Amraam will help: why there is no simple response to the planning bombs of the Russian Federation - Defense One

The material states that Russian bombs planners are inexpensive but powerful weapons. According to Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, Russia drops up to 3,500 such bombs on a monthly basis, which significantly complicates the country's defense. In response to these attacks, Ukraine has repeatedly appealed to the United States to provide ATACMS army tactical missile systems for Russian airfields, where the carriers of these aviation are based. However, US officials are in no hurry.

On September 4, the National Security Council Representative September 4 stated that ATACMS will not produce the desired result because Russian aviation was relocated beyond the radius of these missiles. Some experts, the observers noted, also support this position. A representative of one of NATO member countries stressed that it is not yet clear which weapons are effective against planning bombs, but perhaps a strengthening of unmanned attacks.

The head of the Pentagon Lloyd Austin also hinted about it, noting the effectiveness of Ukrainian attacks with UAVs. Many analysts skeptically evaluate the possibility of efficient use of Western missiles to combat Russian airfields. John Hong from the Rand's analytical center believes that the number of Western missiles in Ukraine is limited, and Russia, having dispersed its aviation, minimized the risks of losses. In addition, repair of runways can be performed within a short time.

An alternative solution may be to provide Ukraine with more modern Air-Air missiles, such as AIM-20d, which are capable of knocking down Russian aircraft before discharging bombs. Most likely, these will be AIM-120-C8 with a range up to 120 km, which are denoted as an "export" option, not AIM-20d ​​with a range of 180 km designed for internal use.

Although the supply of these missiles will also last from three to five years, the main thing is that their transmission is associated with a number of problems, including political risks and a possible lack of arms in the US in case of conflict with other opponents, such as China. Thus, current debates show that no solution is simple, and the struggle for control of the airspace continues to remain a key element of the conflict.