I wonder why lol. Even tho certain donations where made recently for about 2-3 battery systems additionally with also another eu nation gathering extra missile to replenish stocks
To imply that the iskanders are a fine weapon and have continued to be used and are effective for all sorts of targets except non moving. Which you put in a list of russian equipment that is not used because they arent any changers which isnt true.
Pac-3 being spotted Or claiming Downing of hypersonic missiles? Not sure what youre on about there.
you got to pick your poison when you have a small number of interceptors and a large amount of land to cover. lets not also forget that iskanders get used on frontline targets quite often.
never claimed they arent used, i just stated the fact that russia claims them as super weapons.
wdym you wonder why, you stated it yourself russia uses a ton of iskanders and kinzhals, they have a steady supply ukraine does not have a steady supply of patriots interceptor or aster 30, they cant just use them on every kinzhal or iskander, especially when a number of em are used on targets outside coverage
They regularly use them near frontlines, su34/35 2 of them were reportedly shot down this year, one su-35 was seen shot down. And claimed by UAAF. Russian airframes avoid trying to get close regardless n havent shown any progress into Ukranian controlled territories n their airspace
that is offensive use, you dont move a battery near the front for iskandars.
generally this tactic is incredibly risky and they do it very sparingly. they arent going to do it to defend frontline targets from iskanders or kinzhals
Didnt quote your earlier message but you spoke about coverage. Doesnt seem so, if coverage was bad. Jets could also fly low and get closer but havent at all in recent times. Its why they continue to use stand off long range equipment like glide bombs for extended range around 70+kms
Pretty US and allied forces also helped with coverage against Iranian ballistic missiles. Many got through but iran was just spamming at that point. Pretty sure low numbers wise they would have had a high interception rate anyway
Based on what? Israeli air defense has a massively high interception rate (Iron Dome - ~95%, Davids Sling ~97%) compared to the sheer amount of missiles they have to deal with.
Intercepting thousands of missiles is signifigantly harder than 20 or so stealth jets flying in your airspace
This ‘great osint account’ has been caught more than once spreading disinformation straight from the Russian Ministry of Defense, and its Telegram followers are mostly Ziggers.
It did it’s job as expected, iranian strikes had extremely small scale effect. The problem there was logistic that strike necessitated a ton of interceptors.
