The US has sent nearly $30 billion dollars
worth of aid to Ukraine, with a significant chunk of that being military equipment. The
equipment has directed support the nation's stunning counterattack, with US equipment taking
center stage in shaping the battle before it was even launched. Russia is now finding out
why the US doesn't have free healthcare, but what equipment has the US sent and why does
it seem like Russia is helpless against it? Javelin A week after Russia's invasion of Ukraine
there was one name the Russian army, and the rest of the world,
had become very familiar with: Javelin. This premier American anti-tank
system first entered service in 1996 when it replaced the M47 Dragon, and has proven
absolutely lethal against Russian armor. This is the weapon US infantry would have
used themselves in a war with Russia, and its effectiveness is nothing sort of
terrifying. The weapon consists of two components, the Launch Tube Assembly and the reusable
Command Launch Unit. The CLU (clue) is the brains of the system, and features 4 times
magnification at both day and night with its thermal sight. This allows US infantry to no
longer be reliant on supporting heavy vehicles for target identification, and the CLU can
be used by itself even when no more missiles are available to provide infantry with a
portable and very capable thermal sight. A 12 times magnification narrow field of view
option allows gunners to effectively zoom in on a target and properly identify it. When the gunner
is ready to fire, he switches to a Seeker FOV mode at 9 times magnification- this is effectively now
being fed to the missile's guidance unit. With a target selected, the gunner squeezes a second
button and the missile is on its way to deliver 19 pounds (8.4 kg) of supersonic tandem-charge
high explosive American freedom to its target. In order to defeat modern reactive armor,
the Javelin missile features two warheads that detonate in rapid succession. The
first is a smaller charge which is meant to blow away explosive reactive armor panels
being fired up at the missile in an attempt to disrupt it. The second, shaped charge
creates a narrow stream of molten metal that penetrates through tank armor to deliver
an extremely emotional event to the crew inside. When targeting armored vehicles the
Javelin switches to top-attack mode, in which the missile flies straight up into the
air and then comes down directly on the tank's thinner top armor. You've probably seen pictures
of Russian tanks with what were quickly termed 'cope cages'. These metal cages were being welded
onto Russian tanks at the start of the invasion to protect from anti-tank missiles, and in some
cases could actually be effective. However against modern anti-tank weapons, the cages were simply
wasted labor, and as St. Javelin took a horrible toll on Russian tanks, the Russian ministry
of defense quickly sought out a new solution. Nowadays you're probably not seeing
many of these cages on Russian tanks, because A) most Russian tanks
are now Ukrainian tanks and B) they didn't work. So why are Javelins
so effective against Russian armor? The truth is that modern anti-tank missiles of
the quality being supplied to Ukraine are frankly terrifyingly effective. Even western tanks would
be hard put to defend themselves against them, which is why the US is gradually adding the TROPHY
protection system to its own tanks. This anti, anti-tank missile system fires explosive
charges at incoming missiles that are more effective at disrupting the weapon
than explosive reactive armor panels. However, the real reason why Javelins are
pounding Russian armor into scrap metal is that Russia has very poor military doctrine
and uses tanks improperly. Tanks are not meant to operate on their own, but rather are
meant to be directly supported by infantry. Supporting infantry forces are responsible
for keeping enemy hunter-killer teams at bay, yet the Russian military has routinely shown that
it does not operate armor and infantry together well at all. Often, Russian armor is simply left
to fend for itself with predictable results. Kamikaze Drones Odds are you've by now become familiar with
the names Phoenix Ghost or Switchblade. Russian infantry is not only aware of
the names, but actively fears them. The Phoenix Ghost drone is a
loitering munition developed under the US military's Big Safari weapons
program. This acquisitions program is meant to rapidly deliver new weapons to
meet unexpected or evolving threats, allowing the US military to quickly counter
enemy capabilities using pre-existing technology rather than going through a whole
development and testing cycle of new tech. To date the US has sent around 700 of these
weapons to Ukraine, with a significant impact on the battlefield. The loitering munitions can
hover over an area for six hours and conduct surveillance at both night and day thanks to its
infrared sensors. Once a target has been detected, the drone kamikazes down onto its head with
an explosive finale. The drone is great for taking out entrenched infantry or even
lightly armored vehicles such as trucks. The switchblade is the name most people are
familiar with, and has sort of stolen the Phoenix Ghost's thunder. This weapon was conceived by the
US Air Force Special Operations Command as a way of rapidly giving infantry a way to provide their
own air support in Afghanistan. Traditional air support may not always be available or take
time to respond, plus it can cause serious collateral damage. The Switchblade 300 however
can be carried by individual soldiers and used for both reconnaissance and attack, dropping
down from above directly on an enemy's head. When the weapon was first sent to
Afghanistan it was on a test case basis and in limited numbers. In 2012
US soldiers received 75 Switchblades to try out in real world conditions. The
results of that test remain classified, but very shortly afterwards the US Army made
a request that the weapon be immediately made available in far greater numbers. Insurgents
soon feared it, and US soldiers loved it. Soon after its debut in Afghanistan, the
Switchblade was tested from the open bay of an Osprey transport, successfully
tracking and impacting its target. This paved the way for a new development between
Switchblade manufacturer AeroVironment and Kratos Defense & Security Solutions for a high
speed, long range unmanned combat air vehicle that could act as a mothership to a host of
Switchblade drones. The UCV would be designed to rapidly deploy an overwhelming number of
switchblades in order to overcome enemy defenses. The US has provided over 1,000 of both the
anti-personnel and anti-armor version of the Switchblade drone, which Ukraine has
used to devastating effectiveness. In response to the overwhelming
success of the Switchblade, Russia has announced development of its
own loitering munition, the LAOP 500, which it boasts is “twice as powerful” as
the Switchblade. Given the fact that Russia is bringing T-62s out of museums to fight in
Ukraine, take that boast with a grain of salt. So why can't Russia stop these American drones? The easiest answer is that Russia simply
wasn't prepared for modern warfare. Despite its many pre-invasion boasts of being able to
take on even the military forces of the US, Russia has proven that it simply has no idea
how to fight a modern war. It has failed to conduct large scale combined arms operations and
displayed time and again a complete disregard for electronic and signals security. The devastation
delivered by western-provided smart munitions proves that it fundamentally was unprepared
for the consequences of a smart battlefield. The hard answer however is that nobody is really
prepared for the loitering munition threat posed by modern drone forces. There is simply no way
of providing adequate protection to infantry forces from loitering munitions, though the
US has been working at the problem for a few years now. Electronic warfare capabilities
meant to disrupt drone signals or even shoot them down with electromagnetic pulse weapons
are now being seen as integral to the very structure of the traditional American
infantry platoon. So the next time big, tough US infantrymen go to war, expect to
see Geek Squad fighting right alongside them- because without Electronic Warfare support,
infantry is too vulnerable in future conflicts. Stinger At the start of the war, Russian air
forces operated in large numbers across the country. By now Russian rotary aviation is
conspicuously absent from the front lines. The reason is the US made FIM-92 Stinger and similar
platforms provided by other western countries. Russian aviation is having traumatic flashbacks
to the Afghanistan war, when its helicopters were mauled by US supplied stingers. Today
the weapon system has been updated, but remains relatively the same as when
it was liberating communist aviators from their earthly troubles in 1985. The Stinger is a
shoulder-fired man-portable air defense weapon, or MANPAD, that can engage targets up to 3,800
meters away, making it perfect for taking out low flying aircraft such as helicopters. Its smart
seeker head can differentiate between the exhaust plume of an enemy aircraft and its engines,
helping it home in for a successful kill. To fire the weapon a battery coolant unit,
or BCU, is inserted into the gripstock, this delivers a supply of high-pressure
argon gas which cryogenically cools the seeker to operating temperature. This causes
the seeker to be very sensitive to heat sources, thus allowing it to lock in on enemy
vehicles with great precision. Once fired, a small ejection motor pops the missile
clear of the operator and to safe range, where the main rocket motor is activated
sending the missile on its way. The warhead is relatively small, only about 2.26 lbs
(1.02 kg) of HTA-3 explosive, a mix of HMX, TNT, and aluminum powder. However, the weapon is
designed to directly impact a vehicle's engines, which can be easily damaged or destroyed
even with a small amount of explosives. So why is the Stinger once more violently
reuniting Russian aircraft with the ground? Once more it comes down to doctrine- Russian
forces are doing a poor job of integrating air power with ground forces, leaving low flying
Russian aircraft at great threat from manportable weapons. However, the real culprit is Russia's
basic lack of precision targeting- most of its ground attack aircraft lack targeting pods,
meaning that they have to come in low for any attack to have a large degree of precision. This
puts them directly under threat of the Stinger. HIMARS We couldn't possibly do an episode on US weapons Russia is having a very bad day with and
not mention the vaunted HIMARS system. This thing is not very impressive on paper.
The High Mobility Artillery Rocket System is at first glance, underpowered rocket
artillery. Unlike its more capable cousin, the M270 MLRS, the HIMARS system has half
the number of munitions available to it- six GMLRS rockets. It's basically just a
truck with a single pod of missiles on its back- so why in the world has this weapon single
handedly changed the face of the Ukrainian war? In the early 1990s, the US Army was retooling
itself from fighting World War III against the Soviet Union and its allies, to the
expected bush wars of the future which would feature low-intensity conflict. This
meant the Army needed to slim down and start providing weapons that were mobile and flexible,
something traditional rocket artillery is not. HIMARS was developed to meet the need of a light
footprint force such as US paratroopers or a small contingent of overseas troops fighting
a conflict requiring precision rather than overwhelming firepower. Mounted on a truck, the
system has far greater mobility and speed than any of its tracked cousins, and this was a huge
draw for a future low intensity conflict. However, it was exactly this capability that would
make HIMARS so valuable to Ukrainian forces. Faced with overwhelming numbers, Ukraine needed
a platform that could rapidly deliver a fire mission and then flee before enemy counterbattery
fire or air support could respond. Traditional tube artillery would be based around areas
ukraine could enact some form of air defense, which protected them but made them very
inflexible weapons. HIMARS however could quickly drive to a launch site, pop off
its missiles, and drive away in minutes, allowing the weapon system to be anywhere
it needed to be with short notice. But it's HIMARS' precision and range that makes
it truly deadly. Each of the six GLMRS rockets have a range of 57 miles (92 km), and are armed
with precision warheads. This gives Ukraine the ability to punch behind enemy lines at targets
out of range of traditional tube artillery which has a range of around a dozen or so miles.
But it's the precision that really matters, because each rocket can be programmed to hit a
specific target, or to double up and defeat enemy fortifications, striking exactly at their weakest
point. The error radius of HIMARS is classified, but believed to be no more than a
few meters at most and is likely far, far less than that given the
history of US smart weapons. With just a dozen of these weapons at
the start of summer, Ukraine began to batter Russian command posts and logistics
nodes, leading to an immediate effect on the battlefield as Russian forces were slowed
to a crawl as they contended with the chaos being wreaked behind their lines. Russia
quickly moved to neutralize the weapon, dedicating large amounts of air power and special
operations forces to locating and destroying these mobile rocket launchers. Within weeks of the
deployment of HIMARS to Ukraine, Russia claimed it had destroyed all of them, yet the US confirmed
that not a single HIMARS had been lost in combat. Was Russia lying? Normally the answer to that
question would be yes, but in this case they actually might have been telling the truth-
at least from their own point of view. Because the weapon is mounted on a generic heavy duty
truck frame, Ukraine created multiple HIMARS decoys using trucks painted green. Other
decoys were mere mockups made of wood, and it's confirmed that Russia has destroyed
at least ten of these decoys with Kalibr cruise missiles. Russia took the bait and expended
significant effort and resources better used elsewhere to find and destroy these fake HIMARS,
leaving the real HIMARS safe from attack. The US quickly agreed to supply Ukraine with
more HIMARS, and the nation now has just under two dozen of these platforms with plans for
more to be delivered. As of September 8th, Ukraine had struck 400 Russian targets
with the weapons, making it the hardest working weapon in the Ukraine war, and one
that has forced Russia to radically rethink how it deploys its forces. No longer safe
behind the front lines, Russian command and control nodes and logistics hubs have been
forced out of HIMARS range, which means the rate of the offensive has slowed to a crawl as
units have to wait even longer for resupply. Russia has threatened to retaliate against
the United States for further deliveries of the weapon system, but given that it can't
handle 16 of these and the US Army is equipped with over 400, it seems Russia's mouth is
cashing checks its military can't cash. Now go check out What's Wrong With Russia's
Military, or click this other link instead!
