Submitted by Caratteraccio t3_11d9r6y in worldnews
GreenStrong t1_ja7vpwl wrote
Reply to comment by Patient-Lifeguard363 in Anti-war partisans in Belarus claim to have damaged Russian plane | Belarus by Caratteraccio
From the article:
>One of the nine Awacs of the Russian aerospace forces worth $330m (was destroyed),
It is a big flying radar platform. In a modern air force, which Russia never had, it serves as the eyes of the entire force, identifying hostile and friendly aircraft at great distances. Ground based radars are limited by the curvature of the earth; they can't see over the horizon. The fact that Russia only had nine to start with is absurd.
It seems like they're trying to develop a new one, and hoping to introduce it to service in 2026. It will probably be like their T-14 tank, which was "completed" in 2014, and so far hasn't entered general production as an actual weapon.
Brigadier_Beavers t1_ja7z8kx wrote
This seems to be their thing. Make a dozen~ of the new 'super weapon' or machine and call it a day, then freak out when its shown to be decent at best and they need hundreds of them and cant make them quickly.
nagrom7 t1_ja88fqt wrote
Yeah but they look good at parades and PR events though.
DryPresentation3763 t1_ja8446m wrote
> The fact that Russia only had nine to start with is absurd.
Nine is about the same number China has available of their most advanced AWACS. For comparison sake, the US as 31 E-3 Sentry aircraft in service currently. The Navy has an even higher number E-2 Hawkeyes performing the same role for carriers.
OneRougeRogue t1_ja8b97w wrote
>The fact that Russia only had nine to start with is absurd.
And there are unofficial reports that have said of the original nine, only four of them were in flyable condition (the rest have been grounded for years either needing repairs, or cannibalized to repair the functioning four planes).
That four is now down to three.
GreenStrong t1_ja8cbfq wrote
Reasonable amateur's reaction to this comment thirteen months ago:
Bullshit. The Soviet/ Russian army is enormous and fairly sophisticated, they probably have dozens of flying radar platforms
Reasonable amateur's reaction to this comment today:
Bullshit. No way they have four working aircraft. Do you know the value of the scrap metal in those things?
_AutomaticJack_ t1_ja8opd9 wrote
It is important to note here, that 4 is basically the minimum you can have and maintain a constant presence. You drop below 4 and your going to have coverage gaps; in not immediately then intermittently... IIRC at 3 you loose coverage at maintenance intervals and at 2 you can't do 24 hr coverage anymore.
sync-centre t1_ja9fi8h wrote
Russia is also a large country to cover. They will now have to decide which front they want to patrol.
isawagoose t1_ja80ykj wrote
>Ground based radars are limited by the curvature of the earth; they can't see over the horizon.
Same with these. They just make the horizon further away.
basaltgranite t1_ja874ml wrote
A lot farther away. At 10 ft, the horizon is ~4.2 miles (6.8 km) away. At 35,000 ft, it's ~230 miles (~370 km) away.
flamehead2k1 t1_ja89nxo wrote
You mean they don't defy the laws of physics?
elliam t1_ja9g0ql wrote
What nonsense. They are just more advanced than ground radar and can see farther. There’s no curve.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments