No? SPAAGs are often the best choice for countering drones. SAMs are best for countering missiles.
You CAN use a fighter to try and chase a UAV - but it’s a massive waste. The Ukrainians have shown that they are quite pragmatic as to how they use their limited resources.
So that’s why Kyiv is facing 4 hours of electricity per day this winter, pragmatism. Numbers aren’t numbering man
Without getting this thread into de-rail city.
You might find that the ‘explosive things travelling and causing chaos’ is a 2-way street. After all, I don’t see Russian aircraft having much luck in tackling drones coming the other way either…
Air-to-Air vs. cheap UAVS isn’t the way to do it.
And yet missiles are being fired, just as you said…
For the sake of justice, they have very advanced interceptor drones, combined with the very scattered use of geraniums, I’m not surprised that they’ve shot down almost everything before
Well we come back to the original claim. Out of the 1000s of AAMs fired - not a SINGLE one has brought down a single VKS aircraft over 4.5 years of fighting?
Really? Seriously?
Are all of them shot at airplanes? I think many of them are against drones as well
Not all of them at planes. Not all of them at drones. Still, it’s a hell of a claim to make.
In effect - they are saying that the VKS air-to-air K/D Ratio is the best of any air force since the invention of the aeroplane.
At the beginning of the special operation, we were very burned by underestimating the enemy, and aviation actually dropped out from the beginning of the war and came to life only with the appearance of these babies
It’s always the Brits man, always.
Come and say some bullshit and go
So - someone makes outlandish claims such as ‘F-35 will lose to Su-35’ or ‘not a single VKS aircraft lost to enemy aircraft in 4.5 years of fighting’.
Questioning that is BS? Might be in Russia - but we’re allowed to ask questions here. =)
Here is your problem.
Not 1v1 fight, multi role combat missions.
So explain how a 4th gen can sneak up on a 5th gen? Despite the latter being able to see the former before the other way round?
All VKS losses come from friendly fire, drone strikes, and ballistics or air defense, ukraine has a very cautious air force and they have no analogues of the p37m
Again, don’t try to change the subject. Mission not 1v1.sead mission or strike, not 1v1
Right - so we’re not getting totally messed up here. A SEAD missile or Strike Mission. One aircraft.
You argue that the Su-35 will be able to do that better than an F-35?
I just saw this so sorry I didn’t address this, to me it might be quite possible as generally Ukrainian airplanes are equipped with infrared guided and SARH guided missiles and stay low to the ground giving them lower probabilities of launching missiles at a good aspect against a very high and fast opponent which will go cold after launching their payload. Though their F-16s do have access to aim-120c8s however due to the constraints above may not be able to achieve ranges similar to an r-37m or r-77-1 launched relatively faster and from a higher altitude.
To me, it’s like saying x nation has launched 1000s or R-77s surely one must have hit the Eurofighter 80 kilometres away only carrying 2-4 meteors
Each plane got its weak and strong advantage.
But it’s safe to say that su35 did achieve more in recent events
Now come on - I’m playing nice. Let’s stick to the original claim.
F-35 inferior to Su-35 for X mission?
Is coming onto the thread and querying whether that is accurate REALLY being a wind-up merchant or…just being a tad sceptical for valid reasons?
I have no doubts F-35 is a good strike platform but its course must also be plotted properly with respect to radar stations if I remembered correctly, please correct me if I’m wrong.
