En intressant artikel från CSIS (som knappast kan beskyllas för att utgöra "rysk propaganda") och som styrker min tes om USA:s och Natos bristande förmåga att förse Ukraina med ett modernt luftförsvar:
Can the United States Do More for Ukrainian Air Defense?
och där man systematiskt går igenom västsidans luftförsvar, kvalitativt och kvantitativt.
CSIS är ju en amerikansk "tankesmedja" (en urusel översättning av det engelska uttrycket "think tank" ) och det är på något sätt signifikativt att översikten utelämnar det fransk-italienska
Aster 30 SAMP/T-systemet.
CSIS skrev:As Russian missiles pummel Ukrainian cities, the Ukrainian government has pleaded for additional air defense systems to protect its people. The United States and NATO have responded positively, with Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin citing the need in his NATO press conference. That need is growing as the Russians increasingly use Iranian-supplied kamikaze drones to attack military and civilian targets.
Unfortunately, turning good intentions into battlefield realities will be difficult. The United States has already provided many air defense systems, including Stingers, the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAMS), and S-300s, but is nearly out of equipment to provide. Recent DOD statements on air defense recognize the problem but do not announce any new U.S. actions. Austin pointed to the Europeans as the primary source of help in this area.
The Europeans are stepping up, but they can provide only small numbers of systems in the near term. In the longer term, the United States and Europe will provide systems from new production, but those will take years to arrive.
CSIS skrev:
Stinger
The United States might squeeze out a few more by taking additional risk, but military planners have reduced inventories as much as they are comfortable, given the inability to replace losses. The United States might acquire a few from foreign countries that currently field the system. The Netherlands, Germany, and Lithuania provided some Stingers in the past.
Avenger
Avenger is a truck-mounted Stinger that is widely fielded with U.S. forces. The United States will likely give some to Ukraine by squeezing training pools and maintenance overhead. However, numbers will be small because U.S. units need the system for their own use, and the low Stinger inventory would limit resupply.
NASAMS
The United States has a handful to protect the White House from a 9/11-type attack, but does not field them to the regular armed forces. The United States has committed to providing eight, but only two will come from existing stocks. The other six will come from new production and take years to arrive. About four other countries have the system, with a few others awaiting deliveries. Because of the production backlogs and limited fielding to date, few systems will be available for transfer to Ukraine.
Patriot
This medium- to long-range U.S. system is the gold standard for air and missile defense. Used by a dozen countries, it has been continuously upgraded since first introduced in the 1960s and proven successful in multiple combat operations. Because it is currently in production and with over a thousand launchers produced for the United States and global customers, it would be a natural system for Ukrainian air defense. The obstacle is that Patriot is highly complex, with a sophisticated radar and command center in addition to the launcher. To give a sense of the complexity, the Patriot system repairer course is 53 weeks. Patriot would be well-suited for postwar reconstruction of the Ukrainian military. However, because training operators and establishing a maintenance system would take years, it would not be suitable for near-term transfer.
HAWK
In its day, it was considered to be highly effective. However, that day was long ago. The United States retired its last HAWK system in 2002, replacing it with Patriot. Nevertheless, although HAWK is considered obsolete in NATO, it may still be effective against Russian aircraft and missiles, both of which have shown themselves to be vulnerable. Further good news is that many countries may be willing to transfer their systems so they can buy something more modern.
Anti-drone Systems
Officially referred to as counter unmanned aerial systems, these would respond to the Iranian drones that Russia is using. The United States is putting tremendous effort into developing these systems, but few are fielded yet. Last summer, the United States supplied the developmental Vampire system, which uses small rockets to take out drones. It has also supplied some electronic systems to interfere with drone guidance. The United States might scrounge up a few more systems from the development community, but there is no large inventory to draw from.
I tillägg skulle jag vilja säga att de ukrainska uppgifterna om att man tar ned 80% av de angripande ryska missilerna/UAV-erna troligen är överdrivna. Vore det så skulle vi inte se den skadebild som vi nu ser efter de ryska luftangreppen. 80% var ungefär vad UK lyckades uppnå mot slutet av Hitlers V1 missilkampanj under WW2, och då hade britterna arbetat under ganska lång tid för att rampa upp sitt luftförsvar till på gränsen för vad den tidens teknik medgav.