this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2025
492 points (99.4% liked)
Ukraine
10095 readers
414 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
Community Rules
πΊπ¦ Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
π»π€’No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
π₯Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
π·Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human involved must be flagged NSFW
β Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam (includes charities)
- No content against Finnish law
π³ Defense Aid π₯
π³ Humanitarian Aid βοΈβοΈ
πͺ Volunteer with the International Legionnaires
See also:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I was seeing from other online spaces that this would be about 30% of Russias strategic bomber fleet and it's accompanying aircraft like their AWACs that got hit.
If that's the case that's a staggeringly bad day for the Russian air force, which means it's a good fucking day.
For what I thought I knew, they only had 3 (some say they had only one but I doubt it) airworthy AWACS (the A50) so losing one makes it impossible to patrool & cover even the most important parts of russia.
Exactly. This is a massive strike that we fully won't know the repercussions of for a little bit. We'll just have to see how their optempo changes. It honestly could be even worse for them. They have 120 of those bombers, period. Meaning some of them might not even be air worthy at all and are just spare parts.
I feel like the AWACs is a way bigger loss than all those obsolete bombers.
Those bombers have been wantonly dropping cruise missiles of to hit Ukraine. Both are significant.
Yeah, because powerful countries for better or worse did not decisively intercede to destroy them.
Oh cmon dude. There are actual reasons that the west escalated their aid over a time.
It's not a reason I agree with, but their logic in doing so is also entirely justifiable.
Thank you, and wow, that's some good fucking news.
30% less bombers means drone and missile attacks into Ukraine can be significantly decreased that's one of the biggest developments since the start of the war.
@Bonifratz @AnalogNotDigital I was interested in this - can you share where this figure came from / how calculated?
They have roughly 120 strategic bombers in their air force. 40 of those is 33%.
@AnalogNotDigital Ah I found BBC, Reuters and AP quoting the Ukranian SBU " SBU officially confirmed it had carried out the strikes, saying that "34% of [Russia's] strategic cruise missile carriers" were hit" - bbc.com/news/articles/c1ld7ppr⦠- and that " Tu-95 and Tu-22M3, as well as A-50 were destroyed" - Claims not yet independently verified. - It sounds like a massive hit but I have a feeling that we might see independent claims downgrading the figure a bit. The "strategic cruise missile carriers" is also a bit of qualifier. I would assume that there are independent estimates of what usable air power Russia has. I'm not seeing those chime in yet.
I think the "strategic cruise missile carriers" bit is just a bad translation, it's clear in ukranian he means "we blew up aircraft capable of launching cruise missiles" and then is discussing the specific aircraft destroyed as separate figures.
@Bonifratz @AnalogNotDigital Do you have sources for those stats?