- Joined
- Nov 21, 2006
- Messages
- 22,890
- Reaction score
- 32,220
Well, Russia would be facing the same problem with their Air Force. U.S. air bases have a pretty good defense systems in place to take down any incoming threats. Look at Israel. Also, the US had B-1 missions to Iraq and Afghanistan that left and returned to the US in a 24-hour period.
US air defence is highly over-rated. The Iranians landed over 30 hits on an Israeli airbase even though the US had an entire carrier battle group with Aegis ships parked off the coast to reinforce Israel's Iron Dome system.
Aegis and the SM-series missiles are the best air defence system that the US has, and the Iranians still got through both it and the Iron Dome. Russian missiles are a couple generations ahead of what the Iranians have, the US has no chance in hell of stopping Zircon or Oreshnik.
As for hitting Russian airbases, the problem is NATO doesn't really have any long range missiles other than the Tomahawk. The Crimean peninsula and some of the bases in the Black Sea region could be hit with HIMARS, everything else will require Tomahawks. Then there's getting though Russian air defence systems, they currently have around a 80-90% shoot down rate vs. ATACMS and Storm Shadow missiles, that rate will be even higher against Tomahawks since they don't have the stealth features of the Storm Shadows or the speed of the ATACMS. And finally, all Russian planes have rough field capability so even if the airbases are shot up they can still fly off of highways and even dirt roads like the Ukrainians have been doing for the past couple years.
Last edited: