[Treefence]

Sources on both sides now confirming Ukraine controls Kupiansk on the Eastern side of the Oskil river, with video evidence.  Since the bridge was blown, now sure if Ukraine can move heavy equipment over, but this could be the first stepping stone towards the logistics hub of Svatove.  There are unconfirmed reports that Ukraine has crossed in other portions as well.  

Just a little south, Ukraine continues to advance on Lyman and Yampil, securing small towns just outside, but they haven't taken those cities yet.  Just north Ukraine confirmed taking the towns of Studenok and Sosnove, which could give Ukraine the opportunity to put pressure on Lyman from the North West, but there is a small river/creek to cross.  

I agree with Trumpcard, it does seem the Oskil offensive culminated earlier this week, but it is good to see Ukraine still with the initiative in most areas except the south.  It's possible that once Urkaine secures passage across the Oskil, that they will build momentum again, but time will tell.

[Treefence]

Sources on both sides now confirming Ukraine controls Kupiansk on the Eastern side of the Oskil river, with video evidence.  Since the bridge was blown, now sure if Ukraine can move heavy equipment over, but this could be the first stepping stone towards the logistics hub of Svatove.  There are unconfirmed reports that Ukraine has crossed in other portions as well.  

Just a little south, Ukraine continues to advance on Lyman and Yampil, securing small towns just outside, but they haven't taken those cities yet.  Just north Ukraine confirmed taking the towns of Studenok and Sosnove, which could give Ukraine the opportunity to put pressure on Lyman from the North West, but there is a small river/creek to cross.  

I agree with Trumpcard, it does seem the Oskil offensive culminated earlier this week, but it is good to see Ukraine still with the initiative in most areas except the south.  It's possible that once Urkaine secures passage across the Oskil, that they will build momentum again, but time will tell.

[M T]

The Ukrainian resistance making itself known by assassinating two pro-Kremlin Ukrainians.

Putin's election chief & top prosecutor assassinated in twin blasts by 'saboteurs’ in latest killings to rock tyrant | The US Sun (the-sun.com)

Sorry, but these are bordering on terrorist attacks, in support of Ukraine.  
“Dmitry Savluchenko, head of the families,Dmitry Savluchenko, head of the families, youth, and sports youth, and sports department of the Kherson military-civilian administration, was killed in a bomb.”. That doesn’t sound like he was responsible for killings or such.

Another was blowing up someone on way to pick up his child in kindergarten. I’m glad they didn’t wait until the child was in the car—I hope the child didn’t witness it.

[M T]

The Ukrainian resistance making itself known by assassinating two pro-Kremlin Ukrainians.

Putin's election chief & top prosecutor assassinated in twin blasts by 'saboteurs’ in latest killings to rock tyrant | The US Sun (the-sun.com)

Sorry, but these are bordering on terrorist attacks, in support of Ukraine.  
“Dmitry Savluchenko, head of the families,Dmitry Savluchenko, head of the families, youth, and sports youth, and sports department of the Kherson military-civilian administration, was killed in a bomb.”. That doesn’t sound like he was responsible for killings or such.

Another was blowing up someone on way to pick up his child in kindergarten. I’m glad they didn’t wait until the child was in the car—I hope the child didn’t witness it.

[TrumpCard]

We lack sufficient facts to know whether the person who headed a civilian-sounding agency for "youth," on behalf of the occupying authority, was engaged in war crimes or other conduct that justified his assassination.  Note that thousands of Ukrainian children reportedly have been kidnapped, stripped of their identity, transferred to Russia, and "given" to Russian families to raise as their own.  The other officials identified in the article had titles that reflected their more-coercive roles in the occupying administration.

[TrumpCard]

We lack sufficient facts to know whether the person who headed a civilian-sounding agency for "youth," on behalf of the occupying authority, was engaged in war crimes or other conduct that justified his assassination.  Note that thousands of Ukrainian children reportedly have been kidnapped, stripped of their identity, transferred to Russia, and "given" to Russian families to raise as their own.  The other officials identified in the article had titles that reflected their more-coercive roles in the occupying administration.

[GK3]

So Xi and Putin met, and the official Chinese readout doesn’t mention Ukraine, and Putin admits that China “raised concerns”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-xi-j...mwhatsnews

Probably something like “you f-king imbecile; you are making us look bad and emboldening our renegade province to resist assimilating.  But thanks for the cheap oil.”

BC

And now China is threatening some sort of consequences if we proceed with making ourselves independent of their EV batteries.

[GK3]

So Xi and Putin met, and the official Chinese readout doesn’t mention Ukraine, and Putin admits that China “raised concerns”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-xi-j...mwhatsnews

Probably something like “you f-king imbecile; you are making us look bad and emboldening our renegade province to resist assimilating.  But thanks for the cheap oil.”

BC

And now China is threatening some sort of consequences if we proceed with making ourselves independent of their EV batteries.

[Treefence]

Pentagon finally gave a timeline for the first to NASAMS, they say they will be delivered within 2 months.  I'm guessing it'll be a little bit till the next 6 arrive though.

[Treefence]

Pentagon finally gave a timeline for the first to NASAMS, they say they will be delivered within 2 months.  I'm guessing it'll be a little bit till the next 6 arrive though.

[BostonCard]

Sort of like the “consequences” the US faced after Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan?  Lots of Sabre-rattling, but realistically, China’s room to impose consequences is somewhat limited (that’s largely symmetric, there’s not a ton we could do without hurting ourselves).

Ultimately, the issue is that both China and the Us are currently very dependent on one another, but we don’t trust each other, so in each side’s ideal world, each side would not be dependent on the other, but each side would have the other dependent on it.

BC

[BostonCard]

Sort of like the “consequences” the US faced after Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan?  Lots of Sabre-rattling, but realistically, China’s room to impose consequences is somewhat limited (that’s largely symmetric, there’s not a ton we could do without hurting ourselves).

Ultimately, the issue is that both China and the Us are currently very dependent on one another, but we don’t trust each other, so in each side’s ideal world, each side would not be dependent on the other, but each side would have the other dependent on it.

BC

[GK3]

Sort of like the “consequences” the US faced after Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan?  Lots of Sabre-rattling, but realistically, China’s room to impose consequences is somewhat limited (that’s largely symmetric, there’s not a ton we could do without hurting ourselves).

Ultimately, the issue is that both China and the Us are currently very dependent on one another, but we don’t trust each other, so in each side’s ideal world, each side would not be dependent on the other, but each side would have the other dependent on it.

BC

Very True, but it seems to me we can't be dependent upon China for critical components or materials.  EV batteries are becoming critical components, like or not I see us continuing efforts to make our own batteries.  The more things we have to buy from China the happier China is.  You only have to look at Western Europe and its dependence on Russian energy sources.  There always seems to come a time and place where dependence on potential enemies is always is a mistake.

[GK3]

Sort of like the “consequences” the US faced after Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan?  Lots of Sabre-rattling, but realistically, China’s room to impose consequences is somewhat limited (that’s largely symmetric, there’s not a ton we could do without hurting ourselves).

Ultimately, the issue is that both China and the Us are currently very dependent on one another, but we don’t trust each other, so in each side’s ideal world, each side would not be dependent on the other, but each side would have the other dependent on it.

BC

Very True, but it seems to me we can't be dependent upon China for critical components or materials.  EV batteries are becoming critical components, like or not I see us continuing efforts to make our own batteries.  The more things we have to buy from China the happier China is.  You only have to look at Western Europe and its dependence on Russian energy sources.  There always seems to come a time and place where dependence on potential enemies is always is a mistake.

[Leftcoast]

Ultimately, the issue is that both China and the Us are currently very dependent on one another, but we don’t trust each other, so in each side’s ideal world, each side would not be dependent on the other, but each side would have the other dependent on it.

And that's a shame. 

There was much hope on both sides that we were building a platform for common understanding through shared commerce over the previous 25 years.  For those of us who worked with Chinese partners to the great benefit of both the Chinese and US, watching our relationship devolve in the last five years has been sobering and very, very disappointing.  Up until recently China's post-communist path was the positive model while Russia's was the bad counter-example.  

I believe behind the saber rattling and public shows of nationalism there are many Chinese who feel the same.  I know some of them in places like Suzhou, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen. 

Things didn't have to go this way.

(I noticed no one took the bait from my post on drawing Taiwan/Ukraine parallels and lessons learned.  A bit of a rabbit trail perhaps but one I'm intensely interested in.)

[Leftcoast]

Ultimately, the issue is that both China and the Us are currently very dependent on one another, but we don’t trust each other, so in each side’s ideal world, each side would not be dependent on the other, but each side would have the other dependent on it.

And that's a shame. 

There was much hope on both sides that we were building a platform for common understanding through shared commerce over the previous 25 years.  For those of us who worked with Chinese partners to the great benefit of both the Chinese and US, watching our relationship devolve in the last five years has been sobering and very, very disappointing.  Up until recently China's post-communist path was the positive model while Russia's was the bad counter-example.  

I believe behind the saber rattling and public shows of nationalism there are many Chinese who feel the same.  I know some of them in places like Suzhou, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen. 

Things didn't have to go this way.

(I noticed no one took the bait from my post on drawing Taiwan/Ukraine parallels and lessons learned.  A bit of a rabbit trail perhaps but one I'm intensely interested in.)

[TrumpCard]

Pentagon finally gave a timeline for the first to NASAMS, they say they will be delivered within 2 months.  I'm guessing it'll be a little bit till the next 6 arrive though.

Is Ukraine likely to use these primarily to defend population centers or should we expect to see them deployed nearer to the line of contact, maybe in places like Kupyansk or Sloviansk to help defend strategic positions and/or to give cover for troop advances?

[TrumpCard]

Pentagon finally gave a timeline for the first to NASAMS, they say they will be delivered within 2 months.  I'm guessing it'll be a little bit till the next 6 arrive though.

Is Ukraine likely to use these primarily to defend population centers or should we expect to see them deployed nearer to the line of contact, maybe in places like Kupyansk or Sloviansk to help defend strategic positions and/or to give cover for troop advances?

[Goose]

Pentagon finally gave a timeline for the first to NASAMS, they say they will be delivered within 2 months.  I'm guessing it'll be a little bit till the next 6 arrive though.

Is Ukraine likely to use these primarily to defend population centers or should we expect to see them deployed nearer to the line of contact, maybe in places like Kupyansk or Sloviansk to help defend strategic positions and/or to give cover for troop advances?

Very good question! I have recently spent quite a lot of CPU time looking at the NASAMS as a missile defense for a city. The bottom line is that in a stand-alone mode an NASAMS can defend a circle of radius 24 (+/-) km from low flying cruise missiles. It can also defend a similar area against aircraft flying nap-of-the-earth. As aircraft fly higher the radius expands to about 70 km.

Against KH-22 missiles and against almost all Iskander variants it is basically useless. The performance against S-300/400 missiles in a ground attack role depends on their usage. If they are lobbed to high altitude, transit, and then come downhill NASAMS can't do much. The problems are many. The radar has a maximum elevation angle of 55 degrees, so anything that gets "above" the radar is invisible. The detection range is based on radial distance so things at high altitude can get closer in (X,Y) before you see them. The KH-22 family in "high altitude" mode can be "seen" for about 6 seconds before it is at an elevation angle > 55 degrees. The AMRAAM missile isn't designed to attack objects that are at much higher elevation than the launcher. It simply isn't fast enough to get there before the target disappears. The AMRAAM also runs out of energy quickly when climbing, so it can't "hunt" such objects on it's own. An SM-6 it definitely is not. It is an air-to-air missile. In a "look-down shoot-down" scenario it is fine, as it gets a boost from gravity. It isn't going to go "uphill" very far however. The radar can't target objects high that are in a relatively steep dive, so waiting for the target to get low on it's way down won't work either.

So, if you want to defend a city, it better be a small one. The good news is that the Ukrainian cities are mostly physically small. You aren't going to cover all the outlying villages however. OTOH, as a point defense weapon against aircraft or cruise missiles NASAMs will work quite well. It can be used to cover an advancing armored force . If it were me, that is how I would use it. However I think Ukraine has been sold on the idea it can defend their cities. I expect we may find out. In neither case does it make you invulnerable.

[Goose]

Pentagon finally gave a timeline for the first to NASAMS, they say they will be delivered within 2 months.  I'm guessing it'll be a little bit till the next 6 arrive though.

Is Ukraine likely to use these primarily to defend population centers or should we expect to see them deployed nearer to the line of contact, maybe in places like Kupyansk or Sloviansk to help defend strategic positions and/or to give cover for troop advances?

Very good question! I have recently spent quite a lot of CPU time looking at the NASAMS as a missile defense for a city. The bottom line is that in a stand-alone mode an NASAMS can defend a circle of radius 24 (+/-) km from low flying cruise missiles. It can also defend a similar area against aircraft flying nap-of-the-earth. As aircraft fly higher the radius expands to about 70 km.

Against KH-22 missiles and against almost all Iskander variants it is basically useless. The performance against S-300/400 missiles in a ground attack role depends on their usage. If they are lobbed to high altitude, transit, and then come downhill NASAMS can't do much. The problems are many. The radar has a maximum elevation angle of 55 degrees, so anything that gets "above" the radar is invisible. The detection range is based on radial distance so things at high altitude can get closer in (X,Y) before you see them. The KH-22 family in "high altitude" mode can be "seen" for about 6 seconds before it is at an elevation angle > 55 degrees. The AMRAAM missile isn't designed to attack objects that are at much higher elevation than the launcher. It simply isn't fast enough to get there before the target disappears. The AMRAAM also runs out of energy quickly when climbing, so it can't "hunt" such objects on it's own. An SM-6 it definitely is not. It is an air-to-air missile. In a "look-down shoot-down" scenario it is fine, as it gets a boost from gravity. It isn't going to go "uphill" very far however. The radar can't target objects high that are in a relatively steep dive, so waiting for the target to get low on it's way down won't work either.

So, if you want to defend a city, it better be a small one. The good news is that the Ukrainian cities are mostly physically small. You aren't going to cover all the outlying villages however. OTOH, as a point defense weapon against aircraft or cruise missiles NASAMs will work quite well. It can be used to cover an advancing armored force . If it were me, that is how I would use it. However I think Ukraine has been sold on the idea it can defend their cities. I expect we may find out. In neither case does it make you invulnerable.

[M T]

We lack sufficient facts to know whether the person who headed a civilian-sounding agency for "youth," on behalf of the occupying authority, was engaged in war crimes or other conduct that justified his assassination.  Note that thousands of Ukrainian children reportedly have been kidnapped, stripped of their identity, transferred to Russia, and "given" to Russian families to raise as their own.  The other officials identified in the article had titles that reflected their more-coercive roles in the occupying administration.

That’s a mighty big leap you made there.  It wasn’t even suggested in the article but you made it. 

Someone is appointing themselves as prosecutor, judge, and executioner.  They too may face a date with a War Crimes Tribunal.

[M T]

We lack sufficient facts to know whether the person who headed a civilian-sounding agency for "youth," on behalf of the occupying authority, was engaged in war crimes or other conduct that justified his assassination.  Note that thousands of Ukrainian children reportedly have been kidnapped, stripped of their identity, transferred to Russia, and "given" to Russian families to raise as their own.  The other officials identified in the article had titles that reflected their more-coercive roles in the occupying administration.

That’s a mighty big leap you made there.  It wasn’t even suggested in the article but you made it. 

Someone is appointing themselves as prosecutor, judge, and executioner.  They too may face a date with a War Crimes Tribunal.

[Treefence]

Goose, with all that information on NASAMS, do you think it’s possible the first two are both intended for Kyiv? It would seem to be, based on the flaws with the system, having overlapping coverage of each system might be good, and the city is so large and vital, that maybe that’s the first priority. I could be wrong, and I’m not sure how mobile they are.

---

On second though, Kirby said their purpose primarily would be to stop Cruise missiles, war planes, and drones. That might hint at them being closer to the front lines…

[Treefence]

Goose, with all that information on NASAMS, do you think it’s possible the first two are both intended for Kyiv? It would seem to be, based on the flaws with the system, having overlapping coverage of each system might be good, and the city is so large and vital, that maybe that’s the first priority. I could be wrong, and I’m not sure how mobile they are.

---

On second though, Kirby said their purpose primarily would be to stop Cruise missiles, war planes, and drones. That might hint at them being closer to the front lines…

[TrumpCard]

Pentagon finally gave a timeline for the first to NASAMS, they say they will be delivered within 2 months.  I'm guessing it'll be a little bit till the next 6 arrive though.

Is Ukraine likely to use these primarily to defend population centers or should we expect to see them deployed nearer to the line of contact, maybe in places like Kupyansk or Sloviansk to help defend strategic positions and/or to give cover for troop advances?

Very good question! I have recently spent quite a lot of CPU time looking at the NASAMS as a missile defense for a city. The bottom line is that in a stand-alone mode an NASAMS can defend a circle of radius 24 (+/-) km from low flying cruise missiles. It can also defend a similar area against aircraft flying nap-of-the-earth. As aircraft fly higher the radius expands to about 70 km.
. . . 

So, if you want to defend a city, it better be a small one. The good news is that the Ukrainian cities are mostly physically small. You aren't going to cover all the outlying villages however. 
. . . 

I appreciate the explanation.  I didn't understand some of the details or why they are material, but I think I'm excerpting what I think is the essence. 

A range of 24 km means that you can have a NASAMS battery in the middle of a geographic area covering a total of ~800 sq miles, which is nothing like LA County (4k+ sq mi).  As you correctly noted, however, it's sufficient to cover the major Ukrainian cities (even if the outlying suburbs still might be exposed).  If Ukraine gets 8 NASAM batteries in the near future, that means it could cover Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odessa, Dnipro, Zaporizhzhia, Lviv, Kryvyi Rih, and Mykolaiv.  The smallest of those is ~500k people.  Those all seem like target rich environments that , in addition to people, have major infrastructure, military bases, and other sites that Russia is attacking.  I'm no military planner, but it seems like a no brainer to protect those cities with the first 8 batteries.  Some of them -- like Zaporizhzhia, Kryvyi Rih, and Mykolaiv can do double duty because they're also somewhat close to the front lines.  Maybe advance the one in Mykolaiv to Kherson if Ukraine is able to retake the latter because Mykolaiv would still benefit somewhat from the circle of protection provided by a couple of nearby batteries.  But I would not put major population centers for ~500k+ people at higher risk in order to get better air defenses for troop locations that are near towns of 25k people.  Take with a grain of salt or two.

Edit: I want to note that I asked the question originally because I didn't know whether having NASAMS aligned with troop locations would be decisive in the war. If your response had been stronger on the value of NASAMS to the ability of troops to retake large swaths of territory, then my conclusion might well have been different. It seemed to me, however, that you were at least as unsure about the value of NASAMS on the front lines as you are in defensive positions, which explains my sudden decisiveness on the relative merits.

[TrumpCard]

Pentagon finally gave a timeline for the first to NASAMS, they say they will be delivered within 2 months.  I'm guessing it'll be a little bit till the next 6 arrive though.

Is Ukraine likely to use these primarily to defend population centers or should we expect to see them deployed nearer to the line of contact, maybe in places like Kupyansk or Sloviansk to help defend strategic positions and/or to give cover for troop advances?

Very good question! I have recently spent quite a lot of CPU time looking at the NASAMS as a missile defense for a city. The bottom line is that in a stand-alone mode an NASAMS can defend a circle of radius 24 (+/-) km from low flying cruise missiles. It can also defend a similar area against aircraft flying nap-of-the-earth. As aircraft fly higher the radius expands to about 70 km.
. . . 

So, if you want to defend a city, it better be a small one. The good news is that the Ukrainian cities are mostly physically small. You aren't going to cover all the outlying villages however. 
. . . 

I appreciate the explanation.  I didn't understand some of the details or why they are material, but I think I'm excerpting what I think is the essence. 

A range of 24 km means that you can have a NASAMS battery in the middle of a geographic area covering a total of ~800 sq miles, which is nothing like LA County (4k+ sq mi).  As you correctly noted, however, it's sufficient to cover the major Ukrainian cities (even if the outlying suburbs still might be exposed).  If Ukraine gets 8 NASAM batteries in the near future, that means it could cover Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odessa, Dnipro, Zaporizhzhia, Lviv, Kryvyi Rih, and Mykolaiv.  The smallest of those is ~500k people.  Those all seem like target rich environments that , in addition to people, have major infrastructure, military bases, and other sites that Russia is attacking.  I'm no military planner, but it seems like a no brainer to protect those cities with the first 8 batteries.  Some of them -- like Zaporizhzhia, Kryvyi Rih, and Mykolaiv can do double duty because they're also somewhat close to the front lines.  Maybe advance the one in Mykolaiv to Kherson if Ukraine is able to retake the latter because Mykolaiv would still benefit somewhat from the circle of protection provided by a couple of nearby batteries.  But I would not put major population centers for ~500k+ people at higher risk in order to get better air defenses for troop locations that are near towns of 25k people.  Take with a grain of salt or two.

Edit: I want to note that I asked the question originally because I didn't know whether having NASAMS aligned with troop locations would be decisive in the war. If your response had been stronger on the value of NASAMS to the ability of troops to retake large swaths of territory, then my conclusion might well have been different. It seemed to me, however, that you were at least as unsure about the value of NASAMS on the front lines as you are in defensive positions, which explains my sudden decisiveness on the relative merits.

[Goose]

I appreciate the explanation.  I didn't understand some of the details or why they are material, but I think I'm excerpting what I think is the essence. 


A range of 24 km means that you can have a NASAMS battery in the middle of a geographic area covering a total of ~800 sq miles, which is nothing like LA County (4k+ sq mi).  As you correctly noted, however, it's sufficient to cover the major Ukrainian cities (even if the outlying suburbs still might be exposed).  If Ukraine gets 8 NASAM batteries in the near future, that means it could cover Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odessa, Dnipro, Zaporizhzhia, Lviv, Kryvyi Rih, and Mykolaiv.  The smallest of those is ~500k people.  Those all seem like target rich environments that , in addition to people, have major infrastructure, military bases, and other sites that Russia is attacking.  I'm no military planner, but it seems like a no brainer to protect those cities with the first 8 batteries.  Some of them -- like Zaporizhzhia, Kryvyi Rih, and Mykolaiv can do double duty because they're also somewhat close to the front lines.  Maybe advance the one in Mykolaiv to Kherson if Ukraine is able to retake the latter because Mykolaiv would still benefit somewhat from the circle of protection provided by a couple of nearby batteries.  But I would not put major population centers for ~500k+ people at higher risk in order to get better air defenses for troop locations that are near towns of 25k people.  Take with a grain of salt or two.

This analysis is a very good one IMHO. The only problem is that Russia is mostly using KH-22 and S-300/400 missiles to attack cities. This is crazy, because the first is an anti-ship missile and the others are SAMS but they apparently are very low on Kalibr, H-101 and H-555 cruise missiles. Understandably, the NASAMS wasn't designed to deal with these missile types. The KH-22 family is a very nasty anti-ship weapon and the US Navy did lots of mods to the SPY-1 to operate against it. They also greatly improved the kinematics of the missiles to allow them to go uphill fast and far. The AMRAAM has none of that. So, while in "normal" circumstances the NASAMS would provide good protection against the threats, against the current threats they basically don't work.

The good news is that these non-land-attack missiles being used in land-attack mode are wildly inaccurate. If hitting anywhere in the city is OK, they will do. However, against a military headquarters or an advancing military force they would most probably miss. Therefore the NASAMS can defend military targets against aircraft and any "precision" cruise missiles Russia can scrape up. That is the trade-off.

It may be possible that the 6 follow-on NASAMS for Ukraine will be delivered with the GhostEye radar instead of the MPQ-64. This radar eliminates the "cone of silence" above 55 degrees elevation. That will make hitting a KH-22 somewhat possible, although it is still tough because the AMRAAM is just not the right missile to do that. You really want to hit the KH-22 before it goes downhill. If you are the target, a down-the-throat shot is possible (you will be highly motivated). If the target is any distance away, the KH-22 will hit before the AMRAAM gets there. If the GhostEye is provided the NASAMS can track the KH-22 throughout its flight envelope as it approaches. That means if you shoot early and the KH-22 doesn't go into terminal dive "quickly", you have a chance to hit it before it hits the city.

The NASAMS can also be operated in "cooperative" mode where the missile can actually be targeted and fired using data from a remote sensor. An AWACS (or E-2) can "see" a KH-11 a lot sooner than the NASAMS radar can. The ability to launch the AMRAAM with a tentative firing solution "early" can compensate to some degree for it's inadequate kinematics. The GhostEye may help some here as well (increased range), although I don't have specs to know for sure. This is the current con-ops the US Army intends to use. Whether the US and Ukraine could/would do it is an "interesting" question.

UPDATE:
No definite specs still, but GhostEye does have considerably longer range in order to fully support AMRAAM-ER. That will help a lot against the KH-22 family. Iskander is a more difficult issue, mostly because I don't have good data on it's flight profile. It is high and fast though, which is hard for AMRAAMS.

[Goose]

I appreciate the explanation.  I didn't understand some of the details or why they are material, but I think I'm excerpting what I think is the essence. 


A range of 24 km means that you can have a NASAMS battery in the middle of a geographic area covering a total of ~800 sq miles, which is nothing like LA County (4k+ sq mi).  As you correctly noted, however, it's sufficient to cover the major Ukrainian cities (even if the outlying suburbs still might be exposed).  If Ukraine gets 8 NASAM batteries in the near future, that means it could cover Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odessa, Dnipro, Zaporizhzhia, Lviv, Kryvyi Rih, and Mykolaiv.  The smallest of those is ~500k people.  Those all seem like target rich environments that , in addition to people, have major infrastructure, military bases, and other sites that Russia is attacking.  I'm no military planner, but it seems like a no brainer to protect those cities with the first 8 batteries.  Some of them -- like Zaporizhzhia, Kryvyi Rih, and Mykolaiv can do double duty because they're also somewhat close to the front lines.  Maybe advance the one in Mykolaiv to Kherson if Ukraine is able to retake the latter because Mykolaiv would still benefit somewhat from the circle of protection provided by a couple of nearby batteries.  But I would not put major population centers for ~500k+ people at higher risk in order to get better air defenses for troop locations that are near towns of 25k people.  Take with a grain of salt or two.

This analysis is a very good one IMHO. The only problem is that Russia is mostly using KH-22 and S-300/400 missiles to attack cities. This is crazy, because the first is an anti-ship missile and the others are SAMS but they apparently are very low on Kalibr, H-101 and H-555 cruise missiles. Understandably, the NASAMS wasn't designed to deal with these missile types. The KH-22 family is a very nasty anti-ship weapon and the US Navy did lots of mods to the SPY-1 to operate against it. They also greatly improved the kinematics of the missiles to allow them to go uphill fast and far. The AMRAAM has none of that. So, while in "normal" circumstances the NASAMS would provide good protection against the threats, against the current threats they basically don't work.

The good news is that these non-land-attack missiles being used in land-attack mode are wildly inaccurate. If hitting anywhere in the city is OK, they will do. However, against a military headquarters or an advancing military force they would most probably miss. Therefore the NASAMS can defend military targets against aircraft and any "precision" cruise missiles Russia can scrape up. That is the trade-off.

It may be possible that the 6 follow-on NASAMS for Ukraine will be delivered with the GhostEye radar instead of the MPQ-64. This radar eliminates the "cone of silence" above 55 degrees elevation. That will make hitting a KH-22 somewhat possible, although it is still tough because the AMRAAM is just not the right missile to do that. You really want to hit the KH-22 before it goes downhill. If you are the target, a down-the-throat shot is possible (you will be highly motivated). If the target is any distance away, the KH-22 will hit before the AMRAAM gets there. If the GhostEye is provided the NASAMS can track the KH-22 throughout its flight envelope as it approaches. That means if you shoot early and the KH-22 doesn't go into terminal dive "quickly", you have a chance to hit it before it hits the city.

The NASAMS can also be operated in "cooperative" mode where the missile can actually be targeted and fired using data from a remote sensor. An AWACS (or E-2) can "see" a KH-11 a lot sooner than the NASAMS radar can. The ability to launch the AMRAAM with a tentative firing solution "early" can compensate to some degree for it's inadequate kinematics. The GhostEye may help some here as well (increased range), although I don't have specs to know for sure. This is the current con-ops the US Army intends to use. Whether the US and Ukraine could/would do it is an "interesting" question.

UPDATE:
No definite specs still, but GhostEye does have considerably longer range in order to fully support AMRAAM-ER. That will help a lot against the KH-22 family. Iskander is a more difficult issue, mostly because I don't have good data on it's flight profile. It is high and fast though, which is hard for AMRAAMS.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-force...40378.html
If this report is correct, the 3rd army corps is going into the line in Donetsk. Since that was it's rumored destination, it makes sense. It appears to be going in as a defensive force, not one to continue the Russian offense in that Oblast.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-force...40378.html
If this report is correct, the 3rd army corps is going into the line in Donetsk. Since that was it's rumored destination, it makes sense. It appears to be going in as a defensive force, not one to continue the Russian offense in that Oblast.

[thatboy]

Re: the recent developments in Ukraine, this statement was released:

[thatboy]

Re: the recent developments in Ukraine, this statement was released:

[Treefence]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-force...40378.html
If this report is correct, the 3rd army corps is going into the line in Donetsk. Since that was it's rumored destination, it makes sense. It appears to be going in as a defensive force, not one to continue the Russian offense in that Oblast.

I'm surprised they aren't going to the Northern Luhansk flank, but maybe this frees up troops to move from Donetsk to Luhansk.  General question, besides symbolic significance, what would happen if Ukraine took the city of Luhansk.  Would the so called "LPR" capitulate, or would they just admit they are a proxy to Russia, and not their own republic?

[Treefence]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-force...40378.html
If this report is correct, the 3rd army corps is going into the line in Donetsk. Since that was it's rumored destination, it makes sense. It appears to be going in as a defensive force, not one to continue the Russian offense in that Oblast.

I'm surprised they aren't going to the Northern Luhansk flank, but maybe this frees up troops to move from Donetsk to Luhansk.  General question, besides symbolic significance, what would happen if Ukraine took the city of Luhansk.  Would the so called "LPR" capitulate, or would they just admit they are a proxy to Russia, and not their own republic?

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-force...40378.html
If this report is correct, the 3rd army corps is going into the line in Donetsk. Since that was it's rumored destination, it makes sense. It appears to be going in as a defensive force, not one to continue the Russian offense in that Oblast.

I'm surprised they aren't going to the Northern Luhansk flank, but maybe this frees up troops to move from Donetsk to Luhansk.  General question, besides symbolic significance, what would happen if Ukraine took the city of Luhansk.  Would the so called "LPR" capitulate, or would they just admit they are a proxy to Russia, and not their own republic?

The movement you suggest makes sense to me, but Russia seems intent on capturing 100% of Donetsk, come what may. Maybe it is on Putin's bucket list. Keeping Luhansk maybe isn't :-). It would like to see the experiment attempted on the "LPR". I suspect their phone will just go off the hook forever.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-force...40378.html
If this report is correct, the 3rd army corps is going into the line in Donetsk. Since that was it's rumored destination, it makes sense. It appears to be going in as a defensive force, not one to continue the Russian offense in that Oblast.

I'm surprised they aren't going to the Northern Luhansk flank, but maybe this frees up troops to move from Donetsk to Luhansk.  General question, besides symbolic significance, what would happen if Ukraine took the city of Luhansk.  Would the so called "LPR" capitulate, or would they just admit they are a proxy to Russia, and not their own republic?

The movement you suggest makes sense to me, but Russia seems intent on capturing 100% of Donetsk, come what may. Maybe it is on Putin's bucket list. Keeping Luhansk maybe isn't :-). It would like to see the experiment attempted on the "LPR". I suspect their phone will just go off the hook forever.

[Treefence]

Interesting Goose, I wonder if their placements suggest two things, 1: they are there to project power, not actually fight. 2: since this is the only area Russia has making any advances, minimal as they are, Russia is trying to double down in hopes they make a big breakthrough… either way, assuming large amounts of troops aren’t going to the northern Luhansk region, we could see some significant progress for Ukraine in that region…

[Treefence]

Interesting Goose, I wonder if their placements suggest two things, 1: they are there to project power, not actually fight. 2: since this is the only area Russia has making any advances, minimal as they are, Russia is trying to double down in hopes they make a big breakthrough… either way, assuming large amounts of troops aren’t going to the northern Luhansk region, we could see some significant progress for Ukraine in that region…

[Treefence]

Reports from various sources saying Russia is likely to withdraw from Lyman soon, as Ukraine is beginning to encircle the town. It is remarkable how many cities took months for Russia to take, and now Russian defenses in those cities collapse in days/weeks.

[Treefence]

Reports from various sources saying Russia is likely to withdraw from Lyman soon, as Ukraine is beginning to encircle the town. It is remarkable how many cities took months for Russia to take, and now Russian defenses in those cities collapse in days/weeks.