Ukraine update: Russian 'super weapons' are a no-show on the battlefield

This post was originally published on this site

Though the videos supposedly showing a glowing white streak tearing across the Ukrainian sky are apparently fake, it does seem that Russia has deployed some form of hypersonic missile in Ukraine. Two of them. Out of about 1,300 missiles launched into Ukraine. Those two may not actually be the tricky, defense-dodging Kh-47M2 Kinzhal that Russia first showed off in 2017, and are more likely the air-launched 9M723 Iskander-M first hinted at in 2009, but still—two real missiles.

Which sets them far above the rest of Russia’s “super weapons,” which are simply missing from the battlefields of Ukraine.

The MiG-29 that both Russia and Ukraine are flying is a third-generation air superiority fighter, designed in the 1970s. The MiG-29 was always an amazingly nimble plane in close combat, and the current version have been updated with all new electronics, and even more agile flight controls. It’s still more than capable of taking out relatively slow ground support aircraft like the Su-25 (which dates from 1975), and the Su-34 fighter / bomber. As a dedicated air-superiority fighter, whose primary task is taking out other planes, the updated MiG-29 can even give a good account of itself against the fourth-generation Su-27. (Note: Not all fourth-generation fighters are by any means equal—the U.S. F-15 has an air-to-air combat record of 104 kills to no losses.)

But Russia is supposed to have something much better—the Su-57 “Felon.” With stealth that’s supposed to equal the F-22 and maneuverability better than an F-35, the Su-57 was introduced back in 2010 and was intended to replace all those older Soviet-era planes in the Russian arsenal. It’s the first real “clean sheet” design since the end of the USSR, and a staple of defense contractors talking up Russia’s growing military power.

So why aren’t Su-57s ripping across the skies of Ukraine, unseen by radar, unbothered by aging air defenses, and dunking on those three-generations-behind MiG-29s? Well, that’s because original plans to buy hundreds of these planes got scaled back to just a few dozen. As of today, only 14 Su-57s have been built, and 10 of those are prototype aircraft used for testing. Russia has four (4) actual production planes. None of which it seems willing to risk over Ukraine.

There’s a similar story on the ground. The T-80U and T-90 series tanks may be frequently touted as “Russia’s most modern equipment,” but it’s not supposed to be that way. In 2010, Russia first showed off prototypes for the T-14 Armata tank, designed as a direct competitor to the U.S. M1 Abrams (which itself dates back to 1979). With a new gun that outclassed anything else on treads, a 2000hp engine, multiple missile launchers, and a sophisticated armor system that includes elements of stealth, the T-14 is a beast of a tank. Oh, and it’s also been designed with a more complex tread system and lighter frame that is supposed to, among other things, keep it from getting stuck in the mud.

In 2012, Russia announced that it had ordered 2,300 of the new tanks, which would roll onto the battlefield between 2015 and 2020. Seven more prototypes appeared in Russia’s annual Victory Parade in 2018 — though one of them had to be towed away after the fancy new suspension system either broke down or proved to be too difficult for the driver to operate. 

So why aren’t these mechanized monsters out there terrorizing Ukrainian farmers? That’s because the real number of T-14 tanks delivered so far is … none. A 22 tank “pilot batch” is slated to come out before the end of the year, but don’t count on it. There have been continuous delays in development, and that was before sanctions cut off supplies to Russian manufacturers.

The truth about Russia’s superweapons is that they are super-rare. If Russia was able to take the field with the army it brags about—and the army that defense contractors in the U.S. count on to scare up more funding—things in Ukraine might be very different. In reality, developing sophisticated weapons systems takes time. The Joint Strike Fighter competition that led to the F-35 started in 1997. The plane wasn’t officially in service until 2015. Several U.S. weapons systems have faced infamous delays, and quite a few “next great things” have been cancelled before ever reaching service.

But in Russia’s case, their system is plagued by the same problem that has trucks breaking down and soldiers carrying antique rifles: Theft. The money being shoveled into development of new weapons has to make it through so many levels of kleptocracy, that it’s a wonder anything ever moves at all.

Going back to those T-80 tanks, Russia theoretically has over 4,000 of them. Only most of those tanks are “in storage.” Only around 480 are considered to be active. Considering the state of those rolling down the road, it’s hard to imagine how neglected, picked over, and inoperable the “in storage” tanks really are. Assuming they haven’t been sold for scrap metal. 

Of those 480 active tanks, about 310 rolled into Ukraine. Of those 310, 84 have now been verified as destroyed, captured, or otherwise lost to service. Those are just the ones that survived well enough to count, not including those reduced to fragments when their own ammo exploded.

Most of the tanks Russia brought to Ukraine are actually T-72s, which entered service in 1969. These are the tanks that Russia deploys everywhere, with a supposed 2,000 T-72s up and rolling (minus the 192 confirmed lost in Ukraine). Which raises a real question: If Russia has 200 T-90s and another 4,000 T-80s sitting “in storage,” why does it keep 2,000 older, less capable T-72s rolling around? Why did it also bring to Ukraine a selection of 1950s-era T-64 tanks that no one thought were still running?

Do those “in storage” tanks actually exist? Just how long has Russia been playing the game of vastly inflating its capability?

Daily Kos readers have now raised over $1.98 million to assist Ukrainian refugees.
Help keep that support going.