"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (4 Viewers)

[Admiral Beez]

You're making a big assumption that the missiles were directed at Poland.

True, and it looks like it might be the remnants of Ukrainian intercepts. Of course that means the Russians sent a missile awfully close to Poland.

 

[J_P_C]

it was two 5W55 missiles, target was power grid node located close to polish border. Most probably missiles has been lounched by russians from teritory of Belarus

 

[manta22]

You're making a big assumption that the missiles were directed at Poland. Given Russia's apparent crappy targeting processes and, worse, the poor reliability of some of its weapon systems, I think it far more likely that the missiles landed in Polish territory by accident. The 2 missiles seem to have hit nothing of military importance so, rather than being directed at Poland, I suspect they simply missed the target they were aimed at.

Russian missile accuracy is so bad they can't reliably hit a vehicle, can't hit a building, can't hit a city, and now can't even hit a country. Putin has done more damage to Russia's image as a world- class military power than anyone. Where is Klaus von Stauffenberg when we need him?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Poland was supposed to be protected by Patriot batteries. I guess a few, if not ALL the missiles directed at Poland got through?

U.S. to Send Patriot Missile Systems to Poland

The U.S. military is sending two Patriot missile-defense systems to Poland, amid growing fears that Russia’s war in Ukraine could threatening neighboring countries. “This defensive deployment is being conducted proactively to counter any potential threat to U.S. and Allied forces and NATO territory

www.wsj.com

1. They may not have have had time to launch.

2. The Patriot system is not 100% effective at shoot-downs. Never has, never will be.

 

[vikingBerserker]

Sounds like it was debris from an intercepted missile. Same thing happened to Moldavia (?) the other week.

I suspect that would have had something to do with not being intercepted by a Patriot as well.

 

[GrauGeist]

If it was debris falling into a Patriot's zone, they won't be launched since the missile's flight and intercept had already been tracked/monitored.

There has been occasions were a Patriot will strike debris from an intercepted missile, but that was only after the Patriot had been launched.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

If it was debris falling into a Patriot's zone, they won't be launched since the missile's flight and intercept had already been tracked/monitored.

There has been occasions were a Patriot will strike debris from an intercepted missile, but that was only after the Patriot had been launched.

Agreed.

Even if it was a launch, I believe the Patriot system is no more than 70% effective. During the Gulf War it was between 50 and 70%. Obviously the system has been improved, but nothing will be 100%. You launch enough missiles, something is going to get through.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

NATO could invoke Article 4 after Russian missiles struck Poland. Here's what that means.

Multiple Eastern European countries previously invoked NATO Article 4 in February following Russia's invasion in Ukraine.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Admiral Beez]

You launch enough missiles, something is going to get through.

Then Ukraine needs more missiles. Today's events may push even the most reluctant NATO partner to pony up for more SAMS.

 

[manta22]

"...You launch enough missiles, something is going to get through."

Yes, the term is "saturating" the air defense system.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Then Ukraine needs more missiles. Today's events may push even the most reluctant NATO partner to pony up for more SAMS.

I agree they need more, but no matter how many they get you are still only looking at about a 70% effectivity rate.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I agree they need more, but no matter how many they get you are still only looking at about a 70% effectivity rate.

Statistically, 70% effectiveness per unit is one thing, but if you're facing down 100-missile strikes (as the Ukrainians did today), 150-175 SAM launches will be likely to take down just about all the incoming, even accounting for failed launches.

So how many you shoot at the incoming does actually matter, even with a statistical failure rate built-in.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Statistically, 70% effectiveness per unit is one thing, but if you're facing down 100-misile strikes (as the Ukrainians did today), 150-175 SAM launches will be likely to take down just about all the incoming, even accounting for failed launches.

So how many you shoot at the incoming does actually matter, even with a statistical failure rate built-in.

Agreed

 

[GrauGeist]

Something I find interesting in all of this:
If Russia can target power stations with relative accuracy, then it has zero excuses for striking blocks of flats, hospitals and schools and other civilian targets.

Correction: Russia-Ukraine-War story

In earlier versions of a story published November 15, 2022, The Associated Press reported erroneously, based on information from a senior American intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity, that Russian missiles had crossed into Poland and killed two people.

apnews.com

 

[buffnut453]

Something I find interesting in all of this:
If Russia can target power stations with relative accuracy, then it has zero excuses for striking blocks of flats, hospitals and schools and other civilian targets.

Correction: Russia-Ukraine-War story

In earlier versions of a story published November 15, 2022, The Associated Press reported erroneously, based on information from a senior American intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity, that Russian missiles had crossed into Poland and killed two people.

apnews.com

Well...it depends on the weapon systems employed. This very much appears to be an integrated campaign where Russia is using high-precision weapons to hit critical infrastructure like the power grid while using less-accurate systems to demonstrate the inability of Kyiv to protect the people of Ukraine. The problem here is that never in the history of mankind, with the possible exception of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, has the indiscriminate targeting of civilians paid off as a war-winning strategy.

 

[GrauGeist]

Keep in mind that Hiroshima, Kokura (primary) and Nagasaki (secondary) had a large a large military presence, both in infrastructure and command and control.
The civilians (as with any war since the dawn of time) were collateral damage.

 

[buffnut453]

I know...but nobody can convince me that any nuclear device is a high-precision weapon system. I was simply pointing out that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the exceptions to the general rule that air bombardment generally fails to "break" a civilian population or the will of national/military leaders.

 

[GrauGeist]

Right, I agree - but the exceptional accuracy early in the war, of civilian targets leads me to suspect that these weren't piss-poor aiming, since nearby infrastructure was rarely, if ever, hit.

As the war special operation wore on, there was a shift from civilian targets to power and water.

 

[buffnut453]

The evolving situation regarding the missiles that landed in Poland is creating some interesting insights. First off, it's the Russians who are rabidly indignant about the claim that they may have had something to do with it. While early reporting--on Twitter, mind you...NOT by Western political leaders--did point the finger at Russia, the general tone from the leaders of NATO member nations has been muted. Even the Polish Prime Minister has urged calm. If anyone has a right to be rabidly indignant, it's Mateusz Morawiecki.

It's pretty clear, based on a few comments about trajectories etc., that there's a lot of behind-the-scenes investigation going on to determine where the missile came from. The measured response by NATO members is, IMHO, appropriate. Let's get the facts straight before making any claims and escalating the rhetoric.

This could be a dangerous situation for Ukraine given that they've already pushed back hard on Russia's suggestion that the missile came from Ukraine. Kyiv's Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said on Twitter "Russia now promotes a conspiracy theory that it was allegedly a missile of Ukrainian air defence that fell on the territory of Poland. Which is not true. No one should buy Russian propaganda or amplify its messages."

Given the latest snippets which suggest the missile did, indeed, come from Ukraine, this could be a major faux pas by Kyiv...indeed it may be their first major mis-step of the information war. It's one thing to constantly blame Moscow for everything. However, you have to fess up if you make a mistake....or even if you make a correct decision that has unintended consequences. There will be a lot of political damage if evidence points to the missile(s) being Ukrainian but Kyiv maintains the line that it wasn't theirs.

 

[GrauGeist]

I've seen several claims that it came from Belarus and I beleive the Poles did confirm it is Russian.

One of the sources, is found in the link I posted earlier. I'll go back through my browser history to see if I can find the other.