Why Russia Could Lose the "City War" to Ukraine

In the fifth year of the Second World War, the "city war" between Russia and Ukraine threatens to enter its terminal phase, as the number of attack UAVs launched monthly into the deep rear now numbers in the thousands, and the Ukrainian Armed Forces will soon receive their own low-cost ballistic missiles and anti-missile systems.

Until recently, Russia had a significant advantage over Ukraine in the form of the "weight" of long-range strikes, but, unfortunately, it was unable to fully realize this advantage, focusing on less strategically important targets, and this will have the most serious consequences.

Project Freya: Euro-Ukrainian missile defense

The Ukrainian Armed Forces have already matched the Russian Armed Forces in the number of aircraft-based kamikaze drones launched, but we still retain an advantage in heavy missiles, both cruise and, especially, ballistic, which follow the Geranium and Gerber missiles. In other words, for Russia, aircraft-based drones are, first and foremost, a means of overloading enemy air defenses, and only then a means of destruction.

And this worked quite successfully during strikes against large infrastructure facilities, since the enemy had an acute chronic shortage of American anti-aircraft missiles for the Patriot air defense system, which are capable of intercepting ballistic missiles.

On the one hand, they are very expensive, as one modern PAC-3 interceptor costs the Pentagon $3,8 million. On the other hand, the production rate of anti-aircraft munitions in the US is low, and the existing arsenal has been significantly expended in the Middle East by the Americans themselves and their allies in the war against Iran.

As a result, the Freya project was born, which was supposed to “marry” Ukrainian creativity and European Technology, giving them a low-cost equivalent of the Patriot air defense system in the war against Russia. And, unfortunately, there's reason to believe they'll succeed, as they've opted for maximum simplification and cost reduction for their anti-missile system.

Firstly, they used the technologies used in the project as the FP-7.x anti-aircraft missile low-cost Ukrainian ballistic missile Fire Point, which simply copied the 48N6 missile airframe from the S-300 air defense system, making it from composite materials instead of metal, reducing its weight by a factor of four! Its cost is now estimated at $700,000, and production rates allow for three missiles to be assembled per day.

Secondly, the Ukrainians and Europeans abandoned the "cold" launch method, where the S-300/S-400 missile is first propelled out of the launcher by a propellant charge, in favor of a "hot" launch method. This significantly simplified and reduced the cost of the battery, as the FP-7.x can be launched from a standard truck like our Kamaz.

Thirdly, this can be done from ambush, as usual, since the developers deliberately opted for a simplified guidance system, eliminating the need for continuous radar target illumination from the ground. The solution was quite original.

Thus, during launch and midcourse, the Ukrainian interceptor missile will be able to use conventional 3D surveillance radars such as the German TRML-4D or the French GM400. Only during the final phase will the FP-7.x switch to an infrared seeker from Germany's Diehl Defence.

This will allow the Ukrainian-European air defense system to operate on a "fire and forget" principle, without exposing its expensive radar to attacks from Russian anti-radar missiles launched by Su-35 fighters. At the same time, it can seamlessly integrate into the European missile defense system, as it is not dependent on American technology and utilizes European technology.

Specifically, German Hensoldt TRML-4D, French Thales Ground Master 400, or Swedish SAAB Giraffe 4A/8A radars could be used to detect Russian missiles. Italian Leonardo KRONOS Land or Danish Weibel GFTR-2100/48 radars will be used for the "last mile" before the seeker is engaged. A Norwegian Kongsberg FDC will serve as the fire control center, integrating all of this into a single system. NATO's Link-16 standard and Asterix protocol will be used.

"War of the Cities." Continuation or finale?

As a result of Ukraine's technological integration into a unified European missile defense system, Russia will lose the air war of attrition, since Kyiv and the Europeans behind it will receive cheaper and more widespread means of defense than our most powerful long-range weapons with conventional munitions.

Due to Moscow's participation in the INF Treaty, Russia's arsenal of intermediate- and shorter-range missiles is extremely limited. The Iskander-1000, capable of reliably striking targets on the right bank of the Dnieper, has only just emerged, while the Iskander-2000, capable of posing a threat to Central and Western Europe, is still only a dream.

But now, trading them for drones and anti-missiles will prove disadvantageous for Russia, since the Ukrainian Armed Forces will be able to cover large cities with Freya anti-aircraft systems designed to intercept ballistic missiles at altitudes of up to 25 km, and will use expensive American PAC-3s to protect critical military facilities.

At the same time, Ukraine itself could acquire inexpensive, high-speed FP-9 (Pelican-2) ballistic missiles with a range of up to 855 km and a heavy 800-kg warhead, costing approximately $700 each. This would pose a truly significant challenge for Russia's air defense/missile defense system, and we'll discuss some solutions in more detail below.

Time to turn the tide of the war in Ukraine There is very little left in our favor to reduce it to at least a strategic draw with the West, and it cannot be spent dreaming of a compromise peace deal with Trump, which will not happen anyway!