[Goose]

Ukraine has started to hit Russia’s shadow fleet in international waters.  I don’t know enough admiralty law to know if this is legal, but of course, since the ships are unflagged, who is going to be in a position to complain?  I know western countries are worried about precedent (though I’ll note that targeting commercial vessels during wartime has a history as long as ocean shipping and wars).

In so far as the ships are unflagged, indeed who can complain? However, from a legal point of view, Ukraine has big  problems. Merchant ships, even Russian flagged merchant ships, cannot legally be sunk without warning. Under the law, the Ukrainian "warship" must stop the merchant ship and search the merchant ship to locate contraband. If no contraband is found, the merchant ship must be sent on its way. If contraband is found the ship may be seized or sunk. In either case the passengers and crew must be provided for in a manner that protects their life. This part of international law goes back to the early 1900s and still is "in force". However, during both WW I and WW II the nature of modern warfare, particularly the submarine and airplane (plus vastly improved mines) rendered these laws impractical. As a result, a consensus developed around the idea that unrestricted warfare against merchant ships was permissible. For those that wish to geek-out on this issue, https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/vi...ontext=ils is germane. The most important conclusion is:

The IMT also held that, in light of the order of the British Admiralty concerning the Skagerrak and in light of Admiral Nimitz’s answers concerning unrestricted submarine warfare in the Pacific, “the sentence of Dönitz is not assessed on the ground of his breaches of the international law of submarine warfare.” Dönitz was still found guilty of the conduct—confirming its illegality—but his sentence did not reflect the illegality in light of the related illegality on the part of Britain and the United States. The IMT thus confirmed the continued relevance of the London Submarine Protocol as well as the illegality of the enforcement of the exclusion zones of the Second World War type.

Thus, what Ukraine is doing is unarguably illegal, but, like Dönitz they get a pass because Russia does it too.

But if the Houthis can attack commercial vessels in the Red Sea, and the US can sink alleged drug boats in the Caribbean, Ukraine I’m sure is thinking that targeting the shadow fleet is one way to put pressure on Russia and Putin to negotiate in good faith.

Indeed. Ukraine is at least a nation-state and has standing in international law. It is also clearly engaging in a declared war against a defined enemy. The US is not at war with Venezuela (yet), and the US is also not engaged in "unrestricted" warfare against all vessels in the area. Even if one considers the looser standard used by the IMT as "legality", it is very unclear it applies. The Houthis may claim to be a nation-state. They may also claim to be at war with Israel. However it is unclear how shipping traffic out of the Suez canal is connected to that war. They are probably closer to the IMT standard than the US is in the Caribbean, but still quite far from it.

[Goose]

Ukraine has started to hit Russia’s shadow fleet in international waters.  I don’t know enough admiralty law to know if this is legal, but of course, since the ships are unflagged, who is going to be in a position to complain?  I know western countries are worried about precedent (though I’ll note that targeting commercial vessels during wartime has a history as long as ocean shipping and wars).

In so far as the ships are unflagged, indeed who can complain? However, from a legal point of view, Ukraine has big  problems. Merchant ships, even Russian flagged merchant ships, cannot legally be sunk without warning. Under the law, the Ukrainian "warship" must stop the merchant ship and search the merchant ship to locate contraband. If no contraband is found, the merchant ship must be sent on its way. If contraband is found the ship may be seized or sunk. In either case the passengers and crew must be provided for in a manner that protects their life. This part of international law goes back to the early 1900s and still is "in force". However, during both WW I and WW II the nature of modern warfare, particularly the submarine and airplane (plus vastly improved mines) rendered these laws impractical. As a result, a consensus developed around the idea that unrestricted warfare against merchant ships was permissible. For those that wish to geek-out on this issue, https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/vi...ontext=ils is germane. The most important conclusion is:

The IMT also held that, in light of the order of the British Admiralty concerning the Skagerrak and in light of Admiral Nimitz’s answers concerning unrestricted submarine warfare in the Pacific, “the sentence of Dönitz is not assessed on the ground of his breaches of the international law of submarine warfare.” Dönitz was still found guilty of the conduct—confirming its illegality—but his sentence did not reflect the illegality in light of the related illegality on the part of Britain and the United States. The IMT thus confirmed the continued relevance of the London Submarine Protocol as well as the illegality of the enforcement of the exclusion zones of the Second World War type.

Thus, what Ukraine is doing is unarguably illegal, but, like Dönitz they get a pass because Russia does it too.

But if the Houthis can attack commercial vessels in the Red Sea, and the US can sink alleged drug boats in the Caribbean, Ukraine I’m sure is thinking that targeting the shadow fleet is one way to put pressure on Russia and Putin to negotiate in good faith.

Indeed. Ukraine is at least a nation-state and has standing in international law. It is also clearly engaging in a declared war against a defined enemy. The US is not at war with Venezuela (yet), and the US is also not engaged in "unrestricted" warfare against all vessels in the area. Even if one considers the looser standard used by the IMT as "legality", it is very unclear it applies. The Houthis may claim to be a nation-state. They may also claim to be at war with Israel. However it is unclear how shipping traffic out of the Suez canal is connected to that war. They are probably closer to the IMT standard than the US is in the Caribbean, but still quite far from it.

[BostonCard]

What I don’t get is why anyone would think that Russia would in any way have an environment conducive to doing business (ie, rule of law, predictable environment, enforceable contracts, etc.).  Just ask Bill Browder.

Of course, for some people, the corruption, lack of rule of law, and ability to exploit natural resources and extract rents are a feature, not a bug. 

BC

Yeah, Bill Browder doesn’t get it either…

https://x.com/billbrowder/status/1995051...35921?s=46

BC

[BostonCard]

What I don’t get is why anyone would think that Russia would in any way have an environment conducive to doing business (ie, rule of law, predictable environment, enforceable contracts, etc.).  Just ask Bill Browder.

Of course, for some people, the corruption, lack of rule of law, and ability to exploit natural resources and extract rents are a feature, not a bug. 

BC

Yeah, Bill Browder doesn’t get it either…

https://x.com/billbrowder/status/1995051...35921?s=46

BC

[M T]

Putin keeps playing the US.
https://michaelramirez.substack.com/p/mi...m-10-22-25

[M T]

Putin keeps playing the US.
https://michaelramirez.substack.com/p/mi...m-10-22-25

[TrumpCard]

This cartoon totally ignores the 2025 FIFA Peace Prize.

[TrumpCard]

This cartoon totally ignores the 2025 FIFA Peace Prize.

[dabigv13]

With a shortage of armored vehicles, Russia started using civilian cars, trucks, and ATVs for assaults. Then motorbikes. Now they're getting truly premodern, with actual horse mounted troops, I guess you would call them dragoons. As can be expected, they do not fare well against drones. Bonkers.

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/200...27256?s=20

[dabigv13]

With a shortage of armored vehicles, Russia started using civilian cars, trucks, and ATVs for assaults. Then motorbikes. Now they're getting truly premodern, with actual horse mounted troops, I guess you would call them dragoons. As can be expected, they do not fare well against drones. Bonkers.

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/200...27256?s=20

[GK3]

With a shortage of armored vehicles, Russia started using civilian cars, trucks, and ATVs for assaults. Then motorbikes. Now they're getting truly premodern, with actual horse mounted troops, I guess you would call them dragoons. As can be expected, they do not fare well against drones. Bonkers.

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/200...27256?s=20

Yes, and then  come Ox carts.  The Romans would be proud.

I note now that  is no longer so dangerous in Russia to stand close to an open window, but far more dangerous to start your car.

[GK3]

With a shortage of armored vehicles, Russia started using civilian cars, trucks, and ATVs for assaults. Then motorbikes. Now they're getting truly premodern, with actual horse mounted troops, I guess you would call them dragoons. As can be expected, they do not fare well against drones. Bonkers.

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/200...27256?s=20

Yes, and then  come Ox carts.  The Romans would be proud.

I note now that  is no longer so dangerous in Russia to stand close to an open window, but far more dangerous to start your car.

[ADPinWDC]

No good solutions from here.
A)  Europe can try to play the "Neo-liberal Idealist" role and refuse to "reward the Aggressor evil Russia"... and so the war grinds on for another year or two, like WW1. 
Russia will keep bombing.  They have more inventory. 
Ukraine is exhausted.  I visited Kyiv in March 2023, looking at energy infrastructure. 

B)  Stop the killing, and take a Bad Deal.  Nobody, nobody has 200,000 troops to throw against 200,000+ land mines in Donbas, that will not take back territory. 
Russia will keep the Eastern portion, claiming the old boundaries from 1618, just before the Thirty Years War.
That is not "just"; Putin has a simple reply: "Make me"
Meanwhile, four years on, Europe (at various levels) still pays Russia for oil and gas. Russian leverage rises in Winter.

Serious REAL-POLITIK.
C) Worse... Russia & China amp up the rival BRICS currency, and Middle Eastern SWFs pull money OUT of Europe for fear of seizure.  European Banks are already strained by stagflation in the EU and industry sliding further.  

France and the UK suffer more severe fiscal crises than USA.  Both Starmer and Macron are running below 20% in approval -- Despite public statements by their leaders, their populations will refuse to provide troops and more resources to Ukraine.  Putin knows the fortitude of Europe is fractured and limp; with few soldiers. 
Putin is a vampire, and he knows the American people will not send troops either. 
Woodrow Wilson originated the "America FIRST" campaign for reelection in 1916 -- promising to keep USA out of "European wars".  Wilson. 

Despite pleading by Neo-liberals, there is no consensus to die in Ukraine, compared to battling Hitler in 1939.
Even then, USA did not get in.  Not until Dec 1941. 

There is no stomach to continue a losing battle.  
There are no winners in Ukraine.  #WinterISHere. 

Frankly, for USA, China is a much more insidious threat.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...-president

[ADPinWDC]

No good solutions from here.
A)  Europe can try to play the "Neo-liberal Idealist" role and refuse to "reward the Aggressor evil Russia"... and so the war grinds on for another year or two, like WW1. 
Russia will keep bombing.  They have more inventory. 
Ukraine is exhausted.  I visited Kyiv in March 2023, looking at energy infrastructure. 

B)  Stop the killing, and take a Bad Deal.  Nobody, nobody has 200,000 troops to throw against 200,000+ land mines in Donbas, that will not take back territory. 
Russia will keep the Eastern portion, claiming the old boundaries from 1618, just before the Thirty Years War.
That is not "just"; Putin has a simple reply: "Make me"
Meanwhile, four years on, Europe (at various levels) still pays Russia for oil and gas. Russian leverage rises in Winter.

Serious REAL-POLITIK.
C) Worse... Russia & China amp up the rival BRICS currency, and Middle Eastern SWFs pull money OUT of Europe for fear of seizure.  European Banks are already strained by stagflation in the EU and industry sliding further.  

France and the UK suffer more severe fiscal crises than USA.  Both Starmer and Macron are running below 20% in approval -- Despite public statements by their leaders, their populations will refuse to provide troops and more resources to Ukraine.  Putin knows the fortitude of Europe is fractured and limp; with few soldiers. 
Putin is a vampire, and he knows the American people will not send troops either. 
Woodrow Wilson originated the "America FIRST" campaign for reelection in 1916 -- promising to keep USA out of "European wars".  Wilson. 

Despite pleading by Neo-liberals, there is no consensus to die in Ukraine, compared to battling Hitler in 1939.
Even then, USA did not get in.  Not until Dec 1941. 

There is no stomach to continue a losing battle.  
There are no winners in Ukraine.  #WinterISHere. 

Frankly, for USA, China is a much more insidious threat.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...-president

[dabigv13]

Russia is making assaults across no man's land with men on horses, and you are dooming? 

Russian crude prices are very low. They will reach their breaking point. This war was always going to take years, too bad the US is dialing back support and allowing it to go on even longer than it should.

[dabigv13]

Russia is making assaults across no man's land with men on horses, and you are dooming? 

Russian crude prices are very low. They will reach their breaking point. This war was always going to take years, too bad the US is dialing back support and allowing it to go on even longer than it should.

[dabigv13]

Some more interesting videos.

Here are some videos of Shaheds being intercepted by drones. Achieving cost effective interception is a big deal for durable defense, especially with reduced western support.

https://x.com/wilendhornets/status/20034...68955?s=20

Ukraine recently used a naval drone to attack a Russian submarine at port, apparently damaging it. Here we can see how they set up that attack, by attacking a Russian anti-submarine reconnaisance plane and disabling it. This was their only one in the region, and was active in surveilling for Ukrainian naval drones.

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/200...21467?s=20

Finally, this twitter thread goes through Ukraine's extensive new fortifications in the south and east. This defensive line is far more formidable than any of their previous ones. Three antitank ditches, 3 rows of dragon's teeth obstacles, and 21 rows of barbed wire, with fortifications for drone teams and artillery behind the line. Ukraine had drawn some criticism for building fortified lines too late and too poorly, but they seem to have done well here. Will be very challenging to breach these.

https://x.com/clement_molin/status/20034...38155?s=20

A net-launcher to intercept FPV drones at close range

https://bsky.app/profile/meanwhileua.bsk...ov6b4jsm2d

[dabigv13]

Some more interesting videos.

Here are some videos of Shaheds being intercepted by drones. Achieving cost effective interception is a big deal for durable defense, especially with reduced western support.

https://x.com/wilendhornets/status/20034...68955?s=20

Ukraine recently used a naval drone to attack a Russian submarine at port, apparently damaging it. Here we can see how they set up that attack, by attacking a Russian anti-submarine reconnaisance plane and disabling it. This was their only one in the region, and was active in surveilling for Ukrainian naval drones.

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/200...21467?s=20

Finally, this twitter thread goes through Ukraine's extensive new fortifications in the south and east. This defensive line is far more formidable than any of their previous ones. Three antitank ditches, 3 rows of dragon's teeth obstacles, and 21 rows of barbed wire, with fortifications for drone teams and artillery behind the line. Ukraine had drawn some criticism for building fortified lines too late and too poorly, but they seem to have done well here. Will be very challenging to breach these.

https://x.com/clement_molin/status/20034...38155?s=20

A net-launcher to intercept FPV drones at close range

https://bsky.app/profile/meanwhileua.bsk...ov6b4jsm2d

[TrumpCard]

I've seen estimates of 1.1 million killed/wounded on each side.  Is there any prospect of seeing the toll slow down soon?

[TrumpCard]

I've seen estimates of 1.1 million killed/wounded on each side.  Is there any prospect of seeing the toll slow down soon?

[Goose]

I've seen estimates of 1.1 million killed/wounded on each side.  Is there any prospect of seeing the toll slow down soon?

IMO, no. Putin is going to push the ground war all winter because the bad weather greatly hampers Ukrainian drone operations. Of course, it does the same for Russian drone operations, but since Russia is advancing (or attempting to) not being seen is critical. The Ukrainian defenses are almost entirely static, so reconnaissance is less important to the Russians.

[Goose]

I've seen estimates of 1.1 million killed/wounded on each side.  Is there any prospect of seeing the toll slow down soon?

IMO, no. Putin is going to push the ground war all winter because the bad weather greatly hampers Ukrainian drone operations. Of course, it does the same for Russian drone operations, but since Russia is advancing (or attempting to) not being seen is critical. The Ukrainian defenses are almost entirely static, so reconnaissance is less important to the Russians.

[TrumpCard]

That explains the recent surge in the number of Russian troops on the frontline.  I was still in the mindset of late 2022, when winter portended a period of stalemate.

I know Putin lacks a graceful exit from this war, but I wonder if he kicks himself for starting it when he's alone.

[TrumpCard]

That explains the recent surge in the number of Russian troops on the frontline.  I was still in the mindset of late 2022, when winter portended a period of stalemate.

I know Putin lacks a graceful exit from this war, but I wonder if he kicks himself for starting it when he's alone.

[BostonCard]

No good solutions from here.
A)  Europe can try to play the "Neo-liberal Idealist" role and refuse to "reward the Aggressor evil Russia"... and so the war grinds on for another year or two, like WW1. 
Russia will keep bombing.  They have more inventory. 
Ukraine is exhausted.  I visited Kyiv in March 2023, looking at energy infrastructure. 

B)  Stop the killing, and take a Bad Deal.  Nobody, nobody has 200,000 troops to throw against 200,000+ land mines in Donbas, that will not take back territory. 
Russia will keep the Eastern portion, claiming the old boundaries from 1618, just before the Thirty Years War.
That is not "just"; Putin has a simple reply: "Make me"
Meanwhile, four years on, Europe (at various levels) still pays Russia for oil and gas. Russian leverage rises in Winter.

Serious REAL-POLITIK.
C) Worse... Russia & China amp up the rival BRICS currency, and Middle Eastern SWFs pull money OUT of Europe for fear of seizure.  European Banks are already strained by stagflation in the EU and industry sliding further.  

France and the UK suffer more severe fiscal crises than USA.  Both Starmer and Macron are running below 20% in approval -- Despite public statements by their leaders, their populations will refuse to provide troops and more resources to Ukraine.  Putin knows the fortitude of Europe is fractured and limp; with few soldiers. 
Putin is a vampire, and he knows the American people will not send troops either. 
Woodrow Wilson originated the "America FIRST" campaign for reelection in 1916 -- promising to keep USA out of "European wars".  Wilson. 

Despite pleading by Neo-liberals, there is no consensus to die in Ukraine, compared to battling Hitler in 1939.
Even then, USA did not get in.  Not until Dec 1941. 

There is no stomach to continue a losing battle.  
There are no winners in Ukraine.  #WinterISHere. 

Frankly, for USA, China is a much more insidious threat.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...-president

I agree with you that there are no winners in Ukraine.

But your comments are exactly why Ukraine can’t afford to take the deal, particularly one where they have to concede territory that Russia has not been able to conquer.  They know that Putin would pocket any gains from the cease fire, and take the opportunity to regroup, and attack at a future time of its choosing.  Because there is no desire from the west to shed blood for Ukraine, any security guarantee being proffered is meaningless; basically Ukraine would need Western troops on the ground that would be a tripwire, something that is unacceptable to Russia (because they know it would be a tripwire).  The Ukranian hope boils down to trading territory for time; Russia has captured about 5000 square kilometers this year, less than 1% of Ukranian territory.

The Europeans are largely going to continue to support Ukraine with money and weapons (not troops) because as long as Putin is stuck in a morass in Ukraine, it is not going to test NATO resolve in the Balkans.  I don’t know if Putin is crazy enough to try to attack the Balkans but nobody wants to find out.

BC

[BostonCard]

No good solutions from here.
A)  Europe can try to play the "Neo-liberal Idealist" role and refuse to "reward the Aggressor evil Russia"... and so the war grinds on for another year or two, like WW1. 
Russia will keep bombing.  They have more inventory. 
Ukraine is exhausted.  I visited Kyiv in March 2023, looking at energy infrastructure. 

B)  Stop the killing, and take a Bad Deal.  Nobody, nobody has 200,000 troops to throw against 200,000+ land mines in Donbas, that will not take back territory. 
Russia will keep the Eastern portion, claiming the old boundaries from 1618, just before the Thirty Years War.
That is not "just"; Putin has a simple reply: "Make me"
Meanwhile, four years on, Europe (at various levels) still pays Russia for oil and gas. Russian leverage rises in Winter.

Serious REAL-POLITIK.
C) Worse... Russia & China amp up the rival BRICS currency, and Middle Eastern SWFs pull money OUT of Europe for fear of seizure.  European Banks are already strained by stagflation in the EU and industry sliding further.  

France and the UK suffer more severe fiscal crises than USA.  Both Starmer and Macron are running below 20% in approval -- Despite public statements by their leaders, their populations will refuse to provide troops and more resources to Ukraine.  Putin knows the fortitude of Europe is fractured and limp; with few soldiers. 
Putin is a vampire, and he knows the American people will not send troops either. 
Woodrow Wilson originated the "America FIRST" campaign for reelection in 1916 -- promising to keep USA out of "European wars".  Wilson. 

Despite pleading by Neo-liberals, there is no consensus to die in Ukraine, compared to battling Hitler in 1939.
Even then, USA did not get in.  Not until Dec 1941. 

There is no stomach to continue a losing battle.  
There are no winners in Ukraine.  #WinterISHere. 

Frankly, for USA, China is a much more insidious threat.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...-president

I agree with you that there are no winners in Ukraine.

But your comments are exactly why Ukraine can’t afford to take the deal, particularly one where they have to concede territory that Russia has not been able to conquer.  They know that Putin would pocket any gains from the cease fire, and take the opportunity to regroup, and attack at a future time of its choosing.  Because there is no desire from the west to shed blood for Ukraine, any security guarantee being proffered is meaningless; basically Ukraine would need Western troops on the ground that would be a tripwire, something that is unacceptable to Russia (because they know it would be a tripwire).  The Ukranian hope boils down to trading territory for time; Russia has captured about 5000 square kilometers this year, less than 1% of Ukranian territory.

The Europeans are largely going to continue to support Ukraine with money and weapons (not troops) because as long as Putin is stuck in a morass in Ukraine, it is not going to test NATO resolve in the Balkans.  I don’t know if Putin is crazy enough to try to attack the Balkans but nobody wants to find out.

BC

[Goose]

Some more interesting videos.

Here are some videos of Shaheds being intercepted by drones. Achieving cost effective interception is a big deal for durable defense, especially with reduced western support.

https://x.com/wilendhornets/status/20034...68955?s=20

Indeed it is. Unfortunately ground-based FPV drones can't do that. https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/ukra...39849.html discusses the reasons this is the case. The article does omit one very critical constraint that makes the problem even worse. As has been repeatedly pointed out, ground based drone interception is heavily constrained by geometry. The detection range, either radar or visual, of low flying drones is quite limited. This results in a very limited period of time in which interception is possible. In many cases the target can be detected but there is no feasible intercept course available. Obviously the faster the interceptor drone is the greater the options are. However, high speed with electrically powered drones drastically cuts down the range. It is a very complicated problem.
 
It is possible to use these systems as point defense weapons, but as area defense weapons, they are hopeless. FWIW so are missiles, for similar reasons. Missiles are "better" because of their higher speed, but their ground based sensor's inherent limitations are still the limiting factor.

Ukraine recently used a naval drone to attack a Russian submarine at port, apparently damaging it. Here we can see how they set up that attack, by attacking a Russian anti-submarine reconnaisance plane and disabling it. This was their only one in the region, and was active in surveilling for Ukrainian naval drones.

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/200...21467?s=20

Thanks! Really like this, although I really hate to see Mays damaged. There are so few of them left :-) . Ukraine has got the Russian Navy on the run everywhere. One wonders if Ukraine could declare a legally enforceable blockade using drones alone :-). Would be interesting if they try it.

[Goose]

Some more interesting videos.

Here are some videos of Shaheds being intercepted by drones. Achieving cost effective interception is a big deal for durable defense, especially with reduced western support.

https://x.com/wilendhornets/status/20034...68955?s=20

Indeed it is. Unfortunately ground-based FPV drones can't do that. https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/ukra...39849.html discusses the reasons this is the case. The article does omit one very critical constraint that makes the problem even worse. As has been repeatedly pointed out, ground based drone interception is heavily constrained by geometry. The detection range, either radar or visual, of low flying drones is quite limited. This results in a very limited period of time in which interception is possible. In many cases the target can be detected but there is no feasible intercept course available. Obviously the faster the interceptor drone is the greater the options are. However, high speed with electrically powered drones drastically cuts down the range. It is a very complicated problem.
 
It is possible to use these systems as point defense weapons, but as area defense weapons, they are hopeless. FWIW so are missiles, for similar reasons. Missiles are "better" because of their higher speed, but their ground based sensor's inherent limitations are still the limiting factor.

Ukraine recently used a naval drone to attack a Russian submarine at port, apparently damaging it. Here we can see how they set up that attack, by attacking a Russian anti-submarine reconnaisance plane and disabling it. This was their only one in the region, and was active in surveilling for Ukrainian naval drones.

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/200...21467?s=20

Thanks! Really like this, although I really hate to see Mays damaged. There are so few of them left :-) . Ukraine has got the Russian Navy on the run everywhere. One wonders if Ukraine could declare a legally enforceable blockade using drones alone :-). Would be interesting if they try it.

[dabigv13]

Some more interesting videos.

Here are some videos of Shaheds being intercepted by drones. Achieving cost effective interception is a big deal for durable defense, especially with reduced western support.

https://x.com/wilendhornets/status/20034...68955?s=20

Indeed it is. Unfortunately ground-based FPV drones can't do that. https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/ukra...39849.html discusses the reasons this is the case. The article does omit one very critical constraint that makes the problem even worse. As has been repeatedly pointed out, ground based drone interception is heavily constrained by geometry. The detection range, either radar or visual, of low flying drones is quite limited. This results in a very limited period of time in which interception is possible. In many cases the target can be detected but there is no feasible intercept course available. Obviously the faster the interceptor drone is the greater the options are. However, high speed with electrically powered drones drastically cuts down the range. It is a very complicated problem.
 
It is possible to use these systems as point defense weapons, but as area defense weapons, they are hopeless. FWIW so are missiles, for similar reasons. Missiles are "better" because of their higher speed, but their ground based sensor's inherent limitations are still the limiting factor.

Clearly they can be effective, as the video shows. The second shahed intercepted even looks to be a jet powered variant, and the drone still gets it. Note that article is from October- this is an area of active development, and we know Ukraine has been working on autonomous targeting as well.

Perhaps FPV drones can't be a sole defense, but their effectiveness is improving and their production and use is expanding.

[dabigv13]

Some more interesting videos.

Here are some videos of Shaheds being intercepted by drones. Achieving cost effective interception is a big deal for durable defense, especially with reduced western support.

https://x.com/wilendhornets/status/20034...68955?s=20

Indeed it is. Unfortunately ground-based FPV drones can't do that. https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/ukra...39849.html discusses the reasons this is the case. The article does omit one very critical constraint that makes the problem even worse. As has been repeatedly pointed out, ground based drone interception is heavily constrained by geometry. The detection range, either radar or visual, of low flying drones is quite limited. This results in a very limited period of time in which interception is possible. In many cases the target can be detected but there is no feasible intercept course available. Obviously the faster the interceptor drone is the greater the options are. However, high speed with electrically powered drones drastically cuts down the range. It is a very complicated problem.
 
It is possible to use these systems as point defense weapons, but as area defense weapons, they are hopeless. FWIW so are missiles, for similar reasons. Missiles are "better" because of their higher speed, but their ground based sensor's inherent limitations are still the limiting factor.

Clearly they can be effective, as the video shows. The second shahed intercepted even looks to be a jet powered variant, and the drone still gets it. Note that article is from October- this is an area of active development, and we know Ukraine has been working on autonomous targeting as well.

Perhaps FPV drones can't be a sole defense, but their effectiveness is improving and their production and use is expanding.

[Goose]

Clearly they can be effective, as the video shows. The second shahed intercepted even looks to be a jet powered variant, and the drone still gets it. Note that article is from October- this is an area of active development, and we know Ukraine has been working on autonomous targeting as well.

Yes, improvements can be made in the process. However, as the article from October pointed out you need a radar, communications systems, etc. for each of the defended points. These things require money and organization which are not in abundant supply in Ukraine. These requirements do not change. The need for highly skilled pilots is at present a significant ongoing issue. AI may remove that constraint eventually, but it has not yet done so.
 
As for the interception of a jet powered drone, that also happens every day in Ukraine by machine gun fire too. If you have good geometry it is quite possible to collide a "slow" interceptor drone with a "faster" jet drone. You may need a head-on collision, but it can be done. That doesn't mean it is an "effective" weapon. It may be the best you have, but that may well not be enough.
 
Most importantly, no matter how much development goes on or how sophisticated your targeting software is, you cannot defeat geometry. If a Shahed 136 is flying directly towards the acquisition radar you have 8.3 minutes to launch your FPV drone and acquire the target visually (radar 10 feet in the air, drone at an altitude of 100 ft).  This is a "best case" scenario. You can defend yourself :-). However, if the drone's flight path is more than 16 miles either side of your radar, you don't detect the drone at all. You are safe, but the drone is on its way to its target. If the drone flight path point of closest approach is 15.9 miles from you and not closing with your position at that point, you have at most 1.9 minutes to launch and acquire. That isn't happening. The field of view of an FPV isn't all that wide. Acquiring the radar detected target at range (at night remember) isn't easy. If it were, a radar wouldn't be necessary. If you then have to "run down" the target, it can simply be impossible, depending on the geometry at that moment. A jet powered Geran 3 halves the time available to react.
 
All this aside, you would need radars and drone launchers/operators spaced every 30 miles (best case) or so along a "line of defense" to even detect all the drones, let alone shoot them down. Even then, two drones in the same "box" overloads the system unless you have multiple drone operators (and drones) at each site. Of course, on any given night most of these assets would be doing nothing. The resource consumption would be massive. There is simply no way such a system can "work". The geometry is just too difficult.
 
OTOH, an airborne radar at 30,000 ft will give you over 2 hours warning of the drone approach, assuming it is launched from more than 230 miles away. Not only that, the Shahed 136's ground track will be apparent after 10 or so minutes of flight. This allows interceptor drones to travel a significant distance before intercept. Such a system is much more difficult to overload. Such a  system can work. It is still expensive and complex, but it can work. A ground based one cannot.

[Goose]

Clearly they can be effective, as the video shows. The second shahed intercepted even looks to be a jet powered variant, and the drone still gets it. Note that article is from October- this is an area of active development, and we know Ukraine has been working on autonomous targeting as well.

Yes, improvements can be made in the process. However, as the article from October pointed out you need a radar, communications systems, etc. for each of the defended points. These things require money and organization which are not in abundant supply in Ukraine. These requirements do not change. The need for highly skilled pilots is at present a significant ongoing issue. AI may remove that constraint eventually, but it has not yet done so.
 
As for the interception of a jet powered drone, that also happens every day in Ukraine by machine gun fire too. If you have good geometry it is quite possible to collide a "slow" interceptor drone with a "faster" jet drone. You may need a head-on collision, but it can be done. That doesn't mean it is an "effective" weapon. It may be the best you have, but that may well not be enough.
 
Most importantly, no matter how much development goes on or how sophisticated your targeting software is, you cannot defeat geometry. If a Shahed 136 is flying directly towards the acquisition radar you have 8.3 minutes to launch your FPV drone and acquire the target visually (radar 10 feet in the air, drone at an altitude of 100 ft).  This is a "best case" scenario. You can defend yourself :-). However, if the drone's flight path is more than 16 miles either side of your radar, you don't detect the drone at all. You are safe, but the drone is on its way to its target. If the drone flight path point of closest approach is 15.9 miles from you and not closing with your position at that point, you have at most 1.9 minutes to launch and acquire. That isn't happening. The field of view of an FPV isn't all that wide. Acquiring the radar detected target at range (at night remember) isn't easy. If it were, a radar wouldn't be necessary. If you then have to "run down" the target, it can simply be impossible, depending on the geometry at that moment. A jet powered Geran 3 halves the time available to react.
 
All this aside, you would need radars and drone launchers/operators spaced every 30 miles (best case) or so along a "line of defense" to even detect all the drones, let alone shoot them down. Even then, two drones in the same "box" overloads the system unless you have multiple drone operators (and drones) at each site. Of course, on any given night most of these assets would be doing nothing. The resource consumption would be massive. There is simply no way such a system can "work". The geometry is just too difficult.
 
OTOH, an airborne radar at 30,000 ft will give you over 2 hours warning of the drone approach, assuming it is launched from more than 230 miles away. Not only that, the Shahed 136's ground track will be apparent after 10 or so minutes of flight. This allows interceptor drones to travel a significant distance before intercept. Such a system is much more difficult to overload. Such a  system can work. It is still expensive and complex, but it can work. A ground based one cannot.

[dabigv13]

The FPV drone interceptor got the jet shahed from behind FWIW, it did not have favorable geometry.

I think it's very workable to have dispersed drone interceptors every 10 or 20 miles, especially with autonomous targeting. They already have that sort of system with 50 cals. I guess I don't see it as impossible, especially with the fast pace of drone development in Ukraine, and the clear effectiveness we can see on these videos.

I agree an AWACS coordinated system would be even better. Ukraine has some capability in this regard with their Swedish donated Saab 340(s). They have at least one operating of two that were pledged. Unknown if the second one has been delivered yet.

It was apparently used to help a F16 kill a Russian Su-35 over Kursk in June.

https://defensemirror.com/news/39631

https://www.twz.com/air/claims-swirl-aro...-shootdown

I think you will appreciate this. Reportedly last night Ukrainian F16's shot down 34 of 35 Russian cruise missiles.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/12/23/8013110/

How Ukraine is using their AWACS capability routinely, I am unsure. They have not been mentioned frequently in the news apart from that Su35 shootdown. I suppose it's possible they are already well integrated in their air defense system, but with only 1 or 2 of them I'm certain they are not used continuously.

[dabigv13]

The FPV drone interceptor got the jet shahed from behind FWIW, it did not have favorable geometry.

I think it's very workable to have dispersed drone interceptors every 10 or 20 miles, especially with autonomous targeting. They already have that sort of system with 50 cals. I guess I don't see it as impossible, especially with the fast pace of drone development in Ukraine, and the clear effectiveness we can see on these videos.

I agree an AWACS coordinated system would be even better. Ukraine has some capability in this regard with their Swedish donated Saab 340(s). They have at least one operating of two that were pledged. Unknown if the second one has been delivered yet.

It was apparently used to help a F16 kill a Russian Su-35 over Kursk in June.

https://defensemirror.com/news/39631

https://www.twz.com/air/claims-swirl-aro...-shootdown

I think you will appreciate this. Reportedly last night Ukrainian F16's shot down 34 of 35 Russian cruise missiles.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/12/23/8013110/

How Ukraine is using their AWACS capability routinely, I am unsure. They have not been mentioned frequently in the news apart from that Su35 shootdown. I suppose it's possible they are already well integrated in their air defense system, but with only 1 or 2 of them I'm certain they are not used continuously.

[Goose]

The FPV drone interceptor got the jet shahed from behind FWIW, it did not have favorable geometry.

The fact it was struck from behind does not mean it was a tail-chase all the way. Most FPVs would lose a tail-chase with a 230 mph Geran 3. The Geran 3 probably was approaching the drone launch point, although not necessarily at a fixed angle. That means the closure rate would be additive. Very low margin for error in the attack. The drone operator acquires the target. He then  gains altitude while he approaches the merge. As the  Shahed  passes, the drone dives down on it from behind, trading altitude for increased speed. The interceptor drone is now closing the target at a much lower speed than a head-on attack would produce, but still closing. Easier to aim with a reduced closure rate. Correct tactics for guns, but also for collision/proximity fuse.

I think it's very workable to have dispersed drone interceptors every 10 or 20 miles, especially with autonomous targeting. They already have that sort of system with 50 cals. I guess I don't see it as impossible,

That many drones and operators would be an immense logistics problem. Maybe it would be possible, but it seems unlikely to me. Do these systems all have their own radar? AFAIK most of the 50 cals are strictly visually operated. That would require a LOT of air search radars, and I don't think Ukraine has anywhere near that many. The October article did indicate that was a problem.

  especially with the fast pace of drone development in Ukraine, and the clear effectiveness we can see on these videos.

Sorry, but these videos are a N of 1. The fact something happened once doesn't necessarily mean it happens frequently and easily. If Ukraine was stopping virtually all of the "low end" drones then we would have a data point indicating effectiveness. So far, as I understand it these low-end drones are doing lots of damage to the power grid in Ukraine.

I agree an AWACS coordinated system would be even better. Ukraine has some capability in this regard with their Swedish donated Saab 340(s). They have at least one operating of two that were pledged. Unknown if the second one has been delivered yet.

It was apparently used to help a F16 kill a Russian Su-35 over Kursk in June.

https://defensemirror.com/news/39631

https://www.twz.com/air/claims-swirl-aro...-shootdown

I think you will appreciate this. Reportedly last night Ukrainian F16's shot down 34 of 35 Russian cruise missiles.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/12/23/8013110/

How Ukraine is using their AWACS capability routinely, I am unsure. They have not been mentioned frequently in the news apart from that Su35 shootdown. I suppose it's possible they are already well integrated in their air defense system, but with only 1 or 2 of them I'm certain they are not used continuously.

Unfortunately you are undoubtedly correct. 1 or 2 AWACS can't cover even the northern borders of Ukraine continuously. Just not enough aircraft. As I understand it both of the promised planes are operational in Ukraine. I am guessing they are used more to target cruise missiles than low-end drones, mostly because the damage potential of the cruise missiles are greater and you need either aircraft or fast missiles to shoot them down.

[Goose]

The FPV drone interceptor got the jet shahed from behind FWIW, it did not have favorable geometry.

The fact it was struck from behind does not mean it was a tail-chase all the way. Most FPVs would lose a tail-chase with a 230 mph Geran 3. The Geran 3 probably was approaching the drone launch point, although not necessarily at a fixed angle. That means the closure rate would be additive. Very low margin for error in the attack. The drone operator acquires the target. He then  gains altitude while he approaches the merge. As the  Shahed  passes, the drone dives down on it from behind, trading altitude for increased speed. The interceptor drone is now closing the target at a much lower speed than a head-on attack would produce, but still closing. Easier to aim with a reduced closure rate. Correct tactics for guns, but also for collision/proximity fuse.

I think it's very workable to have dispersed drone interceptors every 10 or 20 miles, especially with autonomous targeting. They already have that sort of system with 50 cals. I guess I don't see it as impossible,

That many drones and operators would be an immense logistics problem. Maybe it would be possible, but it seems unlikely to me. Do these systems all have their own radar? AFAIK most of the 50 cals are strictly visually operated. That would require a LOT of air search radars, and I don't think Ukraine has anywhere near that many. The October article did indicate that was a problem.

  especially with the fast pace of drone development in Ukraine, and the clear effectiveness we can see on these videos.

Sorry, but these videos are a N of 1. The fact something happened once doesn't necessarily mean it happens frequently and easily. If Ukraine was stopping virtually all of the "low end" drones then we would have a data point indicating effectiveness. So far, as I understand it these low-end drones are doing lots of damage to the power grid in Ukraine.

I agree an AWACS coordinated system would be even better. Ukraine has some capability in this regard with their Swedish donated Saab 340(s). They have at least one operating of two that were pledged. Unknown if the second one has been delivered yet.

It was apparently used to help a F16 kill a Russian Su-35 over Kursk in June.

https://defensemirror.com/news/39631

https://www.twz.com/air/claims-swirl-aro...-shootdown

I think you will appreciate this. Reportedly last night Ukrainian F16's shot down 34 of 35 Russian cruise missiles.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/12/23/8013110/

How Ukraine is using their AWACS capability routinely, I am unsure. They have not been mentioned frequently in the news apart from that Su35 shootdown. I suppose it's possible they are already well integrated in their air defense system, but with only 1 or 2 of them I'm certain they are not used continuously.

Unfortunately you are undoubtedly correct. 1 or 2 AWACS can't cover even the northern borders of Ukraine continuously. Just not enough aircraft. As I understand it both of the promised planes are operational in Ukraine. I am guessing they are used more to target cruise missiles than low-end drones, mostly because the damage potential of the cruise missiles are greater and you need either aircraft or fast missiles to shoot them down.

[dabigv13]

Ukraine is supposedly building nearly 1000 drone interceptors per day. I doubt they would be expanding their production so much if they were not effective. This article specifically cites capability against jet powered shaheds.

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-...ed-2025-12

Ukraine has used acoustic devices to pick up the shaheds, and thermal imaging, then passing targets off to machine gunner/spotlight teams. There was a really good article a year or so ago about their system, though it's probably already out of date by now. In any case, the interceptor drones may not be perfect but it seems to be a significant improvement and one that will likely continue to improve.

[dabigv13]

Ukraine is supposedly building nearly 1000 drone interceptors per day. I doubt they would be expanding their production so much if they were not effective. This article specifically cites capability against jet powered shaheds.

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-...ed-2025-12

Ukraine has used acoustic devices to pick up the shaheds, and thermal imaging, then passing targets off to machine gunner/spotlight teams. There was a really good article a year or so ago about their system, though it's probably already out of date by now. In any case, the interceptor drones may not be perfect but it seems to be a significant improvement and one that will likely continue to improve.

[ADPinWDC]

I've seen estimates of 1.1 million killed/wounded on each side.  Is there any prospect of seeing the toll slow down soon?

IMO, no. Putin is going to push the ground war all winter because the bad weather greatly hampers Ukrainian drone operations. Of course, it does the same for Russian drone operations, but since Russia is advancing (or attempting to) not being seen is critical. The Ukrainian defenses are almost entirely static, so reconnaissance is less important to the Russians.

Right -- in a War of Attrition, both sides keep losing in weekly exchange of drones.  
Ukraine lacks manpower and inventory to retake the Donbas / Eastern provinces.  
Strongly agree that Winter also dramatically reduces ability of Ukraine to retake any territory.  
Sending more money and ammo to Ukraine simply piles up thousands of deaths a month on each side, plus lost infrastructure.  
A year from now, where are we?  More deaths.  
Europe may think they can use Ukraine to just bleed Russia, which is a cruel gambit.
And Russia builds up its manufacturing military industrial base beyond what slacker Europe has. 
Last summer Merz admitted that for decades, Europe was a free rider on US security blanket. 
Now there are no good options.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg6v0pk964o

[ADPinWDC]

I've seen estimates of 1.1 million killed/wounded on each side.  Is there any prospect of seeing the toll slow down soon?

IMO, no. Putin is going to push the ground war all winter because the bad weather greatly hampers Ukrainian drone operations. Of course, it does the same for Russian drone operations, but since Russia is advancing (or attempting to) not being seen is critical. The Ukrainian defenses are almost entirely static, so reconnaissance is less important to the Russians.

Right -- in a War of Attrition, both sides keep losing in weekly exchange of drones.  
Ukraine lacks manpower and inventory to retake the Donbas / Eastern provinces.  
Strongly agree that Winter also dramatically reduces ability of Ukraine to retake any territory.  
Sending more money and ammo to Ukraine simply piles up thousands of deaths a month on each side, plus lost infrastructure.  
A year from now, where are we?  More deaths.  
Europe may think they can use Ukraine to just bleed Russia, which is a cruel gambit.
And Russia builds up its manufacturing military industrial base beyond what slacker Europe has. 
Last summer Merz admitted that for decades, Europe was a free rider on US security blanket. 
Now there are no good options.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg6v0pk964o