• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

UA-RU-NATO War | Discussions | Jun. 1st/Sep. 13th 2025

Status
Not open for further replies.
Socom7 said:
I would not go as far as to claim a "mortal blow". Depending on who you believe, it is a moderate to heavy blow to the bomber wing of the triad. However, strategic bombers - especially old ones - are of questionable utility in a full-scale nuclear war, and moreover Russia relies mainly on land-based ICBMS for its nuclear deterrence (which perhaps explains why they would risk their strategic bombers in a conventional war with Ukraine).

I do not expect this attack to trigger a nuclear war.
Click to expand...
We disagree. In the US even “old” strategic bombers are extremely useful. And so are Russians. They are used as MRE’s (missile ranger extenders) and are loaded with as many cruise missiles as it is possible.

Half of Russias operational fleet has just been wasted. Given their age and the production long shut down and even from areas no longer under Russian control, each airframe is irreplaceable. Quite frankly they no longer posses the airframes to provide worldwide deterrent and attacked missions with strategic bombers. That to me is a mortal blown. I don’t believe they’ll ever recover. I don’t believe they’ll even try. I think they’ll be replaced with drones and ballistic missiles launched from land, sea and perhaps from drone carriers. it’s mortal because it’s the end of man bombers, providing an equal of their triad.

Those airframes cannot and will not be replaced, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Torch said:
We disagree. In the US even “old” strategic bombers are extremely useful. And so are Russians. They are used as MRE’s (missile ranger extenders) and are loaded with as many cruise missiles as it is possible. Fact.

Half of Russias operational fleet has just been wasted. Given their age and the production long shut down and even from areas no longer under Russian control, each airframe is irreplaceable. Quite frankly they longer posses the airframes to provide worldwide deterrent and attacked missions with strategic bombers. That to me is a mortal blown. I don’t believe they’ll ever recover. I don’t believe they’ll even try. I think they’ll be replaced with drones and ballistic missiles launched from land and see perhaps from drone carriers. it’s mortal because it’s the end of man bombers, providing an equal of their triad.

Those airframes cannot and will not be replaced, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
This attack was a big deal there’s no way around it. The Russians don’t have the capability to build five new bombers a year let alone 40. Especially considering how much Russia is relying on glide bombs for strikes against Ukraine.
 
Snowfall said:
This attack was a big deal there’s no way around it
Click to expand...
There's no certainty about the destruction of 50% of the Russian aircraft. I've seen some sources say it was a third, others say several.

"A Ukrainian security source indicated that drones were smuggled into Russia and hidden in wooden structures placed on trucks. Their roofs were then opened remotely, allowing the drones to fly to their targets.

Photos shared by the SBU show numerous small black drones hidden in the false roofs of what appear to be shipping containers. The Russian ministry confirmed that the drones were not launched from Ukrainian territory, but "in the immediate vicinity of the airfields."

These claims are again difficult to verify.

Source: BFM

rmc.bfmtv.com

Ce que l'on sait des spectaculaires attaques de drones ukrainiens en Russie

L'Ukraine a mené dimanche une vaste attaque coordonnée de drones contre des aérodromes militaires en Russie, jusqu'en Sibérie, Moscou confirmant ensuite que plusieurs avions avaient "pris feu", à la veille de pourparlers attendus à Istanbul. Voici ce que l'on sait.
rmc.bfmtv.com rmc.bfmtv.com
 
GBS61 said:
There's no certainty about the destruction of 50% of the Russian aircraft. I've seen some sources say it was a third, others say several.

"A Ukrainian security source indicated that drones were smuggled into Russia and hidden in wooden structures placed on trucks. Their roofs were then opened remotely, allowing the drones to fly to their targets.

Photos shared by the SBU show numerous small black drones hidden in the false roofs of what appear to be shipping containers. The Russian ministry confirmed that the drones were not launched from Ukrainian territory, but "in the immediate vicinity of the airfields."

These claims are again difficult to verify.

Source: BFM

rmc.bfmtv.com

Ce que l'on sait des spectaculaires attaques de drones ukrainiens en Russie

L'Ukraine a mené dimanche une vaste attaque coordonnée de drones contre des aérodromes militaires en Russie, jusqu'en Sibérie, Moscou confirmant ensuite que plusieurs avions avaient "pris feu", à la veille de pourparlers attendus à Istanbul. Voici ce que l'on sait.
rmc.bfmtv.com rmc.bfmtv.com
Click to expand...
We're pretty confident on the number being 34%.
 
7gtz said:
❗️Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov held a telephone conversation with US Secretary of State Rubio and discussed the situation related to the crisis in Ukraine. Rubio expressed condolences to Lavrov over the victims of the bombings of railway infrastructure in the Bryansk and Kursk regions, the Russian Foreign Ministry reported

РИА Новости

❗️Лавров провел телефонный разговор с госсекретарем США Рубио, обсудили ситуацию, связанную с кризисом на Украине, сообщили в МИД России
t.me t.me

РИА Новости

❗️Рубио выразил Лаврову соболезнования в связи с жертвами в результате подрывов ж/д инфраструктуры в Брянской и Курской областях, сообщили в МИД России
t.me t.me
Click to expand...
Excuse my french, but what the actual fuck?
 
HoldFast said:
Ah, here's an estimate: U.S. Intelligence Estimated russian Cruise and Hypersonic Missile Arsenal, Production Rates on Decline | Defense Express

The fear is once you're all out of conventional munitions and all you have left are nukes...everything starts looking like a nail. Not saying we'll get there, but still a scenario.
Click to expand...
If Russia started to legitimately run out of missiles I have a feeling they would dig in and stay on the defensive until production has gone positive again, raising the level of conscription as well. Just my guess though. If Putin were to use a nuclear weapon I think it would only be on Kyiv or Lviv, to try and harm the efficiency of their government while pushing the meatwave we have seen so far x100, with all of the equipment shortcomings it would bring no matter the cost. Once again this is all just a speculative guess.
 
GBS61 said:
There's no certainty about the destruction of 50% of the Russian aircraft. I've seen some sources say it was a third, others say several.

"A Ukrainian security source indicated that drones were smuggled into Russia and hidden in wooden structures placed on trucks. Their roofs were then opened remotely, allowing the drones to fly to their targets.

Photos shared by the SBU show numerous small black drones hidden in the false roofs of what appear to be shipping containers. The Russian ministry confirmed that the drones were not launched from Ukrainian territory, but "in the immediate vicinity of the airfields."

These claims are again difficult to verify.

Source: BFM

rmc.bfmtv.com

Ce que l'on sait des spectaculaires attaques de drones ukrainiens en Russie

L'Ukraine a mené dimanche une vaste attaque coordonnée de drones contre des aérodromes militaires en Russie, jusqu'en Sibérie, Moscou confirmant ensuite que plusieurs avions avaient "pris feu", à la veille de pourparlers attendus à Istanbul. Voici ce que l'on sait.
rmc.bfmtv.com rmc.bfmtv.com
Click to expand...
Even a third of their bomber fleet is massive. Do you see the age of most of their bombers? That’s a good indication they’re not making more and it’s not like they can start building them over night. Every bomber you lose when you have 100 isn’t a huge deal when you only have 60 it starts to become a bigger deal. This is compounded by the fact they seem to lose another one every week or 2.
 
Snowfall said:
Even a third of their bomber fleet is massive. Do you see the age of most of their bombers? That’s a good indication they’re not making more and it’s not like they can start building them over night. Every bomber you lose when you have 100 isn’t a huge deal when you only have 60 it starts to become a bigger deal. This is compounded by the fact they seem to lose another one every week or 2.
Click to expand...
And yeah bombers aren’t the primary component of the Russian nuclear triad but losing one branch of that still makes less effective, especially when your submarine fleet is aging as well.
 
Torch said:
We disagree. In the US even “old” strategic bombers are extremely useful. And so are Russians. They are used as MRE’s (missile ranger extenders) and are loaded with as many cruise missiles as it is possible.
Click to expand...
Yep; that's all they're good for nowadays - range extenders for cruise missiles. However; Russia has been relying more heavily on drones in its attack waves, and this trend is expected to continue. See here:
1748814297693.png

Torch said:
Half of Russias operational fleet has just been wasted. Given their age and the production long shut down and even from areas no longer under Russian control, each airframe is irreplaceable. Quite frankly they no longer posses the airframes to provide worldwide deterrent and attacked missions with strategic bombers. That to me is a mortal blown. I don’t believe they’ll ever recover. I don’t believe they’ll even try. I think they’ll be replaced with drones and ballistic missiles launched from land, sea and perhaps from drone carriers. it’s mortal because it’s the end of man bombers, providing an equal of their triad.
Click to expand...
I agree, and this may possibly be in Russia's favor. There does not seem to be any reason to maintain a strategic bomber fleet, especially if you're trying to fight a major war on a budget (at Russia is currently doing). ICBMs/SLBMs are perfectly sufficient to maintain nuclear deterrence, and Russia would do well to divest itself of its obsolete strategic bomber wing (note: some of those airframes were built 70 years ago).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Torch
Peter Griffin said:
Excuse my french, but what the actual fuck?
Click to expand...
If you're concerned about the Trump administration enjoying the taste of Putin's male appendage, that's par for the course nowadays, and no reason for immediate concern. If, however, you're worried about the prospect of nuclear war, this is not something a talk between Lavrov and Rubio would portend. Instead, watch out for discussions between the Russian General Staff and the Pentagon*.

* Note: it's perfectly possible that these are ongoing, but kept under wraps.
 
An American diplomat should not be offering condolences to dictator regime. Like offering condolences to North Korea for storing their missiles in a farmers shack after we blow it up. It shows weakness and novice experience in diplomacy when dealing with the Enemy.
 
Socom7 said:
If you're concerned about the Trump administration enjoying the taste of Putin's male appendage, that's par for the course nowadays, and no reason for immediate concern. If, however, you're worried about the prospect of nuclear war, this is not something a talk between Lavrov and Rubio would portend. Instead, watch out for discussions between the Russian General Staff and the Pentagon*.

* Note: it's perfectly possible that these are ongoing, but kept under wraps.
Click to expand...
also remind you politicizing this does absolutely nothing constructive to the argument. Regardless of your political leaning this is not how our foreign policy with Russia should be going. Direct talks that actually bring a ceasefire are a pipedream at this point, and the fault lays at Putin's feet and his lack of willingness for compromise. Even if I was a Trump supporter this is not how I would want my elected officials offering condolences to a nation state that has maimed and killed Americans and our allies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom