how many of ‘red lines’ Ukraine’s supporters have now crossed!
Graph paper?
😂😂😂
Russia’s response might be to arm U.K. enemy’s.
I will keep a look out for Russian cruise missiles appearing with the new
Siberian trained Scottish terrorists.
Don’t need aircraft, they just throw them tossing the caber style of a big hill.
I’m generally a reader rather than a poster but enjoy input from Daniele and others,
Regarding Ukraine, there is not much reported of air war or superiority by either side and it seems to be a relentless war of attrition on the ground .What are the grown ups view on why AirPower ( excluding drones) has not been more significant?
As far as I can gather, the prevalence of MANPADs and other AA systems has made risking aircraft in supporting roles prohibitively risky. To Russians, a few dozen mobiks being killed is not worth risking having a Su-25 turned into Swiss cheese by a Starstreak
Sounds stupid, to say but it strangely feels like air power has become almost unneeded, as you don’t see many videos and posts talking about air strikes. It’s more aero reconnaissance units with UAVs dropping grenades and mortars.
And also rockets, missiles, and trench warfare with backup from combined arms, tanks and ATVs and IFV etc
From watching the posts from the front lines and as others have said perhaps a lack of aircraft and willingness to use jets knowing AA is also doing damage
John wrote:
Not really, the problem for the Russians is unlike the West, they didn’t invest as heavily into PGM and targeting pods (which allow the West to strike from a distance) The UK found that out the hard way when flying a Tornado down the centre line of an enemy runway whilst fitted with a JP233 isnt really that good an idea and yet despite all the evidence that using dumb bombs against a near peer had gone the way of the Dodo, the Russians continued down that path. This they learnt the hard way in 2008 when they invaded Georgia.
The West has also invested heavily in suppression of enemy air defence (SEAD) and destruction of enemy air defences , (and trains heavily for such missions) yet whilst the Russians have the technology to mirror such western endeavours , they haven’t done so. For the life in me, I don’t know why the Russians haven’t invested in that direction or regards PGMS and targeting pods. But that failure to do so, has come around to bite them on the bum big style, and as such it has degraded their ability to fly missions into Ukrainian territory. That said, Moscow is learning and I read the other day, that they have started using air launched winged bombs on the Eastern front to the tune of around 20 a day. Cheaper than drones, much harder to bring down and they carry a much heavier payload, whilst allowing the deploying aircraft to remain out of harms way. Not sure if they use a targeting pod or guys on the ground with a Lazer targeting unit, but use them they have and if they up the production of such bombs, then they may start playing the Ukraine at their own game. Once they learn how not to drop such weapons on their own cities (April 30th when one such bomb fell off a plane and landed on the city of Belgorod)
Probably because NATO doesn’t invest heavily in Air Defences. I mean we have some sure, but our main way of dealing with the enemy Airforce has always been to have a better Airforce than them.
So Russia never really invested in PGM’s and SEAD because they figured they’d loose the airwar against the west no matter what, so would have to fight them off from the ground. Which makes them look a bit shit when they come up against another Soviet system, that has historically made the same choices in terms of air defence and ground attack.
I think it may have been as many as three as I read a while after the event a third had been found which suggests there was a second too. Damn lucky they got away with that one in terms of casualties but if true how do you accidentally release three of them.
Zero Tornado were lost whilst deploying JP233…
It’s one of the great myths of the war….
One did have a CFT whilst flying away from a strike…
It was loft bombing that had the most casualties…and 1 Tornado was hit at medium altitude whilst using LGB’s…
That’s so interesting, as i’d fallen for that myth too. Thought it common knowledge!
Rude boy wrote:
“Zero Tornado were lost whilst deploying JP233…””
I never said that any Tornados were lost, I stated that the RAF found out the hardway (which i admit could be construed as a loss so apologies if I gave that impression) that flying an aircraft down the centre line of a runway wasn’t a good idea. The fact remains after 1991, the West gravitated on mass towards Targeting pods and PGMs, which gives them a decisive edge over the Russian air force which was the point I was making.
Oddly enough it wasn’t GW1 that forced the change….
It was Kosovo.
So many missions were scrubbed, or targets not engaged, that NATO really started down the all PGM route. Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan with tight ROE drove it even further.
The Buccaneer was the first British Aircraft to be fitted with a targeting pod,. they were used to laze targets for bomb carrying aircraft in the 1991 conflict in Kuwait, Also a load of TIALD laser designator pods were rushed into service for the same war, these pods saw service until they were replaced by the lighting pod for the Tornadoes and sniper for the harriers.
Buccaneers got Pave Tack pods in the 1970’s when they were to use them with Paveway for anti-shipping strikes.
There weren’t ‘loads’ of TIALD pods…there were 2. Called ‘San’ and ‘Tray’ after the Viz characters. Both were prototypes. It took several years post 1991 before TIALD actually entered full service…
Only around 40 TIALD pods were ever made…they were a very rare item. It was only in the mid 2000’s when we started to get limited numbers of Sniper and Litening pods as the resolution on TIALD wasn’t good enough to comply with ROE in Afg…
Litening is still rather rare…Sniper has totally disappeared…
I never said there were loads of them, i stated the RAF had them, which kind of explains why Buccaneers would accompany other aircraft carrying air to ground ordinance.(Which with your knowledge on the subject you should remember because I do) meaning they weren’t as common as muck. the fact remains the U.K. realised that targeting pods afforded a longer range strike capability and they realised that before 1980, which was reinforced by the 1991 Gulf war, where PGMs really came into their own. as for lightening been as rare as rocking horse shite, I was under the impression the U.K. purchased the latest Mark 5 iteration for our Typhoons a year ago.
Yes but this is Russian air power..which seems to struggle against even the quite primitive and weak Ukrainian integrated air defence system..western airforces have proven that they are able to take apart Sophisticated and dense integrated air defence systems with immunity and then pound h very large national armed forces into dust….so I don’t think western nations need to unlearn what they have learnt in the western air campaigns of the 1990s-2020s…what they have learnt is that they don’t actually have a peer in Russia….and therefore the Russian armed forces are probably more exposed to western air power and integrated air defence systems than even Iraq was ( as Iraq actually manages to use its airforce effectively against its peer Iran)…an Elizabeth class with 24 F35Bs and an integrated air defence system including AEW, type 45 and CAMM armed frigates is actually an existential threat to Russia that it probably has no answer to… beyond hoping one of its Cold War based SSNs can breach the ASW net of Merlin’s, UK 21c SSNs and type 23s ( essentially not something a SSN based on 1970-80 USSR tec base could really manage).
One of their biggest failings is that a sophisticated DAS isn’t theatre entry standard for them and when they do have a DAS of sorts fitted it is generations behind what we would expect in terms of automation. Most of their fits are manually operated. if you look back to the early months of the campaign and footage of Russian aircraft they were banging off countermeasures at a ridiculous rate. It ‘s been suggested that a high number of their aircraft losses was simply down to them expending their countermeasures through fear rather than the aircraft receiving any declaration on the warners. We operate in a manner that if our countermeasures are reduced to a certain percentage then its turn around and go home, what remains in the dispensers is to get us out the engagement area and in to relatively clear airspace safely.
I read Ukrainian Pravda which gives a daily coverage of events. Was a very interesting video of Ukrainian jets attacking Russian assets in a forest flying right over them low and fast and it seems hitting their targets too. There are daily reports of air strikes from both sides though most ( esp Russian) seem to be related to long range missile launches and recently winged bombs. But do seem to be strikes on a daily basis so probably more action than we think. Seem to be far less helicopter strikes these days mind they seem to be suicidal as things stand.
Hi Woody. 😀
Russia’s reluctance/inability to fully commit.
Russia’s inability to conduct an effective air campaign due to a lack of training/professionalism.
Widespread GBAD from both sides.
Lack of Ukrainian aircraft, reluctance to lose what they have remaining.
Speculation, but unspecified NATO assistance to UKR in warning of incoming AC?
Effective air defences. Mobile air defences and the utter rubbish state of command, training, integration and accuracy of the Russian air force and missile forces. The Russian inability to conduct a strategic air campaign bodes really very very poorly should any conflict with NATO occur.
I’d imagine the RAF and French air forces alone could probably defeat Russia’s air force.
Motivation of knowing you are defending your homeland from invading criminals also helps?
As probably the knowledge of the materiel support NATO and others are offering.
Thanks for your responses, i wondered if it highlighted differences between western and eastern strategies and technology that air is not being utilised. If you look at the gulf war, air dominance was vital, I get your points that technology has moved on and they are just too vulnerable
If western nations were involved it would be a very different story for sure. Baisically the USSR invested heavily in Air Defence but not so much in the actual air force, it kind of knew NATO would dominate the skies, so aimed to work around that idea, not fight the inevitable.
Russia and Ukraine, both being successors of the USSR, have inherited the same system: Very strong Air Defence, and comparatively weaker Air Forces. So you get two forces really good on the defence, not great on the offence and the result is: not much air combat.
If NATO was actually fighting this it would be very different and it would come down to whether Russian Air Defence can beat NATO Air Power (hint: it didn’t in Iraq, Bosnia, Iraq again, Lybia, Syria, etc)
Pretty sure I posted another reply to you, but it included a youtube link so it’s sitting in approval hell right now :/
There’s a video out there, I don’t have the link sadly, of a SU-25 pilot flying low and fast, and then popping up to fire a bunch of missiles in a ballistic arc. If you know what you’re looking for you can see his radar warning indicator go absolutely batshit the moment he pulls back on his stick, with at least 3-4 different radars illuminating him. (Which means that at least 3-4 people are tracking him and potentially getting ready to lob a Surface to Air Missile at him).
For the Ukrainians, flying high is also not an option, because the Russian favourite tactic is to sit far behind their GBAD screen with a few Migs and some very long range Soviet era missiles (R-33, R-37), wait for a Ukrainian aircraft to show up, and then snipe at it. They don’t score a lot of kills, both missiles are like freight trains, relatively easy to spot, and then avoid, but avoiding them scrubs the mission for the Ukranians, and they can’t retaliate so even if the Russians only score a 1 in 20 kill rate, it’s still a bad exchange.
Equally the Russians don’t really want to push over and past the Ukranian GBAD screen because that means closing to were the Ukr Airforce can actually engage them, and possibly have the advantage. So both sides fixed wing air forces are limited to quick, low level raids firing ordenance at maximum range and then 180*ing back to base before they get targeted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nS2T2cxLlyw
Here you can see two Ukranian Su-25’s doing just that. Low level flight, then pull up to launch rockets in a ballistic arc (so they go a bit further) and notice that they imediately launch chaff and flares as they fire and then turn home.
Thanks Dern,
watching the link 👍
HI Mate, the following may answer your question.
Air Power is a strategic concept that incorporates everything from a mission objective, to firing a weapon from an aircraft, its supporting logistics and the team supporting the pilot in undertaking their mission.
Last year at the start of the War, Russia most definitely had the advantage in regard to “air power”. But from Day 0, it was squandered through inept leadership and a distinct lack of any strategic thinking in the following successive months, in both the deployment and support of their ground-based air defences (GBAD) and their use of ground attack and air interception operations.
Starting with Russia’s poor implementation and use of GBAD. On paper Russia had significantly more systems, plus they were more modern than Ukraine’s. Russia’s forces should have known all the key parameters and performances of each missile system it faced. As these were designed and built in Russia. Therefore, they should have known how to counter them.
On day one, Russia took out the majority, if not all of Ukraine’s fixed search radars and GBAD sites, using a combination of ballistic and cruise missiles. They also took out a large percentage of mobile GBAD from known locations. However, they did not get them all. From then on Ukraine constantly moves its mobile S300, Buk and Tor systems around. Which meant that although they were few in number, they were still sufficient to force Russia’s Air Force to fly low level to avoid them.
They then launched the heliborne and transport aircraft assault on Hostomel, which was a classic Soviet behind the lines move. Over a third of the aircraft were shot down by either MANPADS or Ukrainian fighter aircraft. I believe even a Su-25 shot down a couple of Mil-8/17s. Russia operationally failed in a number of key areas. It did not achieve a corridor of air supremacy from Belarus to the airport and it did not have the ground swept or suppressed from threats. This enabled Ukraine to not only shoot down most of the supporting elements, but also prevent a resupply and link-up to the besieged Russian troops, which eventually led to their decimation.
It seems that Russia neglected to undertake or planned dedicated suppression of enemy air defences (SEAD) missions, the question remains as to why? Not doing so meant their aircraft had to fly a low attack profile to avoid Ukraine’s radar based GBAD. From the outside it looked like the Air Force and Army were doing their own thing. They were not conducting combined operations. The Hostomel Operation should have seen the Air Force working to sweep the skies of threats but also suppressing local ground threats.
Moving around their GBAD made them harder for Russia to target, but should it? We know Russia has the Kh-31P anti-radiation missile. But a lot of the aircraft seen on videos taxing off to a mission did not have it fitted. The Kh-31P and even the updated PM version are not in the same league as HARM, as they don’t have a combined GPS/INS. Thereby making them useless, if the target switches off its radar. The suppression and destruction of your enemy’s air defences is one of the key tenants for gaining air superiority over the battlefield.
The combination of the IL-76 Midas AEW aircraft and Su-35s. Should have allowed Russia to dominate the air space. But because Ukraine’s radar based GBAD was still operational. High altitude fighter sweeps could not be conducted beyond a safe line into enemy territory. This allowed Ukraine to use mobile search radars to keep a picture on what was happening in the sky. Which was then used to direct their Mig-29s and Su-27s to intercept threats. Apart from the odd engagement, air interdiction has largely stalemated, due to both sides employing effective GBAD. Even though Russia has an air-to-air missile range advantage. They cannot use it due to Ukraine’s GBAD.
Throughout last year we saw Russia were losing shed loads of both fixed and rotary wing aircraft to man portable air defences (MANPADS). Not all the aircraft being shot down deployed countermeasures. Which meant they either didn’t have a defensive aids system (DAS) incorporating a missile approach warning system (MAWS) or that it wasn’t working. Even those that were shot down after banging off some flares, showed that their countermeasures were ineffective. It also meant that on a lot of occasions the pilot/crew would not have known a missile was on its way or the direction it was approaching from.
The employment of Russia’s GBAD is a lesson on how not to do things. This was blatantly obvious, when nearly every day there were images of blown-up air defence systems being shown. Or there were videos of drones flying directly overhead of an air defence system, then dropping a weapon on it. This proved that the air defences were operating independently, rather than as a networked group. Where a regiment etc who moved forward with its GBAD, should have been provided with overwatch from units already set up.
It was said that the short-range air defence (SHORAD) systems like Pantsir, couldn’t detect the Bayraktar TB2 drone. Which in theory should be bonkers, as the TB2 although is fairly small, it most certainly is not stealthy. The Pantsir’s X-band radar should detect it, but also the passive thermal camera it has, should also see it. But clearly this was not happening. Which was bizarre, as the Pantsirs had been used effectively in both Libya and Syria, to take out TB2s and other similar drones. Which to my mind showed that the crews weren’t trained enough to recognize the threat. But for quite a lot of months the TB2 pretty much reigned over the battlefield. It allowed along with Javelin and NLAW to not only blunt Russian ground forces advances, but to also push them back in a rout.
However, as time moved on and Russia retreated its forces, so that they could concentrate in the South. Ukraine reported losing more and more Su-24s, Su-25s but especially drones like the TB2s. This was because Russia has learned a valuable lesson and networked it’s GBAD into a fully layered defence. Plus, they could put them closer together to cover a smaller area.
Ukraine was given the High-speed anti-radiation missile (HARM). It is fitted to their Mig-29s. However, it only uses about a third of its capabilities. As the Mig doesn’t have the sensitive Electronic Surveillance Measures (ESM) or a NATO Mil-Std-1553B databus. Therefore, the missile does all the radar searching and targeting. Regardless of these handicaps, Ukraine has been very successful in using HARM against GBAD.
We saw that Russian aircraft were predominantly doing overflight low level bombing and pop-up unguided rocket attacks, why? The only logical reason is that Russia does not have large stocks of precision guided or air launched stand-off weapons. Whereas, Ukraine now has been given JDAM, which is a stand-off glide bomb. Though there has been some evidence of a Russian JDAMski (KAB-500S-E) being used in both Syria and Ukraine. Now that Ukraine has the Storm Shadow, this seriously raises the bar in what Ukraine can do offensively. If Ukraine has the intelligence of where key Russian military installations are, you can be pretty sure they are going to be visited soon. Ukraine only has two aircraft that can really be used to carry Storm Shadow due to its weight. These are the Su-24 and Su-27. Of the two, I’d suspect the Su-24 would be the aircraft of choice.
Russia have predominantly used short range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles to attack both military and civilian infrastructure. Ukraine’s Soviet era air defences were just about keeping up with the cruise missile threat, but couldn’t cope with the ballistic threat. This led the West in providing Ukraine with modern air defence systems, from MANPADS such as Stinger, Starstreak, Mistral and Grom. Followed by short/medium range systems such as Aspide, Crotale, Iris-T SLM and NASAMS. It has now got Patriot, which even though isn’t the latest PAC-3 standard, has recently taken out the supposed unstoppable Kinzhal air launched ballistic missile.
It’s the loitering suicide drones that have been a real nightmare for Ukraine, as they are quite small and firing a limited number of expensive missiles at them is not the most cost-effective means at countering them. It has not come as a surprise then that the German Gepard self-propelled anti-aircraft artillery (SPAAG) has been very successful in downing this threat, which includes the Shahed 136 and Lancet drones. The German Army had mothballed these, luckily keeping them in dry storage. It offered 50 of these to Ukraine, with 32 being delivered so far. Ukraine had been upgrading their ZSU-23s, but they are not as effective as the Gepards.
As a summary, Russia’s use of air power has not only failed when it should have steam rolled Ukraine. Its overall performance has been dismal approaching amatuerish. Whereas, Ukraine has managed to not only punch above its weight by blunting the effectiveness of a significantly larger force, but to also put it on the defensive.
The obvious Air Power lessons we have learned from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine are:
1. They did not learn from how Iraq’s air defences were destroyed by the Allied forces. Suppression of enemy air defences was not continued in force after Day 1.
2. By not suppressing GBAD leads to severe operational restrictions in how operations are not only planned and supported, but has a continuing knock on effect.
3. The lack of training its forces have had against realistic threats has a detrimental performance effect when in a real conflict. But perhaps more importantly is the lack of time these forces have had using their kit, that they are supposed to use in a fight. E.g. Do the have a Red Flag equivalent?
4. No coordinated combined arms operations. E.g The Hostomel Operation
5. A significant lack of investment in keeping their in-service kit up to date, or procuring modern weapons in large enough numbers to sustain an operation.
6. A lack of industrial knowledge and capacity to not only manufacture large numbers of modern weaponry, but also to replenish it.
7. Propaganda and showmanship counts for nothing when facing a determined enemy willing to fight.
8. Inept and incompetent leadership, who are unable to quickly adapt to changing situations will lead to not only a stalled offensive, but significant manpower and materiel losses. Was there ever a Plan B?
9. No response was made early enough to Ukraine’s use of the TB2 drone, even though it had been faced in both Libya and Syria. You could include the earlier Azerbaijan/Armenia conflict.
10. There is still a place in a modern air defence system for anti-aircraft artillery, as it’s been shown to be the most cost-effective method in dealing with small suicide drones.
11. Cheap expendable drones can be used to wear down your enemy’s air defence missile stocks.
12. To preserve not only your number of aircraft but also trained crew, it is vital that the aircraft is fitted with a defensive aid system (DAS). But also that it is continuously tested against emerging threats and kept up to date.
Thanks Davey, Dern,
Both great answers with great detail,
Wow, a swarm of zanussi fridge freezers, with a grenade taped to the handle, dropped from a 1950s flying shed, piloted by half trained cretins on less than 40 hours flying per annum, commanded by incompetent thieves and embezzlers! Yep, time to shit our pants…..not!
😆👍
😃😂😃😂🤣 very funny.
I laughed for days when the Russian air force bombed their own city 40+ miles inside Russia. Couldn’t even bomb the right country.
🤣😂😁👍👍
Free fridge freezers, I will take one of those.
I am beginning to understand why the Russians are looting so many white-goods from Ukraine now.
It’s a new spin on the old propaganda air drops….instead of leaflets it will be a “hot” white goods air drop.
(Speaker of the House of Lords, for it is he) “Thank you M’Lud Archbishop for that thoughtful and reasoned intervention …”
😂👍
lol, lmao even
Yet another threat from these utter losers.
Try it on why don’t you? We will meter out to Russia anything they try to do to us.
Novichok= storm shadow that is our proportionate response.
Not really. Here we are sending arms to a nation that has been invaded. Salisbury was a state sanctioned poisoning on British territory. Significantly worse. We should have cracked down on Russia then… never good to dwell on decisions we can’t change now though.
we could make sure they don’t win
but we couldn’t win ourselvesas that includes the invasion of russia with either troops or bombs and missleis which they uk don’t have enough of (im talking off both troops and missliels)
but don’t worry, when the chips are down the USA will (or is soppoed to) come in.
It isn’t a case of “we” it is NATO.
And NATO has no interest in invading Russia
But NAFO does… NAFO expansion is non-negotiable.
NAFO?
North Atlantic Fellas Organization (NAFO, French: Organisation des Fellas de l’Atlantique nord, OFAN) is a group that definitely has never pronounced nonsense, and has certainly never been funded, or part of the CIA.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/15/NAFO_OFAN_brain_damaged_cartoon_dogs.jpeg
It’s expansion remains non-negotiable.
The CIA does not exist.
Eh?
I’m utterly shocked that you the master of all military jargon is unaware of the Twitter dog army of NAFO 😂😂 a silly joke as it started has become quite something, raising at this point probably millions for Ukraine while keeping the Russian trolls at bay online.
Sadly true….I can talk to you about the smallest of obscure MoD sites, but id actually never ever heard of this.
As others say, every day a school day here, our collective knowledge is fantastic. 👍
Ok, just got round to looking it up. It does….😆
I posted a reply with a link, but it’s stuck in approval hell because of the link >:/
I’ll enjoy seeing it, I had no idea of their existence till you mentioned them, I’ve learned something.
Christ, less than no interest.
I know, it is amazing how much their paranoia after 1812 and 1941 has affected their brains.
Expanded on by Putin to justify his own moves.
Perhaps when you spend 200 years rewriting history to suit yourself, you start to get far too good at it for your own good, esp when it all turns inward. Very worrying future across the pond as their position in the World becomes all the more threatened and I fear that inward ‘reflection’ will become far more messy where objectivity isn’t even in the dictionary any more. For all his faults I think Macron sees the prospective dangers in relying on cross pond security just don’t see enough European unity to achieve what he wants mind. But increased self sufficiency is a priority so we are not completely tied to the mere hope the US doesn’t pull itself apart in the coming decades.
The UK would not need to invade Russia…the RN and RAF on their own have quite the potential to remove the russia navy and airforce from the North Sea as we also sit on pretty much all russia access to sea trade routes it’s game set and match if russia decided to make it more kinetic….that’s even before you add NATO..Simply put the forces that just the key European NATO nations could bring to bear are utterly overwhelming and would completely crush Russia…hundreds of warships….3500+ military aircraft…
But we are not going to invade Russia just react and contain Russia as part of NATO if Russia attacks any member of NATO.
I doubt that the small number of missiles supplied will make much military difference. But giving Ukraine something they can threaten to retaliate with, if Russian missile attacks on civilian targets continue, might have some deterrent effect.
Peter wrote:
The problem for Russia isn’t the number of Storm Shadow missiles the Uk hands over (Note the UK purchased around 700) but how others followed suit, after the UK started that ball rolling, be it NLAW, Starstreak, Tanks, etc. So in this case, what’s to stop the Germans/Spanish handing over a few KEPD 350 (Aka Taurus) the French their version of the Storm Shadow, meaning that Moscow will have a much bigger problem. But that isn’t the only issue for Moscow regards the supply of long range PGMs. The use by the Ukraine of Western MRLS (M270, HIMARS) and their GMLRS weaponry (which let’s be honest have been few in number 15XM270. 20 x HIMARS) have due to their ability to hit the nail on the head from a distance, coupled with behind the line’s intel has seen the Ukraine take out Russian ammunition dumps at leisure within striking distance of such weapons, the only Russian counter to this is move their ammo dumps well out of range. (Which will have to be moved even further after the supply of GLSDB and now Storm shadow)
All of which has impacted on their ability to quickly supply their teeth arms with ammo, both of which has made a huge impact on the FIBA, never mind the loss of ammo as well as the degrading effects such long distance strikes have had on Russia moral. Yes the Russians are slowing moving forward, but after the initial gains made, we are now talking treacle and as we have seen this past year, when the Ukraine does push back , not only do the Russians fold quicker than a piece of origami paper, they can beat any of the blokes aiming for the Olympics 100 metres. (But not the geezer from the US, who is currently bumping his gums as he has been banned form entering the female race)
My point, can be summed up by the adage “Its not the size of the dog in the fight that counts, it’s the size of the fight in the dog that does” and to be frank, the Ukrainians have displayed some really beefy dogs bollocks
Russian logistics are dreadful anything that can be done to make them worse is only going to make it easier for the Ukranians and to increase the infighting between Russian MOD and the private armies like Wagner.
And the majority of the logistics going into Crimea to keep the Russian stolen territory propped up comes across Putin’s vanity project Kerch Bridge- which surely must now be visited by as many Storm Shadows as possible. Once severed resupplying Russfascist troops based in Crimea becomes a good bit harder.
Well I think the first strike is on the railway part of the bridge. That is used for supplies of fuel etc.
The second on the Russia -> Crimea part of the bridge?
Do you think they’d get the hint?
Farouk,
Absolutely agree UK is acting w/ malice aforethought in this matter, leading by example. Well done, carry on. 🤣😂😁😉
Very true..it’s a nations will to fight that always matters…on paper the French third republic should have smashed the wehrmacht even without the BEF…instead it fell apart…Ukraine should have fallen apart in the face of overwhelming advantage in numbers of armed forces, industrial capacity and wealth…but it’s still handing Russia its arse a year later….the taliban should never have been able to win in Afghanistan against the combined power of the western world…supporting the Afghanistan government. The will to fight is pretty much everything. The RN and UK armed forces should not have been able to travel 8000 miles, sit in the south Atlantic off the coast of a regional power,,destroy its airforce and manage an apposed amphibious assault to retake the Falklands.
So a deterrent effect then and probably intended to be. Quite different from NLAW and Javelin which were given to be used asap.
👍
“SHOIGU WERE IS THE AMMUNITION!?”
Dmitry Peskov, a cheap skate rabble rouser who can make Goebbels seem decent. Anyone who follows news from Putin’s disaster in the Ukraine, will by now know that Peskov counts for nought. As thick as two short planks!
My own regret is that Ben Wallace didn’t say that that the provision of Storm Shadow, the work required to ensure compatibility with Ukrainian aircraft, and training, was undertaken as “Project Salisbury”… 😏
Really would have been amusing if Big Ben would have stated that UK was loaning Tranche 1 Typhoons to launch the Storm Shadows. Believe Mad Vlad might have figuratively screwed himself into the Kremlin”s ceiling over that news; either that or collapse from apoplexy–both interesting options. 🤔😳😁
I think people forget what Russia actually did to this county and how much payback they deserve….what Russia did was an artic five event and the UK had every right to do something pretty nasty in retaliation…a lot of nations would have ( I’m not sure the US would have sat back if it had happens in say Boston).
Russia is finished as any sort of world power / top tier economy,
May take a while but they have been militarily hollowed out and shown to be utterly corrupt and incompetent in Ukraine. They cannot win, although whether Ukraine can or whether it’ll degrade into stalemate frozen conflict is another matter.
They have a declining population, a ‘brain drain’ caused by the war and a stagnating economy which will get much worse as their war chest is frittered away. Their only desirable exports are oil and gas which the world is going to have to try and get away from sooner or later and they have a vast amount of hinterland, much of which borders China, is sparsely populated but resource rich.
Despite it’s odd mix of pride, paranoia and indignation as a nation it’s hard to think of what Russia has achieved or added to the world over the last century which isn’t going to change anytime soon now it’s an isolated international pariah state.
Also at some point chinas going to probably invade east Asian Russia for food production land…
I think your right. China needs resources- especially food, minerals, gas and oil- all in plentiful supply in Russia’s far east. Russia really is a spent force. There is nothing short of Russia’s nuclear arsenal to stop China taking the far east. Would Russia use nuclear weapons to protect its sparsely populated and frankly forgotten about territory. Some of Russia’s far eastern territory is further away from Moscow then New York is.
And the Chinese are gradually renaming parts of those regions back to their former Chinese names (15 so far) including Sevastopol. Strange how the Russians said nothing about that yet this week went into a frenzy when Poland restored Kallingrad back to its former Polish name. So beautifully amusing.
I’m not sure that there is much land suitable for agriculture in the Eastern area of Russia boarding China.
Is not that part of Eastern Siberia very cold in the Winter, with a late Spring?
Yes, oil and gas there!
If Russia was to break-up after the war, the West needs to step in to help a rump East Siberian state to resist China.
Hi Meiron
There is a lot of Siberia that at present is not much use for agro..but there is also a lot that is of use and is not being well managed due to lack of farmers…but the apposolute fundamental change is climate change and global warming…basically the models show that china is in a zone that will not be conducive to agriculture at all but Siberia, especially the north will will open up, the south of Siberia will need well managing as warming will potentially create soil erosion if it’s not properly farmed.
This is from a research from the region:
“These changes, on the one hand, can have a positive effect on the agricultural sector of the region, where there is not enough heat and moisture. In the changing climate, the length of the growing season will increase, opening up prospects for growing heat-loving crops in the north of the agricultural zone of Siberia – early ripening varieties of corn, lentils, and soybeans. However, one should bear in mind that at the same time in the south of Siberia, due to an increase in temperature and uneven precipitation, the soils will dry out, to lead to their degradation. Additional irrigation and more active use of mineral fertilizers will be required. The forecasts presented indicate the necessity of direct investments into the north. This is important for the stable development of the agricultural industry as a whole, ” says Alexander Shpedt, Doctor of Agricultural Sciences, Deputy Director for Science at the Institute of Agriculture of the Krasnoyarsk Science Center SB RAS.
After what they did in Salisbury, Litvinenko and all the other murders carried out by them on UK soil and abroad. Any opportunity we have to put the boot in we should do so. They laughed that we were powerless and insignificant to do anything about their acts. Well they ain’t laughing now.
No I think they are about to find out that facing a Challenger 2 in full attack mode is nothing to laugh about.
Storm Shadow a 20 year old missile that we can easily produce better more upto date versions of are nothing to laugh about
NLAW have proven to the cost of thousands of Russfascist armoured vehicles to be nothing to laugh about.
Operation Salisbury in full retribution mode. You reap what you sow Putin. You’ve sowed the seeds for your own downfall.
I just have to wonder about the timing of this announcement. It makes no sense if it is like some other “Big” announcements it means just an intent. By that I mean like the US Abrams which was heralded but in reality will probably take a year to transpire.
This smacks of we are making the announcement because the work is done, they are in place and noons goes WTF when parts of one turn up on Reuters.
Everyman and his dog knows that the Ukraine is going launch a counterattack, And most of us must by now know that the Ukraine needs to be able to focus all its efforts on that.
So what could they decide to do with these missiles ? Yes the bridge is the obvious target, but to be honest the southern front has pretty well stabilised along the Dnieper and I can’t see the Russians mounting a mass river crossing.
On the other hand this weapon would enable them to neutralise the still pretty sizeable Russian Amphibious force based in Crimea and Novorissiysk.
Which may sound an odd choice but the threat of that force being used on Odessa means tying up a lot of forces in the south.
Or put another way that and the rest of the Black Sea Fleet is what I’d hit, not a bridge.
Putin is a bit like Hitler, he loves his Navy and losing that would be a massive kick in his teeth.
The threat of the missiles causes key things like ammunition and fuel dumps to be moved out of range.
That of it myself is a big theatre effect.
Nobody killed doing that either. So it is a passive effector.
Abrams will get there in the coming months apparently, already training on them in Germany I believe as the US decided to supply older models from existing stock in the end not the ones that would have taken a year.
They couldn’t manage a river crossing as we saw exactly a year ago today, I doubt anyone (sane) within the russian military would ever contemplate an amphibious landing ever again.
I imagine the Kremlin is wondering what they could ‘donate’ to Argentina …
‘Meybe if they gavz somthink to uss, then we khuld give it beck? Justz an idea … You got a better one?“
They have nothing useful to donate.
The kit that the Argentinians had in ‘82 was generally as good as the junk Russia us using in 2023.
BTW the core of the professional Argentinian forces was better trained and better lead than the Russian twits are ATM.
There was me making a joke …
I gets
The UK is completely defenseless against any sort of Russian top and cruise missiles. Everyone knows that. But by all means keep talking. There are no anti-aircraft missiles defending the UK. There is also no airborne early warning for the UK unless someone else is doing it for them. It’s always best to hide behind someone else.
Well, nobody can accuse our government of seeking a peaceful settlement to this war.
Giving the Ukrainians the wherewithal to strike deep inside Russia is a serious escalation. I know Ukraine wants nothing more than to bring NATO forces directly into the war. But let us hope and pray some common sense creeps into the target selection process.
Anyone know how many Russian nuclear reactors are within Storm Shadows 350 mile range?
150 mile range isnt it? Probably quite a lot of nuclear reactors- however you have to be utterly raving lunatic- like the Russians are to discharge heavy weapons of any sort around a nuclear power station. I mean who in their right minds wants another Chernobyl?
I think George is referring to our version rather than the export model Ukraine are getting. Different ranges. But yes you’d have to be a lunatic to target nuclear reactors, especially just 150 miles from your own country. We will have received assurances about their use i.e. not used on Russian territory.
Is it certain that they are getting the export version? I assume it means new build missiles then.
It may well be an assumption but its what most articles I have read implied. Wiki states this too. I’m guessing the difference is just software.
Given Ben Wallace in his speech said the Kalibr had a 2,000km range, 7 times that of Storm Shadow, the maths indicates they’re getting the export version.
Even better I guess. Doesn’t drain our stocks and keeps missile production open.
MBDA UK must be very busy atm.
The oldest ones we have will have multiple components that are close to expiry.
So it was never on the cards to upgrade those to Spear4.
So we donate or we dispose?
Getting a bit confused now. Everyone seems to be suggesting it is the export variant Ukraine is getting, implying new build. I agree it would make more sense to send old missiles from our stock, especially considering they are double the range. Unless of course they are modifying missiles from our stock to export standard if that can be done.
I don’t know but I would suspect they get them in ongoing batches via RAF flights and any use beyond that agreed would immediately stop that supply. So it’s a very small risk I suspect t and certainly hope.
And todays stupidest post goes to George 🏆
• You can’t have a peaceful settlement that is isn’t a just settlement. That is what HMG and every other government supporting Ukraine against Russian fascism wants, a just and peaceful settlement with Russian forces withdrawn from Ukraine and reparations to Ukraine.
• Why would Ukraine want to irradiate its fields, towns and cities by targeting Russian nuclear power stations? Chernobyl demonstrated a disaster at a plant contaminates for thousands of miles across dozens of countries.
As the radiation would undoubtedly contaminate NATO countries too, this would also undermine the support Ukraine receives from NATO.
• No you do NOT know that Ukraine wants to being NATO forces into the war as combatants. The Ukrainians are winning, why would they need to? They also know that a direct clash between NATO and Russia risks a nuclear confrontation on their soil. The last thing they want is to become a nuclear blasted battlefield.
Are you:
(a) a Munich-style appeaser / aka coward?
(b) one of those sad old lefties who long for the restoration of the workers paradise that was the USSR?
(c) just another of Putin’s useful idiots?
Or combination of the above?
Better than I could have written. I’m guessing a mix of all three Tbh. A being the most dominant.
Are you actually serious. I did plan a point by point push back to your comment but Tbh the idea that Ukr is actually going to use donated kit to destroy Russian nuclear power plants is ludicrous and it’s 150!miles BTW. Not 350! Plainly your pension fund is begging for a swift capitulation by the Ukr side. 🙏🙏
150 or 350 depending on the versions we give them. Do you really know for certain, which one is being supplied?
The Ukrainian military has numerous militias and politically diverse factions within it’s ranks. Each with their own agendas. Who is to say if someone from Azov or Right Sector will press the button?
Ukraine has lived with the fallout from Chernobyl for decades. If desperate enough I can see some nutter attacking a Russian nuclear power station. Especially to bring about circumstances whereby NATO would become directly involved in their war.
You seem to forget that Russia and Ukraine share the same formative origins. Both were privileged founding signatories to the USSR, regardless what happened next. Both are failed states recovering from communism. Both have officials/oligarchs influenced and/or trained by the KGB. In that respect, they are as bad and as unpredictable as each other. Deeply deserving of everything they’ve suffered thus far. They’ve certainly earned it by exporting socialism and communism around the globe. It’s in their nature. Trust them at your peril!
Lastly, my pensions have naff all to do with this squabble between former communist comrades.
The UK have sent the export version to Ukraine – 250 km range
So no deep strikes into Mordor, or hitting the bridge, but the Black sea fleet might be just in range.
I imagine the likely attempts at retaliation by the Russian will be cyber and interfering with undersea cables. Hopefully we’ve put in place some plans to deal with these.
This government is generally as hopeless as all of the other ones over the last couple of decades but their performance on Ukraine has been fantastic. Time and again we’ve taken the lead and it’s great to see us continuing to do so
True, we have been in the lead all the while. Now we just need the Americans to actually deliver those Abrams tanks and their equivalent of Storm Shadow – and maybe some F-16s?
I don’t really understand the reticence about F16
Neither do I. US sells F-16s to Taiwan, notwithstanding the annoyance of China, and is actively looking at ways to speed delivery.
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/exclusive-us-seeks-way-speed-delivery-new-fighter-jets-taiwan-2022-01-20/
I do not think it is a reluctance to send the aeroplanes. I think the Americans have a good handle on what it takes to bring aircrew, ground crew and logistics to support F16 and they understandably think it is an unnecessary distraction .
If I was the Ukrainians I would be going after the Gripen, excellent fighter, designed to be flown off roads by conscripts with an excellent radar. But there are not that many around.
The project to give the Ukraine airforce should have started 9 months ago.
???
I think the Ukranians have an airforce equipped with Soviet junk.
They don’t do as much flying as they would like because the junk doesn’t have the effectors or detectors needed.
I don’t really believe that it would be a distraction to motivated people to be given something to get their teeth into.
I think pilot and maintainer training should have started, as you say, 9 months ago and they would be good by now.
The Grippen isn’t the solution are there are no spare frames around.
The world is awash with old F16’s and perfect ones that the Nordics are happy to donate.
The problem with Ukr taking any western ac is that they are all pretty much designed and deployed to operate in a completely permissive environment. Operating them over Ukraine atm would simply result in many lost pilots. Such is the effectiveness of Russian AF systems that Ukr would achieve nothing with F16’s ( or any other type) over and above that which they would achieve with they’re old soviet types. Frankly this is not a permissive air war. Ukraine must first take it’s kit, equip and train on SEAD/Dead tactics using HARM or equivalent and persue that until Russian AD is degraded massively. To do otherwise will just result in unacceptable aircrew losses. One of the reasons I advocate A10 in the interim is that operated close over Ukr lines it’s just a bit more survivable for the pilots when inevitably they get taken down over their own lines. Brutal but doable.
It will be cyber, to avoid possible escalation to direct confrontation with a NATO member. As the Storm Shadow decision was taken months ago, the U.K. has undoubtedly been planning for such a response. Hence the the NCSC’s (GCHQ) beginning to issue further alerts about cyber attacks about a month ago.
I often wonder if they know how stupid they sound?
200,000 troops dead or badly injured, one old WW2 era tank on display, it’s becoming clear the with the exception of the underwater arena that Russias threat has been greatly overestimated for many many years. The era of just keep throwing bodies at it and we’ll eventually win has long gone.
It is possible, even probable, that the first SS attack was today when a factory in Luhansk, so far out of UA’s weapon’s range, was accurately hit. Also, it seems accompanying the SS were the first known use of ADM-160B MALD (Miniature Air-Launched Decoy) decoy missiles, with wreckage found nearby.
Jimk:
Three targets in Luhansk were hit:
1) Machine Building Plant Nbr100
2) Polypak factory used as munitions storage hub.
3) Oil depot.
and from this video, that looks like the middle of the building has been reduced to rubble.
That’s a successful mission. It looks like the UAF has had access to the SS for quite a while and the announcement was very carefully timed so as to not tip the Russians off. The RuAF now have a better idea of what they are up against.
So, in regard to your posts 16 months ago about Russia taking Ukraine with only missiles and not needing ground forces, in 24 hours (I can cut and paste your post for all to see) what are your thoughts now my little Saville troll?
Well that’s all good for the Russian AF alas they can only sit and watch these little friends tear them several new ones 😂😂😂
It’s stormshadow John, not SS! I realise your getting every little scrap of propaganda in that you can given time is running short but that is pretty desperate.
If we conducted proportionate response on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine we’d be rolling through devestated Russian territory by now. Funny how Russia throws its toys out of the pram for eventually, reluctantly, belatedly giving Ukraine some measure of the capability Russia has been indescriminately raining on Ukraine for over a year.
So all I’m hearing is ukr will be receiving the MTCR compliant export version which would assume that this model exists in unsold storage somewhere as I can’t imagine the RAF would handicap themselves with it, so is this just a lie or can the full range version itself be handicapped?
As an aside many years ago I’m sure I remember the listed range being 900km but maybe that’s just old age.
Hi everyone, just wondering if these would be good for taking out the kerch bridge completely so it would be bloody hard to build again.
Wreckage found and photographed, Storm Shadow confirmed as weapon used to attack Luhansk.
so the first targets (confirmed) were in Luhansk, yesterday and today, rather than ‘the’ Bridge. Presumbly this means chances of success were considered too small, given the location / distance / AA? Otherwise, I imagine, this would be ‘the’ top of the list?