- cross-posted to:
- ukraine@sopuli.xyz
- cross-posted to:
- ukraine@sopuli.xyz
You must log in or # to comment.
That doesn’t sound cost efficient.
Edit: Some are missing the point… I’m totally in favor for intercepting those bastards. But in sum I believe that stuff like skynex (30-35mm shrapnel ammo) or manpads are more cost efficient. Poland produces a leading solution with its Piorun manpad.
You can’t really put a price on sovereignty or human life.
No. My edit above makes that clear, too. But in a long run you cannot spent costly manufactured, even scarce rockets to down cheap drones, or even decoy drones.
It will deplete the stocks which are getting filled back too slowly. That’s why the Gepard is such a success in Ukraine. It catches all the slow moving targets at minimal cost.
Those dutch F-35s are already deployed in that region for this exact purpose. It’s not like they flew over there from the Netherlands just for these drones.
I edited my comment, but scrambling F-35s and wasting rockets on cheaper drones, will never be effective. I added some infos above to make the point more clear.
Probably cheaper than letting them crash and explode in Poland, triggering article 5.
Maybe. But then again, maybe not in the long run.
This is a quite comprehensive video, but it does touch on the economics of defense vs offense. But it’s a tough watch if you’re not used to it.
Should 5k€ worth of missiles with million€ with of equipment.
Not sure I would be bragging about it.
The EU should update their war handbook. It’s not the 90s anymore.
That first sentence gave me an anyeurism. Was it supposed to be “Shot 5k€ worth of drones with millions of € worth of equipment” ?
Yeah. That makes more sense than whatever I wrote 🤷
Both of those costs are irrelevant. The important question is what does the thing those missiles were going to hit otherwise cost. There is a difference between hitting a busy hospital complex and an empty field. If the missiles would have killed someone (seems likely!) I’m demanding you put a cost on human life as well before you ask if it was worth the cost.
Those costs are very relevant in war. If it’s cheaper to attack than to defend, then an attacker can just keep attacking until the defender is no longer able to defend.
If you value human life to the point that nothing but the best will do, you’d have tanks helping every child cross the street. Valuing human life means efficiently using resources to defend it.
Even if defense costs more, if you are a larger economy you can still outlast the attacker and win. And economy isn’t even the right measure as being attacked tends to create a willingness to defend at higher costs than an attacker is willing to spend even if their economy is on paper bigger.
Which is to say the most important question for the defender is the value of what you defend, followed by the likeliness of an attack. Only after knowing those numbers can you ask how much you are willing to spend on defense and if it isn’t worth it.
You make assumptions that are pretty wild…
Even if defense costs more, if you are a larger economy you can still outlast the attacker and win.
Wow!
You realize that behind these drones, you have the Chinese economy? Is the Polish economy larger?!?
The point I’m making is exactly the reason why Ukraine was able to survive until now. They have been investing heavily in cheap, large scale technologies, while Russia started a war “old school”.
Now this is changing, with Russia relying more and more on drones.
You realize that behind these drones, you have the Chinese economy? Is the Polish economy larger?!?
In this case, the Polish and Netherlands armies - so probably closer to be the EU or NATO.
The point I’m making is exactly the reason why Ukraine was able to survive until now. They have been investing heavily in cheap, large scale technologies, while Russia started a war “old school”.
I’m sure Ukraine would have had lost much more by now, if they didn’t get a lot of help from the outside. However, I don’t know how much they have spent compared to how much the help they have been given.
I was with you until you “demanded” shit.
Hey they got 4 out of 21!!
How could they fly over most of Ukraine undetected?
Some flew through Belarus, but also why wouldn’t they? Ukrainians obviously concentrated on those going for the cities. What a weird question.
why wouldn’t they?
Because Ukraine seemed to shoot down most of the drones. I had assumed that they use Helicopters to follow them and shoot them down.
Ukraine does a lot of different things to shoot down drones. Drones do a lot of things to avoid all of those things. We call this an arms race.
While helicopters have been tried to shoot down drones they are not used very often because they don’t work well compared to other options.
They do not.
Mobilise 100,000,000€ jet, and fire a 100,000€ missile to shoot down a 5,000€ drone
Winning
The Russian Shaheds probably cost on the order of $20-50k. The damage they can do can easily be greater than one sidewinder.
Russian invasion would be way more expensive
You rather they bomb 1,000,000€ buildings and kill 1000 lives (worth infinite)?
Not at all, we just need to be prepared for when they escalate.
Economy often wins or loses a war.
If they keep sending cheap drones and drain our military budget, and we don’t do much in return they’re gaining ground
Debating the cost effectiveness of political moves.
