Systems that have precious few missiles left so they have to be extremely selective on what they actually engage.

​@killman369547 Killing the launch platform is more efficient than killing the weapon it launches. Glide bombs are kinda useless without the aircraft to launch them 🤷🏻‍♂️

That would tend to defeat the purpose of the glide bomb kits. But it's conceivable Russia is miscalculating what it considers a safe standoff range (which would clearly be what happened with the Mainstay, unless that was friendly fire. We just don't know.)

glide bombs are released from far away

​@@blacklake13 Or... it could be an expected result, that flying more missions, increases exposure to air defenses; something the people chortling about Russia losing aircraft, haven't faced in 50 years.

That was a huge scale war over a much much longer time frame ! 13 SU34's in a month from a small fleet of 100 is very significant !

@@edwardfletcher7790 The US lost 102 fixed wing combat aircraft and the US Navy flagship, in the same amount of time the Ukraine conflict has been running. The 'scale' of the conflict is comparable.

I've been saying this for a long time now.

​@@edwardfletcher779013 kills is Ukrainian claim, just like Russians they tend to overclaim kills

That was over a period of more than 10 years. Plus we were also in other Southeastern Asian countries such as Laos, Cambodia, Thailand and yes North Vietnam. And they were all supplied by China and some of Russia. Remember also there were places to hide as in the jungles and marshes versus the farm fields and woods in much of Ukraine. So that also puts Ukraine at a disadvantage

Nothing besides increased use of drones in this entire war, is the new normal.

No, this is the old normal. Everyone has gotten high on their own farts after 30 years of beating up dudes in dresses and flipflops trying to shoot down F18s with AKs.

Western air forces have never faced air defenses of such density and complexity as Ukraine has. Even one Buk-M1 hidden in a barn, which will be turned on only when your plane flies by on a call from ground observers, prevents aircraft from flying within a radius of 50 km. You just can't afford to lose a $100 million plane. There are no ground targets that would justify such losses.

@@azanudniy I know youre russian so you have no familiarity with how western militaries neutralize anti air networks, buts its called C4ISR. Its a complicated process of fusing intelligence, networks, sensors, strike assets that can figure out and track things like air defense networks before destroying them that non western nations outside of a couple in Asia do not have an equivalent of. This is why you guys are losing so many aircraft in ukraine while NATO would have a cakewalk. Its also how NATO is able to find a buk hidden in a barn that russia cant. Your comment about plane flying in for strike and them turning it on demonstrates how russia doesnt have a clue of this and would be taken completely by surprise and overwhelmed in a NATO conflict. You think that the buk is denying airspace but it isnt, youre fighting a military force that is on another level, that you dont know exists. So then what happens when that buk turns on its radar and gets smacked by a HARM from an F18 20 miles outside its engagement range? Or an F35 flying unseen next to the strike aircraft? Or the buk barn gets destroyed a day before the strike because it was already being tracked you see what I mean?

F-16s are on the way -- far better than anything Russia has.

Breaking news, plane is countered by systems that were designed and calibrated to counter that specific plane In other news...

Have a little cheese with that whine😂

No other?!? Apart from, oh, I dunno, Vietnam? Gulf War?

@@MostlyPennyCat golf war was not more than 30km range for the long range SAM… Vietnam more of the same. Also golf war was a war against a country with none support at all from 3rd countries and at the other side a coalition. Doesn’t make sense make a comparison on that. Vietnam is the closest one but this Ukraine war is more high tech. So not the same level…

@@lakkchina Ukraine war is more high-tech because it’s taking place now. The comparison is definitely similar. The problem with this plane is that it’s too big it’s basically an enlarged flanker trying to act like an f16.

Can you selectively jam IFF to get a friendly battery to shoot at a friendly plane when it's returning from a mission? I could see Ukraine having observers inside Russia to watch for flight patterns.

I suspect it is less mental and more physical. Ejection seats are amazing things, but they are also VERY rough on the occupant.

They've been doing that from the outset.

and it's actually working well for them, Ukrakne is running out of SAM missiles real fast

Cos of exaggerated claims about shot down aircraft? nah

Anyone that claims "insider info" is either clickbaiting or risking revealing classified info. We're just a couple of fighter pilots discussing current events like we would in a ready room or squadron bar. Purely speculative.

I see, thank you. @@CWLemoine

The risks of having an older s300 system in auto mode and no one watching it’s possible !! But it’s also likely the Ukrainians have uprated the old s200 and have used that on some extreme range targets like the A50. The aircraft hit closer to the front have been hit by a mixture of Patriots, NASAM, IRIS-T and some replacement s300s out of Greece don’t doubt they have been effective and the Russian losses have been high but the Russians have been systematically killing off these systems as near the front line they are quickly spotted by drones. I doubt Ukraine will be able to replace those systems and it’s clear the Russians have renewed their bombing with little resistance.

I think Ukraine makes a lot of the SU34 shootdowns up though

The Ukrainians are now picking them off on the ground with a whole new variety of drones. They think that they are safe and far enough from the battlefield, but the new Ukrainian drones are hitting them at medium to long range with drones which are converted light aircraft carrying 300kg of payload. The danger to the SU-34 over the battlefield is that they have no idea which system they will be facing next.

25 are you crazy, they have Su25 cheap bomber fighters that are small agile and ground huggers!

that were probably those that got shot down by friendly fire.

Your ex was a honey pot . Soyboy

your gf had them priorities sorted out fatherland before the boyfriend :p

I tried to get to Monino Air Museum when I went in 06,but foreigners need passes to go. It's on an active base. We didn't have time to get them.

You got honey Potted and did even know it . Your ex had a successful mission

Stop thinking propaganda is real lol

Would you interview me? I’d interview me 😂

So true

Anyone who claims to know definitively is lying.

​​@@CWLemoine Just take a look at the visual loss data over at Oryx or the like. There's at least 2 or 3 genuinly solid visual loss counters, both Russian and Western. Oryx is just the most infamous and has visual evidence to back up the data set.

Quite a number of them. Air losses are said to be over 300 aircraft.

and there are two crew in a SU-34

Not how a SAM works

​@@springbloom5940 it is how the patriot and AIM 120 work

@@Jadefox32 No. It is not. Ask me how I know.

That story was fake news.

Meanwhile pictures occurred that were showing Cesna look-alike planes/drones. JFTR. And once you were able to cross their first line of defense they have to face the tough challenge securing their vast territory. That will become Russias problem anyway. Controlling occupied land that is packed with hostile people.

Well they do as there is no significant Ukraine airforce activity, the Russians are dropping up to a 100 glide bombs every day, and can up that rate significantly if required for periods of 3-4 days the Ukrainians can’t stop them at all. The only real other issue is Russian airframes have lower life time hour ratings than NATO aircraft and they are literally wearing out there planes.

Just came over this. I agree on what you say. I have also been following the war, and whenever the RU have had a "high loss", say 2-3 downs in a certain area, they suspend operations, and do not retake it until they found out on how to deal it, or change scenario.

You'll be surprised by how bad Russians can be. Just look up 2022 Chornobaivka attacks. Russians kept getting attacked and they kept replacing the equipment. For nearly a year.

You seen them do their armour operations, they are happy to take losses.

Everyone has cameras in their pockets nowdays. So a downed plane filmed all over.

Are not russia moving their navy to the caspian sea? And could we not see a russian bomber be shot down?

Good point, but I think NATO would have the tools to get air superiority over the span of 2 years even in that environment. And most expected Russia did too. That's why people are surprised they've made so little headway.

The USDOD has donated what amounts to a rounding error level of kit. You obviously have no concept of US ordnance stockpiles. 😆😆😆😆

​@@6.5x55Definitely more than a rounding error when it comes to Patriot. However, I agree with your general sentiment that the Merikans have way more kit than the Russians.

@@jaysdood a bit nit picking on the Patriot side...of course it ignores the fact that Patriot is merely the short range capability of air defense assets of the US. To address the OP's contention that tge West is exhausted to the extent that it cannot resist Russia head on, the US is retaining ample multiples of the needed ordnance to fight a TWO front war, let alone a bled out Russia.

They have the capabilities, they lack training because it's not in their doctrine.

But all media bad though

Well, considering the Vietnam war was entirely pointless I. Disagree with that

@@kipkipper-lg9vl Vietnam was pointless, but that has nothing to do with my argument. If the US can lose 300 aircraft without blinking, Russia can lose more. It's not a big deal to them.

@@tomsmith3045 yeah to be fair i think that is true, they will ramp up prtoduction to meet the demand

If u dive deeper into what the true Russian goals are (ie not what western tv reports) then it looks like they (Russians) are seriously pulling their punches. They may or may not continue such strategy.

I have noticed that too, esp with the A50 shootdowns.

Except none of that is true. The Ukrainian airforce didn't survive and was only revived by international donations. The Ukrainian air force is making *no* deep strikes, the Russian navy is getting hit by surface drones and practically if not discretely all of the shootdowns are by ground forces. So, no, you're the one coping, with the aid of a steady diet of propaganda.

Well they have to appeal to the wannabe Alpha Male MAGA crowd.

On the flip side, some people take everything put forth by Ukraine as undeniable facts. And that's a bigger problem because there's a LOT more people that are willing to take the word of a government that has been caught lying in the past, than there are people that think mayyyyybe we should verify first.

It would end up costing us a lot more. You can't justify more military spending to Joe public - they'll see it as more waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere.

@@minthouse6338 the point being, R&D is done for Raptor. NGAD like any new tech is an unknown risk. Leadership's responsibility is to help the public understand these are not costs but *investments*.

& Gulf War blue losses.

Never trust anyone who claims to know everything definitively.

@@CWLemoine That is true, however educated assessment of what could potentially be going on is what we'd expect of you, given your experience and knowledge. In this case, there is verifiable evidence of a significant increase in the number of Russian glide bomb strikes on Avdiivka towards the end of the battle for that town. These are released by Su-34's at range, which means they would need a much higher ROE than usual while also using a mission profile that requires altitude. Combine that with the verified loss of a Patriot launcher relatively close to the front line near Avdiivka (after which there weren't any more shoot downs claimed), and combine it with the capabilities of the Patriot where they don't need to be connected by wires or close to their supporting radar, and we can make a pretty likely assessment that Ukraine were pushing Patriot launchers up much closer to the front lines which are linked to their radar much further back. Su-34's are flying at higher altitudes with much more sorties and they are seeing the Patriot radar outside the normal range they would consider a large threat, but unknown to them they are actually well in range because the actual launcher is many km closer than the radar itself. This is what is likely to have caused these shootdowns, and some level of discussion on these potential factors would have been good in this video. Of course, once a Patriot launcher was destroyed because it was pushed up so far, and once the battle of Avdiivka ended meaning a return to the usual Su-34 ROE, the situation went back to the previous status quo and we haven't heard of similar shootdowns recently.

What could be going on? They're either getting shot down by Ukraine or Russia or the numbers are significantly inflated. It depends. There's not enough valid information to make an assessment.

It's a risky strategy that's cost them a patriot launcher, but until the Ukrainians have 120-240 fighters, it's what they have to do

@pogo1140 ya at least the radar us way out of the way. Oneaincher and several aircraft. Monetarily good trade, but there's more to it. If you only have say 16-24 of the things, Russia has quite a few 34's. Although that is greatly diminished

They have plenty more systems than just Patriots, they rate the German IRIS-T system higher, the NASAMS system have been in action at the front line too. Plus the Ukrainians got More S300 systems gifted from Greece. Though a lot of the S300s have been hit in the week or so already.

@Rob-vv5yn the main issue for the Russians with Patriot near the front is reach. Having watched stormshadow fly literally 300 yards away from S400 and not get shot down make me hold those systems in much less regard.

@@jeremygair4007 if you can tell me where you saw that it would be great to see

I think it’s tactics and possibly the SU25 lacking something in their targeting systems to use the guide bombs they are able to carry fab500 and 250s. Maybe they have a shortage of the more modern SU25s as well as they lost a few of the more modern ones earlier in the war.

We haven't been seeing similar losses with SU-24s because there are significantly fewer SU-24s in Russian service, and god only knows how many of the few they have are actually still in working order. SU-25s and SU-34s make up the bulk of Russian ground attack capabilities, do the bulk of the missions, and thus take the bulk of the losses. The SU-25 has taken higher losses than all other Russian airframes.

Western sources using satellite footage are listing the Su34 output from the factory is 30-35 of these aircraft currently per year the Su 30’s probably very similar numbers, plus they are making the Su57 not that these have been much in use over Ukraine and Mig has restarted production of MIG35 not that they will make more than 6-8 of those per year as they have built those for some time.

Like a Bond Villain 😂

The loss only really matters if they aren't building replacement airframes. and let me check....... they are, they are building replacement airframes.

@@killman369547 and their supply and manufacturing capacity is being sapped at the same time..

Yeah I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt on this one. Other casualty reports have been in line with other western intelligence. It hasn't been like they add every downed airframe to the "shot down" list, but only those they actually target. They could have, and been called out on it, making them sound less credible. Also keep in mind they're *under* reporting civilian casualties; limited to only those confirmed (and identified?), the 30k-75k civilian casualties buried in the rubble after the siege of Mariupol is completely left out of it and will likely never make official statistics until after the war. No, they're not building replacement equipment (airframes, tanks, APVs, IFCs, artillery, radar, electronic warfare, anti air) in the rate they're losing them. Hell, recent videos from their ammunition factories show people create small arms ammunition manually rather than by machines using (manual labor) equipment dating back to very old USSR times.

Pilots matter, 30 is still significant. ​@@killman369547

​@@killman369547yeah like a few a year. Not nearly enough to make up for losses

Not of the 10+ Su-34 that have been claimed as shot down recently. Both sides use deception and inflate their own numbers a lot. It will be years before true numbers come out or maybe never.

Did the same thing happen in Desert Storm?

@@minthouse6338Yes

Check out Patrick Lancaster, he has a YT. American (maybe Canadian not sure) frontline journalist reporting from the Russian side. Guy's a hero.

Supply is likely to be exhausted soon.

​@@UDontCare0Vice Adm. Tom Copeman, USN Ret., vice president for air warfare systems at Raytheon Missile Systems Copeman said the program’s production line currently boasts about 500 missiles per year and is on track to reach 550 by the end of 2024

Forget the stigma. They oversold the capabilities of everything they made. What's even the selling point? I don't care if it"s flown by the Bad Guys, I care that it's another Big Cyka Sukhoi scam.

Unfortunately, most of the people judge an aircraft from its appearance, not as an extremely complicated system in a very difficult and hazardus operation (performance anyone?). The situation of this view will be restored only if an actual conflict arises, something that I personally don't wish. By the way, ground to air defences have severely depleted the West, considering the amount of firepower that is used against the Russian Federation. Consequently the ratio of firepower (from Ukrainians) to losses (of Russians) is very high. On the other side (the Russian one), there is the issue of repair parts which is partially controlled by the West. Take care of yourself and the ones you love.

I love the old USSR Anthem, but still regard them as an enemy. ❤

​@@christopherneufelt8971Not true. Surplus stocks of ground to air weapons may be depleted in some countries in the West, but the West is not being actually depleted of anything. The countrys that are sending aid to Ukraine have set minimum levels of every vehicle, missile tank, etc that they would need in a future war according to their individual studies, formulas and strategies. Only if the amount of these weapons or supplies exceed that forecasted amount is the extra then sent to Ukraine.

what facts? usually you need evidence to establish facts

Real life isn't a Terrence Hill movie where one dude casually wins a 1v20 while taking a swig of beer every other takedown. No one wants a fair fight and no one wants to lose their ability to keep fighting after said unfair fight is lost. I've got no dog in this conflict seeing as both nations are ruled by tyrants.

Poor avionics was the 90s , have a look at what the new Sukhiis are loaded with, countries like India and Malaysia who buy fighters from all over the world would be buying them if they were crap .

Luna's a girl.

She's a girl. (the dog) 😂

There is only one shot of the SU35!

Just because there isn't photo or video of it doesn't mean it didn't happen. For example, it could have fallen into a lake or the ocean. But to answer your question, most of them have been confirmed. Independent trackers have a ton of photo and video of different russian aircraft losses

I don't agree. I like the side by side for bombers. Most of our own bomber aircraft are tandem seaters.

Well I agree with bombers but this is classed as a "fighter bomber"@@deanwilliams433

Cockpit has nothing to do with it. We operated the F-111 for a long time and people still say the F-15E isn't as good.

The side to side is more effective because the two crew can communicate and coordinate more effectively not being seperated. Also, twin seaters are damn hot, both the KA-52 and the SU-34.

what? the sound is the same

She's the best!

But they're winning lol And Ukrainians are surrending in droves because they have no ammo while Russia produces more shells than Europe combined

The Ukrainians had to bring up all their air defences to try and protect their ground forces from the pounding they were taking from bombs and rockets. I’m sure the Russians have taken losses but they have also managed to kill off most of the air defences leaving the cities, power plants and airbases unprotected and in the last week they have destroyed every power plant they have targeted and claimed to have hit 3 x SU25s at one of the airfields as well. Add to that the Russians are still glide bombing and have even managed to increase the range and weight of some of these bombs as well.

“deMoCrAcy” Most informed US voter lol

You can't mass produce pilots the same way you mass produce planes.

The way Ukraine verifies kills is by the number of missiles they fire and reporting x2 kills.

@@springbloom5940yeah and Moscow said it be all over in three days........

​@@yawningkitty457as I remember western media said this, not russians

@@yawningkitty457 And Ukraine said it would be over in 2 days in 2014.