01-15-2024, 09:15 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukraine-russi...04732.html
The emergency landing of the IL-22 was a very nice piece of flying. At least one Russian pilot was on the job that night. The damage to the tail is significant but that is not to say there wasn't also damage in the tube itself. Calling for an ambulance indicates somebody was at least hurt. For Ukraine, too bad they didn't take this one down too. These planes usually carry people with either "special skills" or higher ranks involved in battle management. They too have special training and generally experience in the art. The plane can be fairly easily replaced but the people cannot.
The Mainstay is important at present because it can help target Ukrainian air force operating bases (which change frequently) and can warn of Ukrainian air strikes inbound, even when the Ukrainian aircraft fly low. Right now, the latter isn't all that important, as the Ukrainian air force cannot mount many sorties. When the F-16s arrive that will change. The A-50s will then be very important to warn Russian aircraft of the threat and to vector Russian air to attack the inbound strike. This is the original purpose of the Mainstay and it can definitely execute that task. It generally does not control a large number of aircraft (typically 8 or less), which differs from the US/NATO AWACS. This is part of the Russian approach to the IADS which puts the air controller deeply in the loop. It is said that the A-50 can control much larger forces, but AFAIK it hasn't been demonstrated doing this.
The A-50 can also warn of cruise missiles inbound and in theory can interface directly (via datalinks) to the Russian IADS (e.g. individual S-400 batteries) and directly launch and target the missiles. This capability has not been observed anywhere in the current set of Russian wars. In fact, in Ukraine, the Russian IADS hasn't operated in an "integrated" fashion, much to everyone's surprise. However, we really don't want the Russians to start living up to the advertised capabilities of the A-50. They may have just never felt it necessary in Syria and Ukraine to "get their act together". We don't want to give them the chance, so destroying the aircraft and crews "soon" would be important. With a small number of aircraft, there are also a small number of trained crews. They are almost more valuable than the aircraft.
The emergency landing of the IL-22 was a very nice piece of flying. At least one Russian pilot was on the job that night. The damage to the tail is significant but that is not to say there wasn't also damage in the tube itself. Calling for an ambulance indicates somebody was at least hurt. For Ukraine, too bad they didn't take this one down too. These planes usually carry people with either "special skills" or higher ranks involved in battle management. They too have special training and generally experience in the art. The plane can be fairly easily replaced but the people cannot.
The Mainstay is important at present because it can help target Ukrainian air force operating bases (which change frequently) and can warn of Ukrainian air strikes inbound, even when the Ukrainian aircraft fly low. Right now, the latter isn't all that important, as the Ukrainian air force cannot mount many sorties. When the F-16s arrive that will change. The A-50s will then be very important to warn Russian aircraft of the threat and to vector Russian air to attack the inbound strike. This is the original purpose of the Mainstay and it can definitely execute that task. It generally does not control a large number of aircraft (typically 8 or less), which differs from the US/NATO AWACS. This is part of the Russian approach to the IADS which puts the air controller deeply in the loop. It is said that the A-50 can control much larger forces, but AFAIK it hasn't been demonstrated doing this.
The A-50 can also warn of cruise missiles inbound and in theory can interface directly (via datalinks) to the Russian IADS (e.g. individual S-400 batteries) and directly launch and target the missiles. This capability has not been observed anywhere in the current set of Russian wars. In fact, in Ukraine, the Russian IADS hasn't operated in an "integrated" fashion, much to everyone's surprise. However, we really don't want the Russians to start living up to the advertised capabilities of the A-50. They may have just never felt it necessary in Syria and Ukraine to "get their act together". We don't want to give them the chance, so destroying the aircraft and crews "soon" would be important. With a small number of aircraft, there are also a small number of trained crews. They are almost more valuable than the aircraft.