Why Doesn't Russia Just Move Their Bombers?
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 12. 2022
- Exclusive! Grab the NordVPN deal ➼ nordvpn.com/covert. Try it risk-free now with a 30-day money-back guarantee!
Check Out Project Owl on Discord
/ discord
For Business Inquiries - CovertCabal@Ellify.com
Amazon Prime 30 Free Trial - amzn.to/2AiNfvJ
Microphone I use = amzn.to/2zYFz1D
Video Editor = amzn.to/2JLqX5o
Military Aircraft Models = amzn.to/2A3NPxu
Military Strategy Book = amzn.to/2AaqwST
----------------------------------
Credits:
Footage:
Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
The NATO Channel
Ministry of Defence of Estonia
Department of Defense (US)
"The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
KCNA - North Korea State Media
Music:
BTS Prolog - Kevin MacLeod - incompetech.com
Exclusive! Grab the NordVPN deal ➼ nordvpn.com/covert. Try it risk-free now with a 30-day money-back guarantee!
It isn’t said enough, but thank you for not taking money from sketchy sponsors.
this just goes to show you the propaganda level they had
You know nothing about the world or combat you were so wrong about Russia wrong wrong wrong wrong they suck
This channel and these 'hour' long ads. It's getting old.....stop spamming us, we watch the ads on YT already. You're risking losing your audience.
@@MichaelRichards983 idc about ads they’re necessary. But Schilling garbage companies I’ll pass @nord
They did. It was on the news tonite. They moved them to a base in the Sino-Siberia region, over 2,000 miles East. Pretty shocking so far away.
Considering that 75 percent of everything is west of the Urals and the Ukrainians were hitting stuff next to Moscow its potentially possible anything short of the area around and south of Karelia might be vulnerable. The Russians have already botched their estimates and evaluations multiple times so they probably wanted to make sure they weren't wrong this time. If the Ukrainians hit them in Siberia then they are really fucked xD.
@@thirstyserpent1079 if Ukraine can hit their stuff in Siberia someone is supplying them with really cool stuff
That's because that was the closest base that has the required infrastructure for the maintenance of those bombers apart from Engels Air base. They had no better choice
They moved some but not all as far as I read, to Ukrainka (!!!) close to the Pacific and China border. They might be short of pilots and aircrew or some of the airframes are not in a flyworthy state ... if Ukraine had additional drones to go for Engels I'd try to destroy even the non-flyworthy ones. But main target to destroy are the cruise missiles, and only after that the platforms which can use them (bombers & sea vessels)
@@spxram4793 Yeah, how ironic they moved to the air base called Ukrainka! 😄
Russia in 2023: we can’t redeploy bombers to the other side of the country since it would complicate logistics too much!
US in 1991: Bombs Iraq from Louisiana.
I hope you are not comparing the two countries capability, professionalism and military 😅
Theres simply no comparison!
Thank you for pointing out how far the United States goes to commit war crimes
@@realsaxual2357yeah we even commit war crimes with class. 😗
@@pandibbarman like using depleted uranium next to its own allied troops in Kosovo causing peacekeepers to get cancer
Would love you to make a video on North Korean bases, air defences and beach defences. And perhaps some videos explaining their military. Something in depth with aerial photographs like you've been doing recently.
+Show us the Il-28s!
Expanding on that, they recently test fired a SLBM from a lake or something, that was interesting to read. And I found a few websites and sources talking about their coastal artillery sites. Would be great to have videos on topics like that. Think I found a few aerial photographs of North Korean Anti-Tank blocks on beaches as well, and some pillboxes built into mountain tunnels! Seen in videos of people driving on the roads!
Interesting AA position at 38°57′08″N , 125°48′55″E at Pyongyang. Looks like AAA gun emplacement? Things like that I'd love for you to cover, especially with clearer satellite imagery
Any more lazy requests?
@@karmpuscookie what do you mean by "lazy request"? It was just a suggestion because he's done videos on the topic before and it would be interesting to see a video on the area again, lol
I don't think the Russians believed that an attack on Russia land was a serious possibility. They simply assumed that Ukraine would never dare.
They looked at Ukrainian weapons and said “ ehh , the world didn’t care when we took land in 2014, we can handle everything they have...”
@@stubbingtonmarigold3032 if the TU-141 can be made to work for this kind of scenario, basically all MIG-15 to MIG-23, SU-22 and whatevere could be taken from museums and re-purposed as a drone, like the target drones for SAM exercises. Plenty of airframes which can carry quite some weight and fly far.
Nah Russia new, and they let it happen to bolster the propaganda. Jesus you people are dense
They didn't account for Russian friendly fire. If they think Ukraine is part of Russia then they must think Russia is also part of Russia which means anything is a possible target to Russians.
Or they were simply ready to accept possible losses knowing that with its powerful air defenses and Ukrainian very limited capabilities for long range attacks they would not be able to make to much damage, sourly way less then those bombers would do to Ukrainian infrastructure. BTW back in February one Tu-141 drone from Ukraine flew through air-space of 3 NATO countries and fell on Zagreb Capital of Croatia, luckily nobody was killed but crash site was literally in central city park. Ukraine government accused Russia of attacking a NATO country xD
I can't imagine the turmoil, the accusations, the whaling and rending of clothes that would occur if the United States Air Base housing our B-52 and B1 bombers was struck not once but twice by some terrorist organization. Heads would roll, politicians careers would be made or broken on this.
In Russia it's just a special rapid unscheduled disassembly operation.
smoking accident. nothing to see here. /s
Lose 30,000 men and failing to take some random town? In Mother Russia, you just send more.
Lose 3000 men and barely taking a town? In America, 5000 daily anti-war protests in every major city, 500 congressional hearings streamed on every news site, president may or may not face calls of impeachment, half of Congress is gone next election.
Not true at all! The Iranians launched cruise missiles at our main base in Iraq in retaliation for that general being killed in a strike. They had NO defenses at the time. Thousands of American troops came under attack. Many many troops were hurt. Many troops got permanent head injuries. No one cared. Trump said they just got headaches. Which was a huge lie. We were attacked with missiles and we did nothing.
It's because Russia is smart enough to not take the bait.
deterrent
This "special x operation" thing was run into the ground six months ago. Painfully dull.
It is worth noting that Russian losses of Air Defense assets in Ukraine resulted in Russia pulling air defense assets away from Russian cities and bases to replenish front line air defense units, and that their response to attacks in Engels and other targets in Russia has been to withdraw AA from Ukraine to restore coverage over Russian cities and strategic assets, which has allowed Ukraine to be more active with their aerial assets over the front lines. The slow usage of their limited long range kamikaze drones may be intended to threaten Russian targets again in the event they try to redeploy AA assets to the front again.
"Active?"
You talk utter nonsense.
Outside if drones the Ukrainian air force has been practically wiped out.
@@fryertuck6496 Drones have proven to be very effective. Im sorry the war isnt going the way you hoped, Vladie. 3 Days? Also, where are the Russian aerial assets? They dont seem to be flying around that much either. What a joke....paper tiger.
And where did you get that from?
@@JimmyRussle LMAO, tick tock...
@@fryertuck6496ukraine still fighting a year later go drink some of that shitty Russian piss that Russians are stupid enough to call vodka
The pictures are not from the day of the attack. That day Engels was covered with clouds which stayed for days and obtaining a satellite imagery was not possible. It’s taken either a few days or a few weeks before that.
the main factor in their reluctance to add more distance is engine wear. They can't produce enough to replace them
I think that Kyiv chose to use those drones because the west didn't send long rage missiles and because they wanted to show the Russians that they are able and willing to hit strategic targets deep into Russia itself
@@somebody700 of course Ukraine utilize western intelligence. Ukraine needs to destroy Russian bombers and the west needs to reduce Russian strategic warfare capabilities, so what? Nothing of this would have happened if Putin stayed in his place.
@@somebody700 there is no point because I agree with you 🙂
Kyiv*
@@sarkis951 its Kiev. We are calling Venice not Venezia.
That and because those airfields are used to support bombers that are firing missiles into Ukraine...it's a legit target. It would be a harder discussion if Ukraine was hitting shopping malls, schools, and other Russian infrastructure. It would also spook their Western supporters. Ukraine has been amazingly restrained. I would love to see a Doolittle style raid over Moscow but with missiles and drones rather than manned aircraft. I'm sure they're at least wargaming it.
The message Ukraine is sending is that Moscow can be hit, too.
I agree.👍
czcams.com/video/VGvHJwtY2rM/video.html I think this is more of the message that Ukraine is sending
Let’s hope they don’t do that. My guess is Russia would escalate wildly in retaliation.
@@Chris_miller192 it’s all fun and games until the Moscow bubble gets blown up.
@@Chris_miller192 I don't think they will. That would only feed into Putin's narrative of defending the homeland. Just the idea that they can keeps Russia holding back anti-aircraft systems to protect Moscow and it's air bases and those are all weapons systems that Russia now can't use in Ukraine.
This Content Creator is one of my favorite Channel, very specific & constructive. Kudos to you sir.
It still amazes me that the only useful objects Russia owns are Soviet leftovers.
This shows how Russia has been run down by its leaders.
Imho a pressing question is:
Why in the world can't the supposedly best air defense in the world defend three airbases against a couple of drones??
Like, they're not even some highly sophisticated drones.
We're talking about some rather simple drones which were developed and assembled within a couple of months by Ukraine during wartime. During each attack only a small number was used since Ukraine has only started making them, so there certainly aren't many available.
@cycle
If Russian air defense was as good as it is claimed on paper then it would be a piece of cake to protect 3 airbases.
Just put some of those supposedly amazing air defense systems around the bases.
What's much more costly is losing these big long range bombers Russia has only a quite limited number of.
Additionally losing them will mean you can't use them in offensive roles anymore obviously.
Then last but not least, it's not like Russia is about to defeat Ukraine so that some losses among these bombers wouldn't matter.
The opposite is the case, Russia is actually losing this war. The question is currently just how bad the loss will be.
Losing a significant number of their long range bombers will make the loss only worse, so that's why I'm sure Russia would love to be able to protect them...
@cycle sure sure
still doesn't answer the question of how a drone got 800km deep into russia, flying over AD sites of S500, S400, S300 and definetly flying over warzones that have better equipped air defense to deal with cruise missiles.
Not once
But twice
May be a good idea if u watch the video first
You tell us, Jew
Because Putin overstated the capabilities of his air defense. They are great a propaganda and fans-boys In the west who are failing at life drink the cool aid.
Anther factor would be the face loss of having been forced to give up the use of air bases for fear of attacks, and while the strikes from Ukraine has been embarrassing, the actual losses has not been major, even without believing their official version painting it as nearly nothing.
Useful content as always
I'm guessing a lot of those aircraft that haven't moved are not airworthy.
They probably robbed Peter to keep Paul flying
Ukraine aircraft you mean ?
@@marleymatthews7633 Both. Ukrainians out of necessity, Russians due to negligence and rampant corruption.
@@LostShipMate Rampant corruption and chronic underinvestment unfortunately led to insane deterioration of Ukrainian Air Force too (and false promises, like Budapest memorandum). They had a huge inventory after dissolution of USSR from which over 90% was lost in following years
@@przemysawmarcisz3573 considering the AA tech available nowadays, a post USSR Air Force wouldn’t make much of a difference. You would need ultra modern aircraft, and a lot of them, to combat current AA defenses, and even stealth and ultra modern tech, they still go down. This war can’t be fought with air forces unless you want to lose a lot of them, costing billions, as well as their skilled pilots. This war can be fought from the ground and won from the ground costing much less money, but probably more lives unfortunately.
whole border area between Ukraine and Russia large, you cannot defend every single inch of airspace
But you can protect predictable targets. It's not as if Ukraine is hitting civilian targets.
Fortunately, Russia has to protect civilian targets for the "8 years Donbass" narrative!
you dont have to. defending around the targets is enough
True, but Air Defense is layered with Radars, various ranged missle systems, Anti air gun systems, and aircraft that basically makes it very very hard for something to get through. There's also the question of dear god why haven't you increased your air defense around one of your most critical air bases after it has been struck and allow another strike to take place? Something is going on behind the scenes and I couldn't you tell what. It could be self sabotage, it could be EW, or it could be the Russians are incompetent
@@michaelkassner2993 or Russian hardware is simply overrated? Like the moskva
China loves this conflict on the other side of Russia, China is rubbing their hands together and licking their lips at the thought of getting gas production land in the east
Ryan Mcbeth sent me. Great video thank you.
in 1999 I joined the Polish army. this year Poland joined NATO, but what I found was a remnant of the Warsaw Pact. most of the equipment was obsolete, out of order, for one truck, tank, etc. there were several broken ones. in the statistics, of course, they counted as efficient. now let's take the russian army. it's even worse there. a country where everyone cheats everyone else.
A none bias analysis is always be factual, more informative and interesting to watch. 😊👍
You are right about Russian supply side issues but also their older fleet hates the cold. Hard enough to start an engine with those prehistoric firecrackers when the blades are frozen in place. May see more activity when it warms up but they (whatever they call their airforce now) will be to afraid to actually fly most of their toys over Ukraine. Wonder what it is like to be in a Russian former Honda factory trying to figure out how to use a radio microchip to power a........
Putin: "Shoigu, why didn't you think of this before?"
Shoigu: "We planned for the victory parade in Kyiv by March 1st, remember?"
Putin: "I swear to God, Shoigu: if I hear that one more time, I'll throw you out the window myself. I know judo!"
Shoigu: "There is no windows in the bunker, my fuhrer..."
Great, informative report!
I wondered exactly this. Now I know. Thanks!
Because Russia thinks about more then Ukraine is the proper answer.
I don’t know what this video answers but it isn’t the question asked
they don't make the prettiest of aircraft and missiles, but if it stays together, it's pretty damn effective.
More like surprising, given the Russian penchant for maintaining their equipment
Oh I would disagree on looks , that sexy smooth swept wing bomber looks great, unfortunately it’s a sexy old design and functional modern design are they way they are for a reason.
Russia tends to focus on aircraft development with an available global market. Not many countries need or can afford long range or super sonic bombers in any meaningful numbers. Russia uses the foreign sales revenues to subsidize their own air forces. Also, I'm not aware of any country other than the US operating the B-52, B-1, or B-2.
@@chrishooge3442 Only countries with genuine bombers are US, Russia and China AFAIK. Some countries like Britain had their own designs but retired them in the 80s/90s, and some had obtained them from other countries but don't know what happened to them, by now they probably weren't maintained or were scrapped. The only countries that long range bombers make sense for are Britain and France imo, but just aren't worth the cost on their current budgets. That's just so they can defend their island colonies quickly, since their airstrips will be immediately captured or destroyed by any serious enemy and ships (especially carriers) are powerful, but slow and vulnerable (and furthermore, they don't have enough of them). They make the most sense for the US and China, which is why the B-21 exists and why there'll be a Chinese match to its characteristics in one way or another soon. They do make sense for Russia, but only for defence-in-depth type stuff like Russia might start trying now, moving them further into Russia out of range of most/all attacks.
I'm not an expert and these are just my opinions.
Tightly packed together aircraft might be ones out of commission, but set up like that to provide a tempting target away from the mission capable aircraft, essentially a decoy.
Did you listen to the overall numbers? Russia can't afford to lose the grounded bombers.
The cost efficiency is insane
GREAT REPORT 👍
Ukraine's limited drone/crusie missile attacks have done one thing and thats force the Russians to put effort, money and man power in to protecting the air base which means it can't be used elswhere. If they can get teams behind the lines to blow up bridges, rail lines, power sub stations and the like they can tie up man power and resources further reduceing Russian abillity to fight.
the war on Ukraine has proved that Russia has more resources dedicated to intercontinental threats not local ones.
The latest drone attacks have forced Russia to redeploy SAMs away from the active theatre of operations, to defend interior assets. So Ukraine gets to carry out CAS missions and deny their opposition the advantage of air superiority without having to destroy enemy aircraft. In short, the attack on Engels achieved its goal despite missing the Marx.
basically terrorism
@@CAPSLOCKPUNDIT Don't drink and write, 🤡
Ryan McBeth also does an exelent breakdown
Mostly propaganda tho
@@thesaltbaron5733 care to elaborate on what part ispropaganda?
@@bhero6 basically all of it is pro Ukrainian nonsense. I prefer HistoryLegends who isn't afraid to challenge the propaganda disseminated by both sides.
@@thesaltbaron5733 seeing as, a month ago, HistoryLegends released their video titled “BUKHMUT IS ABOUT TO FALL” I think you might be getting the definition of propaganda mixed up.
It's easier to put additional AD systems around bases. They didn't need them previously, and now they will add them.
Perfect example of the 7 P's ‼️
Piss poor planing-
Prevents piss poor
Performance Pal ‼️
Time to remove the Elephant in the room permanently ‼️
my speculation is that a good portion of the bombers are not in state of immediate flight, the russian only moved the good ones away. with the heavy sanctions in place, fixing and preparing these bombers for flight will be very difficult and the situation will only get worse.
Yep.
Dude what the duck
Really think that soviet bombers has some import parts? And sanctions will affect it?
Perhaps there is no active industrial activity related to these planes..
Essentially not refurbishable because the original factories and tooling are gone/worn out/ not replaced.
They likely figured something better was coming and they could retire the planes before significant remanufacture was needed.
I don't get why Russia isn't using the Soviet-era dispersals and shelters anymore, which were pretty much installed on every airbase they have. When you look at Russia's airbases via Google Maps, most of the dispersals and shelters are either removed or in a derelict state. Instead Russia is preferring huge platforms with thightly lined up formations of aircraft, whilst in times of conflict this is very nonsensical to do (as we have seen at Engels), since it makes hitting expensive jets easier than hitting a dartboard at your local pub.
Any thoughts on why Russia isn't using dispersals/shelters anymore? I know for example that most of Russia's twin engine jets (like the Su-27) don't fit in the older model shelters for example.
They probably budgeted billions to upgrade and build new shelters and such over the years, and it all went into yachts and castles. I can't account for their apparent incompetence in so many areas. They seem to have not only stopped making new equipment and training, but even in thinking about their jobs.
@@hamletksquid2702 We always gave the Soviets shit but at least they actually had a competent military, a decent NCO corps, and actual combat experience. The Russian Federation HAD combat experience, then wasted it all due to corruption, dedovchina, having no NCO corps anymore (which is why high ranking Russian Officers keep getting smoked micromanaging everything).
@@MrElis420 - My only military experience was in the Canadian reserves many years ago, so I can't claim any particular expertise on the Soviets. Our impression was that they would come in a very organized way, and we would mow them down as they did, but more would keep coming. They certainly weren't a rabble as the Russian army is. This is like some post-apocalyptic movie where the barbaric survivors find a warehouse full of working tanks and set out to conquer the neighboring tribes. So far, all we've seen of their tactics is a mass advance and then small failed attacks, so we can't even guess at how bad their larger tactics might be. Right now, Russian arrows on the maps all go in straight lines and Ukrainian ones go in curves.
Not even 30 yrs of IMF driven "market reforms" can explain it, it seems somebody wants to keep them with their pants down.
@@danmihaiescu3114 - Apparently, it's their own generals and colonels, who siphon off the budget for construction and training into their own pockets. It's a homegrown problem.
Civilian airports could be used. The point is that cruise missiles are no longer effective as most have been shot down. Ballistic missiles would solve more problems but deliveries from Iran are slow. There’s a lot of train tracks to be rebuilt to ship them.
Half those planes sitting out there aren’t even airworthy.
Great video as always. I have been wondering recently, how many more cruise missiles does Russia have considering expenditure and manufacturing rates? We've been seeing some used that were produced fairly recently
I think we can only assume the analysts were wrong about their production numbers, at this point. They said 40-60 a month earlier, most experts seemed to agree on that, but if that were true, Russia would be completely out of missiles right now. I just saw a post on their MoD's official telegram that said "kalibr will never run out" so it seems quite likely they successfully ramped up production to at least 100+ a month, since they've been lazily firing about 120-140 every four weeks, split between about two barrages per month. I don't think anyone can say for sure, however, it really does seem like US and UK analysts screwed up and significantly underestimated Russia's military industrial capacity.
One that didn't explode in the last wave had a manufacturing date of November this year...
They are running out of them thats why they went to Iran for loitering drones. If they hadnt gotten those from iran they would have run out by now. Other thing is freq of attacks using long range pgm has changed from first months of war. So I'd give 8 more attacks before they get really desperate.
@@saml7610No, thats not How it works, if they have 100%, running out/Empty is not 0%.
Its reserves, maybe 40-40-60% is running out/Empty.
If the War ends tommorow, do they have enough vs China/Japan?
Thats why Running out is not 100 or 0.
Are the newest batches of better made than the previous ones? You can make more if you drop any pretense of quality control...
Wear and tear on the airframes with associated maintainance issues.
I wonder if the planes were operational. Moving planes exposes maintenance practices.
Did you notice the the Turbo props have missing propellers or engines on the aircraft with tires on them? The corruption had interfered with the supply chain and they are “taking from Peter to pay Paul”.
Happy New Years 🎉❤️🌎
Even if we ignore the perceived low likelihood of an enemy bomber attack, the expected protection of the anti-air defense systems, and the predicted protection of the armored hangars (beliefs which would all need to be changed before anyone would even think of moving the bombers farther away from the frontlines), there are many problems with the idea "just move them somewhere else":
1, at any given time, only a fraction of the bombers would be in active service, with the other bombers on base getting repairs, undergoing maintenance, or receiving refits, among other things that could make it costly/difficult to get all the planes flight-capable in any kind of short timeframe;
2, bombers require longer/wider runways to take off and land than nearly any other military aircraft, so the number of airports they can use is heavily limited;
3, bombers require large amounts of heavy equipment to maintain/rearm/deploy properly, so even if an airport has a large enough runway to let a bomber land and refuel, that might not be a viable long-term option.
4, relocating the base personnel to follow the bombers can be equally costly/difficult, resulting in either low morale for the experienced troops who just had their lives uprooted or low effectiveness for the new troops who replaced those that couldn't make the move.
5, planes have a limited range they can safely fly on one tank of fuel, so moving the bombers' home airport would change how safely they could reach enemy targets.
Moving the aircraft into antoher base is just not only moving the airplane
The surprising part is those bombers can still actually fly to another location.
Those fuel trucks looks like the are from the 50'ties.
*I endorse Covert Cabal.* 🤣
Not gonna lie in the age of jets it's really cool to still see propeller craft finding a role
there are still a lot of areas where prop aircraft makes more sense. They are easier and cheaper to run and maintain. Dont cost a lot of money to manufacture compared to jets and you give nothing away to the enemy when you fly them.
@@Rose.Of.Hizaki I know, that's the really cool thing about them is that even in such high tech times where militaries claim that the airspace can't be penetrated, a prop plane shows up and says hold my beer
Well it might be that they need repairs to make them fly. Maybe the parts might be hard to find. And they keep looking or find another on another aircraft.
It puzzles me that the Russians don't have a series of dispersals around their airfields. These spread out the bomber fleet making it more difficult to hit several in one pass of the airfield.
Russia has already send most of the stationed bombers east. That is, if u seen the latest images of Engels base.
Because these forces are strategically placed on airbases that are designated to them, And have special equipment to maintain these massive aircraft, Along with the close situation of parts of the supply line needed to keep them going, Not only that, But the bases are in these locations because they allow quick travel towards potential enemy nations outside of the border.
The wing configuration of that bomber in the top rightat 5:55 doesn't look too healthy
..
05:50 yo! That’s my old base!
Great video, as a civilian a lot of these aspects of logistics never really occured to me.
And yet you vote...
@@SamBrickell ?
They don't have any bomber crews left to move them. The bomber crews are all being retrained to man Russia's newest T-34 and T-54/55, top-of-the-line tanks from the 1940's and 1950's. Their T-72, T-80, and T-90 models have that explode-on-impact feature such as the 1970's Ford Pinto hatchback and station wagon, which enjoyed similar glory in it's day.
There runway’s look wobbly in some pics
What's that ship firing ESSM? Rarely seen such VLS placement...
Multiple factors need to count to park the bomber:
1. if there is any nearby airbase is suitable to park the bomber (facilities, length if runways, refuelling issue …)
2. if that move will expose your airbase strength (by opponent's intelligence network or military satellites)
3. if it is a necessary move (where Russia is already tight on its budget, personnel, maintenance crews, …)
4. if the bomber is moved, what about its inventory, ammunition (you cannot have the bombers to move all of it)
5. possibility of your bomber will be under attacked based on your own intelligence network and how much you understand about your opponent's tactics.
In this case, the Russian military obviously does not have the resources or intelligence to have their precious bombers to be moved to a safer airbase.
Key to the answer: "most of their former bomber bases are outside of Russia"
Those propellers are definitely an alien technology.
The bombers are now used to store truck tires.
I'm sure they thought this out and they're very carefully so the heavy tires won't dent the skin of the aircraft.
If they move the bombers to the East, it's going to increase the flight hours drastically. Taking into consideration the Russian mentality to maintenance, I'd say there's a high chance of falling planes in Russia.
Maybe the reason is simpler. What if the planes in question simply don't work? What if the planes in question are not combat ready? That is a possibility.
Range versus fuel capacity.
"We shot it down" but the pieces still landing on the runway really isn't as much of a boast as they think it is.
So not that long ago Russia was using drones to strike targets far inside Ukraine ... but they didn't consider that Ukraine would be doing the same thing and so they'd need to disperse their bombers?
that is why they are called Orcs (and Vogons ) No ability to think.........
They launched an entire war thinking the other country wouldn't fight back, lol. Not the smartest bunch, those Russians.
That's what I was thinking. They just couldn't believe Ukraine might attack them on their own territory.
@@suecharnock9369 By whom? Never heard of that.
@@igor_pavlovich lots of people, pro Ukrainians and such
It's also possible that the objective isn't as much as to destroy the bombers, but to make the Russians deploy additional resources to protect them... Taking some pressure off the front lines. In other words, Doolittle raids...
how beautiful that Tu160 is... Best looking bomber of all times.
5:00 is there any BDA evidence showing fragments of Tu-141 drones?
4:23 Nice of Russia to put a big freaking spinning light on top of their air defense vehicle...may as well put a big sign on it that says, "I'm right here!"
Every air defense system has a big light on it. Ignorant
@@humphreybumblecuck5151 What US defenses have them? I have never seen ours with a big spinning light on it. That includes Phalanx on ships, ground-based C-RAMS and others. Your name checks out.
@@jmr1068204 I am being a bit coy but I mean the radars themselves always associated with air defense systems' radars. They all emit light, which is how HARM missiles work.
You are overlooking RADAR IS ITSELF A FORM OF LIGHT, they output a lot of energy (they are very bright) and are easily perceived with the right equipment.
I suppose you are half-right the visible light makes them more visible to ground forces but if ground forces are already on top of your air-defense you already fucked up. As for things in the sky there is little difference between a spinning light and a radar dish both are pretty visible visible, radar even more so.
Obviously the light is for safety, and for the reasons I mentioned it doesn't really have the drawback you claim it does.
@@humphreybumblecuck5151 The radars emit radiation and HARM is an anti-radiation missile. I'm quite familiar with it. If they leave the radar on when planes are in the area seeking radar stations and a/a systems, they can track the planes and perhaps try to get a shot with defenses. That will, however, give their defense location away. The radar also makes them vulnerable to a strike just by being on. So it's a catch-22 for the enemy.
We could just as well use a JASSM-ER to strike them from a considerable distance via infrared homing, so really the planes don't need to be in the local area at all. The ER version can hit them from 575 miles and the XR from 1,200 miles. They don't stand a chance either way.
@@jmr1068204 Yeah exactly so the little spinny safety light is ultimately irrelevant. I see then you were completely joking with your first post and I was joking with my first post so we both just had a "whoosh" moment and didn't fully recognize each others jokes.
I'm gonna crawl away now lol
Great descriptive and informative video...thank you!!!
The poor old Russians are struggling enough logistically and probably better off taking the chance of an attack taking out some aircraft than the expenditure of packing up and moving the whole shooting match to another base...then add the costs of additional airtime and fuel etc. etc. and it kind of makes sense that the chance is worth taking...whether strategically the wisest idea...is questionable...but so is the whole incursion into Ukraine...so guess that fits in with their train of thought over the last year. No sense to any of it to be honest.
Another factor: who wants to be the Minister of Defense who has to tell Putin the bases have to be operationally abandoned because Russia can't defend Russian airbases on Russian soil? And those aren't just bombers with cruise missiles, they're the bombers with cruise missiles that provide part of Russia's nuclear deterrence - the last thing that makes Russia a world power is their nuclear strike capability. Acknowledging that one leg of this is not secure will be like telling Putin part of his dick just got cut off.
A pity they don't have you as their defense minister.
I wish Russia would just pull the gloves off get this war over with so we can go back to normal...
Joe Biden made Russia billions on oil thanks to out policies so don't think they can't afford it..
Dun dun dun dun dun dun.. "here comes solid info"
Its not the Tu-141 Stritz old soviet drone that the ukrainians are using.The Stritz is too big to avoid detection & also the the damage would be greater given its size
its very interesting how nothing changed in russia in 40 years
Even though they aren't admitting it, im pretty sure these recent attacks have been using the new ukranian drone with 1000km range. I also think they waited for the right time to send a message. So that'd explain why Ukraine didn't attack the bases with these drones sooner. The drones a) didn't exist yet and then b) when they did come into service the ukranians waited for the right moment to use them
They are former Druhz drones from the soviet era, repurposed and adapted with help from western intelligence
You said Russia & preforming maintenance in the same sentence 🤔
Could you please do a video on Russian military production capabilities? Thanks!
'it has three types of bombers'
yeah, stationary, taking off, and destroyed.
The real question is why Russian SAM has not been able to intercept tu 141.
stand off launch, they don't launch in UA airspace
Igor was drinking vodka!
Well, they were able to take down one of their own SU-25s.
Their long-range platforms are good, but aren't designed to intercept the Tu-141 on its trajectory. Their short-range systems are generally not so good, as proven in several theaters in recent years (Russian short/medium range SAMs in Libya was an unmitigated disaster). And even when it comes to long-range SAMs, most of the incredible/amazing/game-changing things we've heard about the S-400... has come from Russia itself. Meanwhile, people make fun of Patriot for its performance as a brand new system in 1989, but don't realize it's been constantly upgraded over 30 years, and the new medium-range systems the west has fielded (NASAMS, IRIS-T SLM, SAMP/T) are absolutely excellent and, in some cases, cross into potential long-range territory with medium-range munitions.
@@QuizmasterLaw They should still be able to see them coming.
Great video
now we know.. tires!
i also wonder: can't they afford simple hangars?
even in Top Gun 2 the enemy had hangers.........and a couple of F-14's!! I know, it's a movie!!
why bother? none of attacks actually destroyed any plane
@@igor_pavlovich kinda did
Because they're savages and have centuries old history of half-assing everything. When they're cannibalizing other planes they just leave them out in the open too. Or that one time when plane crashed at Domodedovo and they didn't clean up wreck - imagine you're going on a trip to Russia (as it's civilian airport) and right before landing you see wreck of a plane by landing strip
Gotta buy them billion dollar yachts
Why doesn't Russia just take the bombers, and push them somewhere else!
The point of the whole vid. All is explained.
@@Boric78 Its a meme based off of the Spongebob quote.
@@dragonace119 indeed
Russians are practicing a new technique of covering airframes with tires.
It's all good. They've got tyres on them now.
"before Russia adapts"...they still haven't realized the use of hard cover for all the drones, much less adequately defending an air base which is a bit more complex :-) Love the videos and always learn something new
they are going to need a few years to adapt, and Ukraine is adapting much quicker then that!!
I gotta say, the TU 95 is one of my favorite aircraft. If I was a billionaire, I would definitely have bought one before this war. It's just so cool looking, and it's so loud cause of it's counter rotating propulsion system.
Disclaimer: I'm rooting for Ukraine to win on this conflict.
you could've bought the Ukrainian TU-95 back in 1994 before they were handed over to Russia following the Budapest treaty
@@spxram4793 they were russian made anyaways and ukraine would not have been able to maitain them without russia
@@briant5685 He never said anything about that, lmfao Russian supporters can't help but make excuses.
@@briant5685 it would have taken time and effort to set up a domestic parts industry.
The Tu-95 is the antithesis of high tech. It’s not hard to make parts or even just find someone to make them in the west.
The reality is that it’s a sitting duck in a modern conflict and is basically only useful if you have air superiority (which the Ukrainians would never have against any opponent worth talking about) or as a cruise missile launcher and that requires a much more complex operation than a medium size country like Ukraine is going to be able to support unless they’re also producing for export.
Move them to another location . That would be a great idea . But you have to start them first and thats the problem ,their are old. Poorly keep and did I mention they need mechanics of all kinds. Plus spare parts. Does this give you why they just set.
Damn those TU-160 have to be the most beautiful military plane ever.
They are nice. I also like the lesser known Tu-22M
Turns out they moved the bombers
The long answer is the complex needs of facilities and crews. The short answer is multiple generations of fetal alcohol syndrome mixed with massive corruption.
Wrong, Russia has no worries, Unlike the Ukraine Nazis that are following every one of Hitlers failures. Right down to now Elisting actal Child soldiers.. What a pile of Deep state Losers Ukraine is. 3 months left max for the Cokehead leader of Ukraine.
Sounds like smaller scale of Jewish society
Well done.
What were the condition of these jets prestrike I would suspect closer to end of life perhaps these would be used initially expecting heavy losses and not as important
Why doesn't Russia just quit, is the question.
Putin's ego is massive.
@@somebody700 At best Russia is doing a casualty ratiof 1 to 1 compared to Ukraine so how are they winning A war of attrition?
@@blazingkhalif2 Russian population is 145M, while Ukraine's is 45M. A 1:1 ratio of KIA would mean Ukraine will run out of manpower much earlier.
Russia is likely losing less troops than Ukraine, since the frontlines have become static, allowing their substantial advantage in artillery to overmatch Ukraine.
@@somebody700 winning the war of attrition by losing territory and fighting the money battle against NATO which includes the largest economy the world has ever seen? Cool story bro.
@@somebody700 👈🏽 send me an encyclopedia (I must have hit a nerve) which I’m clearly not going to read or respond to as I don’t care about your delusions.
Russia could very well find out just how Karma can work
Well we can send b52s on the same 12+ hr flights hit a target and come back several days a week but again we have the better maintenance crews and experience to do so. It’s not to do so but we also have air stations to land in if something happens. Russia just doesn’t have the capacity or other air stations to do the same. Such a shame.. lol
Yeah everything is better
The US military is a global delivery service with a combat component
Because amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.
@@thomasprice7893 logistically we can be anywhere anytime if the need arises and the brass oks it. Benghazi for example we could of have had people there asap. We had a drone there in minutes
How hard is it to build a roof?
Because they can't be trusted to fly too far without bits falling off them.
Slava Ukraini.
Extreme long range on matter if you make it there right?
They can move them to "mare a lago"
this is the real moral superiority - attacking military airbases for strategic bombers with outdated reconnaissance drones while your enemy attacks critical civilian infrastructure with ballistic/сruise missiles and iranian drones
When they're not busy firing on their fellow Ukrainians to blame it on Russia.... Real morally superior..
Sheep..
@@OGPatriot03 🤡🤡🤡
@@OGPatriot03 Lmao did you go to the school of “BS I can pull out my rear end?”
Only made more amusing by the “DoNt StEp On SnEk” Picture. Captain smoothbrain up here