25 Comments
User's avatar
Scott Townley's avatar

Impressively innovative and developed at unprecedented speed. I an ideal world we wouldn’t need such weapons, however we do not live in anything close to such. Meeting and exceeding Russia as an adversary militarily is the only way to achieve peace. Hopefully, this improves Ukraine’s chance to beat back Putin’s dictatorship and military incursions such that they may claim Crimea etc. as their own again.

Expand full comment
PhilsThom's avatar

It appears that Russia is still fighting the last war it had whilst the Ukrainians are innovating, adapting and thinking laterally.

Expand full comment
Jane Baker's avatar

Or someone else is,for them.

Expand full comment
MICHAEL'S CURIOUS WORLD's avatar

This is a huge innovation, as you say. Taiwan could just fill the waters around the island with front boats and missiles and make the Chinese aircraft and ships into targets.

I hope my own Australia copies Ukraine for coastal defence, particularly in the Torres Strait to the north and the least and West coats. Combine this with Ghostbat long-range surveillance drones and we could control our coastline.

Expand full comment
Robot Bender's avatar

Can you imagine if Ukraine can park some of these close to air bases asking the coast? Airborne, gear up, POW!

Expand full comment
sotoportego's avatar

First good news in a day filled with bad news, including the Romanian presidential election results. Thanks for this, Wes.

Expand full comment
Robert C Culwell's avatar

THIS

IS

HORRIFYING!

Expand full comment
Rob steffes's avatar

For the Russians, yes.

Expand full comment
Robert C Culwell's avatar

I fear that this leap 🤖 📡🎚️⚙️ 🎛️ brings danger for us all....

Expand full comment
Jane Baker's avatar

It's certainly very very stupid.

Expand full comment
alan king's avatar

It is impressive how the Ukrainians are adapting their tactics in the face of an adversary that is numerically, superior. If not already, could they also use such a platform to launch ground attacks on high value targets? It would be limited due to the amount of weaponry per platform, but still would that be a possibility? Or is that even feasible?

Expand full comment
RNDM31's avatar

I've a sneaking suspicion that Sweden and Finlanld, with their labyrinthine coastal archipelagos, will be EXTREMELY interested in these developments. As will for slightly different reasons their Baltic neighbours across the narrow sea who share the problematic eastern neighbour but boast very open and exposed coastlines.

Expand full comment
Ann Spragens's avatar

Stunning.

Expand full comment
Hunterson7's avatar

This horrible war has become, for military tactics and weapons, a Spanish Civil War on blood thirsty steroids.

Expand full comment
Simon Chivers's avatar

Good point. Is the development all their own or is there "assistance" ?

Expand full comment
Tony's avatar

This is just amazing.

Thanks for this breakdown, a great read.

Expand full comment
Jane's avatar

Viva Ukraine!

Expand full comment
Jane Baker's avatar

This sideshow may be boys fun but it means absolutely nothing. The 'conflict' is a mere sideshow now the 'War' has been won. It's all over bar the shouting. But the boys toys will keep the big boys happy playing for a lot longer while the whole country gets looted and everything taken away.

Expand full comment
Sarcastosaurus's avatar

Wes,

please mind, that the AIM-9s in question - AIM-9Ms - were originally develloped for the US Navy (i.e. that's the AIM-9D/G/H/L/M-family branch, as opposed to the AIM-9E/J/N/P of the US Air Force). Sure, the US Air Force eventually swallowed its pride and bought a 'Navy product', i.e. introduced AIM-9Ls and then AIM-9Ms to own service.

...however, the point is that such Sidewinders were always meant to be deployed from aircraft operating from decks of US Navy's aircraft carriers, and thus meant to be deployed under circumstances including the corrosion caused by salt water.

Of course, it's a bit different when one is deploying them from aircraft operated from decks of aircraft carriers, which are 'still' at least 18-20 metres above the sea level... to what they have to endure when installed on a Magura-7. 'But', already the Falklands War (when Royal Navy's SHARs were often parked on decks of HMS Invincible and HMS Hermes, in conditions of 100% humidity) has proven them as 'salt water resistant'. And that was in 1982, shortly after the service entry of the AIM-9L...

....which is bringing me to your description of the sea as 'dynamic' surrounding: the sky is no smooth medium. The air is in the constant state of flux/movement (see 'meteorology'), and thus turbulent.

Then add to this the vibrations (both mechanic and those caused by the sound of their engines and other systems).

...and then mind that the lower an aircraft is flying, the more vibrations there are (because the air is denser at lower altitudes)...

Bottom line: the air is not less dynamic environment than the sea.

Actually a Magura-7 is more likely to offer more space for installations necessary to operate stuff like AIM-9 or R-73 than, for exmaple, any airframe of something like F-16 or MiG-29 do. So much so, at some point we've got to expect the SBU/DIU to follow in fashion of the Houthis, and start installing R-27Rs on its Maguras (which, of course, would require the installation of a radar taken from one or another MiG-29 or Su-27, which in turn is going to require much more capable power supply, and much more capable fire-control etc....)

Expand full comment
Joey_Blau's avatar

OK ! Now let's see a AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) launched from that baby!!!

Expand full comment
Ricardo Castillo's avatar

💪🏽💪🏽💪🏽

Expand full comment