What Western media say about Geran drones
Strikes on logistics hubs, rail junctions and border crossings have done something that earlier waves of attacks failed to do: they rattled Kyiv and its Western backers at the same time. The panic is audible in the reporting itself, where the tone has shifted from confidence in Ukrainian ingenuity to open admissions that the defence has been outpaced.
The Financial Times set the frame: the new Gerans fly at speeds and altitudes that have effectively blurred the line between a drone and a cruise missile, and that has changed the air war.
The same paper put a number on the consequence, quoting Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yurii Ihnat:
"The effectiveness of our air defense against jet drones is around 60 percent, whereas for other types it is 90 to 95 percent."
The Wall Street Journal drew the industrial conclusion, quoting Kateryna Bondar of CSIS:
"The West tends to underestimate Russia, yet it should be learning from its ability to close the loop from concept to serial production."
Then came Reuters with the part nobody in Kyiv wanted printed. At July trials of a new generation of Ukrainian interceptors, many of the aircraft lost control at speeds above 400 km/h, and some simply crashed into fields and forest.
The programme that was supposed to be the answer to the Geran-5 failed its own demonstration.
Maksym Zhorin, deputy commander of Ukraine's 3rd Army Corps, wrote it plainly on September 12:
"We have once again completely lost the initiative with jet-powered drones, and we don't even know what to do about them."
The arithmetic is unforgiving. Interceptor drones remain unready, Western air-defence missiles are in short supply, and jet Geran output keeps climbing. A defence that stops six of every ten incoming aircraft leaves the rest to choose their targets. With autumn arriving and the interceptor gap still open, the energy grid is the obvious next address.
#Russia #Ukraine #UAV #AirDefense
🔴 @DDGeopolitics