How has Western equipment fared in the Ukrainian counteroffensive? Last I checked, the Leopard 2 and Challenger were relegated to backline support because they weren't effective on the offensive and that Ukraine is still struggling with air defence (given that Russia has been tossing around FABs with impunity). The real takeaway from this conflict is that artillery is king and that tanks/planes can't keep up in development pace with modern interceptors like drones and MANPADS. WW2's doctrine of large-scale combined arms and blitzkrieg tactics may be a thing of the past.

[–] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The only country on this planet that is currently capable is SEAD is the USA. No single or combined European power/s can put together a strike package that can significantly degrade an enemies air defenses. I don’t think China has the capacity yet and Russia obviously doesn’t have it.

I don’t expect Ukraine even with Western hand me down Vipers to take down Russian air defenses. They may be able to contest for air superiority over a sector of the battlefield but it would be costly.

Stealth is a huge component of modern Western air warfare doctrine that allows fighters to operate in contested airspace. But stealth isn’t SEAD.

For everyone else, light mobile artillery, long range rockets, AA and drones are going to be the way forward.

[–] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

Stealth is still susceptible to infrared, which is what Ukraine was using to shoot down Russian aircraft at the start of the war.

If your CAS needs to get into visual range, it's fucked. If it doesn't, the usefulness of stealth gets called into question (particularly because, y'know, the entire point of CAS is to have a big bomb to drop on someone, and strapping that to a mounting point ruins your stealth profile).