[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/k/ - Weapons

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


Where is the Russian Air Force
>>
they're too afraid to use it much in ukrainian airspace because the losses are irreplaceable
>>
>>53559635
Bad weather. Can't fly
>>
>>53559635
On the ground. The pilots are reinforcing the infantry screens of battered BTGs.
>>
>>53559635
I bought them all.
>>
>>53559635
awaiting the inevitable dumb-fuck-ass NATO intervention.
Russia isnt going to use them on the undercard
>>
>>53559635
You cannot fly when you've maxed hours on all of your engines and only done maintenance on a must-need basis afterwards.
>>
Burning in Ukrainian fields.
>>
>>53559635
>>53559655
>>53559661
>>53559673
>>53559675
It’s actually a fairly perplexing mystery.

“they’re scared of losses”. Russian fixed wing combat aircraft losses haven’t been THAT high to warrant this. As of this writing it goes 1 Su-35, 9 Su-34, 5 Su-30, 9 Su-25. This is less than coalition aircraft losses in Desert Storm, which had no impact on the coalition AirPower continuing to decimate the Iraqis. This is lower than Soviet aircraft losses in Afghanistan, and the Soviet AF was always operational throughout.

Moreover other arms of the Russian military have been far more devastated by losses such as the army, and the Russian government still stubbornly throws them forward into the grinder. The VDV for instance has been bled dry and while their operations have been scaled back since the ears early days they’re still active. Meanwhile the Russian Air Force was very inactive even from day 1

The GPS duct taped to the cockpit was telling, and might expose some of the truth. Simply that the Russian Air Force fell victim to some sort of internal corruption and embezzlement scam and is not operational beyond that of it on paper. Its procurements are a fraud, and even ad hoc measures into the war have not allowed them to operate. It’s possible the Russian AF as we know it is only a few units around Moscow, and everything else is simply non functional due to the scam of the century. Keep in mind the Russian AF did not participate in the victory parade despite its symbolic importance. This shows the level of inoperability extends to the highest levels.
>>
File: 3mmged0.jpg (161 KB, 1142x1600)
161 KB
161 KB JPG
>>53559635
Fucking the wives and sweethearts of the Russian infantry
>>
>>53559811
If it's true that russia can't currently produce new tanks because of import restrictions I highly doubt they can produce new combat aircraft. I assume they are holding back because they need to be able to pose a threat to NATO which is getting increasingly more difficult.
>>
>>53559635

There is nothing in Soviet or Russian military history that air power played a decisive role; air power is meant to provide a third dimension to the land battle. Soviet fighters tended to be fighter-bombers or interceptors, with the Su-27 "Flanker" not arriving until 1986. Air force mostly exist to keep the sky safe and provide flying artillery to the army rather than act independently.
>>
>>53559693
lmao

NATO electronic warfare is wildly more advanced than anything RU predicted. RU can't fly many at once because they have no longer have functional IFF. They start targeting each themselves.
>>
>>53559675
Larry Ellison, is it really you?
>>
>>53559811

It's because the rumors about the Russian AF throughout all of these years have turned out to be true - which is they in no way have any pilots nor can they train additional crews at the rate they need to.

Shit we've heard throughout the years:

>Completely burned out Russian pilots in Syria who were basically on the verge of quitting due to exhaustion
>Abysmal flight hours for active duty pilots back in Russia (literally a handful of hours per month)
>Non existent trainer availability
>No modern simulators
>Russia basically relying on China to train some of their pilots because they have greater infrastructure (we've seen videos of crashed Chinese trainers with pilots bailing out and one of them randomly turns out to be fucking Russian)
>>
>>53560261
>literally a handful of hours per month

Sorry, I meant PER YEAR
>>
>>53559938
Good point. They still might want to use the airforce as a Nuclear Bomb delivery.
You dont really know how functional the rocket silos are and so for a Russian general you want some strategical planes in the resever.
>>
>>53559693
>inevitable dumb-fuck-ass NATO intervention.
>dumb-fuck-ass
That's a strange way to spell turbo Chad
>>
Down here, in hell, with us.

1:19:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PUsnzNfOwQ
>>
>>53560261
That would make ssenes too. What if the downed pilots are 50% of pilots they have?
>>
File: su-34_keychain.jpg (89 KB, 500x802)
89 KB
89 KB JPG
>>53559635
>Ukrainians turning Russian aircraft into novelty souvenirs
https://www.dronesforukraine.fund/su-34
>>
>>53559811
If russian planes are unusable then how can they offord to sell them to other countries like algeria
>>
It's because independent air operations have never been a thing in Russian history and have generally dismissed air power as secondary to land power.
>>
>>53560460
i buy these if they were made from washing machines looted by the russians then recaptured by ukrainians after the russians got rekt trying to take their looted washing machine back to russia with them
>>
>>53559635
Their engines have to be replaced every 5k hours and they have no more engines to replace them with.
>>
>>53560909
>independent air operations have never been a thing in Russian history and have generally dismissed air power as secondary to land power.
I'll take "how to know if you're retarded" for $1000
>>
>>53559811
>This is less than coalition aircraft losses in Desert Storm

The difference is that coalition aircraft were going right into the heart of the fire time and time again. A large percentage of Russian sorties either stay over their own airspace or barely penetrate Ukrainian airspace.
>>
>>53560889
>how can they afford to sell something worth millions of dollars
>>
>>53559655
ww2 japan was so cool
>>
Russia doesn’t use airpower the same way as the West which depended a lot on reinforcements from America and the UK.

Russia’s modern military doctrine takes a very different approach to warfare, placing a much larger emphasis on what Russia calls new generation warfare (NGW) in the lead-up and early stages of conflict (Grey Zone operations), and then the measured and even budget-minded use of force during the conflict itself. Russia uses its more expensive assets only as necessary, and where cheaper alternatives don’t seem viable—a stark contrast to America’s approach to overwhelming technological might.

Importantly, Russia’s military doctrine is not built on the back of airpower like one might say America’s is, but rather sees airpower as subservient to its larger ground forces. As Forbes writer David Axe put it, Russia’s air force is primarily used as airborne artillery. This may, in fact, be the direct result of NATO’s massive airpower capabilities, and the Russian understanding that it may lose air superiority in the event of a large-scale conflict. Rather than trying to win a losing battle, Russian doctrine has shifted to accept the idea that it may not control the airspace it’s fighting in.

Russia’s military doctrine does not call for using its airpower apparatus to quickly take total control over enemy airspace, nor does it even call for the rapid elimination of enemy air defenses. This speaks to Russia’s lack of dedicated suppression of enemy air defense (SEAD) platforms like America’s specialized Wild Weasel F-16s. Russian jets can and do employ anti-radiation missiles to engage air defense systems, for instance, but it’s not a job that any Russian pilot or aircraft specializes in or frequently trains specifically for.

Instead, Russia places a heavy emphasis on long-range fires, with the use of their own integrated air defense systems even prioritized over tasking aircraft with dominating the airspace above their forces.
>>
>>53561040

Russia’s approach to warfare calls for using advanced air defense systems to mitigate the effectiveness of enemy air defenses and aircraft alike, all while using a high volume of artillery, rocket, and missile fire to gain and leverage fire superiority. Aircraft support ground forces to these ends, rather than serving as the primary means of taking control over the battlespace. If airpower serves as the backbone of America’s military doctrine, large tank units and artillery serve as the backbone of Russia’s.

Russia does not prioritize denying airspace to its enemies. Russia’s approach to warfare calls for very literally punishing their enemies in the initial stages of fighting with the goal of rapidly resolving conflicts in a way Russia deems favorable.

Russia aims to use its fire superiority to target and degrade critical elements of command and infrastructure that will ultimately force its opponent to agree to favorable terms. As such, the strategy Russian commanders employ seemingly assumes nationwide air dominance won’t be assured. That shouldn’t be mistaken for arguing that Russia won’t use aircraft and integrated air defense systems to dominate their immediate airspace or airspace over an objective to the best of their ability. They would and are certainly doing that. But Russia doesn’t view establishing country-wide air dominance as essential to accomplishing their broader objectives.

Because Russian forces seemingly have difficulty discerning between friendly and enemy aircraft in a chaotic battlefield environment, a heavy presence of Russian aircraft operating over Russian forces likely seems riskier than relying on advanced air defense systems like the S-400 Triumpf to keep enemy aircraft from engaging their troops, however.

So instead, Russian jets are used in a similar fashion to Russian artillery: conducting airstrikes against targets in support of its ground forces.
>>
where is nato aviation? at least russia have excuse
>>
>>53561040
That's a lot of words to say that Russian air doctrine and capability is inferior to that of America by many orders of magnitude.
>>
>>53561059
Please tell, exactly how can NATO aircraft be involved if their countries are not engaged in direct military action?
>>
>>53561058

Russia’s approach is not working in Ukraine. Its use of airpower as a supplement to its overarching objective to secure fire superiority has proven largely ineffective over Ukraine, as have Russia’s long-touted integrated air defense systems. While Ukraine’s air force has certainly suffered losses, they continue to fly combat sorties every day more than a month into this conflict.

Ukrainian fighters, mostly operating at night, have continued to provide air support to ground forces on the defense, and Ukrainian drones have wreaked havoc against Russian equipment throughout the country. Meanwhile, Russian aircraft continue to fly hundreds of sorties per day, often deploying munitions while still inside Russian airspace at targets hundreds of miles inside Ukraine, serving as long-range artillery for their largely stalled ground forces.

Russia’s inability to take control of Ukrainian airspace, coupled with its doctrinal approach to using aircraft as an extension of their long-range artillery and rocket assets, is clearly not working it was meant to on paper.

Perhaps the most important reason of all may simply be that Russia’s approach to warfare severely undervalued the importance of controlling the airspace overhead. However the war in Ukraine eventually concludes, it seems likely that we’ll see a shift in Russia’s concept of airpower and its uses in warfare in the years to come.
>>
>>53561077
english and america officers were confirmed died on snake island in failed pig rush attempt that spectacularly failed
>>
>>53560397
If russians are relying on bombers to deliver nukes we should just glass Moscow tomorrow
>>
>>53561118
Let's take "Things that never happened" for $100.
>>
>>53560397

Nuclear silos and submarines (at sea) are probably the most functional part of the triad. Bombers are a meme without constant patrols.
>>
>>53561118
>assuming American and British officers operate similarly dysfunctional as your churka army
Go laugh at your own casualties somewhere else, dumb nigger
>>
File: image1.jpg (231 KB, 1080x506)
231 KB
231 KB JPG
>>53561064
>That's a lot of words to say that Russian air doctrine and capability is inferior to that of America by many orders of magnitude.
>>
>>53561118
I'm gonna go ahead and assume that's not true.
>>
>>53561118
are those confirmed US and UK officer losses in the room with us right now?
>>
>>53561118
kek this post triggers the anglo
>>
>>53561173
>he can't stop making Marvel reference
>>
File: airgavin.png (295 KB, 410x414)
295 KB
295 KB PNG
The entire Russian Air Force was shot down on the first day by a mysterious lone aircraft. The Russians claim it was a CIA aircraft while HATO members claim it was the work of a madman.
>>
Same place as the vdv
>>
File: 1355032616083.gif (63 KB, 150x150)
63 KB
63 KB GIF
>>53560889
>he doesn't know
>>
File: bUNXwFD.jpg (24 KB, 450x338)
24 KB
24 KB JPG
>>53561277
>>
File: 1650052864027.jpg (3.19 MB, 3500x2334)
3.19 MB
3.19 MB JPG
>>53561277
it was a lone Nazi plane actually which resurfaced from the dark side of the moon
>>
>>53560889
You have to do a lot of maintenance per hour of flight. A list someone on airliners.net came up with, not purported to be perfect numbers:
maintenance hours to hours flown
Saab Draken.- 50 to 1
Eurofighter....- 9 to 1
F-14............. - 24 to 1
F-18E/F........- 6 to 1
F-18E/F........- 15 to 1 (different source)
Saab Gripen..- 10 to 1
C-17.............- 20 to 1
F-15A/B........- 32.3 here thru f117 stats from
(HaveBlue and the F-117A by David Aronstein)
F-15C/D........- 22.1
F-16A...........- 19.2
F-117...........- 150 (pre 1989)
F-117...........- 45 (after improvements, post 1989)
CH-46E........- 19.6 in 1995 GlobalSecurity.org
CH-46E........- 27.2 in 2000
CH-53D........- 24.8 in 1995
CH-53D........- 27.9 in 2000
F-20.............- 5.6 (http://www.f20a.com/f20maint.htm)
A-6E............- 51.9 DMMH/FH
(http://yarchive.net/mil/fa18_vs_a6.html)
F/A-18C.......- 19.1 DMMH/FH
B-2..............- 124
>>
Tanks are disposable, planes are not.
>>
>>53561405
I miswrote, it should be maintenance MAN hours.
>>
>>53560460
I'd buy one if i was sure i would not get scammed with some peace of painted metal from a Chinese factory
>>
>>53561277
stop that
>>
>>53561436
>>53561277

Ugh...
>>
>>53561428
This.
>>
>>53561405
>F-20 is the lowest
The tigershark deserved better...
>>
>>53559635
No avgas and too afraid of Ukrainian AA assets
>>
>>53559635
Russian airforce got S300ed
>>
>>53561199
Pretending to be retarded doesn't make you any less retarded.
>>
200 jets and 163 helicopters have been shot down according to ukies. I saw some reviewer said they have already used their best pilots. They had around 500 jets for the invasion out of which only 300 - 400 can be used. Now they try to avoid ukranian AA and fighter jets as much as possible. So they only fly in Mariupol and Donbas
>>
>>53559811
>haven’t been THAT high to warrant this. As of this writing it goes 1 Su-35, 9 Su-34, 5 Su-30, 9 Su-25.
Apparently this is all of Russian trained pilots. See in like 3rd week they were losing Syrian campaign veterans , who who where shot in photos with Putin for propaganda purposes. Russia have 1000 aircrafts on paper but theit pilots bench is 20 pilots deep. Like nothing changed from WWII.
>>
File: grapes.gif (10 KB, 640x918)
10 KB
10 KB GIF
>>53561040
>>53561058
So many words to describe simple two word phrase.
Sour Grapes.
>>
>>53559966
>>53561040
but we're not even seeing them do that, anon

>>53561110
>Russian aircraft continue to fly hundreds of sorties per day
actually only 2-300, which is low for an air group 300-strong in the middle of a war

>>53561118
>confirmed
silly Ivan, "confirmed" doesn't mean "RT said so it must be true"
>>
>>53561471
>no blitzfighter
>no hilariously undergunned blitztank to spam at T-72s
VGH, what could've been
>>
>>53559987
damn, thats pretty fuckin great
>>
>>53560889
>offord to sell them to other countries like algeria
Because they inflate the cost and 'forget' about maintenance, or even send them existing Soviet-era shit with a new coat of paint (i.e., what they tried to do with Algeria's MiG-29SMT order in the early 2000s but got caught almost immediately and forced to take back the jets and refund them in full).
>>
File: 1646167498900.jpg (714 KB, 813x1350)
714 KB
714 KB JPG
>>53561040
>As Forbes writer David Axe
Ah yes, the great King of Hacks, only surpassed by the likes of Mike Sparks, Pierre Sprey, and Incel Slave Z.
>>
File: Russian Isekai.png (1.53 MB, 1004x1174)
1.53 MB
1.53 MB PNG
>>53561118
The vatnik fanfictions are really getting out of hand, holy fuck.
>>
>>53560889
Because they sold all the working ones
>>
>>53561118
If that were true they would be spamming photos of their dead bodies everywhere
>>
>>53563414
you mistake. pictures of dead enemy is war crimes even if it is pig. russia adheres
>>
>>53559966
Cope
In this war Russians don't follow THEIR instructions. They have everything in their books but for some reason they do it differently and fail
>>
>>53560460
>1000 USD
oh come on
>>
Question is do they only fuel the planes for very short duration sorties as they are limiting their pilots ability to fly to West Ukraine, defect and collect their bounty.
>>
>>53561428
https://www.dronesforukraine.fund/su-34
if you scroll down you can see the pics of them taking and cutting the metal
>>
>>53561405
F18E/F? Eurofighter and Grippen looks nice. Thu I have doubts about Eurofighter, those things have vector thrust engines and those things are pain in the ass to maintain, unless they are easily changed and maintenance done in factory.
>>
>>53561040
>>53561058
For those who don't want to waste their time reading these two messages, I'll sum them up in a single word : cope
>>
Ruaf lost 9 jets in a single day in early March. And some of its best pilots. So they decided to keep pilots alive and planes intact just in case HATO decides to buttfuck russia
>>
File: ooohhh.jpg (87 KB, 1020x1024)
87 KB
87 KB JPG
>>53559987
I'm imagining the faces of S400 operators when their whole frequency spectrum gets jammed by a growler
>>
>>53559811
came here to post this
its fucking fishy
>>
File: pepekek.png (13 KB, 231x218)
13 KB
13 KB PNG
daily reminder that russian helicopters are fucking lobbing rockets ballistically while their air force is dropping WW2 tier bombs
>>
>>53559720
Took the thread too long to get to the correct answer.
>>
>>53567339
My guess is that their number of actually useful aircraft is maybe 2-300 out of the claimed 1000+ planes of the oh-so-mighty Russian Air Force. Coincidentally, that's around the exact number that deployed to Ukraine...
>>
>>53567153
You're doing god's work anon.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.