[Goose]

Maybe in the last couple months, over two years into the war, Russia finally figured out how to use their air force, but I think the more parsimonious explanation, the one that fits the known facts, is that Ukraine is running out of air defense missiles.

Fortunately there is a solution for that if the House can ever vote on it.

There is another set of "known facts" you seem to ignore. The first article, clearly written from a Ukrainian point of view, describes the situation precisely.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03...ombs-tech/

The Russians are currently flying over a hundred TAC air sorties a day, compared to basically zero a year ago. This is placing a massive load on the Ukrainian air defense systems that previously didn't exist at all. As the article points out, the front is 960 km long. Ukraine has nowhere near enough missile launchers to cover that entire front, even if/when they have missiles to supply them. This illustrates with clarity the inherent limitation of a SAM-based defense. Each missile site is a point defense system that defends a circle around it's location. To defend a long front, you need LOTS of such point defense systems. That is why the USSR built a vast number of them. Ukraine doesn't have and since 2014 has not had anywhere near enough missile launchers to meet Soviet standards.

Equally importantly the glide bombs provide a "stand off" distance of 40 km. A Patriot can reach that far easily and can be located far enough behind the "front" to be relatively "safe". An NASAMS has a maximum range of 30 km with "standard" AMRAAMs and 50 km with AMRAAM-ERs. That puts the NASAMs at most 10 km behind the  front. Possible but risky. This analysis for NASAMS relies on the attack being directly towards the missile launcher. Being "off axis" increases the range beyond what an NASAMS can hit. HAWK missiles have ranges similar to NASAMS-ER. IRIS-T doesn't have near the range. The S300/400 does have the range but it is unclear how many of these systems Ukraine has remaining and how many missiles are available. Getting more missiles will obviously rely on purchasing them from current users. AFAIK, those are the choices.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/05/world...lanes.html

This article makes many of the same points, while debunking the Ukrainian claims that they destroyed 14 Russian aircraft. 2 or possibly 3 are "confirmed" kills. Both articles point out that the VKS is suffering attrition due to Ukrainian missiles. The VKS has responded to its losses by using extensive drone reconnaissance to both locate the targets and (more importantly) verify (as best they can) there are no long-range SAMs in the immediate vicinity. Orlan drones can carry an ELINT package that will detect the radars of most NATO and essentially all USSR designed SAMs, so they can usually find any SAM sites.

Like all things in war, especially for Russians, these capabilities often aren't used very well, but the VKS is getting better. All they need to do is look at the USAF "playbook" and copy it. Easier said than done, but given time they have got a lot of it right. The important maneuver we have yet to see from the VKS is "toss" glide bomb launches. The VKS flies high to maximize the range of their glide bombs.The VKS is right now behaving as if it is impervious while over occupied/Russian territory. They aren't quite, but pretty close, especially if their "snoopers" say there are no active SAMs in the area. If/when the F-16s "arrive" and/or Ukraine gets a larger supply of missiles the Russians may have to learn how to do that. The SU-34 is a fast aircraft, so the VKS can in theory do the job even better than the USAF. It can get up to speed below the radar horizon, "pop up" and "toss" its glide bombs, then dive for the deck. SARH missiles can't cope with this maneuver and ARH often fails because the initial steer doesn't bring them close enough to "see" the target.  It takes better airmanship than the typical VKS pilot normally possess, but as Russia has shown, they learn.

I agree that Ukraine running out of SAMs is an immense problem, but even if they had all they needed, they have a new and very deadly enemy to face. Of that there is no doubt. The first article makes the case that Ukraine can, with the F-16s and an adequate SAM supply, inflict unsustainable losses on the VKS. This analysis must be relying heavily on the F-16s, because Ukraine doesn't have anywhere near enough SAM launchers to do that, assuming the VKS fights "smart" and avoids them. The USAF knows how to do that pretty well. The VKS may not be able to do it, but I suspect they can learn, given time. Ukraine's best hope is to not give them time.

Should be said that Russia is running out of things too. They're now sending in troops for assaults over exposed territory using ATVs and vans. Here's a Russian golf cart attack bring disrupted with an FPV drone.

https://x.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1779017304224731629

While I don't doubt Russia is running out of things, I don't think this video supports that contention in any way. What is different between the vehicle used by the Russians and the RWMIK Land Rover used by the UK? https://www.eliteukforces.info/uksf-gear/wmik/ Does the fact the UK uses these vehicles mean they are running out of things? https://www.americanspecialops.com/vehicles/atv/ Ditto. https://military.polaris.com/en-us/appli.../military/ In fact, the US uses all kinds of ATVs for military purposes.

The vehicle in the photo carried a crew of two (it appears) and had what looked like an antenna radome mounted on it. Hardly looks like a vehicle making an assault, but more like a communications/EW vehicle. It may have actually been a GPS jammer for all we know. Glad Ukraine hit it because if it was a jammer it can cause problems for precision weapons and drones. Maybe it can only transmit when parked because it uses a dismounted generator.

[Goose]

Maybe in the last couple months, over two years into the war, Russia finally figured out how to use their air force, but I think the more parsimonious explanation, the one that fits the known facts, is that Ukraine is running out of air defense missiles.

Fortunately there is a solution for that if the House can ever vote on it.

There is another set of "known facts" you seem to ignore. The first article, clearly written from a Ukrainian point of view, describes the situation precisely.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03...ombs-tech/

The Russians are currently flying over a hundred TAC air sorties a day, compared to basically zero a year ago. This is placing a massive load on the Ukrainian air defense systems that previously didn't exist at all. As the article points out, the front is 960 km long. Ukraine has nowhere near enough missile launchers to cover that entire front, even if/when they have missiles to supply them. This illustrates with clarity the inherent limitation of a SAM-based defense. Each missile site is a point defense system that defends a circle around it's location. To defend a long front, you need LOTS of such point defense systems. That is why the USSR built a vast number of them. Ukraine doesn't have and since 2014 has not had anywhere near enough missile launchers to meet Soviet standards.

Equally importantly the glide bombs provide a "stand off" distance of 40 km. A Patriot can reach that far easily and can be located far enough behind the "front" to be relatively "safe". An NASAMS has a maximum range of 30 km with "standard" AMRAAMs and 50 km with AMRAAM-ERs. That puts the NASAMs at most 10 km behind the  front. Possible but risky. This analysis for NASAMS relies on the attack being directly towards the missile launcher. Being "off axis" increases the range beyond what an NASAMS can hit. HAWK missiles have ranges similar to NASAMS-ER. IRIS-T doesn't have near the range. The S300/400 does have the range but it is unclear how many of these systems Ukraine has remaining and how many missiles are available. Getting more missiles will obviously rely on purchasing them from current users. AFAIK, those are the choices.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/05/world...lanes.html

This article makes many of the same points, while debunking the Ukrainian claims that they destroyed 14 Russian aircraft. 2 or possibly 3 are "confirmed" kills. Both articles point out that the VKS is suffering attrition due to Ukrainian missiles. The VKS has responded to its losses by using extensive drone reconnaissance to both locate the targets and (more importantly) verify (as best they can) there are no long-range SAMs in the immediate vicinity. Orlan drones can carry an ELINT package that will detect the radars of most NATO and essentially all USSR designed SAMs, so they can usually find any SAM sites.

Like all things in war, especially for Russians, these capabilities often aren't used very well, but the VKS is getting better. All they need to do is look at the USAF "playbook" and copy it. Easier said than done, but given time they have got a lot of it right. The important maneuver we have yet to see from the VKS is "toss" glide bomb launches. The VKS flies high to maximize the range of their glide bombs.The VKS is right now behaving as if it is impervious while over occupied/Russian territory. They aren't quite, but pretty close, especially if their "snoopers" say there are no active SAMs in the area. If/when the F-16s "arrive" and/or Ukraine gets a larger supply of missiles the Russians may have to learn how to do that. The SU-34 is a fast aircraft, so the VKS can in theory do the job even better than the USAF. It can get up to speed below the radar horizon, "pop up" and "toss" its glide bombs, then dive for the deck. SARH missiles can't cope with this maneuver and ARH often fails because the initial steer doesn't bring them close enough to "see" the target.  It takes better airmanship than the typical VKS pilot normally possess, but as Russia has shown, they learn.

I agree that Ukraine running out of SAMs is an immense problem, but even if they had all they needed, they have a new and very deadly enemy to face. Of that there is no doubt. The first article makes the case that Ukraine can, with the F-16s and an adequate SAM supply, inflict unsustainable losses on the VKS. This analysis must be relying heavily on the F-16s, because Ukraine doesn't have anywhere near enough SAM launchers to do that, assuming the VKS fights "smart" and avoids them. The USAF knows how to do that pretty well. The VKS may not be able to do it, but I suspect they can learn, given time. Ukraine's best hope is to not give them time.

Should be said that Russia is running out of things too. They're now sending in troops for assaults over exposed territory using ATVs and vans. Here's a Russian golf cart attack bring disrupted with an FPV drone.

https://x.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1779017304224731629

While I don't doubt Russia is running out of things, I don't think this video supports that contention in any way. What is different between the vehicle used by the Russians and the RWMIK Land Rover used by the UK? https://www.eliteukforces.info/uksf-gear/wmik/ Does the fact the UK uses these vehicles mean they are running out of things? https://www.americanspecialops.com/vehicles/atv/ Ditto. https://military.polaris.com/en-us/appli.../military/ In fact, the US uses all kinds of ATVs for military purposes.

The vehicle in the photo carried a crew of two (it appears) and had what looked like an antenna radome mounted on it. Hardly looks like a vehicle making an assault, but more like a communications/EW vehicle. It may have actually been a GPS jammer for all we know. Glad Ukraine hit it because if it was a jammer it can cause problems for precision weapons and drones. Maybe it can only transmit when parked because it uses a dismounted generator.