Forbes: Russia needs to destroy only two bases to behead the British Air Force

6

The Royal Joint Institute for Defense Studies of Great Britain (RUSI) studied the situation and gave Russia useful advice on how to behead the British Air Force in the event of a major war, writes the American magazine Forbes.

It turns out that it is enough to destroy only two bases on "Foggy Albion" and the Royal Air Force of Great Britain (RAF) will virtually cease to exist, having lost most of its personnel and aircraft.



The RAF now has eight fighter squadrons. Seven fly on twin-engine multi-functional fighters of the fourth generation Eurofighter Typhoon (160 pieces) and one on single-engine stealth multi-functional fighter-bombers of the fifth generation F-35 (15 pieces).

The problem is that all Typhoons are at two poorly defended bases - Lossiemouth in Scotland and Coningsby in Lincolnshire. At the same time, the F-35 are based at the Marham base in Norfolk.

The concentration of all Typhoon squadrons at two main operating bases, where there is no ground-based air defense, means that they are vulnerable to attack by long-range missiles in the event of a major conflict, especially from Russia

- says analyst Justin Bronk.

Moreover, Moscow is already deploying long-range cruise and ballistic missiles, such as the Caliber, Avangard and Kh-101. The Russian Navy is firing "Caliber" from ships and submarines. Russian strategic bombers carry the Kh-101, and the Avangard (hypersonic intercontinental missile system) is in service with the ground forces of the Strategic Missile Forces. And there is simply nothing to intercept all this.

The UK has no missile defense of its own. Therefore, in case of war, it will have to be borrowed. But if the enemy strikes before the ally's missile defense appears on the territory of Great Britain, the consequences will be dire.

The RAF is unable to quickly repair damaged aircraft or replace destroyed aircraft with new ones. In this matter, London's possibilities are extremely limited.
  • Royal Air Force
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

VK Zen Telegram
6 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir Tuzakov
    Vladimir Tuzakov
    +3
    30 July 2020 18: 54
    Yes, let the Royal Air Force fly until "blue in the face", no one is going to fight and will not (unless somewhere in the outskirts of the Third World). Throwing in to support the pants of military tension and intimidation of Western citizens by Russia ...
  2. 123
    123
    +2
    30 July 2020 19: 25
    The RF Ministry of Defense does not need such advice. Want to be useful to someone? Let them turn to Beijing, they have just another exacerbation, they wanted to send the British aircraft carrier to Asia, there is a heated debate about passports. Let the Chinese comrades take care of them, the Englishwoman is now shitting on them.
  3. Binder
    Binder
    0
    30 July 2020 20: 04
    Such fake exhaust strongly reminds me of the notorious historical call to fight "with little blood, a mighty blow on foreign territory." What this resulted, I think, is known to everyone ...
    1. Lawyer
      Lawyer
      -1
      31 July 2020 06: 42
      Nobody is interested there. They also do not want to fight. But apart from the mighty fleet and the once again invincible army, they, the poor, have nothing to be proud of.
      Not drunk policemen with bottles in their hands? :))))
  4. commbatant
    commbatant
    0
    30 July 2020 22: 42
    If the British Air Force (warplanes) are deployed on a pair of VVBs, this does not mean that the UK does not have other airfields to disperse its combat aircraft ....

    Aerodrome network. On the territory of the UK, there are currently about 200 airfields of various classes (including 25 with unpaved runways), 100 of which are suitable for modern aviation... Most of them are located in the southeast and south of the country. The command of the national air force has at its disposal up to 50 airfields, some of which are constantly used for basing combat, military transport and auxiliary aviation. For air traffic control in the aerodrome areas, surveillance radar stations were installed: AR-1, SR.787, S.511, AN / FPN-47 and AN'CPN-18.

    Foreign military review. 2010, No. 9, P.44-53

    http://factmil.com/publ/strana/velikobritanija/voenno_vozdushnye_sily_velikobritanii_2010/9-1-0-392

    Air defense system of Great Britain

    https://topwar.ru/110002-sistema-pvo-velikobritanii-chast-5.html
  5. Natan bruk
    Natan bruk
    -2
    31 July 2020 00: 21
    The editors' search for an article in the Western press about the paranoia of the West in front of the "Russian threat" and the increase in the tone of the jingoistic patriots was crowned with another success. Only this is exactly the same in the other direction - in Russia there is no less paranoia in front of the "Western threat". But what " big war "? Who needs it? Russia is definitely not, it would have to get out of the crisis, lift the sanctions (which are actually very painful, despite the vigorous statements about the growth of milk yields and ears of wheat, although there are no really serious sanctions and hardly will be, since the harm from such sanctions for the West will outweigh the benefits), achieve recognition of Crimea, etc. What is the "big war"? In the same way, the West absolutely does not need it. Why would he attack Russia? Win it, and then feed 146 million, clean up the infrastructure, bring the standards of health care, social security, etc. to the west? No resources will recoup this. I'm not even talking about the fact that the "big war" will leave both sides in ruins. Therefore, both the article itself and its reprint are nonsense.