apparently not, at least as of late last month
Russia shot down several of its own aircraft in the initial days of the invasion of Ukraine, resulting in a dearth of willing pilots needed for Moscow to achieve air superiority, The Financial Times reported…
Ukrainian forces on the battlefield also witnessed Russians downing Moscow’s own helicopters and planes, according to Vadym Skibitsky, deputy head of Ukrainian military intelligence…
Experienced pilots have been in short supply for Moscow, with its air force starting the invasion with “fewer than 100 fully trained and current pilots…” The think tank said Russia began committing instructor pilots to combat operations, hindering its ability to train anyone else.
A couple of quotes from the article posted by @Johnny_L.A , bolding by me. They have 100s of modern aircraft but less than 100 pilots? Talk about poor planning. Makes me wonder if all the modern aircraft only exist on paper, like a lot of Russia’s supposed great military.
But it’s not just the aircraft that Russia needs. Experienced pilots have been in short supply for Moscow, with its air force starting the invasion with “fewer than 100 fully trained and current pilots,” according to the Royal United Services Institute, a British think tank, Ukrainian military assessments.
Moscow’s failure to control the skies comes despite it fielding hundreds of fourth-generation fighters and advanced aircraft like the Su-57, which British intelligence said in January had not yet been sent on missions within Ukraine’s airspace.
They may have plenty of pilots, but few that are ‘fully trained and current’. ‘Fully trained’ would mean that they have mastered their type of aircraft. But training fades, so pilots would have to have recurrent training in their aircraft. (I keep saying ‘their aircraft’. That is, the aircraft to which they are assigned and trained. In the civilian world, you’d have a type certificate for each turbine-powered aircraft or aircraft over 12,500 pounds, for example.) Recurrent training requires resources, and just maintaining flight currency is expensive.
I’m pretty sure I mentioned that the last time Russian pilots came up. Flight training is stupidly expensive. The US spends millions training pilots, even for their transport aircraft. You could cut that cost a bit, but fundamentally, it’s expensive. Pilots learn by doing, and the physical costs of flying a military plane are quite steep. Fuel, practice weapons, ground crew, maintenance. It all adds up. You spend the money or the planes start breaking down. You spend the money or the pilots lose their edge.
Poorly trained pilots flying badly maintained planes that are identical to the opposing force’s aircraft over poorly trained ground troops with MANPADs.
What could possibly go wrong?
Wholesome:
I get the training costs, but churning out a couple of hundred fourth generation aircraft isn’t cheap. Even if they just sit on the ground most of the time they still need maintenance. Just think of all the problems they had with undermaintained vehicles at the start of the war. Imagine that translated to fighter/bombers.
Hopefully, everything. Good summation, tho.
Point scored to Ukraine, again, in the social media battle. The tank is a nice touch.
If they aren’t flying, you save money on fuel and wear on the aircraft, but what else? Groud crew and pilots get paid, whether they are moving chocks or not.
Well, sort of - but not exactly. It’s an IFF problem for sure, but it should be kept in mind that the Russian front line aircraft are relatively more modern and capable than their Ukrainian equivalents. It’s why Ukraine will eventually need a new supply of modern combat aircraft to keep up.
Also, if they’re not flying, how much real work is the ground crew doing? Will people trained on “fixing” planes that rarely actually fly be competent to maintain planes that are actually being used in combat? Training matters all the way down the line, and the best training is always the stuff that comes the closest you can get to the Real Thing.
Saving a few bucks in training costs you blood in war.
The key here is that they look the same. One Su-27 looks just like another Su-27, and when you are on the ground with an Verba, you shoot whatever flies over. Sucks if it’s one of yours.
I can see that.
USN gunners fired on their own aircraft when the roundels had a big red spot in the middle, resembling the Japanese roundels.
And it’s just incredible that Russia has not been able to fix the communications over the course of a full year. Instead of improving what they have, they seem determined to pull equipment out of decades long storage to use. I read somewhere that semaphore flags have been recovered from captured Russian vehicles. What’s next? Smoke signals?
Semaphore might be nice for the front of your blocked caravan to speak to the rear without radio giving away your position.
So that’s why they had the flags! And the pop-off tank tops solve the smoke signal issue too!
It would, but nobody was issued blankets to make the smoke signals. The signals all just say one letter over and over.
Russia was already in a population decline. This is going to harm the long term survival of the country.
Especially considering the demographics of who’s getting killed/maimed, or getting out of the country before they can be drafted.
So was Ukraine. Ukraine has also lost a lot of people as refugees, although those may return if the war ever ends. And some of them may return to join the army.
I saw recently that about 700,000 Russian men of draft-eligible age have left the country. And a more recent report that Russia will start drafting students, which means even more young men leaving. This is not going to end well for Russian demographics.