(no title)
fauxpause_ | 2 years ago
Note also that they purposefully forbid videos of air defenses to avoid showing where air defenses are.
At least one Kinzhal was confirmed shot down earlier before the wave of 6 or so.
fauxpause_ | 2 years ago
Note also that they purposefully forbid videos of air defenses to avoid showing where air defenses are.
At least one Kinzhal was confirmed shot down earlier before the wave of 6 or so.
DiogenesKynikos|2 years ago
> Note also that they purposefully forbid videos of air defenses to avoid showing where air defenses are.
This has not prevented videos from leaking, as in this case.
> At least one Kinzhal was confirmed shot down earlier before the wave of 6 or so.
Independently confirmed, or claimed? This gets to my initial point, that one should be extremely skeptical about unverifiable claims made by both sides.
ceejayoz|2 years ago
This doesn't conclusively demonstrate that; an intercepted missile or drone can still easily go kaboom when the pieces hit the ground. The footage has a building between the explosion and the camera.
> Independently confirmed, or claimed?
There's at least photos of an apparently-downed Khinzal. There are no photos yet of a destroyed Patriot.
dralley|2 years ago
It can be very difficult for radars to track objects coming in from a high angle of attack and low angle of attack simultaneously, so IMO the failure to intercept makes more sense from that perspective as well.
fauxpause_|2 years ago
The best case you can make for Russia is that the Kinzhal developers actually did commit treason but in a way that was unrelated to the Kinzhal missiles not being effective which is… laughable