I was an Air Defense radar operator in the US Army from 84-86. Even with much more primitive equipment we basically knew who was up there. IFF technology is 60 years old now. Mistakes can happen, yes. Equipment does fail. But shooting down two of your own planes, deep inside your own airspace, when neither is operating aggressively? There's incompetence and then there's whatever this "friendly fire" incident is. Is that actually reassuring to Russians? "Our enemy does not posesa weapons that can do this. But they don't need to because we shoot our own planes down FIRST!" Addendum-Any air defense asset would normally have an experienced crew chief or systems chief. In the US Army, an E6 or E7. If you're in an air defense situation and something appears in the sky far behind your LOC, and it's loitering, not being evasive or moving aggressively AND your own air force hasn't engaged it? Call up the chain of command. It could be a troop transport. It could be a general. For this to feasibly be friendly fire requires inexperience, incompetence, poor to no communication AND equipment failure.
I mean we didn’t get off Scott free either,yeah equipment unfortunately fails,like when a patriot shot down a tornado in one of the Middle Eastern conflicts,as it’s iff didn’t respond,and the crews were trained to identify and fire in under a minute,very sad
IFF i way older than 60years mate. a very simple form was being used by the RAF at the end of the 1930s. that said. if it is a blue on blue your completely right in what you say.
Strange are the inner machinations of the minds of Russians. It's very hard to explain why, but I understand perfectly why they would see it as reassuring. Essentially, incompetence is no shock to any Russian. Especially if the government can somewhat downplay the degree of incompetence needed to do this, then ultimately everyone knows there are some incredibly incompetent people in all sorts of positions. Maybe a SAM battery was put under the command of someone too dumb to ever get such a position through anything but nepotism, maybe some general's son. Everyone knows this sort of stuff happens, it's a part of Russian culture, basically, and in that case if that person screwed up this badly, something will probably be done to prevent it from happening again and all is well. Maybe that person gets fired, maybe sent to a basic infantry unit, maybe promoted to a new position where his duties don't interfere with anything the military needs done well. But if the enemy shot it down, that means the enemy is actually dangerous, and these options of dealing with the problem aren't available.
friendly firing a A-50 seems highly unlikely. It would be like shooting at your own aircraft carrier because the bloody thing has a huge signature and is generally located behind your own lines and let alone constant radio chatter to confirm IFF
The Ukranians don't necessarily have to steer the missile from its launch site do they? Could a Ukraninan boat carry the required tracking and control kit? Could a Ukraninan boat carry the missile itself even?
The IL 22 got hit with something smaller than any US long range SAM. The splash pattern speaks to a much lighter weapon. A 50 could have been attacked by their own forces and on purpose, considering the issues in the Russian army.
An A-50 being shot down is a lie in the fist place, by N@T0 and their terrorist proxies. That was their fist claim that they shot an A-50, but then the Russians confirmed that it was an IL-22 and that it landed safely. So then the U@T0 proxy started claiming that it was two planes that they shot, insisting on the lie that it was an A-50. Who followed that and knows the timeline, the lies of N@T0 terrorist proxies are pretty obvious.
It wouldn't be the first time Russia shot down their own plane during this war. It does make me wonder how their Friend or Foe identification works or if they are solely relying on visual identification
@@nian89 The Russians know that NATO planes operating over Romania are easily capable of tracking targets above the Sea of Azov, so they have a habit of turning off their IFF. They also know that Ukraine is capable of spoofing IFF, which means that it is not always safe to use automated systems to process IFF information.
It's mind blowing that they'd rather admit they're incompetent in shooting down their own plane rather then just admitting it was shot down by Ukraine.
I agree it kinda almost childish..but remember when moska ship sunk for how long they denied it and then claimed that something detonated on the ship and killed one and injured couple people and that its all fine untill Turkish ship crew sold that famous short clip of moskva smoking and leaning left all empty and "grey" looking .... It's that whole thing about "we are so powerful we can take whole Ukraine in 3day maybe week tops" . Maybe little embarrassment from a country with no navy or any good air Force but keeps hurting them bed...
Unfortunately for the Russians such incompetence is not completely far-fetched. I personally think the Ukrainians shot the A-50 down but that's just my gut feeling.
@@anaturn12 It is on of the most important aircraft in their air force, so them being incompetent as the sole reason this aircraft got downed is something I simply cannot believe. I mean I certainly believe that VKS thanks to corruption is incompetent to an extent, but they can’t be this incompetent right? The most plausible explanation is that Ukraine shot it down. Now this of course doesn’t mean that the Russians aren’t incompetent.
@@pieter-bashoogsteen2283 Yea you hit a lot of thing iam also conflicted about. Yes Russia proven intself incopetent but i dont think to the point they shoot their own awacs. My tinfoil theory is that F16s are in ukraine and caused this and those 3 airplane losses which also were blamed on friendly fire
Apparently A-50s are SAM magnets: a month later Russia once again has to decide if they will claim that an A-50 was shot down by Ukraine far from the front, or if they will claim they shot down their own plane. Ukraine claims to have been the cause of the plane being shot down, although they aren't specific enough to rule out causing the Russians to shoot down their own plane.
There is no good look for losing an AWACS platform. Either you didn't protect the platform properly from hostiles, or your own units are so incompetent at IFF discipline that they destroyed one of their own assets.
With the Russians, both would be relevant. They just dont seem to have credible systems and procedures in place such that in a combat scenario, they seem to be floundering. Incidentally thats the NATO designation of the Su 34..."Flounder"
The Ukrainian MoD released what they said were flight tracker logs where they noticed both planes flying similar or identical flight paths over the course of days. If these are authentic (and it would be pretty easy to verify), it isn't terribly unbelievable that they could pretty easily set up an ambush. In any event, whether it was a Ukrainian shoot down or a Russian friendly fire event, the long and short of it indicates a staggering level of Russian incompetence.
Just a thought, but perhaps both are true. The Ukrainians downed the A-50 and the Russians hit the IL-22, thinking it was the attacker? This would also explain why the IL-22 survived, LOL.
Something many seem to not have considered, USSR are forcing all and sundry into their war, some of those will be pro-Ukraine, so what's to stop a Russian pro-Ukraine AA operator 'accidentally' targeting some very juicy targets?
When the A50 was hit, that probably took out command and control for a large area. Even if the individual Russian planes could locate other planes in the air, they might not have been able to tell what they were without the assistance of the A50. I don't know if it's still the case, but individual Russian planes were infamous for having only a limited number of frequencies available and were totally dependent on command and control channels for situational awareness. So loss of the A50 could have drastically increased the fog of war and make friendly fire against the IL22 more likely. If the IL22 was an EW aircraft, it also might have lit up the radar warning displays like Christmas trees. Another factor is that authoritarian regimes are often reluctant to let different branches work with each other, because additional lines of communication could make it more possible to plan a coup. That could also be why logistics and combined arms (infantry+artillery, artillery+ armor, etc.) are doing so badly.
@@bradleyross2274 Cool you do not know about this topic and for this bullshite, you managed to vomit here you would get a D from me. Well, you took the D. There are no signs of any A-50 No debris, no impact region, no underwater beacon signals that could be interesting even by UA, no wide-scale rescue missions no reported loss of any of the 9 A-50 or 4 A-50U in total. Your utter mindfock rambling is quite laughable
I believe it's easier for Russian officers to report to their generals that the AA crews messed up rather than admitting that their defenses failed and ukrainians were able to overcome them. Do not forget that the Russian army is about saving face and sending good reports to your higher-ups.
This was true 60 years ago but you're forgetting that the Russians are in a high intensity war where lower units have some level of independence from the higher ups. This wasn't true in 2022 but later on they adopted this structure because it's more effective.
Yeah I agree. It's better to be able to point to the air defense crew and say it was their fault rather than admit command f-ed up, potentially leading to the gulag for that commander. Like what happened to the guy in charge of the Kerch Bridge defense when the drone boats got through
Previous Air Defence Coordinator here (Navy). Of course we'll not know for a long time how it actually happened, because making that public knowledge will negate the possibility of further similar events. However I figure this possiblity, Ukraine was able to get the IFF codes for the area and day and fly one of their fighters up close to those targets while being misindentified as a friendly. In that case, from the russian perspective, the event appears truly as a friendly fire mishap; but ukraine is right to claim having shot those down. Once the A-50 is eliminated, there's not much left to paint the picture so an ukrainian fighter may escape with ease back to its homeplate, leaving no evidence of who was actually involved.
I think that is good probability and it is plausible. But I think that long range Air Defense was used. It is my guess that they were at the very edge of their range. That would probably explain why the crippled IL 22 limped home. The many pocketed marks and holes in the aircraft speak of multiple strikes from a fragmentation warhead... and a big one! It might be much to large for an aircraft to carry.
If the Russian IFF is simular to US IFF, Ukraine would have had to get the codes from an inside source as there are to many numerical options to just guess and get the code correct. I use to work on theses systems and deal with the COMSEC when I was in the Navy.
@@StephenBazemore-oc3kl We have the same thoughts. The PAC 3 missile is not the systems first choice for a long range aircraft threat or engagement. The older MIN-104 would be the best guess for a shot like this.
the thing missed is the IL-22 suffered casualties, even if it wasn’t shot down. that plane has high-ranking officers in it, the loss of them hurts the forces badly as they are irreplaceable. the plane itself is a loss even though it landed, so it was highly successful all around: two planes damaged beyond use/destroyed and multiple officers injured or killed.
Russia got a thousand generals and ten thousands of "high ranking officers". You use words as if they mean anything. Pretty much every pilot is an officer, you don't put a private or corporal into a plane.
The Ukrainian version is that they have noticed these Russian command aircraft repeatedly operating over the Sea of Azov, and decided to specially move Patriot launchers and radar close behind the front line to ambush them, got their planes, and then moved the Patriots back again. Whatever the actual cause was, for the Russians the choice is between "Our air force was ambushed by the clever Ukrainians" or "Our GBAD is so incompetent that they couldn't tell relatively slow-moving, large aircraft (And the A-50 was probably working with that GBAD when the shootdown happened) that were operating over the Sea of Azov (Where the Russians have complete air superiority and should never have Ukrainian aircraft operating there.) from Ukrainian aircraft or drones."
@StopFollowingTheClowns-sx5zn I hope President Putin pays you very well for publicly embarrassing yourself with such foolish comments. So these manpad suiciders were waiting for the IL-22 at an airfield where it usually never lands, and they just happened to be incredibly lucky that out-of-the-blue the IL-22 decided to depart usual operating procedures to land there for no good reason? Otherwise, the seemingly far more likely scenario is that the IL-22 was damaged by the Ukrainians or incompetent Russian GBAD, and was forced to make an emergency landing at the nearest airfield.
Ukrainians are showing a lot more ingenuity than the Russian. They did tons of things that even the Americans wouldn't such as building a wooden replica of the HMARS and left it there for the Russian to blow up. So moving the Patriot missile system and jamming is really not beyond them to do. A gutsy move that could have cost them if Russian had seen it.
You'd think the radar emissions the A50 gives off would readily identify it to every air defense system in the area. So not knowing it was a Russian A50 is a pretty lame excuse.
Man, losing a smaller, combat craft, with or without the pilot(s) maybe a bit kind of expected. But recce and electronics large planes that are more valuable being shot at, shot down or damaged, is alot more terrifying for the VKS, if Ukrainians can get more of them, Russian air force would be shaking
Rumors already of pilots refusing to fly over the Sea of Azov. It would mean Russian air power being pushed back another 150km if they stop operating over the sea.
@@kkrolik2106 This. These aircraft crew represent the brains of the operation. This crew may have been operating in this war a long time. A crew transferred in from the border with Finland or Japan won't have the same knowledge built up over the past 2 years. And training a new crew might be nearly impossible considering how many hundreds of thousands of young lives Russia has wasted.
While I'm sure this was a coordinated operation, I also think we should stop pretending that the unclassified range of a Patriot interceptor is anywhere near its limit.
I mean, if you want to, you can sit down and observe the firing footage of a patriot in order to roughly calculate the maximum range. It's not going to be some magically higher number compared to Russian systems. Physics is still physics and just because some guys don't want to lose their jobs and freedom doesn't mean that the patriot is going to be performing exponentially better than what we know for sure it can do. Unclassified ranges for sure could be lower and probably are, because technically speaking the true maximum range of a missile is something barely relevant because it could only be achievable under impractical circumstances, and unless proof is provided, some guy stammering when he has benefits for not saying the true range (both the not getting arrested bit and the fact that people will think just how great American technology is and will give more creedance to his words) is not proof of anything Simple fact is, assume an average estimate of range unless proof is provided otherwise. Ukraine isn't not unknown to claim confirmed accidents and friendly fires as their own kills, they want to spread propaganda just as much as everyone else.
@@domaxltv Publicly quoted capabilities have to be plausible in order to be credible and must be reasonably accurate in order to achieve maximum deterrence and fear factor in the enemy.
One thing I am missing on the friendly fire explanation side is the rogue battery commander explantion. We've seen many cases of disgruntled soldiers taking it out on their own, especially with the lack of payments and the high attrition rates.
Try this one. Ukraine uses a modified S-200 SA-5 Gammon with an anti radiation seeker as opposed to its normal seeker. It has the range, altitude and tbe warhead to bring down an A50 and using an anti radiation seeker would negate the need for tbe A-50 to be illuminated by Ukrainian radar. Tbe coordinates of tbe A-50 could have been passed onto thrm by the Americans so it. could have flown blind switching on tbe seeker at the last minute Ukraine performed a similar trick when they sunk the Russian battle cruiser Moskva
S-200 or a Patriot in passive 'home-on-emitter' mode are possilblities. Flying the same track for days is a great way to set this kind of attack up. Also the A-50 would have had an escort (SU-33-35s likely) and those would be clutter to an active homing missle, but ignored by passive anti-radiation seeker.
Letos not forget that Ukraine has also acces to passive radars with 300km range which are basically invisible and AWACS like A50 must light up like Xmass tree on them. So passive launch towards known location of A50 really isnt implausible.
I said the same thing, although I doubt highly they used that particular variant of the missile. I'd put my money on modified S-200 missile with Patriot guts over an ARM seeker S-200 just because of the age and effectiveness of the ARM seeker being low and focused on NATO frequency bands for AEWC.
@@S300V was launched from large bases you mean... Poland made theirs significantly more mobile in the late 90's... which is impressive and clearly so has Ukraine since NONE of the S-200 sites are active and we know they have been launching them in the ground attack role from places other than their known S-200 sites.
Patriots advertised ranges are only in tens of km for missile intercepts. (I’m alive because of several Patriot missiles used to defend us from SCUDs in 2003.) Edit: I'm not familiar with Patriot WEZ. If PAC-2 has 160km WEZ, that's very impressive.
@@LRRPFco52 as others have said, Pac-2 advertised 160km. The US is usually quite conservative in its range estimations, probably by assuming a target would try to defend at least to some extent (while Russia's 400km range is probably against a target flying in a straight line towards the missile). Assuming the Russians either didn't detect the patriot pings, or had gotten "used" to them by preparatory EW, they likely were a pretty cooperative target (flying high and slow in a straight line). It wouldn't surprise me if Pac-2 would significantly exceed its claimed capabilities in this situation.
I find it really hard to believe that the Russian air defense would have shot down precisely the planes responsible for determining who is a friend and who is an enemy.
The internet is amazing. I'm not really interested in aviation history, but was interested in this incident and YT served me this excellent overview by someone interested and knowledgeable in this area. Thanks for the video!
I served in the AF for 8 years in various roles. This was a good presentation of the facts we know and what we don't know. It seems highly unlikely the Russians shot down their own aircraft unless it was done internally as sabotage. It seems far more likely that the Ukrainians have gotten their hands on a surface to air or air to air missile with much greater range than has been seen.
I'm thinking this Rishi Sunk mentioned more long range missiles earlier in the week, I also wonder about maybe 1 or 2 F16's having covertly arrived but I am doubtful on that one
From what ive seen and the aircrafts positions when they were hit I think it was likely the A-50 which was orbiting close to the Ukrainian coast as it regularly does was shot down and the IL-22M which was on the opposite side of the Sea of Azov was friendly fire possibly in the confusion caused by the A-50 being shot down. Ukraine activated a Patriot at Odessa in December which caught a couple of Russian aircraft flat footed over the Black Sea and I think it was likely a new site went live around Zaporizhia. Previously Ukraine had kept their limited long range SAMs a long way back around Kyiv where they were safer and relying on short and medium range SAM for defence closer to the front.
This scenario sounds plausible. The whole 'friendly fire" narrative is likely a psyop to inject just enough uncertainty for those watching (and supporting) from the sidelines.
There is no downed A-50. It's another Ghost of Kiev story. It's fascinating how fanatics and idiots still eat that shit of a notorious liar. You may think that any person with even a single brain cell left would learn that lesson sooner or later, but nope.
If the A50’s re-appear over the northwest part of the sea of Azov it was friendly fire, if they stay at a greater distance is was the ukraine airdefence.
Plausible speculation here: The A50 is caught by a 'Patriot Trap' wherein the launcher is positioned forward and missiles are barely in envelope. The IL-22 may or may not have been damaged by a Patriot, likely not because of kinetic kill rather than proximity. The aircraft near the downed A50 become aware of the downing and retreat from the attack site. With the A50 down, Russian air defenses are blinded and may be heightened to expect an attack through that sector to take advantage. The IL-22 is escaping towards Kerch and becomes classified as a threat to the bridge during the confusion and struck by Russian air defense.
Here's a challenge to the scenario of the IL-22 hit by Russian air defense: Remember the shrapnel pattern on MH-17? It's near the front of the airplane. The IL-22 has shrapnel damage on the tail, suggesting it was chased by a missile coming from behind, the warhead triggered by a proximity fuse. If it was shot at by a SAM site near the Kerch bridge I would expect the shrapnel damage near the cockpit. (Lots of assumptions in this scenario of course but it's something to think about. )
why would they shoot the IL-22M though , could be panic but wouldn't the determine that an enemy aircraft wouldn't have gotten that far without getting picked up by the A-50 ?
One thing not mentioned here are other Ukrainian systems. Ukraine's Soviet Era SAM inventory includes some systems capable of handily reaching the Azov Sea without risking the site. I'm talking about a modified S-200 (SA-5) system. Modified because there is no way Russia wouldn't know they are in operation due to knowing the specs of the radars installed during the Soviet Union. Ukraine operated them as SAM batteries until the mid 2010's. Both Poland and Ukraine are known to have modified their systems. Ukraine mostly for ground attack. That doesn't mean that they couldn't have received help in shoving something like a Patriot ARH seeker missile guts into that missile. That'd be a hell of a melding of tech, but far from impossible. It'd give them the necessary surprise factor (unknown Patriot radar and the lack of launch and lock warnings on radar warning equipment) to pull it off with a missile capable of reaching the aircraft without risking launcher or radar. It also explains the shrapnel damage on the IL-22.
I think regardless of what version might be responsible, the fact that they lost 2 very specialized aircraft due to ground to air systems is a more interesting story.
No evidence, love your gullibility, would like to have to rely upon you in life. This war has taught me how many people live in complete absence of the truth, you deserve to get treated like sheep, when you act like one.
Even more interesting is that regardless of what the truth about this incident is, it does not have any bearing on the situation on the ground. Ukraine is in a retreat and without any hope to do anything about it.
@@huaiwei lol. Media are desperate for any news, particularly if they can prop the losers they support for a moment. What impact would the loss of such an airplane have? Nil. Russia can instantly replace it. So?
The Ukraine also had a SAM under development in 2022, that had a claimed maximum range of 280 km and was supposed to enter service "soon" (Before the war, that meant 2025-2030. But same was said of the Neptune missile...). An A-50 can't really hide its position, and the attacks appear like they just fired a missile against strong airborne sources of EM radiation.Also the friendly fire theory would in consequence mean suicide, since the A-50 is integrated into the air defense network and would have meant that it sends its own state vector as identified target. Possible, but that applies also to a city sized alien spacecraft positioning itself over Moscow and firing a powerful energy beam at the Kremlin...
Wars have a way of increasing the urgency of weapons development. And a war knocks a lot off the cost of testing. Instead of going through bureaucracy to clear air spaces and expend expensive drone targets, you can use enemy aircraft as targets for your prototype as soon as it's ready.
You provided an absolutely great report of these incidents. A very unbiased report. Well qualified, well substantiated and well reported. The internet needs more of this type of commentary. Thank you for your efforts and time. Much appreciated. An intelligent report, without clutter.
@@preppen78 Careless smoking downed the plane. Or Sergei took a glass of vodka to calm his nerves and too stay happy since watching a radar screen for 4 hours could be very boring. But he accidentally dropped his vodka on an electric cable that sparked a great fire on the plane that burned up all electric cables and made it impossible to steer the plane so it crashed.
I mean, the first part is true, since there is exactly zero evidence for any of that and was revealed as one of the many lies, like Ghost of Kiev and so on. But of course stupid will never learn.
It's a hard call, both point to something going sideways for the Russians. If Ukraine did it, it implies they were able to get both planes in range of their missiles and we don't know the full capabilities of what Ukraine has. This is plausible on both counts. If Russia did it, it implies there some issues with command and control with the Russian forces. Again plausible as command and control issues affect all military forces worldwide to some extent. I would lean towards Ukraine did it but there's nothing definitive about the incident on balance.
1 Ukraine operates the Soviet era SA-5 (S-200) with a range of 250km. It could have been modified with improved radar. 2 Patriot PAC-2 has a published range range of 160km but if its put into ballistics mode (fired at 45 degrees) it might be much greater. 3 SAMP/T has a published range of 130km but it also has huge fin area so perhaps in ballistics mode with some gliding it could also reach out to over 200km. It's unlikely to be an own kill. Russian propaganda is already claiming victory in the conflict and for Ukraine to achieve this is such am embarrassment they would rather accept an own blue on blue. We have to remember that propaganda is the core of any Russian military activity.
@@williamzk9083 it's unlikely it's an own kill for a few reason. a) It's a much larger, slower target than UA cruise missiles / jets b) It was flying a flight path over the Azov sea - it would be easy to rule out that it was a Ukrainian asset due to position c) It had taken this flight path many times d) it would have had a transponder active at the time If they shot it down - then it was a much more significant failure than previous friendly fire events.
@@zoeherriot I think most of vatniks will be incredulous that Western systems exceeded their promised performance and Russian systems under perform in their promises. So it is for missile range.
Is there a reason no one mentions the S-200? The Ukrainians have some (that were said to have been converted to serve a ground-to-ground role). Some variants have ~300 km range. Maybe they did not convert them all? Got some new old stock from other parts of the former warsaw pact?
If you shoot down your own AWACS there is a lot more wrong within your military than if it is show down by the enemy. :) I've read about Russia having special long range SAMs that are only useful against sluggish targets like AWACS aircraft. It is possible that Ukraine also possesses these? Or perhaps if PATRIOT PAC2 has such a mode that increases its range? After all you don't need to maneuver to hit these. Stats that US gives for its equipment are often lower compared to their real abilities.
there have been some documents about Patriot missiles having a significantly increased range when operating in a home-on-jam mode so if the A-50 was jamming and they used Patriot then that could be a possibility.
iirc Patriot technically doesn't need to have a radar lock or illuminate the whole way as the missile handles terminal guidance. So they could have fired it 'Blind', going after the biggest target it could see. It would explain the 10 minute delay as they wouldn't want the missiles to track the same target or had fired a spread of missiles. I wouldn't be surprised if they used HIMARS to camouflage the launch. Also, after two years it would be pretty hard not to repeat paths or get lazy or get flight plans stolen.
@@sababugs1125 Well this is war and you must take risks. You risk losing a PAC launcher (what's the probability? 10% I guess?) for the opportunity to shoot down an AWACS (50% chance?).
@@oohhboy-funhouseif you know exactly where the target is and will go, this makes sense. I wonder if all the ground based early warning Radar systems that were delivered to Ukraine played a role here.
@@lethalfang probably , they could've also used decoys and stuff to maybe deceive Russian intelligence and I doubt the Russians would be prepared for a patriot kiss
Thanks again, Chris. So Russia feels that it's less embarrassing to admit that they've had, what appear to be multiple friendly fire incidents than to admit that the Ukrainians were able to do this. I would hope that the official capabilities of the Patriot system are less than the system's actual capabilities but perhaps I'm just an old cynic.
According to Habitual Linecrosser, who works with the Patriot system, the publicly given stats are less than what it's capable of. Though, of course, he didn't divulge its actual limits. And that lines up with the US deliberately understating the capabilities of its systems.
@@mobiusflammel9372 what Patriot? Ukraine had non of them al died, also this plane was way too far for any Patriot missle to hit it from the Ukraine soil , if that story is true, it was something else.
There is one system designed specifically for this role of taking out AEWC aircraft that the Soviet Union put together. That's the S-200 (SA-5 in NATO terms). Now, before you throw me out, hear me out. Ukraine retired their systems around the mid 2010's but kept them around. They were using them for ground attack but stopped suddenly. Between Poland modifying their S-200 system and Ukraine doing the same its possible it was a modified version of that system. To add confusion to this, as Russia would DEFINITELY know those S-200 systems are in operation, what could have happened was a melding of missile technology. I'm talking Patriot PAC3 MSE Seeker and INS and Patriot radar paired with a missile designed to travel absurd distance. One thing is certain. That IL-22 wasn't hit by a PAC3 since there is no warhead with it and that shrapnel damage is extensive for a kinetic hit-to-kill warhead PAC2 does, but that's a huge risk to a Patriot battery. S-200 can cover that range handily, and with modification, do so without using radars which Russia knows the frequency bands for. Now that's all speculation. We've seen this kind of ingenuity before involving the same S-200 missile system and using it as a ground attack missile.
I was wondering if it was actually possible to datalink patriot and warsaw pact AD systems. Like, even those HARM missiles were actually launched by laptop aboard the MIG-29, rather than being integrated. And datalinking seems even more problematic. The video also says Ukraine only has PAC2, which does have an 80+ kg warhead which IMHO seems capable of doing that much shrapnel damage. Since US/NATO ranges are normally understated rather than overstated, e.g. "100+ miles". My guess, as an illiterate hobbyist, would be that it was rather a tactically well planned ambush with a Patriot that is more capable than the public knows.
When I saw the ranges my first thought was S-200 as well. My fantastic speculation was AIM-120 radar and target computer feeding the S-200 control system for the terminal phase. The Ukrainians have had access to AIM-120 for some time now with NASAM.
Look at the damage of il22 which escorted A50 and managed to land after it was hit. Minor damage. S200 has a very powerful warhead filled with lots of steel balls. It would instantly kill all personell on board and tear that airplane apart. So its not s200 but rather something very lightweight. Moreover S200 is not easily portable. It has deadly liquid propellant that is loaded on site
@romanl8862 the warhead component and the photographic damage do need to line up (unless the Il22 photo is a fake ) but what's to say it wasn't an s200 near miss? If it was a direct hit I think it would've followed the A50 into the Azov.
I'm willing to accept a Patriot bagged the A-50, then the IL-22M fleeing south from that got dinged to some extent by friendly fire - perhaps from a site protecting the bridge - and had to emergency land in Anapa. I feel like a SAM site wouldn't fire south into the Sea of Azov, because that would require a hostile plane/drone to fly around/across Crimea and come back to the north without already being shot down, and if it came from the Crimea, I'd expect the IL-22M would retreat more southeast rather than south. As for why a bridge defense site would engage... maybe they mistook the IL-22M for an inbound cruise missile somehow? Good job on sticking to the facts and leaving it there. :D
that is possible. didn't a Russian officer just get 8 years in prison for not protecting the Crimea bridge from a Ukrainian drone attack? the AAA officers in charge of bridge defense must be sweating pretty hard.
Some years ago I spoke with a soldier manning a Patriot battery. When I commented on the range he smiled and said the actual range capacity was significantly more than published. His comments were deliberately vague, but it stuck with me and I suspect that the Patriot systems can hit targets at much longer ranges... especially relatively slow moving targets like and AWACS.
Yup. Habitual linecrosser, a YTber, will also admit to the US, if anything, understating it's capabilities. Also an air defense operator, and had to look up the unclassified range a few times in his videos to say it.
Ah, sure, that "I know a guy who knows something/someone" story. I spoke to a soldier who said that Patriots are completly fake and can't shoot down anything, it's all for money laundring. See: easy to just write that.
Similar, good point out. Although one difference, Nazi Germany still had massive respect to the RN/Britain as a whole as an enemy, russia looks down on Ukraine and wants their culture and people genocided. "We sank it ourselves, you couldn't sink it RN!" vs "They can't have done it, not capable!".
@michaelfloyd1127 Photographic evidence? A-50s are huge. Even if it went down over water the Azov sea is so shallow it would likely be visible...and certainly recovery activity would be noted. Not saying such evidence isn't out there, just haven't seen it yet.
this would be same as my country (US) admitting how many helicopters we lost in iraq etc... they were all tagged friendly fire and mechanical malfunctions
They still haven’t admitted that Ukrainians turned the Moskva into a submarine. Remember Putin smugly said “it sank” when asked about the Kursk submarine
@@mitchyoung93 When a plane falls out of the sky and hits the sea, it often comes at a speed and angle to cause its full breakup upon impact. There would not be a plane wreck, but rather, a field of debris with only the wings being easily identifiable as being part of an airplane. Even so, the Azov sea is not so shallow and the waters not so clear that a plane wreck could be seen from the air.
It's absolutely hilarious how Russia will immediately claim either "friendly fire" or "we totally intercepted the attack, the burning debris just fell unlucky" on every attack behind the lines.
Good take. I'm inclined to think that Ukraine shot down the A50 and the Il22 then high-tailed it out of there and got itself rogered by friendly fire. Look at where it landed. There were several airfields closer to the A50 crash site than where it landed (assuming the audio is authentic).
The thing with the Patriot System is that most of its capabilities are unknown to the public. The Ukrainians bagged the Aircraft. How they did it or how the kill chain evolved in the destruction of the Russian A-50 AWACS type aircraft will not be publicly known for quite some time. Why? Because they are going to want to be able to do it again. While I am happy that Ukraine succeeded here, there is also that crew on that airplane; they are gone. I personally don't take any joy in that. Those men had little to no choice in the matter. There is a lot of speculation going on here. The idea that the Russians would be more comfortable with a friendly fire incident just boggles the mind, but that is the Russians. They are going to fight till they can't any longer. When that will be is anybody's guess.
Your first sentence is right on the target. I remember the Gulf War in ‘91’ and the Patriot Missile System became a national embarrassment when the Patriots failed to shoot down the Iraqi Scuds. The U.S. Army Base that was hit with the Scud missiles and killed over a hundred American Service Men and Women. I just watched a video of President Zelensky praising the Patriots capabilities. He said that it was the greatest Weapons system ever devised. I suspect because of the security surrounding the Patriot system we really don’t have a clue what secret variants of the missile there are. I suspect as the War continues we shall see what we shall see. Hermit
Okay apparently second one confirmed and at this point my biggest question is, does it even matter anymore if it's friendly fire or enemy fire? The more I think about it the less it matters to the amount of joy and happiness it provides me. Makes a difference in whether it's epic war happiness or comedy happiness though. Come on, can we have another video on the second one please?
I don't suppose anybody is releasing open source flight tracks for aircraft like this? If they were, we might look at whether Russian planes suddenly start keeping a bigger distance, suggesting that it was a hostile missile and they're backing off. Or not.
Just know that publicly released information on weapon systems...is usually underestimated. Except in Russia's case. Russia exaggerates it's capabilities in hopes it scares others. The West underestimates its capabilities so the enemy does not know what the true range is for situations EXACTLY like this.
My question at this point is how are the Russian's flying their command post/AWACS aircraft now? Assuming aircraft availability are they flying a similar or same pattern as the aircraft that were shot down? If so, then that would indicate a friendly fire incident. If they are not flying in the same pattern, but keeping a greater distance from the Ukrainian shoreline, then enemy action becomes more probable. I'm playing with the probabilities. How the Russian air force behaves over the next few days or weeks will be highly indicative of what actually occurred.
We know Ukraine still has some of the old S-200 SAM missiles. While some have been converted in surface-to-surface use, the S-200 (NATO designation SA-5), with its combined rocket/ramjet propulsion has a range of up to 300 km, which would have made the A-50 within the range of this older missile. Is it possible they took a chance with the old long range missile and got lucky?
S-200 isn't ramjet propelled, it has a liquid fueled rocket engine. Its huge range comes simply from the fact that the missile itself is huge; ready for launch it weighs 7 tonnes which is about the same as a MiG-19...
Or bolted-on some state of the art AI (think Neptune!) AWACs aren't exactly hard to detect - plodding around predictable race-track flight paths emitting gigawatts of radio energy - knocking up a modern seeker to passively guide an SA-5 to the vicinity of the target with a few radio receivers and a Raspberry Pi would be small fry - then let the existing systems on board take over. The game has changed. This is a new type of war.
You forgot to take Russian air defense into equation that is all over the place between Azov Sea and front line. S-200 is not very fast, and would of been detected and shot down. It simply doesn't make sense.
The A-50s radar has a look down capability of 190 miles for ground targets, to peer further into Ukraine it would have to fly a circuit uncomfortably close in. Ukraine's Patriot systems had their range reduced prior to delivery by the western allies, however I believe that at some point the US allowed those limitations to be lifted. All it took was a hungover pilot to blow a turn, stray in too far, and get shot down. Ukraine's steely eyed missile men must have waited weeks for that pilot to finally screw up.
Analyst’s keep overlooking that Ukraine. Has Mamba/Aster 30 long range SAM systems. Along with Patriot PAC2/PAC3 SAM systems. Also few mention that legacy Ukraine aircraft inventory had been undergoing significant upgrades and modifications. So they can employ western Avionics/EW/ECM and weapon systems. There are multiple possible weapon systems that could have been used. Not even talking about F16s could be clandestinely being brought into operation.
I tend to think Ukranians shot it down but dont want to revele how they did it, so Russians dont change tactics. Adapted missle with Satelite support or even slipping a fighter un detected with a couple of Meteors.
The Meteor missile has to integrate with the fighter radar firing it to get the mid range correction data. So it would need to be fired from a French Rafeal, Eurofighter Typhoon or Swedish Gripen. My money is on a British Eurofighter Typhoon Tranche 2 loaned to the Ukrainians.
What could be that undetected fighter capable of blinding even the most potent AWACS asset of Russia? F-22 should come first in mind. BTW, quite a few of them are located in Poland, Romania.
If this wasn't friendly fire, which seems too stupid to be true given that even the Russian armed forces have proven they can learn, I'm inclined to believe Anders Puck Nielsens pre-christmas speculation that the Ukrainian Air Force already has some F-16s in service and are using them as flying launch platforms for AMRAAM and similar.
"the Ukrainian Air Force already has some F-16s in service and are using them as flying launch platforms for AMRAAM and similar" the only problem is that you only achive good missile ranges when you high and fast and there are also on both sides SAM systems at the frontline that prevent exact that
Has anyone considered the option that so far, the data published on Patriot's range may have been humble understatements? Maybe there are at least modes of operation in which the missiles can strke targets at much greater range than publicly known? After seeing th data on Meteor AIMs published having changed over the years for shorter ranges and individual's reports as well as engineering evidence, supporting the older numbers, I do think there is that trend. Thus half a billion worth of enemy equipment unwittingly stumble into the killing zone?
Raytheon/LM have basically already said that, they’re developing a new radar for patriot called LTAMDS because the current missiles are limited by the capability of the radar and could reach other further
I'd love it if both are true. Like what if the A-50 was shot down by Patriot and the IL-22 was damaged by friendly fire that was trying to intercept a second patriot coming for it?
Good point about Russian capabilities. Historically speaking, they start a war with poor capabilities, but learn as they go. They've now had 2 years practice.
Thank you for the detailed analysis. I really appreciate your willingness to admit that your are just not sure or do not know.... when it comes to accuracy or veracity of data.
@@MilitaryAviationHistory have you seen any Russian sources confirming this plane was even lost or are you relying entirely on the unreliable Ukrainians?
Ukraine also has a history of cooking up special weapons for prestige targets, like the Neptunes that knocked out the Moskva. Ukraine probably still has the competency to manufacture missiles in limited numbers, and wouldn't discount the possibility that the engineers at Luch Design Bureau cooked up something special for a high value target (like a S-300 missile with performance similar to the Russian 40N6 series). That would explain the 10 minute delay, in that they confirmed the kill of the A-50 with the first missile and then decided to go for a secondary target with a spare.
@@williamzk9083 The neptune could not be adapted as an anti-aircraft missile. It's subsonic and way too slow. They'd need a much faster rocket, but I would be very surprised if they didn't have the know-how to make something similar to the modernized 48N6 missile (practically any variant using post-1992 rocket tech would have sufficient range). You don't need a very agile missile to hit an A-50 or IL-22M (both are basically airliners in terms of flight performance), but you do need range and speed. Or I guess that if they haven't built one then "acquiring" a S-300 missile of sufficient capability wouldn't be the hardest thing a military intelligence has pulled off. Most countries operating S-300s are rife with corruption.
It's extremely hard to believe that the system responsible for target acquisition and information dissemination would be shot down by friendly systems that it can datalink with. Especially when the ground radar would be able to determine that its a pretty big-ass target signature, not something Ukraine has been able to operate within the Russian air defense system, much less penetrate over Russian lines.
Ukraine could hack the system, send out some false signals, mislead the system. And Ukraine got millions of russian speakers that could make a phone call and order some SAMs to fire on a big slow moving target with a predicatable flight path. Russia making mistakes is nothing new. They shot down a Malaysian passanger plane many years ago. And Chris is wrong when he says that russia learns from their mistakes, because they have continued to shot down planes by accident and friendly fire. Mostly low flying planes that was killed with manpads, but still.
... First, thank you for your Facts First Prudence ..... I would be interested in learning at what altitude these aircraft were flying when the event occurred ..... I would also be interested in the type of radar capabilities the Ukrainians possess..... "I believe" it would be a fair assessment to conclude; an A-50 would/should have detected the missile launch .... If it didn't/couldn't evade - the range must have been short ............ A feat such as this suggests a "joint/cooperative" effort ......... The U.S. Congress may have hamstrung the flow of dollars - but not "unit cohesion".
Ukraine doing it : Unlikely (really risky as Patriot, a system that relocated relatively quite slowly, would be located really close to the frontline) but not impossible Russia doing it : HOW...???
For the latter.. maybe some mutiny or internal rebellion, perhaps Ukrainian agents actually manning russian air defence systems or something of that sort. Inexplicable.
The Patriot is most vulnerable when it is transmitting. If it simply set up, listened for the A-50's signal and launched a missile in anti-radiation mode the Patriot doesn't even exist from an EW perspective.
Maybe they didn't bring the radar and fired it blind as the missile can handle terminal guidance? After two years I wouldn't be surprised if the crew got lazy with flight paths or plans stolen or were passively tracked or missile had home on radar.
It may have been a long range spevial American anti radation missile given to the Ukrainians for just this purpose. The F,14 had some dry long range missiles. We have adapted many American missiles to Ukrainian aircraft. It Might be the first F16 in theater having that capability too.
Also some rumors: 1) A lot of rumors that it was done by British military operating in Ukraine. 2) According to one of that rumor they were using F-35 for the shot.
If the other plane can get within range, yes. They tend to make big juicy targets but, from what I recall, (From years ago, so fact check me) , AWACS are *supposed* to be protected by fighters in the area.
If you programmed a passive home-on-signal seeker mode into a Long Range BVRAAM, you could very effectively target AWACS. It would help avoid triggering their MAWS/RAWS equipment until the missile went terminal. You would want to have high resolution and refresh rate seeker guidance during the terminal phase of flight into the intercept basket.
@@davefloyd9443 yeah but would it have thought of it as a threat , Ukrainians carry out strikes all the time but not against the A-50 so far ,for the most part as I know the Ukrainian air force currently just lops western cruise missiles and jdams , as far as the A-50 was concerned it was routine bombing
idk , how much the missile aerodynamics would allow that , aren't those missiles designed to target on the ground stations ? although I am not an expert so
I find it fascinating (and as a supporter of Ukraine, very good) that Russian planes are falling out of the sky and the Russians have no idea why. Ukraine has already succeeded in forcing the Black Sea Fleet to effectively withdraw from the western Black Sea. Maybe Russia can rename it the Azov Sea Fleet and claim that was always the plan. That was done over time, by peeling away layers of capability until the ships were effectively targets. This is similar but even more significant. If Russia's ability to protect its air assets is peeled away by the elimination of its eyes and ears, then Russian air assets will be rendered ineffective. Ukraine achieved this to some extent early on by making missions over the battlefield too dangerous. Russia countered with glide bombs. Ukraine is now demonstrating the ability to reach out and touch Russian aviation far beyond the reach of glide bombs. As an outside observer, it is all very interesting.
The problem I have with this supposition is that very few fighting ships have actually been hit (2) and basically none of Russia control of the black sea has been taken. And the problem with all these recent "shoot downs" is that they are claims. There is very very little proof of these claims. And some Ukranian claims contradict others. It was 2 su 34 then 6 then 4. And yet no evidence of any type was ever presented. We have no evidence the a-50 was even lost. They claimed the command aircraft was shot down, but the only picture we have from this entire event is of it on the ground with damage. They Ukranians also claimed.to.have previously destroyed that a50 on the ground, but that turned out to also be a massive exaggeration. Ukrainian claims are often wrong or lies. Russian claims are the same. So we must rely on evidence. And the evidence says an IL22 received major tail damage, and that is all.
@@French_Connection When both sides say the same thing happened, that is one of the few instances when you can be certain it did. The russians admitted to loosing a plane and another damaged. Quite frankly I am not sure what's worse to the russian public. A plane flying in a predictable flight path every day getting shot down by friendly fire. Or by enemy fire. If friendly fire, how the hell did russian air defence not know what the aircraft was, if it was doing the same thing every day, for months, let alone IFF systems they SHOULD have! They cannot possibly be THAT incompetent. A ukraine shoot down is more plausible, and there is precedent for this too! US operated F-117 shot down in serbia, because of Serb observers watching the airfield, seeing only the stealth bombers take off, and said bombers took a predictable path to get into serbia!
@@French_Connection So you are denying these aircraft losses, even though Russia admits them? If you wish to live in a fantasy world I guess that is your choice.
Or it could just be the A-50 crashing. And the IL-22 was a coincidence. 10 minutes after the A-50 goes down is a long time. But Russia attributing it to friendly fire actually sounds worse than equipment failure.
I have seen a few videos where drones nearly intercepted a Su fighter. A drone flying low until it is close and the comes. The A50 is less agile than a fighter.
I can see it all now...Ukraine launches at the aircraft, Russian AD tries to intercept the missiles and shoots their own planes down. That would be frankly hysterical. But experience tells me that this is far more straightforward with really only one concept creating two divergent reactions. First, the A50 and the IL22 are both not in their assigned airspace and closer to the front. Ukraine sees an opportunity and fires at one of them. Second (and at the same time), Russian air def sees planes out of position wrt to the Air Tasking Order and flight plan and fires on one or both.
The Serbs managed to shoot down a F-117 due to the US flying some repeated flight patterns during the 1999 NATO Kosovo bombings. It only makes sense that the US learned from that lesson and helped the Ukrainians set the Patriot missile trap on the A-50. Plus that A-50 was probably lit up like a Christmas tree from the EMF radiation it was emitting. That is a tremendous loss for the Russian forces.
Wild-ass speculation: • Ukraine shoots down A-50 • Elements of Russian air defence turn frothing mad and, within a few minutes of the A-50 being hit, are leaning towards firing on every blip in the AO (IFF? Must be spoofed!) • Senior leadership shuts that down _quickly_ but not quite quickly enough, with at least one missile committed to attack, and ultimately hitting the IL-22
According to the TOP independent military and geopolitical experts there is NO evidence that the A-50 was shot down at all, let alone by Ukraine. The Sea of AZOV is very shallow so if it was shot down we would have easily discovered wreckage for which none was ever presented. The other aircraft was hit by something and the theory is that it was a U.S. aircraft involved providing targeting and guidance. Wish and hope all you want, but even if it was shot down it will have no bearing on the outcome of the war. As the experts have explained time after time, Russia has already won the attrition war. Russia has time on its side as the U.S. and NATO countries are de-militarized of inventory, and the huge financial support flops as we see it happening now across all countries. You might not understand, but the narrative of the loss is being prepared around you by the Biden administration and Corp Media. Just look around. We need to step up like men with "balls' and admit OUR PROXY Ukraine was soundly defeated by Russia, and the U.S. with Boris Johnson scuttled a possible peace agreement between UKR and RU early 2022. (This is censored here, but WELL documented outside the U.S.) The U.S. and NATO TOTALLY underestimated Russia's military capability. Now they are considered the most powerful in the world with China right behind. As former President Obama warned in a 2014 press conference, Russia has MILITARY ESCALATORY DOMINANCE just as China has MILITARY ESCALATORY DOMINANCE in its BACK YARD. We should never believe the propaganda that our military is superior. It has grown old with 1980's upgraded equipment, can't recruit, you see pic's of soldiers walking around bases in high heels, and over 60% don't meet the fitness requirements, only 5 of the 11 carriers are currently operational with at least one significantly under-crewed, on and on... After all, it has LOST EVERY major conflict since WWII. This includes Korea where many historians outside of the U.S. state that we would have lost if it continued. The U.S. lost to Afghan Goat Herders in sandals with AK's and RPG's so don't EVER believe we could defeat Russia and China on the battlefield in WW, peer-level combat.
@@kdrapertrucker They'd never say when they go active. I wouldn't be surprised to learn they are active and they are responsible for these shoot downs. The Russians could have seen them on radar and just htought they were SU-24s and not a threat. So, what's Fox-3 and Splash two in Ukrainian?
Because it really doesn't make any sense, the F16 is a 4th gen fighter aircraft, and the damn flying radar dish would've seen it WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY before it could get a weapons solution. This is either Patriot Missile or an S-200 strike, both missiles were designed with shooting down AWACS in mind.
I was an Air Defense radar operator in the US Army from 84-86. Even with much more primitive equipment we basically knew who was up there. IFF technology is 60 years old now. Mistakes can happen, yes. Equipment does fail. But shooting down two of your own planes, deep inside your own airspace, when neither is operating aggressively? There's incompetence and then there's whatever this "friendly fire" incident is.
Is that actually reassuring to Russians? "Our enemy does not posesa weapons that can do this. But they don't need to because we shoot our own planes down FIRST!"
Addendum-Any air defense asset would normally have an experienced crew chief or systems chief. In the US Army, an E6 or E7. If you're in an air defense situation and something appears in the sky far behind your LOC, and it's loitering, not being evasive or moving aggressively AND your own air force hasn't engaged it? Call up the chain of command. It could be a troop transport. It could be a general. For this to feasibly be friendly fire requires inexperience, incompetence, poor to no communication AND equipment failure.
I mean we didn’t get off Scott free either,yeah equipment unfortunately fails,like when a patriot shot down a tornado in one of the Middle Eastern conflicts,as it’s iff didn’t respond,and the crews were trained to identify and fire in under a minute,very sad
IFF i way older than 60years mate. a very simple form was being used by the RAF at the end of the 1930s.
that said. if it is a blue on blue your completely right in what you say.
Strange are the inner machinations of the minds of Russians.
It's very hard to explain why, but I understand perfectly why they would see it as reassuring. Essentially, incompetence is no shock to any Russian. Especially if the government can somewhat downplay the degree of incompetence needed to do this, then ultimately everyone knows there are some incredibly incompetent people in all sorts of positions. Maybe a SAM battery was put under the command of someone too dumb to ever get such a position through anything but nepotism, maybe some general's son. Everyone knows this sort of stuff happens, it's a part of Russian culture, basically, and in that case if that person screwed up this badly, something will probably be done to prevent it from happening again and all is well. Maybe that person gets fired, maybe sent to a basic infantry unit, maybe promoted to a new position where his duties don't interfere with anything the military needs done well.
But if the enemy shot it down, that means the enemy is actually dangerous, and these options of dealing with the problem aren't available.
@@tommyfred6180 If it has a yellow nose it is a friend so we say in my country in ze time.
16H?
The A-50 was NOT shot down! It was just a special military landing ....
Maintenance loves special landings, the planes are disassembled before they even get to the hanger!
Ngl cringe comment
@@JoseyBerdugo it never gets old
Like mobiks
it was diverted to submarine missions, after Ukraine destroyed a russian submarine in a drydock 🤣
It joined the Moskva on its special underwater operation :D
It was the Inquisition. Nobody expects the Inquisition!
You say that
You haven't met my wife
It always warms my heart, gives me hope for the future - when someone refers to Monty Python .. thank you!
The I the F and the F; those are our two weapons.....
The simple fact that the plane was on a typical airborne radar repeating flying pattern excludes the possibility of friendly fire.
Maybe one of their own pilots defeated and shooted at the A-50, we will never know…
I've seen the Russians making some really incompetent things during this war, but for their own sake and sanity I hope they aren't this stupid
Not necessarily…
@@user-od6gi4lz8t maybe you should first confirm if there was a lost A-50 or not before thinking about confirming what hit it.
@@tunisiandom9318 it was confirmed by everyone, from Ukrainians to Russian officials. :)
friendly firing a A-50 seems highly unlikely. It would be like shooting at your own aircraft carrier because the bloody thing has a huge signature and is generally located behind your own lines and let alone constant radio chatter to confirm IFF
The Ukranians don't necessarily have to steer the missile from its launch site do they?
Could a Ukraninan boat carry the required tracking and control kit?
Could a Ukraninan boat carry the missile itself even?
The IL 22 got hit with something smaller than any US long range SAM. The splash pattern speaks to a much lighter weapon. A 50 could have been attacked by their own forces and on purpose, considering the issues in the Russian army.
An A-50 being shot down is a lie in the fist place, by N@T0 and their terrorist proxies. That was their fist claim that they shot an A-50, but then the Russians confirmed that it was an IL-22 and that it landed safely. So then the U@T0 proxy started claiming that it was two planes that they shot, insisting on the lie that it was an A-50. Who followed that and knows the timeline, the lies of N@T0 terrorist proxies are pretty obvious.
It wouldn't be the first time Russia shot down their own plane during this war. It does make me wonder how their Friend or Foe identification works or if they are solely relying on visual identification
@@nian89 The Russians know that NATO planes operating over Romania are easily capable of tracking targets above the Sea of Azov, so they have a habit of turning off their IFF. They also know that Ukraine is capable of spoofing IFF, which means that it is not always safe to use automated systems to process IFF information.
It's mind blowing that they'd rather admit they're incompetent in shooting down their own plane rather then just admitting it was shot down by Ukraine.
that's because it WASN'T shot down at ALL, dummies!
I agree it kinda almost childish..but remember when moska ship sunk for how long they denied it and then claimed that something detonated on the ship and killed one and injured couple people and that its all fine untill Turkish ship crew sold that famous short clip of moskva smoking and leaning left all empty and "grey" looking .... It's that whole thing about "we are so powerful we can take whole Ukraine in 3day maybe week tops" . Maybe little embarrassment from a country with no navy or any good air Force but keeps hurting them bed...
Sometimes the truth just hurts that much...
Unfortunately for the Russians such incompetence is not completely far-fetched. I personally think the Ukrainians shot the A-50 down but that's just my gut feeling.
That's our russia 😂
When "We are inept" plays better then any other alternative you know everyone is having a good time
Wait, the Russians have had their attacks "coordinated"?
Genius to make it all look random.
Just what I was thinking
I mean there is being innept. But shooting down your own AWACs would get you a kick even on fucking DCS
@@anaturn12 It is on of the most important aircraft in their air force, so them being incompetent as the sole reason this aircraft got downed is something I simply cannot believe. I mean I certainly believe that VKS thanks to corruption is incompetent to an extent, but they can’t be this incompetent right? The most plausible explanation is that Ukraine shot it down. Now this of course doesn’t mean that the Russians aren’t incompetent.
@@pieter-bashoogsteen2283 Yea you hit a lot of thing iam also conflicted about. Yes Russia proven intself incopetent but i dont think to the point they shoot their own awacs.
My tinfoil theory is that F16s are in ukraine and caused this and those 3 airplane losses which also were blamed on friendly fire
Ukraine: "we shot down these idiots." Russia: "we idiots shot ourselves down." Either way, Russia looks like idiots.
😁👍
It was Prigozhin's ghost...👻
WHERE IS MY AMMUNITION@@FiadhaichCruaidh
Where did Russia say that?
@@alpacaofthemountain8760 'blyat...blyat...shoigu...blyat...blyat...gherasimov...blyat...blyat...👻
Apparently A-50s are SAM magnets: a month later Russia once again has to decide if they will claim that an A-50 was shot down by Ukraine far from the front, or if they will claim they shot down their own plane.
Ukraine claims to have been the cause of the plane being shot down, although they aren't specific enough to rule out causing the Russians to shoot down their own plane.
There is no good look for losing an AWACS platform. Either you didn't protect the platform properly from hostiles, or your own units are so incompetent at IFF discipline that they destroyed one of their own assets.
It's nothing to do with incompetence. Russian air defense is not a simple machine- it requires skilled operators to run this.
With the Russians, both would be relevant. They just dont seem to have credible systems and procedures in place such that in a combat scenario, they seem to be floundering. Incidentally thats the NATO designation of the Su 34..."Flounder"
@@digimaks Your statement makes a clear case for incompetence as a possible cause,.
@@digimaks Which means...incompetence.
@digimaks Hmm, this seems a bit like an AI-generated argument, since although it's somewhat relevant, it's completely off point.
The Ukrainian MoD released what they said were flight tracker logs where they noticed both planes flying similar or identical flight paths over the course of days. If these are authentic (and it would be pretty easy to verify), it isn't terribly unbelievable that they could pretty easily set up an ambush. In any event, whether it was a Ukrainian shoot down or a Russian friendly fire event, the long and short of it indicates a staggering level of Russian incompetence.
The repetitive flight patterns really are what would make a successful shot with Patriot possible. That together with jamming.
@@jamesmandahl444 And here comes the cope 😂😂
The 3 day SMO has shown us nothing but Russian incompetence.
@@super_morto
You are aware that it was General Milley that claimed that ?
@@jamesmandahl444 you would have an easier time communicating if you didn't go so far out of your way to sound like a damaged vatnik
Just a thought, but perhaps both are true. The Ukrainians downed the A-50 and the Russians hit the IL-22, thinking it was the attacker? This would also explain why the IL-22 survived, LOL.
You took trolling too far
Something many seem to not have considered, USSR are forcing all and sundry into their war, some of those will be pro-Ukraine, so what's to stop a Russian pro-Ukraine AA operator 'accidentally' targeting some very juicy targets?
Can't dispute the logic!
When the A50 was hit, that probably took out command and control for a large area. Even if the individual Russian planes could locate other planes in the air, they might not have been able to tell what they were without the assistance of the A50. I don't know if it's still the case, but individual Russian planes were infamous for having only a limited number of frequencies available and were totally dependent on command and control channels for situational awareness. So loss of the A50 could have drastically increased the fog of war and make friendly fire against the IL22 more likely. If the IL22 was an EW aircraft, it also might have lit up the radar warning displays like Christmas trees.
Another factor is that authoritarian regimes are often reluctant to let different branches work with each other, because additional lines of communication could make it more possible to plan a coup. That could also be why logistics and combined arms (infantry+artillery, artillery+ armor, etc.) are doing so badly.
@@bradleyross2274 Cool you do not know about this topic and for this bullshite, you managed to vomit here you would get a D from me.
Well, you took the D.
There are no signs of any A-50
No debris, no impact region, no underwater beacon signals that could be interesting even by UA, no wide-scale rescue missions no reported loss of any of the 9 A-50 or 4 A-50U in total.
Your utter mindfock rambling is quite laughable
I believe it's easier for Russian officers to report to their generals that the AA crews messed up rather than admitting that their defenses failed and ukrainians were able to overcome them. Do not forget that the Russian army is about saving face and sending good reports to your higher-ups.
This was true 60 years ago but you're forgetting that the Russians are in a high intensity war where lower units have some level of independence from the higher ups. This wasn't true in 2022 but later on they adopted this structure because it's more effective.
Yeah I agree. It's better to be able to point to the air defense crew and say it was their fault rather than admit command f-ed up, potentially leading to the gulag for that commander. Like what happened to the guy in charge of the Kerch Bridge defense when the drone boats got through
@@wogelsonyour point in no way negates the pervasive vranyo in the ru forces
😂😂😂 okay buddy
Yes, the russian army is basically a clown show.
Previous Air Defence Coordinator here (Navy). Of course we'll not know for a long time how it actually happened, because making that public knowledge will negate the possibility of further similar events. However I figure this possiblity, Ukraine was able to get the IFF codes for the area and day and fly one of their fighters up close to those targets while being misindentified as a friendly. In that case, from the russian perspective, the event appears truly as a friendly fire mishap; but ukraine is right to claim having shot those down. Once the A-50 is eliminated, there's not much left to paint the picture so an ukrainian fighter may escape with ease back to its homeplate, leaving no evidence of who was actually involved.
I think that is good probability and it is plausible. But I think that long range Air Defense was used. It is my guess that they were at the very edge of their range. That would probably explain why the crippled IL 22 limped home. The many pocketed marks and holes in the aircraft speak of multiple strikes from a fragmentation warhead... and a big one! It might be much to large for an aircraft to carry.
If the Russian IFF is simular to US IFF, Ukraine would have had to get the codes from an inside source as there are to many numerical options to just guess and get the code correct. I use to work on theses systems and deal with the COMSEC when I was in the Navy.
@@StephenBazemore-oc3kl We have the same thoughts. The PAC 3 missile is not the systems first choice for a long range aircraft threat or engagement. The older MIN-104 would be the best guess for a shot like this.
bullshit scenario :D
@@mihajlovucinic011 My bad...must have been Special Forces with sling shots.. That is all that is needed for aircraft such as these!
the thing missed is the IL-22 suffered casualties, even if it wasn’t shot down. that plane has high-ranking officers in it, the loss of them hurts the forces badly as they are irreplaceable. the plane itself is a loss even though it landed, so it was highly successful all around: two planes damaged beyond use/destroyed and multiple officers injured or killed.
Russia got a thousand generals and ten thousands of "high ranking officers".
You use words as if they mean anything. Pretty much every pilot is an officer, you don't put a private or corporal into a plane.
@@miriamweller812 keep drinking the vodka, comrade
It's a tragedy, not success. Choose your words.
@@digimaks so sorry your russian isn’t translating well
Delusion and wishful thinking. The images of the damage to the IL-22 clearly showed it was isolated to the tail.
I believe it was one of the shells from the Schwerer Gustav finally returning to Earth.
hehe
maybe it was hit by a t-72 turret that was returning from orbit?
They did demolish sevastapol.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂👍👍
The Ukrainian version is that they have noticed these Russian command aircraft repeatedly operating over the Sea of Azov, and decided to specially move Patriot launchers and radar close behind the front line to ambush them, got their planes, and then moved the Patriots back again. Whatever the actual cause was, for the Russians the choice is between "Our air force was ambushed by the clever Ukrainians" or "Our GBAD is so incompetent that they couldn't tell relatively slow-moving, large aircraft (And the A-50 was probably working with that GBAD when the shootdown happened) that were operating over the Sea of Azov (Where the Russians have complete air superiority and should never have Ukrainian aircraft operating there.) from Ukrainian aircraft or drones."
@StopFollowingTheClowns-sx5zn Even Russia said there was so maybe learn to read your own propaganda lol
@StopFollowingTheClowns-sx5zn I hope President Putin pays you very well for publicly embarrassing yourself with such foolish comments. So these manpad suiciders were waiting for the IL-22 at an airfield where it usually never lands, and they just happened to be incredibly lucky that out-of-the-blue the IL-22 decided to depart usual operating procedures to land there for no good reason? Otherwise, the seemingly far more likely scenario is that the IL-22 was damaged by the Ukrainians or incompetent Russian GBAD, and was forced to make an emergency landing at the nearest airfield.
Ukrainians are showing a lot more ingenuity than the Russian. They did tons of things that even the Americans wouldn't such as building a wooden replica of the HMARS and left it there for the Russian to blow up. So moving the Patriot missile system and jamming is really not beyond them to do. A gutsy move that could have cost them if Russian had seen it.
Ukraine does not normally take credit for Russian friendly fire, I thought.
You'd think the radar emissions the A50 gives off would readily identify it to every air defense system in the area. So not knowing it was a Russian A50 is a pretty lame excuse.
Man, losing a smaller, combat craft, with or without the pilot(s) maybe a bit kind of expected. But recce and electronics large planes that are more valuable being shot at, shot down or damaged, is alot more terrifying for the VKS, if Ukrainians can get more of them, Russian air force would be shaking
Rumors already of pilots refusing to fly over the Sea of Azov. It would mean Russian air power being pushed back another 150km if they stop operating over the sea.
They have more planes of this type than crews to operate them, losing entire crew was biggest blow.
@@kkrolik2106they don't make a-50s anymore though , also as I understand they have like 20 of those in total with like 9 active
This is why Russia is more willing to say that the incident friendly-fire than confirm Ukrainian capability.
@@kkrolik2106 This. These aircraft crew represent the brains of the operation. This crew may have been operating in this war a long time. A crew transferred in from the border with Finland or Japan won't have the same knowledge built up over the past 2 years. And training a new crew might be nearly impossible considering how many hundreds of thousands of young lives Russia has wasted.
While I'm sure this was a coordinated operation, I also think we should stop pretending that the unclassified range of a Patriot interceptor is anywhere near its limit.
Yeah, HLC (who is an Air Defender) Always has to stop himself when talking about Patriot ranges.
Always saying "Patriot's UNCLASSIFIED range is..."
I mean, if you want to, you can sit down and observe the firing footage of a patriot in order to roughly calculate the maximum range. It's not going to be some magically higher number compared to Russian systems. Physics is still physics and just because some guys don't want to lose their jobs and freedom doesn't mean that the patriot is going to be performing exponentially better than what we know for sure it can do.
Unclassified ranges for sure could be lower and probably are, because technically speaking the true maximum range of a missile is something barely relevant because it could only be achievable under impractical circumstances, and unless proof is provided, some guy stammering when he has benefits for not saying the true range (both the not getting arrested bit and the fact that people will think just how great American technology is and will give more creedance to his words) is not proof of anything
Simple fact is, assume an average estimate of range unless proof is provided otherwise. Ukraine isn't not unknown to claim confirmed accidents and friendly fires as their own kills, they want to spread propaganda just as much as everyone else.
@@domaxltv Publicly quoted capabilities have to be plausible in order to be credible and must be reasonably accurate in order to achieve maximum deterrence and fear factor in the enemy.
One thing I am missing on the friendly fire explanation side is the rogue battery commander explantion. We've seen many cases of disgruntled soldiers taking it out on their own, especially with the lack of payments and the high attrition rates.
Try this one. Ukraine uses a modified S-200 SA-5 Gammon with an anti radiation seeker as opposed to its normal seeker. It has the range, altitude and tbe warhead to bring down an A50 and using an anti radiation seeker would negate the need for tbe A-50 to be illuminated by Ukrainian radar. Tbe coordinates of tbe A-50 could have been passed onto thrm by the Americans so it. could have flown blind switching on tbe seeker at the last minute Ukraine performed a similar trick when they sunk the Russian battle cruiser Moskva
S-200 or a Patriot in passive 'home-on-emitter' mode are possilblities. Flying the same track for days is a great way to set this kind of attack up. Also the A-50 would have had an escort (SU-33-35s likely) and those would be clutter to an active homing missle, but ignored by passive anti-radiation seeker.
Letos not forget that Ukraine has also acces to passive radars with 300km range which are basically invisible and AWACS like A50 must light up like Xmass tree on them. So passive launch towards known location of A50 really isnt implausible.
I said the same thing, although I doubt highly they used that particular variant of the missile. I'd put my money on modified S-200 missile with Patriot guts over an ARM seeker S-200 just because of the age and effectiveness of the ARM seeker being low and focused on NATO frequency bands for AEWC.
S200 is launched from a large base. The missile is huge, liquid fueled... would be easy to spot.
@@S300V was launched from large bases you mean... Poland made theirs significantly more mobile in the late 90's... which is impressive and clearly so has Ukraine since NONE of the S-200 sites are active and we know they have been launching them in the ground attack role from places other than their known S-200 sites.
Real range of a PAC-2 missile might be longer than advertised WHO WULDA THUNK.
I also wouldn't put it past the DOD to have a special awacs sniper missile for patriot.
Patriots advertised ranges are only in tens of km for missile intercepts. (I’m alive because of several Patriot missiles used to defend us from SCUDs in 2003.) Edit: I'm not familiar with Patriot WEZ. If PAC-2 has 160km WEZ, that's very impressive.
@@LRRPFco52 I think PAC-2 advertised 160km
@@LRRPFco52 PAC-2 has a diameter nearly double that of S-400, and we've all seen what the Russians claim that system can do.
@@LRRPFco52 as others have said, Pac-2 advertised 160km. The US is usually quite conservative in its range estimations, probably by assuming a target would try to defend at least to some extent (while Russia's 400km range is probably against a target flying in a straight line towards the missile).
Assuming the Russians either didn't detect the patriot pings, or had gotten "used" to them by preparatory EW, they likely were a pretty cooperative target (flying high and slow in a straight line). It wouldn't surprise me if Pac-2 would significantly exceed its claimed capabilities in this situation.
I find it really hard to believe that the Russian air defense would have shot down precisely the planes responsible for determining who is a friend and who is an enemy.
I mean, maybe the a50 forgot to determine *himself* to be a friend 🫠
As Putin doesn't recognize Ukraine, all casualties in the war is friendly fire....
A-50: myabe, i am an enemy?
Maybe the enemy is the friend we shot down ...
If you think about it, for so much of russian history, they have been their own worst enemy
The internet is amazing. I'm not really interested in aviation history, but was interested in this incident and YT served me this excellent overview by someone interested and knowledgeable in this area. Thanks for the video!
I served in the AF for 8 years in various roles. This was a good presentation of the facts we know and what we don't know. It seems highly unlikely the Russians shot down their own aircraft unless it was done internally as sabotage. It seems far more likely that the Ukrainians have gotten their hands on a surface to air or air to air missile with much greater range than has been seen.
I'm thinking this Rishi Sunk mentioned more long range missiles earlier in the week, I also wonder about maybe 1 or 2 F16's having covertly arrived but I am doubtful on that one
It’s a launch vehicle for the flying sauer on top. Everything went according to plan. Losing stage 1 in the process is not a problem.
😂
From what ive seen and the aircrafts positions when they were hit I think it was likely the A-50 which was orbiting close to the Ukrainian coast as it regularly does was shot down and the IL-22M which was on the opposite side of the Sea of Azov was friendly fire possibly in the confusion caused by the A-50 being shot down. Ukraine activated a Patriot at Odessa in December which caught a couple of Russian aircraft flat footed over the Black Sea and I think it was likely a new site went live around Zaporizhia. Previously Ukraine had kept their limited long range SAMs a long way back around Kyiv where they were safer and relying on short and medium range SAM for defence closer to the front.
This scenario sounds plausible. The whole 'friendly fire" narrative is likely a psyop to inject just enough uncertainty for those watching (and supporting) from the sidelines.
Nobody mentions F-16s, but I wonder.
There is no downed A-50. It's another Ghost of Kiev story.
It's fascinating how fanatics and idiots still eat that shit of a notorious liar.
You may think that any person with even a single brain cell left would learn that lesson sooner or later, but nope.
Chris, as one of your patreon supporters I'd like to say many congratulations on 400k subs!
Thank you so much 😀 so awesome to be a part of this community!
@@MilitaryAviationHistory😂😂ukranian propoganda to raise fund when leaders in davos
@@imtiazakand3174 Were you born thick or is this just your lifetime achievement ?
What I took away was that this channel provides quality and unbiased information. I will definitely be adding this to my list of sources on the war!
If the A50’s re-appear over the northwest part of the sea of Azov it was friendly fire, if they stay at a greater distance is was the ukraine airdefence.
Plausible speculation here: The A50 is caught by a 'Patriot Trap' wherein the launcher is positioned forward and missiles are barely in envelope. The IL-22 may or may not have been damaged by a Patriot, likely not because of kinetic kill rather than proximity. The aircraft near the downed A50 become aware of the downing and retreat from the attack site. With the A50 down, Russian air defenses are blinded and may be heightened to expect an attack through that sector to take advantage. The IL-22 is escaping towards Kerch and becomes classified as a threat to the bridge during the confusion and struck by Russian air defense.
Here's a challenge to the scenario of the IL-22 hit by Russian air defense: Remember the shrapnel pattern on MH-17? It's near the front of the airplane. The IL-22 has shrapnel damage on the tail, suggesting it was chased by a missile coming from behind, the warhead triggered by a proximity fuse. If it was shot at by a SAM site near the Kerch bridge I would expect the shrapnel damage near the cockpit. (Lots of assumptions in this scenario of course but it's something to think about. )
That's plausible. Another possibility is sabotage of the A50 (not a missile at all), followed by a friendly fire attack on the panicked IL-22.
why would they shoot the IL-22M though , could be panic but wouldn't the determine that an enemy aircraft wouldn't have gotten that far without getting picked up by the A-50 ?
@@willemkaret1568 The IL-22 may have tried to escape the missile.
One thing not mentioned here are other Ukrainian systems. Ukraine's Soviet Era SAM inventory includes some systems capable of handily reaching the Azov Sea without risking the site. I'm talking about a modified S-200 (SA-5) system. Modified because there is no way Russia wouldn't know they are in operation due to knowing the specs of the radars installed during the Soviet Union. Ukraine operated them as SAM batteries until the mid 2010's. Both Poland and Ukraine are known to have modified their systems. Ukraine mostly for ground attack. That doesn't mean that they couldn't have received help in shoving something like a Patriot ARH seeker missile guts into that missile. That'd be a hell of a melding of tech, but far from impossible. It'd give them the necessary surprise factor (unknown Patriot radar and the lack of launch and lock warnings on radar warning equipment) to pull it off with a missile capable of reaching the aircraft without risking launcher or radar. It also explains the shrapnel damage on the IL-22.
I think regardless of what version might be responsible, the fact that they lost 2 very specialized aircraft due to ground to air systems is a more interesting story.
No evidence, love your gullibility, would like to have to rely upon you in life. This war has taught me how many people live in complete absence of the truth, you deserve to get treated like sheep, when you act like one.
Even more interesting is that regardless of what the truth about this incident is, it does not have any bearing on the situation on the ground. Ukraine is in a retreat and without any hope to do anything about it.
@@gdiwolverinemale4th if it does not have any bearing, this will not even be newsworthy.
@@huaiwei lol. Media are desperate for any news, particularly if they can prop the losers they support for a moment. What impact would the loss of such an airplane have? Nil. Russia can instantly replace it. So?
@@gdiwolverinemale4th I like comments like that :) Did u see the fields around Avdiivka? no hope, lol
"Some shrapnel damage on the tail?" I'm surprised, judging from the photo, the tail didn't fall off after sustaining that kind of damage.
Yeah... apparently that Ilyushin is a tough old bird!
Had it been a horizontal stabilizer, im sure it would have.
Nah, as a Russian friend once said, WE Build Airplane, Strong Like Bull, Smart like farm tractor! (Sometime, not so strong!)
They don't make things like they used to.😀
Nothing a few rolls of duck tape can't patch up.
The Ukraine also had a SAM under development in 2022, that had a claimed maximum range of 280 km and was supposed to enter service "soon" (Before the war, that meant 2025-2030. But same was said of the Neptune missile...). An A-50 can't really hide its position, and the attacks appear like they just fired a missile against strong airborne sources of EM radiation.Also the friendly fire theory would in consequence mean suicide, since the A-50 is integrated into the air defense network and would have meant that it sends its own state vector as identified target. Possible, but that applies also to a city sized alien spacecraft positioning itself over Moscow and firing a powerful energy beam at the Kremlin...
Wars have a way of increasing the urgency of weapons development. And a war knocks a lot off the cost of testing. Instead of going through bureaucracy to clear air spaces and expend expensive drone targets, you can use enemy aircraft as targets for your prototype as soon as it's ready.
They likely also still have quite a few S-300 and S-200 that are far more suited for this kind of long range engagements than Patriots are
You provided an absolutely great report of these incidents. A very unbiased report. Well qualified, well substantiated and well reported. The internet needs more of this type of commentary. Thank you for your efforts and time. Much appreciated. An intelligent report, without clutter.
I'm sure that Russia can swiftly recruit prisoners to staff the electronics on a replacement A50.
😂😂😂👍
maybe that's how it was shot down in the first place - dissidents or incompetence on the Russian side
@@preppen78 Careless smoking downed the plane. Or Sergei took a glass of vodka to calm his nerves and too stay happy since watching a radar screen for 4 hours could be very boring. But he accidentally dropped his vodka on an electric cable that sparked a great fire on the plane that burned up all electric cables and made it impossible to steer the plane so it crashed.
@@preppen78you win the award for dumbest take
Russia didn't lose an A-50, Poseidon has gained a airborne early warning and control aircraft.
Lol very creative humor
It's a special underwater operation.
I mean, the first part is true, since there is exactly zero evidence for any of that and was revealed as one of the many lies, like Ghost of Kiev and so on.
But of course stupid will never learn.
you mean underwater early warningand control
It's a hard call, both point to something going sideways for the Russians. If Ukraine did it, it implies they were able to get both planes in range of their missiles and we don't know the full capabilities of what Ukraine has. This is plausible on both counts. If Russia did it, it implies there some issues with command and control with the Russian forces. Again plausible as command and control issues affect all military forces worldwide to some extent. I would lean towards Ukraine did it but there's nothing definitive about the incident on balance.
1 Ukraine operates the Soviet era SA-5 (S-200) with a range of 250km. It could have been modified with improved radar.
2 Patriot PAC-2 has a published range range of 160km but if its put into ballistics mode (fired at 45 degrees) it might be much greater.
3 SAMP/T has a published range of 130km but it also has huge fin area so perhaps in ballistics mode with some gliding it could also reach out to over 200km.
It's unlikely to be an own kill. Russian propaganda is already claiming victory in the conflict and for Ukraine to achieve this is such am embarrassment they would rather accept an own blue on blue. We have to remember that propaganda is the core of any Russian military activity.
@@williamzk9083 No one (on TH-cam) really knows Patriot missile range. All we know it is "coughing" 160 km.
@@williamzk9083 it's unlikely it's an own kill for a few reason.
a) It's a much larger, slower target than UA cruise missiles / jets
b) It was flying a flight path over the Azov sea - it would be easy to rule out that it was a Ukrainian asset due to position
c) It had taken this flight path many times
d) it would have had a transponder active at the time
If they shot it down - then it was a much more significant failure than previous friendly fire events.
@@zoeherriot I think most of vatniks will be incredulous that Western systems exceeded their promised performance and Russian systems under perform in their promises. So it is for missile range.
@@williamzk9083 they took different approaches to disinformation. :)
Is there a reason no one mentions the S-200? The Ukrainians have some (that were said to have been converted to serve a ground-to-ground role). Some variants have ~300 km range. Maybe they did not convert them all? Got some new old stock from other parts of the former warsaw pact?
If you shoot down your own AWACS there is a lot more wrong within your military than if it is show down by the enemy. :)
I've read about Russia having special long range SAMs that are only useful against sluggish targets like AWACS aircraft. It is possible that Ukraine also possesses these? Or perhaps if PATRIOT PAC2 has such a mode that increases its range? After all you don't need to maneuver to hit these.
Stats that US gives for its equipment are often lower compared to their real abilities.
there have been some documents about Patriot missiles having a significantly increased range when operating in a home-on-jam mode so if the A-50 was jamming and they used Patriot then that could be a possibility.
iirc Patriot technically doesn't need to have a radar lock or illuminate the whole way as the missile handles terminal guidance. So they could have fired it 'Blind', going after the biggest target it could see. It would explain the 10 minute delay as they wouldn't want the missiles to track the same target or had fired a spread of missiles. I wouldn't be surprised if they used HIMARS to camouflage the launch.
Also, after two years it would be pretty hard not to repeat paths or get lazy or get flight plans stolen.
@@oohhboy-funhousepossible but how close did the patriot really get to the frontline , you'd expect it to be targeted by drones if it got close enough
@@sababugs1125 Well this is war and you must take risks. You risk losing a PAC launcher (what's the probability? 10% I guess?) for the opportunity to shoot down an AWACS (50% chance?).
@@oohhboy-funhouseif you know exactly where the target is and will go, this makes sense. I wonder if all the ground based early warning Radar systems that were delivered to Ukraine played a role here.
@@lethalfang probably , they could've also used decoys and stuff to maybe deceive Russian intelligence and I doubt the Russians would be prepared for a patriot kiss
This a50 was promoted to sonar operations for the Moskovch support fleet.
*Moskva
Cruiser was named "Moskva", you know, for the capital city of RF.
And the General on board have become an Admiral
@@megalamanooblol I knew someone would tell me. It didn't take long. Faster than a quick Google I bet. Thanks 😊
Lol it was actually a close guess.
@@nattygsbord Ha! Yes! Admiral
@@nattygsbord and admiral Sokolov got promoted to fish bait
It fell out of a window..... onto a knive on the ground....
After drinking tea. After visiting the cathedral at Salisbury...
@@ptonpc Very beautiful and famous 123-metre spire on the cathedral. Very famous. Here, have some lovely perfume.
“We weren’t incompetent enough to get shot down, we were super incompetent enough to shoot ourselves down.”
If Ruskis got their own radar plane that was circling in this spot for hours , they are in worse trouble than anyone ever expected.
Thanks again, Chris. So Russia feels that it's less embarrassing to admit that they've had, what appear to be multiple friendly fire incidents than to admit that the Ukrainians were able to do this. I would hope that the official capabilities of the Patriot system are less than the system's actual capabilities but perhaps I'm just an old cynic.
According to Habitual Linecrosser, who works with the Patriot system, the publicly given stats are less than what it's capable of. Though, of course, he didn't divulge its actual limits. And that lines up with the US deliberately understating the capabilities of its systems.
@@mobiusflammel9372 what Patriot? Ukraine had non of them al died, also this plane was way too far for any Patriot missle to hit it from the Ukraine soil , if that story is true, it was something else.
Russias ego is so fragile they can’t admit ukraine shot their plane down.
You would understate by at minimum 10%.
A 50 Russia awec is very sofistikated plane,, no way to shoot down with any misil,, SPECIALY Ukraine,
There is one system designed specifically for this role of taking out AEWC aircraft that the Soviet Union put together. That's the S-200 (SA-5 in NATO terms).
Now, before you throw me out, hear me out. Ukraine retired their systems around the mid 2010's but kept them around. They were using them for ground attack but stopped suddenly. Between Poland modifying their S-200 system and Ukraine doing the same its possible it was a modified version of that system.
To add confusion to this, as Russia would DEFINITELY know those S-200 systems are in operation, what could have happened was a melding of missile technology. I'm talking Patriot PAC3 MSE Seeker and INS and Patriot radar paired with a missile designed to travel absurd distance.
One thing is certain. That IL-22 wasn't hit by a PAC3 since there is no warhead with it and that shrapnel damage is extensive for a kinetic hit-to-kill warhead PAC2 does, but that's a huge risk to a Patriot battery. S-200 can cover that range handily, and with modification, do so without using radars which Russia knows the frequency bands for.
Now that's all speculation. We've seen this kind of ingenuity before involving the same S-200 missile system and using it as a ground attack missile.
I was wondering if it was actually possible to datalink patriot and warsaw pact AD systems. Like, even those HARM missiles were actually launched by laptop aboard the MIG-29, rather than being integrated. And datalinking seems even more problematic.
The video also says Ukraine only has PAC2, which does have an 80+ kg warhead which IMHO seems capable of doing that much shrapnel damage.
Since US/NATO ranges are normally understated rather than overstated, e.g. "100+ miles".
My guess, as an illiterate hobbyist, would be that it was rather a tactically well planned ambush with a Patriot that is more capable than the public knows.
When I saw the ranges my first thought was S-200 as well. My fantastic speculation was AIM-120 radar and target computer feeding the S-200 control system for the terminal phase. The Ukrainians have had access to AIM-120 for some time now with NASAM.
@@tripod222 Ukrain has PAC-2 and also PAC-3 and the PAC-3 MSE which intercepted Kinzhal.
Look at the damage of il22 which escorted A50 and managed to land after it was hit. Minor damage. S200 has a very powerful warhead filled with lots of steel balls. It would instantly kill all personell on board and tear that airplane apart. So its not s200 but rather something very lightweight.
Moreover S200 is not easily portable. It has deadly liquid propellant that is loaded on site
@romanl8862 the warhead component and the photographic damage do need to line up (unless the Il22 photo is a fake ) but what's to say it wasn't an s200 near miss? If it was a direct hit I think it would've followed the A50 into the Azov.
I'm willing to accept a Patriot bagged the A-50, then the IL-22M fleeing south from that got dinged to some extent by friendly fire - perhaps from a site protecting the bridge - and had to emergency land in Anapa. I feel like a SAM site wouldn't fire south into the Sea of Azov, because that would require a hostile plane/drone to fly around/across Crimea and come back to the north without already being shot down, and if it came from the Crimea, I'd expect the IL-22M would retreat more southeast rather than south. As for why a bridge defense site would engage... maybe they mistook the IL-22M for an inbound cruise missile somehow?
Good job on sticking to the facts and leaving it there. :D
that is possible. didn't a Russian officer just get 8 years in prison for not protecting the Crimea bridge from a Ukrainian drone attack? the AAA officers in charge of bridge defense must be sweating pretty hard.
Based on the radar tracks it seems that the Il-22M was already fleeing the area when the A-50 went down so I don't think the timing works
@@spiritfoxmy6370 There is no downwed A-50, it's another Ghost of Kiev sory.
There is damaged Il-22 and that's it.
Some years ago I spoke with a soldier manning a Patriot battery. When I commented on the range he smiled and said the actual range capacity was significantly more than published. His comments were deliberately vague, but it stuck with me and I suspect that the Patriot systems can hit targets at much longer ranges... especially relatively slow moving targets like and AWACS.
Yup. Habitual linecrosser, a YTber, will also admit to the US, if anything, understating it's capabilities. Also an air defense operator, and had to look up the unclassified range a few times in his videos to say it.
Ah, sure, that "I know a guy who knows something/someone" story.
I spoke to a soldier who said that Patriots are completly fake and can't shoot down anything, it's all for money laundring.
See: easy to just write that.
Yup
"It was friendly fire!"
To quote The Good Place
"Okay but that's worse. You understand how that's worse, right?"
There was no shot down A-50. The friendy fire guys are just as full of shit as those who made up the first story. Social media clowns who clickbait.
That they would rather be viewed as incompetent, instead of that the other side got you, is a very interesting thing.
They literally look down on Ukrainians as inferiors.
It's like when Bismarck sank. "The enemy didn't do it, we did it ourselves by opening the seacocks."
@@jospi2"I assure you. The fleet of enemy Battleships, cruisers and destroyers has nothing to do with the sinking."
Similar, good point out. Although one difference, Nazi Germany still had massive respect to the RN/Britain as a whole as an enemy, russia looks down on Ukraine and wants their culture and people genocided. "We sank it ourselves, you couldn't sink it RN!" vs "They can't have done it, not capable!".
Your comment makes no sense.
Russia will never admit Ukraine shot the A-50 down so they will say friendly fire shot it down.
WHO CARES WHAT RUSSIA SAYS! TERRORISTS started this world war ! Who will be LEFT?
@michaelfloyd1127 Photographic evidence? A-50s are huge. Even if it went down over water the Azov sea is so shallow it would likely be visible...and certainly recovery activity would be noted. Not saying such evidence isn't out there, just haven't seen it yet.
this would be same as my country (US) admitting how many helicopters we lost in iraq etc... they were all tagged friendly fire and mechanical malfunctions
They still haven’t admitted that Ukrainians turned the Moskva into a submarine. Remember Putin smugly said “it sank” when asked about the Kursk submarine
@@mitchyoung93 When a plane falls out of the sky and hits the sea, it often comes at a speed and angle to cause its full breakup upon impact. There would not be a plane wreck, but rather, a field of debris with only the wings being easily identifiable as being part of an airplane.
Even so, the Azov sea is not so shallow and the waters not so clear that a plane wreck could be seen from the air.
How about the S 200? It is old, but appears to have an operative range in this magnitude. Why should Ukraine only use it to hit ground targets?
It's absolutely hilarious how Russia will immediately claim either "friendly fire" or "we totally intercepted the attack, the burning debris just fell unlucky" on every attack behind the lines.
If you are interested, you can see the same downed A-50 at the 2020 parade during an aviation overflight.
So you can't see it, because there is no downed A-50? Or what you want to say?
@@miriamweller812 This is the same plane that was shot down with number 42.
Idiot. We have 2024 right? He talked about a 2020 (TwentyTwenty) Parade Overflight... Think about it, then do it again...@@miriamweller812
@@miriamweller812 The plane that was shot down in 2024 appears in a video of a parade in 2020.
Good take. I'm inclined to think that Ukraine shot down the A50 and the Il22 then high-tailed it out of there and got itself rogered by friendly fire. Look at where it landed. There were several airfields closer to the A50 crash site than where it landed (assuming the audio is authentic).
The crash site no one's seen or photographed? Lol
@@nagantm441It fell into the Azov Sea. What would you expect to see?
@@PAVANZYL SAR effort. Debris. Witnesses.
Maybe Russia thought, that Prigoshin was on board of the planes.
The thing with the Patriot System is that most of its capabilities are unknown to the public. The Ukrainians bagged the Aircraft. How they did it or how the kill chain evolved in the destruction of the Russian A-50 AWACS type aircraft will not be publicly known for quite some time. Why? Because they are going to want to be able to do it again. While I am happy that Ukraine succeeded here, there is also that crew on that airplane; they are gone. I personally don't take any joy in that. Those men had little to no choice in the matter. There is a lot of speculation going on here. The idea that the Russians would be more comfortable with a friendly fire incident just boggles the mind, but that is the Russians. They are going to fight till they can't any longer. When that will be is anybody's guess.
100%. The ranges for PAC-2 are only quoted for ballistic missile intercepts - I’ve never been able to find ranges for SAM aircraft interdiction
Your first sentence is right on the target. I remember the Gulf War in ‘91’ and the Patriot Missile System became a national embarrassment when the Patriots failed to shoot down the Iraqi Scuds. The U.S. Army Base that was hit with the Scud missiles and killed over a hundred American Service Men and Women. I just watched a video of President Zelensky praising the Patriots capabilities. He said that it was the greatest Weapons system ever devised. I suspect because of the security surrounding the Patriot system we really don’t have a clue what secret variants of the missile there are. I suspect as the War continues we shall see what we shall see. Hermit
it was damaged by S-200 not Patriot
Ok, what evidence do you have that it was shot down?
@@nagantm441 not completely but some damages according to the Ukrainian army, and some running
Okay apparently second one confirmed and at this point my biggest question is, does it even matter anymore if it's friendly fire or enemy fire? The more I think about it the less it matters to the amount of joy and happiness it provides me. Makes a difference in whether it's epic war happiness or comedy happiness though. Come on, can we have another video on the second one please?
Once again a highly informative and interesting video. A massive thank you
I don't suppose anybody is releasing open source flight tracks for aircraft like this? If they were, we might look at whether Russian planes suddenly start keeping a bigger distance, suggesting that it was a hostile missile and they're backing off. Or not.
Yep. Suchimimus has an open source trace acquired from weather data tracking the beasts contrails.
Just know that publicly released information on weapon systems...is usually underestimated. Except in Russia's case. Russia exaggerates it's capabilities in hopes it scares others. The West underestimates its capabilities so the enemy does not know what the true range is for situations EXACTLY like this.
Yep, this has been the respective military M.O.s for a long time.
Like when they lie about shooting down missiles?
@@nagantm441 You aren't talking about that shit Kinzhal are you?
@@nick4819 He probably is. Just another Axis of Evil copester.
@@nagantm441 Even China published a article on Kinzhal being a fake hypersonic missile recently..called it old Soviet tech 😂
Also it wasn't Ukraine that sunk the Moskva. Russia claimed its sinking was due to a sailor smoking. Why would Russia lie? 😁
Because Ukraine lies just as much if not more
@robhunter2435 tell me an example
Why would they tell the truth?/s
In all fairness, the sailor did smoke. He was on fire.
My question at this point is how are the Russian's flying their command post/AWACS aircraft now? Assuming aircraft availability are they flying a similar or same pattern as the aircraft that were shot down? If so, then that would indicate a friendly fire incident. If they are not flying in the same pattern, but keeping a greater distance from the Ukrainian shoreline, then enemy action becomes more probable. I'm playing with the probabilities. How the Russian air force behaves over the next few days or weeks will be highly indicative of what actually occurred.
Back in the 80's I served in the USAF as a programmer for the E-3A AWACS. Not just a radar but command and control so attacks are coordinated.
We know Ukraine still has some of the old S-200 SAM missiles. While some have been converted in surface-to-surface use, the S-200 (NATO designation SA-5), with its combined rocket/ramjet propulsion has a range of up to 300 km, which would have made the A-50 within the range of this older missile. Is it possible they took a chance with the old long range missile and got lucky?
S-200 isn't ramjet propelled, it has a liquid fueled rocket engine. Its huge range comes simply from the fact that the missile itself is huge; ready for launch it weighs 7 tonnes which is about the same as a MiG-19...
Or bolted-on some state of the art AI (think Neptune!) AWACs aren't exactly hard to detect - plodding around predictable race-track flight paths emitting gigawatts of radio energy - knocking up a modern seeker to passively guide an SA-5 to the vicinity of the target with a few radio receivers and a Raspberry Pi would be small fry - then let the existing systems on board take over. The game has changed. This is a new type of war.
You forgot to take Russian air defense into equation that is all over the place between Azov Sea and front line. S-200 is not very fast, and would of been detected and shot down. It simply doesn't make sense.
The A-50s radar has a look down capability of 190 miles for ground targets, to peer further into Ukraine it would have to fly a circuit uncomfortably close in. Ukraine's Patriot systems had their range reduced prior to delivery by the western allies, however I believe that at some point the US allowed those limitations to be lifted. All it took was a hungover pilot to blow a turn, stray in too far, and get shot down. Ukraine's steely eyed missile men must have waited weeks for that pilot to finally screw up.
Yeah, A-50 can't turn much when active, making 60 mile-radius turns
Irrelevant if friendly fire or Ukranian.... it just shows an inability to protect their higher assets and incompetence
They have more. U know it's like Starship tests and Musk will call it success
@@D20-t4o no they dont, they are reduced to less than 7
@@flyboya340 more to shut down. Do russian cares till the single remains?
Woke up today to unconfirmed reports of a second one. Fingers crossed for confirmation. Can't wait for MAH's next video on this.
Analyst’s keep overlooking that Ukraine. Has Mamba/Aster 30 long range SAM systems. Along with Patriot PAC2/PAC3 SAM systems. Also few mention that legacy Ukraine aircraft inventory had been undergoing significant upgrades and modifications. So they can employ western Avionics/EW/ECM and weapon systems. There are multiple possible weapon systems that could have been used. Not even talking about F16s could be clandestinely being brought into operation.
already the ucrainians fly the F-16 ¡
I tend to think Ukranians shot it down but dont want to revele how they did it, so Russians dont change tactics. Adapted missle with Satelite support or even slipping a fighter un detected with a couple of Meteors.
The Meteor missile has to integrate with the fighter radar firing it to get the mid range correction data. So it would need to be fired from a French Rafeal, Eurofighter Typhoon or Swedish Gripen. My money is on a British Eurofighter Typhoon Tranche 2 loaned to the Ukrainians.
What could be that undetected fighter capable of blinding even the most potent AWACS asset of Russia?
F-22 should come first in mind. BTW, quite a few of them are located in Poland, Romania.
If this wasn't friendly fire, which seems too stupid to be true given that even the Russian armed forces have proven they can learn, I'm inclined to believe Anders Puck Nielsens pre-christmas speculation that the Ukrainian Air Force already has some F-16s in service and are using them as flying launch platforms for AMRAAM and similar.
"the Ukrainian Air Force already has some F-16s in service and are using them as flying launch platforms for AMRAAM and similar"
the only problem is that you only achive good missile ranges when you high and fast and there are also on both sides SAM systems at the frontline that prevent exact that
@@jetfighter200 also why wouldn't the AWACS see the F16 coming from a long way off.
@@JohnnyMotel99 One word answer: vodka
@@JohnnyMotel99 See it yes. Bring able to avoid the shot?
Probably not.😊
@@leighrate russians do also have fighters with long range AAMs to take on the F-16 when the awacs sees it inbound.
Has anyone considered the option that so far, the data published on Patriot's range may have been humble understatements? Maybe there are at least modes of operation in which the missiles can strke targets at much greater range than publicly known?
After seeing th data on Meteor AIMs published having changed over the years for shorter ranges and individual's reports as well as engineering evidence, supporting the older numbers, I do think there is that trend.
Thus half a billion worth of enemy equipment unwittingly stumble into the killing zone?
Shhhhhh…
Raytheon/LM have basically already said that, they’re developing a new radar for patriot called LTAMDS because the current missiles are limited by the capability of the radar and could reach other further
He mentions in the video that publicly released data about, e.g., weapon ranges are generally understated.
I'd love it if both are true. Like what if the A-50 was shot down by Patriot and the IL-22 was damaged by friendly fire that was trying to intercept a second patriot coming for it?
Thanks for spending the time to create and share this content 🤙🏾
Good point about Russian capabilities. Historically speaking, they start a war with poor capabilities, but learn as they go. They've now had 2 years practice.
Thank you for the detailed analysis. I really appreciate your willingness to admit that your are just not sure or do not know.... when it comes to accuracy or veracity of data.
Thank you! We will certainly know more as time goes on.
Iff only legacy news would be that honest and up front with not having ALL the facts
@@MilitaryAviationHistory have you seen any Russian sources confirming this plane was even lost or are you relying entirely on the unreliable Ukrainians?
Ukraine also has a history of cooking up special weapons for prestige targets, like the Neptunes that knocked out the Moskva. Ukraine probably still has the competency to manufacture missiles in limited numbers, and wouldn't discount the possibility that the engineers at Luch Design Bureau cooked up something special for a high value target (like a S-300 missile with performance similar to the Russian 40N6 series). That would explain the 10 minute delay, in that they confirmed the kill of the A-50 with the first missile and then decided to go for a secondary target with a spare.
Source: I made it the F up lol. Neptune is little more than a Soviet vintage kh-35 built in Ukraine.
An Neptune could be adapted as an anti aircraft missile. Would only need special software.
@@williamzk9083 lmao no it can't. Good lord.
@@williamzk9083 The neptune could not be adapted as an anti-aircraft missile. It's subsonic and way too slow. They'd need a much faster rocket, but I would be very surprised if they didn't have the know-how to make something similar to the modernized 48N6 missile (practically any variant using post-1992 rocket tech would have sufficient range). You don't need a very agile missile to hit an A-50 or IL-22M (both are basically airliners in terms of flight performance), but you do need range and speed.
Or I guess that if they haven't built one then "acquiring" a S-300 missile of sufficient capability wouldn't be the hardest thing a military intelligence has pulled off. Most countries operating S-300s are rife with corruption.
It has a history of telling absurd BS stories since the coup, which all fall apart instantly, but idiots still fall for them over and over again.
>appears to
>claims
>says
So you don't know?
It's extremely hard to believe that the system responsible for target acquisition and information dissemination would be shot down by friendly systems that it can datalink with.
Especially when the ground radar would be able to determine that its a pretty big-ass target signature, not something Ukraine has been able to operate within the Russian air defense system, much less penetrate over Russian lines.
Ukraine could hack the system, send out some false signals, mislead the system. And Ukraine got millions of russian speakers that could make a phone call and order some SAMs to fire on a big slow moving target with a predicatable flight path. Russia making mistakes is nothing new. They shot down a Malaysian passanger plane many years ago. And Chris is wrong when he says that russia learns from their mistakes, because they have continued to shot down planes by accident and friendly fire. Mostly low flying planes that was killed with manpads, but still.
I wonder how much vodka etc was involved.
I want to add something to this video.
It's awesome.
Source: My eyes, 2024
Russia shooting down their own C&C aircraft that far behind enemy lines is ridiculous.
... First, thank you for your Facts First Prudence ..... I would be interested in learning at what altitude these aircraft were flying when the event occurred ..... I would also be interested in the type of radar capabilities the Ukrainians possess..... "I believe" it would be a fair assessment to conclude; an A-50 would/should have detected the missile launch .... If it didn't/couldn't evade - the range must have been short ............ A feat such as this suggests a "joint/cooperative" effort ......... The U.S. Congress may have hamstrung the flow of dollars - but not "unit cohesion".
"No! No! Ukraine didn't shoot down our A-50! We shot down our own A-50!" Uh, congratulations?
Ukraine doing it : Unlikely (really risky as Patriot, a system that relocated relatively quite slowly, would be located really close to the frontline) but not impossible
Russia doing it : HOW...???
For the latter.. maybe some mutiny or internal rebellion, perhaps Ukrainian agents actually manning russian air defence systems or something of that sort. Inexplicable.
Wouldn't be the first friendly fire AA incident Russia managed to achieve in this conflict.
The Patriot is most vulnerable when it is transmitting. If it simply set up, listened for the A-50's signal and launched a missile in anti-radiation mode the Patriot doesn't even exist from an EW perspective.
@@jimmiller5600 yeah, but it would be in range of drones or other reconissance assets around the front. Patriot also quite big of a system, area wise.
Maybe they didn't bring the radar and fired it blind as the missile can handle terminal guidance? After two years I wouldn't be surprised if the crew got lazy with flight paths or plans stolen or were passively tracked or missile had home on radar.
It may have been a long range spevial American anti radation missile given to the Ukrainians for just this purpose. The F,14 had some dry long range missiles. We have adapted many American missiles to Ukrainian aircraft. It Might be the first F16 in theater having that capability too.
The A-50 is a beautiful aircraft. They make beautiful submarines too
Also some rumors:
1) A lot of rumors that it was done by British military operating in Ukraine.
2) According to one of that rumor they were using F-35 for the shot.
thank you for spreading your knowledge and being so factual without speculating :)
Zelensky in his evening speech said an houre before the shoot down to wait for good news from air defense so i would say it was Ukraine
Same speech where he lied about the il-22 getting shot down?
A question for you...
Can an aircraft like AWCS get damaged/destroyed if fired upon/hit by an anti-radiation missile fired from another aircraft?
If the other plane can get within range, yes. They tend to make big juicy targets but, from what I recall, (From years ago, so fact check me) , AWACS are *supposed* to be protected by fighters in the area.
Plus the A50 would have seen the Ukrainian aircraft before it could see the A50.
If you programmed a passive home-on-signal seeker mode into a Long Range BVRAAM, you could very effectively target AWACS. It would help avoid triggering their MAWS/RAWS equipment until the missile went terminal. You would want to have high resolution and refresh rate seeker guidance during the terminal phase of flight into the intercept basket.
@@davefloyd9443 yeah but would it have thought of it as a threat , Ukrainians carry out strikes all the time but not against the A-50 so far ,for the most part as I know the Ukrainian air force currently just lops western cruise missiles and jdams , as far as the A-50 was concerned it was routine bombing
idk , how much the missile aerodynamics would allow that , aren't those missiles designed to target on the ground stations ? although I am not an expert so
I find it fascinating (and as a supporter of Ukraine, very good) that Russian planes are falling out of the sky and the Russians have no idea why.
Ukraine has already succeeded in forcing the Black Sea Fleet to effectively withdraw from the western Black Sea. Maybe Russia can rename it the Azov Sea Fleet and claim that was always the plan. That was done over time, by peeling away layers of capability until the ships were effectively targets.
This is similar but even more significant. If Russia's ability to protect its air assets is peeled away by the elimination of its eyes and ears, then Russian air assets will be rendered ineffective. Ukraine achieved this to some extent early on by making missions over the battlefield too dangerous. Russia countered with glide bombs. Ukraine is now demonstrating the ability to reach out and touch Russian aviation far beyond the reach of glide bombs.
As an outside observer, it is all very interesting.
The problem I have with this supposition is that very few fighting ships have actually been hit (2) and basically none of Russia control of the black sea has been taken. And the problem with all these recent "shoot downs" is that they are claims. There is very very little proof of these claims. And some Ukranian claims contradict others. It was 2 su 34 then 6 then 4. And yet no evidence of any type was ever presented. We have no evidence the a-50 was even lost. They claimed the command aircraft was shot down, but the only picture we have from this entire event is of it on the ground with damage. They Ukranians also claimed.to.have previously destroyed that a50 on the ground, but that turned out to also be a massive exaggeration. Ukrainian claims are often wrong or lies. Russian claims are the same. So we must rely on evidence. And the evidence says an IL22 received major tail damage, and that is all.
@@French_Connection When both sides say the same thing happened, that is one of the few instances when you can be certain it did. The russians admitted to loosing a plane and another damaged. Quite frankly I am not sure what's worse to the russian public. A plane flying in a predictable flight path every day getting shot down by friendly fire. Or by enemy fire.
If friendly fire, how the hell did russian air defence not know what the aircraft was, if it was doing the same thing every day, for months, let alone IFF systems they SHOULD have! They cannot possibly be THAT incompetent.
A ukraine shoot down is more plausible, and there is precedent for this too! US operated F-117 shot down in serbia, because of Serb observers watching the airfield, seeing only the stealth bombers take off, and said bombers took a predictable path to get into serbia!
@@Destroyer_V0 Peskov denied that plane was shot down. Check the net.
@@French_Connection hey Ivan, maybe if you are going to try to converse in English you should learn the basics of english.
@@French_Connection So you are denying these aircraft losses, even though Russia admits them? If you wish to live in a fantasy world I guess that is your choice.
Or it could just be the A-50 crashing. And the IL-22 was a coincidence.
10 minutes after the A-50 goes down is a long time.
But Russia attributing it to friendly fire actually sounds worse than equipment failure.
I have seen a few videos where drones nearly intercepted a Su fighter. A drone flying low until it is close and the comes. The A50 is less agile than a fighter.
I can see it all now...Ukraine launches at the aircraft, Russian AD tries to intercept the missiles and shoots their own planes down. That would be frankly hysterical. But experience tells me that this is far more straightforward with really only one concept creating two divergent reactions.
First, the A50 and the IL22 are both not in their assigned airspace and closer to the front. Ukraine sees an opportunity and fires at one of them. Second (and at the same time), Russian air def sees planes out of position wrt to the Air Tasking Order and flight plan and fires on one or both.
It's like a whole new level of Smekalka there, not seen before even during the zenith of the old Cold War 😂
Could they have been shot down by an Ukraine flying Submarine ? Because they would not have seen that one coming?
The Serbs managed to shoot down a F-117 due to the US flying some repeated flight patterns during the 1999 NATO Kosovo bombings. It only makes sense that the US learned from that lesson and helped the Ukrainians set the Patriot missile trap on the A-50. Plus that A-50 was probably lit up like a Christmas tree from the EMF radiation it was emitting. That is a tremendous loss for the Russian forces.
1
Because of an open bomb bay... And because of a lot of hubris by the USAF
Wild-ass speculation:
• Ukraine shoots down A-50
• Elements of Russian air defence turn frothing mad and, within a few minutes of the A-50 being hit, are leaning towards firing on every blip in the AO (IFF? Must be spoofed!)
• Senior leadership shuts that down _quickly_ but not quite quickly enough, with at least one missile committed to attack, and ultimately hitting the IL-22
According to the TOP independent military and geopolitical experts there is NO evidence that the A-50 was shot down at all, let alone by Ukraine.
The Sea of AZOV is very shallow so if it was shot down we would have easily discovered wreckage for which none was ever presented.
The other aircraft was hit by something and the theory is that it was a U.S. aircraft involved providing targeting and guidance.
Wish and hope all you want, but even if it was shot down it will have no bearing on the outcome of the war.
As the experts have explained time after time, Russia has already won the attrition war.
Russia has time on its side as the U.S. and NATO countries are de-militarized of inventory, and the huge financial support flops as we see it happening now across all countries.
You might not understand, but the narrative of the loss is being prepared around you by the Biden administration and Corp Media. Just look around.
We need to step up like men with "balls' and admit OUR PROXY Ukraine was soundly defeated by Russia, and the U.S. with Boris Johnson scuttled a possible peace agreement between UKR and RU early 2022. (This is censored here, but WELL documented outside the U.S.)
The U.S. and NATO TOTALLY underestimated Russia's military capability.
Now they are considered the most powerful in the world with China right behind.
As former President Obama warned in a 2014 press conference, Russia has MILITARY ESCALATORY DOMINANCE just as China has MILITARY ESCALATORY DOMINANCE in its BACK YARD.
We should never believe the propaganda that our military is superior. It has grown old with 1980's upgraded equipment, can't recruit, you see pic's of soldiers walking around bases in high heels, and over 60% don't meet the fitness requirements, only 5 of the 11 carriers are currently operational with at least one significantly under-crewed, on and on...
After all, it has LOST EVERY major conflict since WWII. This includes Korea where many historians outside of the U.S. state that we would have lost if it continued.
The U.S. lost to Afghan Goat Herders in sandals with AK's and RPG's so don't EVER believe we could defeat Russia and China on the battlefield in WW, peer-level combat.
Nobody wants to talk about this being F16s and AIM-120s....
F-16s are not active in Ukraine yet, they are in the states training how to fly them.
@@kdrapertrucker They'd never say when they go active. I wouldn't be surprised to learn they are active and they are responsible for these shoot downs. The Russians could have seen them on radar and just htought they were SU-24s and not a threat. So, what's Fox-3 and Splash two in Ukrainian?
Thing is that the A50 would have seen an F16 on its radar and would have anticipated a possible launch.
Because it really doesn't make any sense, the F16 is a 4th gen fighter aircraft, and the damn flying radar dish would've seen it WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY before it could get a weapons solution. This is either Patriot Missile or an S-200 strike, both missiles were designed with shooting down AWACS in mind.