252
submitted 3 months ago by breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca to c/world@lemmy.world

Ukraine's Air Force used F-16 jets as part of its defense against Russia's mass missile and drone attack on Aug. 26, President Volodymyr Zelensky confirmed during a press conference on Aug. 27.

Russia targeted 15 of Ukraine's 24 oblasts on Aug. 26, launching over 200 missiles and drones as part of the largest-ever aerial attack against Ukraine.

. . .

F-16s gave "a very good result," Zelensky told reporters. "As part of this huge attack, we shot down some missiles and drones with the help of F-16s."

MBFC
Archive

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 11 points 3 months ago

Its russia so it is probably shitty WW2 tech at this point but:

Very curious on the anti-missile capabilities. My understanding is that anything newer than a V2 rocket is just too fast for a jet pilot to actively engage. That is why the "meta" is countermeasures and computerized systems (e.g. patriot missiles) where the human involvement is to approve launch for liability/Geneva Convention purposes.

Drones make perfect sense. But curious if this was a mistranslation, reference to attacking launch sites, or what.

[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 28 points 3 months ago

My understanding is that anything newer than a V2 rocket is just too fast for a jet pilot to actively engage.

Not quite. The part you're referring to with V2 is ballistic missiles, specifically in their terminal (falling on target) stage. It is very hard and expensive, but not impossible, to counter these. However, only a fraction of what russia is shooting at Ukraine is ballistic missiles. Most are cruise missiles (think mini jet airplanes with wings and jet engines that fly at jet airplane speeds). These can be shot down by other jets or land based missiles pretty easily if there are defenses in place. Lastly is the Shehed drones (think mini civilian propeller plane). These are very slow flying and be shot down by land based guns, other propeller planes with guns, or even helicopters with guns. Russia is also shooting a small handful of hypersonic missiles. These are crazy fast flying from beginning to end of their flight. They're really expensive and russia doesn't have many of these.

That is why the “meta” is countermeasures and computerized systems (e.g. patriot missiles) where the human involvement is to approve launch for liability/Geneva Convention purposes.

I think human operators are more to prevent shooting down non-combatant aircraft like commercial airline and civilian planes neither of which are broadcasting Friend or Foe signals to air defense operators.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Fair enough. I think anything short of a ballistic missile against a "near peer" IS outdated tech at this point, but doing rough napkin math gives about an hour from launch to impact. I still suspect the f-16s were more about anti-drone operations but, reasonable.

I think human operators are more to prevent shooting down non-combatant aircraft like commercial airline and civilian planes neither of which are broadcasting Friend or Foe signals to air defense operators.

That is the on paper reason. I would take a look at how much friendly fire we and our allies have done and... yeah, it is liability and being able to say a human is involved for the purposes of an audit/

[-] tilefan@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago

that's why cruise missiles like the Storm Shadow have stealth technology, because they can be targeted by standard anti-aircraft systems, be the ground or air-based

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I am genuinely curious how those shake out against a near peer. Because the big advantages of stealth technology is that you never know where an attack or surveillance craft is coming from.

But when you are up against a foe who has satellites pointed at the nearby carrier group and basically all of your larger bases in the region? They likely do know when they are coming and where they came from. And have a good idea of where they are going.

Because stealth technology is not Predator (well... it kind of IS once this ramble is done but role with me). There is still a tiny amount of signal return and just general "distortion" in the area. It is obviously a LOT more complicated but it is the idea of seeing a cabinet slightly ajar and assuming you must have not closed it correctly rather than grabbing a hatchet and calling 911. Because it is just not feasible to go on full alert the moment you see a slight "weirdness" on the radar.

Unless you know that the USS Jimmy Carter just fired a bunch of missiles in your direction. Missiles that IMMEDIATELY disappeared from your radar outside of a small bit of periodic noise that may or may not be on the way to a power plant.

Its similar to all the questions about whether stealth fighters actually make sense. But the reality of THAT is that fighters themselves don't really make sense and haven't for decades and those are mostly long range missile platforms and interceptors. But... everyone wants to be a fighter pilot because Top Gun.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
252 points (98.5% liked)

World News

39129 readers
742 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS