658

Ukraine destroys prized US$1.2 billion Russian air-defence system with cruise missiles, reports say (www.scmp.com)

submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

60 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The advanced S-400 ‘Triumf’ air-defence system was destroyed in a joint operation by Kyiv’s security service and navy, Ukrainian intelligence sources said The attack off the coast of Yevpatoriya was orchestrated through the aerial drones and Neptune domestic missiles, Ukrainian official Anton Gerashchenko said

Ukraine used drones and missiles to take down an advanced Russian air-defence system worth US$1.2 billion early on Thursday, according to multiple reports.

The advanced S-400 “Triumf” air-defence system was destroyed in a joint operation by Kyiv’s security service (SBU) and navy, the BBC and Reuters reported, citing Ukrainian intelligence sources.

The attack off the coast of Yevpatoriya was orchestrated through the use of aerial drones and Neptune domestic missiles, per Anton Gerashchenko, a Ukrainian official writing on Telegram.

Yevpatoriya is a coastal city in the west of occupied Crimea, which Russia seized from Ukraine in 2014.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] MicroWave@lemmy.world 131 points 1 year ago

The air-defence system fired its rounds to shoot the drones down, thus revealing its location, Rybar reported. Ukraine waited until it had fired all its ammo, then targeted it with cruise missiles.

[-] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 89 points 1 year ago

Killbots have a hardwired kill limit.

[-] drolex@sopuli.xyz 48 points 1 year ago

Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own drones at them...

[-] MxM111@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

Looks like he was not completely wrong. A valid strategy!

[-] Buffaloaf@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

That's pretty clever

[-] Danc4498@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago

Seems too obvious, though. What protections do other air defense systems use?

[-] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago

They keep a reserve of missiles for defense instead of blowing their load on likely decoys.

[-] Intralexical@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Ideally you duct-tape a grenade to each of your "decoys" so it doesn't really matter either way which target they choose to prioritize

[-] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

See drones that cheap make everything harder, but you don't shoot them down if you know your enemy has a serious cruise missile capability in reserve.

Hard math though, hide your position or stop incoming.

[-] melonlord@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago

Paper and paper derivatives. Like cardboard.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Meowoem@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

NATO have really good threat analysis so they'd try to target the drones with turret machine guns, small rockets, or air defence drones and leave the big boys sitting ready for larger and faster moving attacks.

Practically though a conflict between major powers would quickly turn into a production race to see who can turn out the most drones

[-] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 year ago

I don't know what size of drones we are talking about but Australia is sending cardboard drones to Ukraine.

Cardboard drones that have a range of 100km with a 3kg payload.

I feel like cheap done and internet access really changed the way war is done.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] NightAuthor@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Baited, lawl

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Blaubarschmann@feddit.de 121 points 1 year ago

Why does every news article nowadays repeat itself at least 2 times? There are almost the exact same sentences twice. You don't even have to read past the abstract because there is no other information at all in the actual text. And besides, you avoid having to scroll past 7 gigantic ads

[-] 0421008445828ceb46f496700a5fa6@kbin.social 41 points 1 year ago

SEO, AI generated content

[-] Fapper_McFapper@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I’m so happy. I thought it was just me noticing this. I really dislike when the headline is the headline, summary and first paragraph. By the time I get to the substance of the article I’ve read the first paragraph three times.

[-] shrugal@lemm.ee 33 points 1 year ago

I think it's because the first paragraph is usually preview content for news aggregators and search engines, so it's used as an appetizer.

[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Probably stems at least in part from the essay format a lot of us were taught in school.

Intro: tell em what you're gonna tell em

Body: tell em

Conclusion: tell em what you told em

[-] hansl@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

You probably got taught wrong. At least that’s not what I learnt (early 90s);

Intro: what’s the problem? Background stuff.

Body: here’s a solution and what else we looked at

Conclusion: tie back solution to problem and what further stuff we could talk about.

[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Less right vs wrong than just the way it was done. It's the product of word/page requirements that encourages us to fluff the everliving fuck out of our papers.

[-] mookulator@mander.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

Because they don’t care about quality in depth content. They’re just in it for the clicks. Probably had an algorithm fill in the remaining paragraphs

[-] Lantech@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

Did you ever have to write a paper in school with a minimum page or word count?

[-] MxM111@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

I like it. Most other articles on internet today made on purpose super long to show you 5090 ads even before you get to the first main point.

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

You answered your own question

Ads

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Seudo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Ah, I think you just answered your own question. Articles gave a lot less substance in the age of information. "News" outlets still need ad revenue even if they don't employ journalists any more.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago

Whoooaaa... The South China Morning Post is reporting this in this kind of tone? Now that is a shifting of the tides, they didn't have to talk up how "prized" it was. No wonder Putin is cozying up to Kim.

Never thought I'd see the day where Russia comes crawling to North Korea, but if Xi's support is starting to wilt this much, they're going to need anyone they can get.

[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago

They even threw this in for shits and giggles:

This would not be the first time Russia accidentally revealed its location by attempting to shoot down Ukrainian targets.

Last week, Ukraine said it was able to attack Russian soldiers after they attempted to shoot down a Ukrainian flag that was attached to helium balloons and flew into occupied territory.

[-] Reverendender@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

It’s like Looney Tunes, but with blood

[-] grue@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

I want to upvote you twice: once for the apt comparison, and again for spelling "Tunes" right.

load more comments (8 replies)

[-] uis@lemmy.world 51 points 1 year ago

Here's how it went:

Few waves of drones were sent
AD spent their ammo on cheap drones
Missile strike before AD was reloaded

[-] aport@programming.dev 11 points 1 year ago

Literally baited their turret

[-] bookmeat@lemm.ee 22 points 1 year ago

Article is misleading. These systems are never a single unit. There's parts spread around where radar is separate from launchers, and other components etc. It's not clear in the article what exactly was destroyed.

[-] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago

This was a triumf

[-] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

I'm making a note here, huge success.

[-] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

It's hard to overstate Russian incompetence

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] MxM111@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

But not anymore.

[-] nogooduser@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

They should have had two so that they could protect each other.

[-] uis@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Also s300 and s400 did protect each other. Didn't help.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2023

658 points (97.1% liked)

World News

38583 readers

1693 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.