Could Britain Survive A Missile Strike From Russia? Ukraine War Special (WarGames 39) | DCS

[@grimreapers]

Modernized Version: kzbin.info/www/bejne/g5a4n6WtdqqCpcU

[@vincebagadonis8016]

Mark Felton's best quote ever: "Today, if Britain is attacked by nuclear weapons, the government will warn us via text message, which you can read as your phone melts in your hand" ...and it is for this reason why he is our lord and savior.

[@KawasakiKiteh]

Felton is not our lord and savior.

[@anthonyb5279]

WOW thats psyco.

[@deanfirnatine7814]

Pfft rural UK will survive, urbanites are dead weight

[@StoutProper]

He’s very funny, got a very dry sense of humour

[@krismurphy7711]

THAT is why the UK has a missile sub at sea ALL THE TIME. UK may get hit first, but it will hit last...and that should protect it from getting hit at all!!

[@danielmills7972]

Process thought: despawn the bomber planes the moment after they have launched everything to relieve server requirements (especially in this case with launch and forget systems)

[@Studio23Media]

Would've helped the AI actually find the targets too.

[@foreignmandirector]

That's an excellent point - despawning elements that are not part of the mission anymore really does help the overall performance of the remaining elements!

[@bunsdad4530]

Be dumb to attack a nuclear plant Pretty much take the cranes down at ports Can’t make weapons Can’t eat Nuclear plants have a couple of feet of concrete So success is very uncertain

[@rozaliamajores4798]

If they can swim good, or under water they can survive

[@seansands424]

Good job he is not in the RAF

[@danieljerram7964]

Mark Felton is an absolute legend love his videos. I love the banter between the reapers.

[@c128stuff]

Yes, he totally is.

[@jbx-]

A few points: Firstly, if an imminent threat was bound for the U.K. mainland I am pretty sure intelligence would dictate assets were not deployed overseas. Second point, in addition to type 45 for air defence U.K. also has type 23 with sea Ceptor, this would contribute to negating Russian aviation or ships/submarines firing off cruise missiles. If a submarine did it would disclose its location, a ship would have a better chance but also this is to assume Russian naval vessels would be entirely offensive in projection and long range aviation would also be within SAM ranges. It is theoretically plausible for Russia to damage the U.K. with missiles as the ground based air defence network is non existent. Rapier is short range (which you forgot to mention) star streak isn’t really anti missile & only 24 sky sabre is not enough The U.K. need to collaborate with France and Italy for block 2 aster BMD. Mach 7.5 & 1,500km range. This can be couples with sky sabre and star streak for a more practical defensive suite. Russia’s only cruise missile threat to the U.K. is really from up north as the Black Sea would have to either traverse mainland Europe and NATO territory or the Mediterranean which is littered with NATO assets and U.K. has Cyprus RAF base and Gibraltar & therefore not practical for the Russians to attack this way. It could send ships around the Horn of Africa but given Russian woes logistically in Ukraine, overseas power projection isn’t their strong points. With a naval base in Portsmouth coming up south even vis submarines would be a bad move for the Russians. If the Russians came from north the U.K. could deploy 2 aircraft carriers with 12 f35 each, alongside helicopters including lynx and apache to hunt and kill ships and merlin for AEW & also anti submarine That alone would immediately put the Russian Navy on the defensive and wouldn’t be able to focus on launching cruise missiles as it would have a lot to contend with to stay afloat. The U.K. could also deploy amphibious assault ships with anti submarine warfare helicopters and every type 23/45 have their own helicopters. F35 would suppress Russian shipping even though the U.K. struggle with anti ship missiles. Martlet and brimstone would be suffice. Additionally, the astute class would be a horrific thorn in the Russian sides and also U.K. have 9 Poseidon anti ship, anti sub and reconnaissance aircraft. The carriers are built for command and control and could effectively track and engage Russian missile activity F35 and typhoon could in theory shoot down cruise missiles but would be a last resort. This video assumes we would have 1 ship or something defending north but the reality is the U.K. can effectively eliminate Russian strategic aviation by simply deploying an aircraft carrier The U.K. needs to expedite sky sabre into service ASAP, I know one is in Poland but we need more and more quickly. We need to try and expand aster with the French and Italians to build on the block1 NT as having no fixed sam system deployed nationwide is grossly negligent We need to increase r and d on lasers which will long term help negate missile effectiveness Lastly, the U.K. have announced that 26 more f35 will be bought to take the total to 74 as a minimum. Type 45 will all get an extra 26 missiles each and that will allow for more aster 30 Astute have had spear fish upgraded & this is all assuming the U.K. wouldn’t try and eliminate a Russian strike prior to them launching weather that’s offensively from GCHQ or us ourselves launching cruise missiles of which we have tomahawk and over 900 storm shawdow

[@jmw0368]

Sorry, can you rephrase that! 😂

[@grimreapers]

Ukraine-Russia Series: Fulcrum/Flanker vs Foxbat/Super Flanker: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJm7l6uZbpl9d7c NASAMS vs Russian Cruise Missiles: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pnuskJVvas-tps0 Russian KH-47M2 vs Polish Air Force: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mZ_Vh6ungZqkb9k Su-27 & Drone vs Snake Island: kzbin.info/www/bejne/ipDSg6KLZ6asnNE Su-25s vs Russian Convoy At Kyiv: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qKq5Z2iYiq-tqNk NATO Eurofighters vs Crimean AWACS: kzbin.info/www/bejne/e5qtY5d8h81sa8k Patriot, Gepard & Gripen vs KH-65: kzbin.info/www/bejne/kJnblaWEn86aZ8k A-10s vs Russian Convoy At Kyiv: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eGHXi6KlZdp_npY USN Tomahawk Strike Kerch Bridge: kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZqfTmmuud96ajJo USAF Stealth Strike Kerch Bridge: kzbin.info/www/bejne/f3vFl2x4mN2hrZI Ukrainian Jets Strike Kerch Bridge: kzbin.info/www/bejne/f2mppqCrj7eYeJY F-22 Raptors vs Russian Fighters: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eaDQg5ajp9x9jc0 Raptor/Eagle vs Super Flanker: kzbin.info/www/bejne/oZbUiqCriKqiY5o USAF Bombers vs Mariupol Defenses: kzbin.info/www/bejne/l3TWk6KFfJWEi5Y Ukraine Bombs Snake Island: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eImZammDgMmemJo Stealth Fighters vs Russian Bombers: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qKrQamOgo7Z3qaM Sinking Of Moskva #3: kzbin.info/www/bejne/hHrNoKx_nsqCsLs Sinking Of Moskva #2: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qZ_Nl5WglKqqjZY Sinking Of Moskva #1: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eKnamWmDfLF9hMU Russia Nukes Britain: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qKvOZWiIe7aqd5o Ukraine Uses Danish F-16s: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z2izmp6opZWEl7s Ukraine Uses Polish Mig-29s: kzbin.info/www/bejne/sHTMZad3ft-ohbc Russian-Britain Missile Attack: kzbin.info/www/bejne/sKiseJmXl9utfqM Ghost Of Kyiv: kzbin.info/www/bejne/j6PGpWuMadNkY7c Belgorod Raid: kzbin.info/www/bejne/o4LcnIeuqZuZqtk Eurofighter/Fulcrum vs Super Flanker: kzbin.info/www/bejne/g4Hcepymes2aiJI US Strike vs Odessa kzbin.info/www/bejne/gZbMgHudr86WbLs Russian Helo Rocket Lob: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z2KbeJp9o7WSqa8 Russian Su-25 vs US Patriot SAM: kzbin.info/www/bejne/l6TTZ2yQecSnhZI Understanding Russian SAMs: kzbin.info/www/bejne/iGXbhauCg7-Lmdk Ukrainian Jets Road Operations: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nnPTq4SentODmNk Russian 40 Mile Convoy: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jKPCXmV8gcefeM0 Flanker vs Super Flanker: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jICkpoJ8ga96oZY

[@petec1050]

Few thoughts. All based on a gradual escalation as opposed to immediate surprise attack. 1. The E3s are indeed retired but are still flying, I believe the aim is to keep crews trained ready for the Wedgetails entering service. I would imagine they would be put back into service if things were escalating towards an attack on the UK mainland. 2. Could crows nest Merlins not be deployed to provide additional airborne early warning 3. Sky Sabre SAMs are now in service and are network enabled. Whilst the range is relatively short they could be placed on projected flight paths of cruise missiles or around high priority targets. 4. The type 23s could also be deployed to patrol the coast and carry Sea Ceotor which is the navalised version of Sky Sabre. 5. Starstreak batteries could be placed as last ditch point defence around high priority strategic targets - much the same as Rapier was used for the games in 2012. 6. The UK as a NATO member has access to the NATI early warning network so I doubt the bombers would get close enough to fire off missiles in the first place. No doubt more money is needed for defence, I believe that’s already been requested by the MOD (increase to 3% GDP) and swiftly rejected by the treasury which is not surprising given the state of the UK economy at present.

[@lewislaws6770]

not to mention the likelihood of the americans stepping in to help, since a large majority of their aircraft in britain are based in the south east, which is simulated here

[@kouamewilliam6779]

Nonsense analysis

[@petec1050]

@@kouamewilliam6779 firstly not really an analysis is it, more thoughts & questions. Secondly perhaps you could elaborate what part is nonsense.

[@stephenclarke3990]

This is simply ALL" hope & may be" really you're just guessing. Well, sadly thats not enough. If you think the UK has ANY early warning system think again, it doesn't and wont have anything. So if you want to see those that you love simply vaporised or melt before your eyes, cary on and do nothing, they would in fact be the lucky ones. Those left would have to face the horrors of Nuclear Fallout. War is simply unimaginable horror, a Nuclear War is just Unimaginable ❗️☮️

[@mariomezquita3492]

Random observation (awesome video, BTW): in the event of an actual detected launch / airborne imminent threat, Typhoons and Tornadoes are permitted to go supersonic from the moment they can get airborne. If it's a 500+ pound warhead striking a nuclear power plant, or 50 people sending an email to the local council about their windows being smashed, you know who wins! (the 50 people writing sternly worded emails to their local council XD )

[@mixit2413]

when I was at school many many years ago the Raf were going supersonic all over the place but that was when concord could go supersonic over mainland britain.

[@duanesamuelson2256]

For a bit of reassurance a 500 lb conventional warhead (as opposed to a bunker buster) isn't likely to break the containment of a reactor. After 9-11 at the savanna river site it was stated that crashing a jumbo jet into the reactor wouldn't break through. Note that savanna river is not a power plant however and has a different kind of reactor.

[@Definitelynotanalienoranything]

I used to deal with those complaints when I was in the RAF. One time a farmer complained that a Tornado scared her pigs and they attacked her. She had to kill one of them with a pitch fork and was demanding payment for the pig.

[@pogo1140]

How long can typhoons stay in burner? depending on how far the missiles are, they could run out of gas long before they got to missile launch range.

[@cmotdibbler4454]

@@Definitelynotanalienoranything It wasn't out of Coningsby in the late 80s was it? I lived a few miles down the road when I was a nipper and used to regularly see Tornados come screaming over head then wait for the booom as they headed out to sea

[@joeclaridy]

I mean this whole scenario is hinged on no NATO support which I find highly unlikely. I would think somewhere in the North Sea or Baltic would be some NATO or US forces conducting patrols that would detect the Russian task force.

[@Souperflysi]

The biggest problem is that we wait for something to happen, and then it’s too late

[@mikeliv8827]

Simple answer to your hypothesis: We don't wait until the attack has begun, we shoot down the Cruise attacking aircraft once they are airborne along the Norwegian coast, job done!

[@craigo2656]

If a Typhoon can carry 8 meteors (Beast mode 14) x 25 typhoons = 200 Meteors, and a Type 45 destroyer can carry 48 Asters x 2 = 96, that makes a total of 296 deployable air defence missiles?

[@stephenwhitey6711]

Mark felton is full of shite

[@mikeymike1792]

This is a cool concept, but seems very unrealistic. It seems to rely on the UK enforcing a no fly zone on its own, which wouldn't happen. It also depends on Russian craft getting within range of Western Europe without anyone detecting them and warning the UK. Even flying over Scandinavia, that's not going to happen. They'll be detected as soon as they leave the deck and nations would scramble QRFs. And because of the NATO connection, even if the strike were to succeed, none of the Russian aircraft would make it back to base, making their strike pretty daft in the first place.

[@lostsoul4680]

Said same and agree.

[@joecater894]

I havent watched the vid yet... so am at a disadvantage... however, on what you are saying.... russians often fly aircraft close to our territory as routine.. and we routinely escourt them away... so I guess one of them could start an attack... but i doubt they'd do it that way if they wanted to attack UK... plus they'd get one back...

[@deanfirnatine7814]

Agreed, Mark's whole scenario is unrealistic

[@anthonyb5279]

Im losing respect for Cap. This is a ridiculously stupid scenario where he hobles one side so Russia can win. The other day he said the Slava class was his favorite ship and he thought it was invincible. England is a fortress! NATO makes sure of that. Britten has lots of anti aircraft defense. what a load of bullshit.

[@StoutProper]

Yeah for a start they’d come over the north via the artic circle and they’d fire their missiles at what, 500-1000 km away?

[@martinwyke]

This omits the 7th Air Defence Brigade which has just replaced their Rapiers with Sky Sabre and Star Streak defensive missile systems. One regiment has gone to Poland but at least one would still be available for the South. Also four Type 23 Frigates are based in the South and while dedicate ASW they each have 32 CAMM surface to air missiles.

[@daviddoyle2085]

I think in a real life scenario british forces would prioritise key infrastructure to try to minimise damage. There’s no way we’d be able to take out every missile that comes in during a barrage on our own but I think the Norwegian forces would be launching their ships and aircraft too so we wouldn’t be completely on our own. Certainly France would too since the fallout from Sizewell would be a huge threat to them too.

[@bertkoerts3991]

Very respectful to acknowledge Mark Felton! Appreciate that! 😊👍

[@steve-iw2bg]

If there was enough time to get 2 type 45 into position then there was enough time to get a sky sabre system and 2 stormers to each target. The artillery regiment responsible for air defense is based on thorney island 8.5 miles east of Portsmouth. 3 Type 23s or other NATO warships would also be patroling the north sea. We would have early warning of a large bomber formation from Norway not to mention the Norwegian air force following the whole way. Crowsnest Merlin, boeing airseaker R1, and Poseidon P8 can all be used for long range missile detection. It was fun to watch but I'll still be sleeping very easily.

[@harrisongilbert]

@@WANHandler You mean the missiles that have never been shown in public and Russia has only said that they purportedly have?

[@89schofe]

@@WANHandler If you think about it to be considered hypersonic it has to travel at speeds greater than 3000mph, a medium range ballistic missiles travels on average at 15,000mph. The russian iskander travels at about 4,500mph. The hypersonic thing is bogus & designed to scare people. They're just missiles 🤷🏼‍♂️ it's when they stick nukes on the end is when you worry

[@potatoskunk5981]

@@WANHandler The hypersonic missiles they've used in Ukraine are basically just an old Soviet-era ballistic missile modified to be launched from an aircraft. Ballistic missiles have been hypersonic for decades. And they reportedly have a very small handful of these - possibly less than 10.

[@CaptLawrence]

this is absolutely correct and it doesnt even take into account that if Russia could even field those rusty old bombers the U.S. would alert your country to be on standby before they made cruise altitude. The U.S. watches every runway in russia 24/7 and we will never stop.

[@tomriley5790]

Well you're assuming the T45s haven't broken down again 2 is the absolute maximum that you could expect to be operational at any one time, similarly 3 T23s and it's extremely unlikely that the missiles would pass within their envelopes. It's certainly possible that there would be NATO ships in the North Sea but not guaranteed. Similarly I'm not sure stormer has any antimissile capability. I also have questions about crowsnest - it's been around since the 1980s so if people haven't worked it out by now and how to effectively jam it I'd be surprised. P8s and RC135s can detect the launch platforms and their electronic signatures but have no ability to detect the missiles themselves. As we've seen with the Russian army claiming that you have capabilities your military don't have does no favours long term. UKs military has been plagued by overspending and cutting programs from production early for decades (which are similarly related because if you spend lots developing something and then don't make many of them it makes them much more expensive).

[@simonjamesdean2307]

The description of early warning defences isn't entirely accurate. We have better resources available which I have seen first hand, and they are quite impressive.

[@Exaldear]

Pretty sure other Euro nations or NATO early warning systems would trigger first?

[@davidforrest6730]

I live in Hartlepool and they have the huge golfballs next to the Seaton Carew nuclear power station just next to Middlesbrough, they may be able to detect an imminent attack and warn us but there's certainly no military presence or air defence systems in the area. It's just a case of 'yep were being attacked, good luck and God speed :/

[@seraphina985]

@@Exaldear Well as they would pretty much have to attempt the attack from the North then yes. The Norwegian station at Vardø for a start as that is way up North (Further North than Murmansk even) so would have coverage out into the Barents Sea to the North of Russia. Doubt it would work keeping further out to sea either since that would then put you close to Iceland or Greenland both of which likely also contain NATO radar systems of their own. As such the tracking information they could provide would almost certainly ensure that the incoming bombers would get a warm welcome from the Typhoon squadrons at RAF Lossiemouth in Scotland that would be airborne and waiting for them.

[@castlekingside76]

In such a scenario I'd imagine most countries would struggle to defend against 200 missiles if such a scenario played out. I want you guys to do this one with more realistic conditions reflecting Russia's current abilities.

[@jeremypintsize7606]

@Gorgeous George Complicated seeing the state of conventionnal forces in ukraine I've a doubt of the readynessof Russian arsenal. And UK +France who wil retaliate imediately it will be au suicide about 250+280 warheads will fly to Russia

[@gcoffey223]

Using their current sbilities you'd be facing missles that go five times faster than those jets, maybe six times.

[@rickrick196]

You also have to include US assets, RAF base, Navy etc.

[@TheRealStretchy]

If only 2 out of 6 cruise missiles hit Ukraine the other 4 are destroyed then I think we'll be okay lol Don't our carriers etc have ews? So a lot missed out

[@richardv9648]

This an absolute loss loss scenario guys. I wish we just stop fking with Russia and pick up some mediocre middle eastern country instead. like the good old days. Boris needs a little spank in his bottom for even taking this such scenario.

[@MrAvant123]

The answer to this is simple, a mass pre-emptive strike on UK would be mostly devastating, HOWEVER we have the nuclear submarine capability to ensure all Russian cities were dust, in fact it is easier following the breakup of the Soviet union. So not a nice output for anyone but it would be MAD as was always the case with nukes. As for non-nuclear missiles how powerful do they think they are - yes they could do a lot of damage but there is only so much explosive warhead you can put on these...

[@melmarshall8176]

Fortunatley we don't have to rely on Britain alone for EWS.

[@audigex]

I feel like a conventional attack on a nuclear power station would be considered a nuclear attack

[@davidforrest6730]

I can see Seaton Carew nuclear station from my window in Hartlepool... Every time I look out the window I get a shudder. I know 100% it will be one of the first places to get hit being on the east coast and half way up the country. Ever since I moved here from Edinburgh (not exactly a safer area), it's had a slightly ominous feel to the place just knowing if war kicks off we have no chance

[@seraphina985]

@@davidforrest6730 In fairness taking a reactor containment building down would take a massive explosion not sure if these missiles would quite pull that off. It would likely take a weapon designed to take out fortified bunkers instead since that is pretty much what the containment buildings are. Probably would still get attacked though as disconnecting them from the grid and cutting off the electricity supply would be far easier than trying to destroy the reactors, the transformers and power lines are not fortified.

[@MichaelBartlettAu]

Cap: *collides with missile* Cap: “ooh I got one… with the gun”

[@danielberger1378]

Haha, I spotted that one, too 😂

[@novosib9017]

typical western lair lol

[@skatman3278]

I think there's a fundamental exaggeration of Russian capability. Despite seeing them in action for a few months now and get absolutely rinsed by the Ukrainians, we're still suggesting the Russians could pull off an attack like this. I would wager that less than half of their aircraft simulated here are flight capable and I would also wager they don't have anywhere near this amount of cruise missiles in working order. Not only this, but it completely ignores Sky Sabre, Rapier, Stormer HVM, any frigates (which have pretty capable S2A capabilities in their own right), the huge amount of USAF aircraft that are based in the UK, and you're probably more likely to have 4 T45s than 3. There are also only about 20/30 Typhoons deployed abroad, meaning that number is far closer to 70/80 in the UK. And then there's the 23 F-35s. Finally, all of RAF/RN aircraft would be up in the air and waiting for the, likely around 8 Russian aircraft before they even get into launch range because we'd know they were coming from our friends in NATO. As a bit of fun, this is OK. As anything remotely more serious, it's pretty absurd and Mark Felton has clearly lost his marbles.

[@castlekingside76]

Agreed

[@skywatcher1972]

Primarily, you're "spot on," but I would be cautious to compare the Ukrainian invasion with this scenario; they are totally different theatres. I would also add to this that the Russians would never commit their entire bomber fleet to Great Britian -- that is quite arrogant to even suggest. Six to ten, at most, and the rest of the offensive from land-based missiles, not, certainly not, this one-dimensional strategy. Finally, I would suggest that, [given the merits of this video,] Britian installs an over the horizon radar site to the far north, beyond the Orkneys -- wherever that is, as Russia would certainly use the Northern attack route, imho.

[@gregtims7627]

Agreed. Are all their bombers able to fly? Even if they did have the cruise missiles, how many would fail? This would be a war against NATO, so the US would move more Naval assets to the region, US aircraft based in UK would assist and the AWACS out of Germany would be on station for sure. Also I would think the bombers would have to get past the Finnish and Swedish air defenses.

[@zilfondel]

I agree, but DCS with that many assets would probably just lag out the game. Also, the US currently has 2-3 carrier battle groups near there Baltics which could quickly dispatch a potential interceptor force, unless Sweden wanted to shoot down American planes overflying their territory.

[@tomriley5790]

T23s would be able to engage curise missiles that came within range, skysabre only if it was in position otherwise it's just too short ranged, stormers again have no anticruise missile capability - you might get lucky. Similarly the number of aircraft is likely to be fewer due to maintenance (roughly 1/3 would probably be acutally available)

[@glenhutchcraft7351]

We in the USA would have something to say about that, and attack on brittin is an attack on the united States Russia would be turned into a parking lot.

[@thegeneralmitch]

Russia: **fires 100+ missiles at UK and bank over french territory** France: "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know NOTHING!" 😂

[@FooBarr68]

As an Englishman I love Grumps English accent. Had me chuckle a few times. Great video gents.

[@WyvernFalken]

Huh? Did I miss a joke here? 😂

[@johnblue8907]

Our Lord and Saviour Felton, lol. I know how you feel. He personally responded to one of my comments on a vid of his once. My life is complete :)

[@francescoboselli6033]

As an Italian I am worried: my country and many other NATO countries seems not even nearly ready to counter Russian cruise missile (see also the other Mark Felton video about the Ukrainian armed drone who felt in Croatia, after crossing undisturbed Romanian and Hungarian airspace). We really need to a SAM protection system like the one of Israel and Japan, to protect all of NATO airspace... The only positive note that I can say regarding my country, is that compared to UK Italy at the moment seems to have more military hardware to counter a cruise missile attac than the UK at the moment (I am referring in particular to the modern ships in service in our navy, and our 2 AEWR in service in our airforce)

[@jmkhenka]

cruise missiles are hard to kill, look at ukraine where they fly right over peoples head. There is only certain kind of radars that can spot them to begin with, and you got minutes to react. So if you dont have a asset inside a coouple miles it will probably be to late anyway. Thats one thing that russia has shown, cruise missiles are really effective. Only negative is the price, its quite expensive to send alot of them - bombers still have their use.

[@Cazline]

SAMs aren't the best for cruise missles and are meant for anti-air, you need ABMs. These however are much more expensive to build, deploy and maintain. The missles used in this video are flying too low for most SAMs to engage.

[@francescoboselli6033]

@@jmkhenka yeah you are right. Unfortunately NATO and western Europe in general didn't develop sufficient systems to counter this menace. Our best hope right now is that USA will provide Europe with sufficient AEWR to compensate the deficit of European nations, and that Russia will not launch many of them, considering how expensive they are. Also I hope that we could have a good chance to intercept Bomber aircrafts before they launch those cruise/ hypersonic missiles

[@francescoboselli6033]

@@Cazline ah ok thanks for the information. Yeah those systems would be pretty expensive for many NATO nations and not even affordable for many. Although I guess that we could increment NATO members can increase their capability of intercept those weapons with more economical solution. They might not be so effective as ABMs, but is always better than nothing

[@tomriley5790]

@@Cazline SAMs work against cruise missiles, they don't work well against balistic missiles hence the ABMs - Most ABMs though (there aren't many) are developments of SAM systems.

[@argosy666]

Wouldn't France and other near by Nato countries/ships assist in the defence once the missles would have been fired? Also as the russians would have gone past Norway they would have scrabled (probably Finland and Sweden as well considering the status of things) and Nato would have been on alert and ready to strike. The northen fighters would probably have been vectored south as the russians were tracked (after all combining the figthers and meeting head on was the winning strategy in the Battle for Britain so it's fair to say round two would be handled similar. This setup seem to be more valid for last year then now.

[@prunesquallor3444]

Great Britain 'may not have enough defensive capability on its own, however Great Britain is a NATO member, and that means Russia will be attacking every member country of NATO, and will be forced to defend from the same NATO countries. At least that is my understanding of NATO’s roll.

[@iainshallish2631]

Not going to matter if its nuclear...which is more probable every day unless NATO backs off. Which it won't so farewell Northern cousins..

[@Ardventures]

People forget just how much American air force is based here. The east coast has Mildenhall planes up all the time.

[@thebiggt123]

Great vid as always GR! Would the American squadrons based in Suffolk not join the fight as our NATO allies? Those F15’s and F16’s and a few F35a’s might make a difference in this scenario

[@cameronspence4977]

You bet your ass we would That might make it too lopsided for the vid though

[@jayfron6012]

If there is an even small attack on Britain from Russia, it’s go time for NATO.

[@DigitalArtisan77]

I think that was on the pessimistic side for our air defences but it seems clear we're only about 1/3 necessary force.

[@Kaelland]

This may be a limitation of what's available in DCS, but the Royal Navy does operate some Type 23 Duke-class guided missile frigates in addition to the Type 45 Daring-class guided missile destroyers. I'm not saying they'd have turned the tide, but one or two of them operating in conjunction with the destroyers may have at least reduced the devastation.

[@MrTangolizard]

We also have land septor

[@Acheron666]

We’d have no chance. 129 aircraft capable of fighting. 101 euro fighters and 28 F-35Bs. 9 reaper drones……That’s all we’ve got excluding trainers and logistics/transport planes. Our government thinks our trident subs will stop any attacks from hostile nations, but we have a no first strike policy, so what use are those subs if we are attacked with conventional weapons. Our naval fleet would have to be in the right place at the right time, which would be no use in a surprise attack. Although we do have a few nuclear powered subs that can retaliate with our own cruise missiles. Those subs are also capable of firing nuclear cruise missiles……But we don’t possess any and would have to rely on the USA to donate them to us. Our F-35B multirole jets are also nuclear capable, but we also don’t posses any nuclear tipped missiles for them………Just 4 trident subs with a grand total of 215 nukes with only 115 active is supposed to stop an idiot like Putler attacking us, when he’s sitting on over 4000 nukes with nearly 2000 active at any time 😂.

[@roentgen571]

@@MrTangolizard CAMM is like 25-45km range, half of Patriot, maybe 1/3 of Arrow. The Land Sabre/CAMM system seems decent for what it is...but that's a medium range SAM, not a major defense asset. You'd use it to defend air bases and the like as a last resort before the MANPADS and point defense cannons. You want something BIG to cover large areas and start hitting things at long range to give fighters a chance to get in the air or get intercept vectors.

[@roentgen571]

@@Acheron666 I think the UK needs to buy Patriot, Arrow, or a land-based version of the Standard missile the USN uses for fleet defense...and you guys need more Typhoons and F35Bs. What do I know, though.

[@MrTangolizard]

@@roentgen571 yes I know but it’s still a asset that they didn’t deploy

[@F1END.MEGALITHIC]

my favourite bit is when it pans to the fly by of the typoon and you shout "big fighter!"

[@brovashift]

If this was to be our real RAF with "im lagging", "I've forgotten what button does what", "should we turn on our missile radar".... we really are screwed! 😂 its like a comedy sketch 🤣

[@barryjames3747]

Reminded me of Dads Army

[@Rover200Power]

So we have established that the new Typhoon isn't as good as the OG Typhoon at shooting cruise missiles.

[@ryanpayne7707]

Doesn't Menwith Hill have an EWR station operated by the USAF? Likewise, does the USAF have AWACS on alert in the UK? I'm sure they'd be more than happy to lend a helping hand to the RAF.

[@firestarteronyoutube5542]

Ignoring the fact that there are two F-15 squadrons at Lakenheath.

[@richardj9016]

Very kind of you old boy.

[@timblack6422]

@@firestarteronyoutube5542 I’ve got a son in law there working on F15 engines currently..

[@grimreapers]

I must admit I only looked at British assets.

[@timblack6422]

@@grimreapers but you have friends!!

[@last_methbender6306]

You forgot the Royal navy has 12 type 23 frigates with Sea ceptor missles that can shoot down cruise missles.

[@TheFreshman321]

I noticed that too. The scenario is incomplete. Missing 24 Rapier batteries and the new Land Sabre.

[@emmata98]

and how many are near the effected area?

[@huw008]

Was thinking about these ships too. These boats have Sea Camm that sounds quite capable even though range of these missiles are short

[@cadenkellner3227]

Does dcs even have type 23 frigates. They should of also added the sams

[@grimreapers]

Thanks

[@I-am-theStorm]

I've recently read about Sky Sabre. I assume this would dramatically change this battle

[@son-of-a-gun]

To be honoust... I It is not a matter of survival in case of a russian attack, it's a matter of not accepting the Russians bullying the rest of the world. I respect the brittish answer to the war in Ukraine.

[@T-3.]

Seems so far fetched, as soon as a Russian plane is detected in European airspace all countries at notified. NATO on alert jets from multiple countries scrambled. Missile launch detected countries would engage. But UK do need SAM’s across the UK

[@riskinhos]

@Gary Baldi in theory. in reality, they won't.

[@Saberjet1950]

I wonder if you could "tip" these missiles like the tempests did with the V1s. they fly so low it might work.

[@matwetton]

Great video. Id like to see this redone with the factor that a declaration of war on the uk means war with nato. This means american assets would defend the uk. Specifically the F15 fleet at raf lakenheath and the e3d screen from geilenkirchen germany

[@shin0bili]

Yep UK and western europe are cucks for the US :)

[@Rover200Power]

I saw an RAF E-3 flying last week sometime 🤔

[@firestarteronyoutube5542]

@@Rover200Power they're "officially" retired but i guess some airplane enthusiasts got their hands on a pretty big radar

[@alexis1451]

And not just the US - plenty of NATO countries close to the UK that would assist in its defense.

[@matwetton]

@@alexis1451 absolutely, I only referenced the F15's at Lakenheath as it would fit this model pretty easily and the F15 is a perfect jet for this type of mission.

[@bugzy8466]

As a university student studying a stressful Masters Degree, that would just take the piss if i got nuked before i even finish

[@leodahood2150]

If an attack was on its way toward britain from north,you would be warned before they passed Murmansk …. Norwegian radarpost in Vardø 😉 besides we are on same team…so are Danmark…you are not alone

[@Xoferif]

"Who do you think you are kidding Mr Putin, if you think old England's done?"

[@classunknown]

Dad's army russian special haha 😂

[@clemalford9768]

'Don't tell him Pike'!!!!

[@markusmaximus6636]

Russia would absolutely wipe us off the table

[@garioedwards8833]

England would be done for. No doubt about that.

[@mattmaschmeyer2120]

I've watched Mark's video and it was very well made and make some good points, but what he doesn't take into account is that great Britain is a NATO member and I am quite positive before they would even attempt to enforce a no-fly zone great Britain would be massively reinforced by United States Patriot missile batteries and air Force

[@arlenehiles2689]

Yes, I don't think that Britain would just go into a no fly zone etc on its own.

[@garydixon8847]

Yep spot on matt

[@jonathanpatrick8506]

I do think you also left out another Airforce that can in fact defend the UK as well which happens to be the USAAF based in RAF Lakenheath

[@ivantheteribul]

I think you mean the USAF.

[@TheOneLifeRider]

"our Lord and Saviour - Mark Felton"! Love it! He's my history channel of choice too.

[@terencebriggs1261]

Great Channel mate

[@gundamator4709]

Good simulation, sadly there are too many factors for you to even get close to simulating this in DCS but I enjoyed the simulation none the less.

[@eastyorkie1972]

Russia probably has more satellites looking at it than anywhere else. As soon as they could see loads of bombers being loaded with munitions it would have stirred a hornet's nest, but even so, Britain is seriously under defended from airborne threats Super vid btw

[@castlekingside76]

Russia doesn't have that ability. Britain does.

[@briant5685]

@@castlekingside76 hahaha your english a***s wouldn't stand a chance

[@jeremypintsize7606]

@@castlekingside76 And UK have allies , Russia have North Korea...

[@KingOfZamunda]

Don't you have any clue on military strategy? They are always loading the bombers and flying towards unfriendly countries. It is a part of their daily/weekly activities. Not just russians but all militaries do that. They breach each others airspace just to see how long it takes to get a response. They fly towards others while they are conducting exercises, they fly towards their ships, enter through remotes areas, conduct missile tests which fly towards their foes but dip juat in time. Militaries are always doing provocative stuff just that it is not reported in the news.

[@andrewcowling5804]

@@KingOfZamunda They dont breach nations airspace. they always fly in international airspace. just look at Denmark and Sweden today sending for their respective Russian ambassadors to give them a right dressing down over a breach of their airspace. and we are part of Nato. so we won't be alone

[@kevinzeh3559]

Only a few minutes in but here's my question. Wouldn't the bombers have to fly over other NATO countries to get in range for the cruise missiles they carry? Also since you have no airborne EWR at the moment wouldn't NATO and USAF fill in for the time being?

[@kevinzeh3559]

First question answered. Second question still stands.

[@davidburke8311]

@@kevinzeh3559 Looking at Flightradar right now, and NATO01 which is an E3A Sentry has been doing circles all evening over the Babadag region of Romania where they have some heavy military. Very close to the West of Ukraine. Second question answered? I don't know what they listen to or the range they can listen to but I'll bet I sleep sound tonight in Northampton - England. I do live on the "Daventry Corridor" which is used by the USAF at RAF Fairford as well as our own RAF at Brize Norton. Had a couple of Stratofortresses go over the other night....

[@duanesamuelson2256]

No. They can come in over the ocean..or even over the icecap and come from the west. People tend to forget that Russia isn't landlocked since they don't have year around ports for the most part.

[@grimreapers]

Good Q

[@Euphoftoday]

Well done for providing all this information to anyone who watches it.

[@pureloyalist9277]

Thats right just tell everyone what we have and haven't, unreal this is the type of news any country wanting to attack the UK will love to have , how was this allowed to be shown on any media,

[@ggc]

Biggest problem with this is the raptors on the queen Elizabeth class would launch and would help out...also the other 50 or so eurofighters would be over London etc in 30 minutes and the computer controlled eurofighters should have targeted to missiles first 👍😁

[@holdfast453]

No raptors this side of the pond. Noisy lightnings more like it.

[@ggc]

@@holdfast453 yes my bad you're right I meant lightning 2 👍😁

[@tatsviewsver1.01m3]

@@ggc and the sky saber.

[@robertlangley687]

All in 202 seconds don't think so.

[@jureeratpholseela7508]

@@tatsviewsver1.01m3 lol how many system are operational. Two ?

[@fatimapina811]

Your consistency and quality of content never disappoints 💜

[@rennismorian8176]

This sounds academically sound but too simplistic .NATO will detect the movement of these planes and there is solid defence

[@nigelpilgrim4232]

Our nuclear powered submarines with trident nuclear missiles will soon attack back & the Russians would have a taste of destruction & the Russians know we have got them !!! Not to mention the US would in turn retaliate as a NATO member & common friend !!!

[@saintuk70]

With the GDP % requirements for NATO, along with a long established military, you're highlighting real world issues with our defenses. In the post-Glasnost Europe we all thought the former Soviet Union threat had gone, however, in the last 5-10 years being back on guard is a must.

[@fredcarr3550]

Not sure that the British defence people shared your thoughts that Russian threats had gone away, or there wouldn't have built a new aircraft carrier.

[@saintuk70]

@@fredcarr3550 carriers were mainly seen as for Far Eastern deployment as well as the far eastern side of the Med, not as a counter to a resurgent Soviet "era". Given the defence review of around 2000 post Gulf War etc. The focus had shifted elsewhere, away from Russia.

[@fredcarr3550]

@@saintuk70 This confirms the old saying, "when you talk peace, you must prepare for war".

[@capmultser]

As always these sites do not check facts. The radar station on Portsdown hill overlooking Portsmouth can pick up a plane taking off from USA. So I'm pretty sure they can pick up anything else heading this way.

[@kingnillvwell381]

That the problem when you see the big kids play with dangerous toys.

[@dennisrichards2540]

Great video. i'm doubtful anything would happen given our geopolitics but I do think we should better defences against cruise missile strikes against our valuable targets like military bases and infrastructure. to be honest we should be developing something to respond against hypersonic cruise missiles not just normal ones.

[@rickywallace98]

Seems to me that all you are doing is actually giving the information needed to the enemy!

[@KT-TV]

Exactly...children of a couch war generation...morons

[@arlenehiles2689]

Y Yes you have a point.

[@MultiPorkpie]

I agree

[@categories5066]

If a random youtuber has this information I'm very sure the Russian secret services has it too

[@unknownunknown3368]

That's exactly what I thought everything is plain to see and they have been doing it for years

[@georgecolthurst4216]

Neat idea, hope you retry it. Scale it back to what the map allows though, that is just too much everything in that tiny area. Mark's stuff is great, but his scenario is a bit far-fetched. Doesn't matter though, as long as it makes a fun video for you guys to fly in.

[@sam_uelson]

There was an air combat game around year 2000 called eurofighter typhoon, that involved a Russian war on the west. The plot was you manning a squadron of typhoons defending Iceland against waves of incoming Russian missiles, fighters, bombers then attempting to stop a ground invasion.

[@steverobbo55]

Never under mind your Country’s Defence 😡 Defence Department only tells what they want you to know 🇦🇺

[@grimreapers]

Defending Britain From Russian Nuclear Ballistic Missiles: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qKvOZWiIe7aqd5o

[@denisplamondon1530]

0

[@TennesseeHomesteadUSA]

Not going to happen. Felton is way out of his league...

[@we-are-electric1445]

@@flashgordon6670 I don't think 192 300 lb warheads is going to bring the country to its knees - assuming they all hit the target.. Looking at Russia performance un Ukraine ( assuming Russia has enough missiles left to use on us) they couldn't hit a barn door from 200 yards. By the time Russia have finished in Ukraine it won't have any missiles left - and with sanctions no way to pay for or manufacture any more. It is fair to assume some or all of the bombers would be shot down. You also have to wonder how many mechanical failures the Russian planes may have and with a 60% failure rate of missiles in Ukraine I am not going to lose any sleep over this video. I also believe the UK is using Norway or is negotiating with Norway to station some Typhoons there it is always possible none of the Russian planes or missiles get through at all . Without nuclear weapons you don't win a war from the air you have to get boots on the ground and we are so far away the Russians are never going to do that.

[@MDC2020]

I like how alot of Russias equipment looks just like US Equipment lol but more of a "Dollar Store" quality lol

[@nigelkingston7698]

Hope and pray you don't run into them... u might not live to tell us how effective they were.

[@danhodson7187]

This was really cool to see! Out of interest, with F35 being upgraded to also carry Meteor could we maybe also have the 24 x F35's taking off from QE in Pompy as well as the 25 x Typhoons scrambling from Conningsby? Also we'd possibly have a Type45 in Portsmouth/The Channel with it for a bit of extra Sea Sceptre. I'm by no means an expert but maybe that would add to the defence scenario :)

[@guitarmasterjay00]

The aircraft are disembarked when the carrier is alongside

[@Stevirobbo]

But we have our spitfires in our museums !!

[@Ian-xq4rt]

F35’s sitting on HMS Queen Elizabeth would also get involved, completely missed off. Interesting to see, you clearly get excited by doing this you can tell, but just not realistic for me as many people have said.

[@lorrebreaker]

Wouldn't the new Sky Sabre system have had an impact on the result at all?

[@jakehayes1998]

I would of thought so.. and we have plenty of sea ceptor?

[@steve-iw2bg]

Yes it would, the artillery regiment responsible for air defense is based on thorney island 8.5 miles east of Portsmouth, they operate sky sabre and Stormer.

[@skatman3278]

Yes it would. Sky Sabre, Rapier (it's still in service), and Stormer would all have a say in the matter. There's also the small matter of a fair few frigates with decent S2A capabilities themselves too.

[@Nathan-ng1jt]

For God's sake don't give Putin any ideas! Leave him to read his "Janet and John invade England" level 1 book (with mostly pictures).

[@Davros-vi4qg]

Yes Nathan, now known as ‘Terry’ 😆

[@alanholck7995]

Is it possible to try the WW2 trick (used against V-1s) of putting a wing under the cruise missile wing & flip it over? Also - the next simulation should be - UK was attacked, NATO article 5 is triggered, here is NATO response. In reality I think the Blackjacks would be taken out by Norway et al on the flight back.

[@tomk3732]

LOL no.

[@robertschultz6922]

Boy I'm glad that maintenance was so good that you had 100% availability

[@charlieterry5357]

This is all very cheerful news! Successive governments of both parties cutting our defence capabilities to the bone!! To think my home county and town of Woodbridge would be vapourized! Thanks Mr Johnson!!

[@dulls8475]

We have more important issues to deal with like "Boris looked at a cake", "Starmer held a beer in Durham" and what a women is.

[@mistrall5437]

For British Islands Russian have prepared only 3 or 4 Zircon missiles with nuclear war deads...😎

[@Rednax42]

As it's the anniversary, any chance of you covering the Falklands war (1982)? I'd be fascinated to see what if the Argentine carrier managed to launch its A4s (in reality they didn't have enough wind) during "pincer movement" against RN taskforce

[@84Plato]

I mean, I find it hard to believe all those bombers would be able to make it all that way across NATO airspace unmolested.

[@SAINT200690]

The US has a Air Base in Scotland that could get there in Time!.. We really do need to pimp up our Defence but Norway and Iceland would send too.

[@johnq5284]

If Russia attacked without warning you would be lucky if you launched half of your aircraft before the 1st missile impacted...

[@endgovernmentextremism]

Luckily the bankers who own Russia and Ukraine own the West as well.

[@level30boss27]

Russia would be lucky if their aircraft didn't crash on takeoff

[@steve-iw2bg]

Any Russian attack would come 2500km over NATO airspace, we would have plenty of warning and no Russian bomber would make it home.

[@liammears]

What a terrifying video for someone who lives in East Suffolk. Seeing all these places I drive past everyday getting obliterated by Russian cruise missiles! They close the Orwell Bridge occasionally for high winds, and then Britain's busiest port has to route all traffic through tiny single carriage roads, causes absolute carnage. Never thought of it as a military target though. Think Britain probably has more assets available to it then this video suggests though and obviously allies, we haven't burnt all our bridges yet!

[@whousley]

All of this assumes that all of the Russian aircraft and missiles used here are in a usable state of service and they have enough adequately trained pilots to pull off such an attack...which, given what we know so far about their space program and military is a very, very generous assumption. Also that they can gather such a force without attracting enough attention to allow you to preposition naval units better.

[@whousley]

@UNEDITED mmm hmmm. Tell me. Would they be launched from ships as fragile as the Moskva? England could just need send in a bunch of ninja monkeys with hand grenades.

[@whousley]

@UNEDITED Thank you. You've expanded my knowledge.

[@kityhawk2000]

@SPECIAL MILITARY OPERATION aww are you salty you lost your flagship. Did you know you are now in the record books for being the only nation to lose their flagship to another country that doesn't even have an active navy. Why don't you admit how many people actually died on it? I'm sure they're families would like to know.

[@aleckulik8242]

You wish?

[@geo.m1639]

It would be interesting if you did one including US Assets in the UK like their F-15s, F-16s and the NATO E-3

[@ionutbz1]

Russia is currently not able to defeat Ukraine, how would you expect them to defeat the UK…?!

[@Shrimping]

Now do Felton’s Nuclear Strike, not sure how but nuke something cmon.

[@grimreapers]

k

[@paulharrison2325]

Right now I would be surprised if they had a dozen of these missiles and one plane to deliver them…! Thanks for the content, as always, brilliant

[@Hail_Full_of_Grace]

really? they have plenty of kit mate.

[@castlekingside76]

No they don't. Russia is running out of them.

[@ilovecoffeev]

@@Hail_Full_of_Grace they may have kit, but trained pilots don't just appear out of nowhere. They hardly get enough airtime training to get the basics, much less to face off against QRF pilots.

[@Hail_Full_of_Grace]

@@ilovecoffeev They have fully functioning bomber crew and many bombers , show me evidence they dont id love to be wrong.

[@paulharrison2325]

@@Hail_Full_of_Grace yes they do, the Russian military is large and modern. The issue is that the large part is not modern and the modern part is not large. I think we can clearly see in ukraine that it has a lot of obsolete equipment, a lot of untrained soldiers and a lot of low tech weapons. We are certainly not seeing this scale of relatively high spec attack - and I doubt that’s because they have it just aren’t using it.

[@davidlabedz2046]

I have noticed in most of your simulations, Russian CIWS, RARELY miss incoming American cruise missiles and Russian cruise missiles almost always get to the target.

[@georgeantabi6025]

Because that's the truth.

[@dinodude7290]

DCS do be like that

[@fredsas12]

In reality its the total opposite, though. Russian CIWS and anti missile system are pretty bad vs Western era contemporaries, never mind modern variants.

[@georgeantabi6025]

@Gary Baldi yeah well how about the Ticonderoga tries shooting down sea-skimming missiles in strong waves, 30 knot winds and rain.

[@georgeantabi6025]

@Gary Baldi now if you're talking about DCS, all of the attacks were simulated in excellent weather, so I honestly don't have any reason not to believe in Russian AA systems. And my second point is that the weather is interrupting the radar waves, not the weapons themselves, and since the Moskva and the Ticonderoga use the same radar frequencies, it is very possible that the Ticonderoga would preform just like the Moskva. And something else I wanted to include in my first reply was that the number of missiles fired at the ship was unknown, so they could've fired as many as 64 Neptunes (since it is estimated that 8 TEL vehicles are present in Odessa according to internet sources), and don't forget that they also used a TB-2 to get the attention of the ship. So this is why I think the sinking of the Moskva was only a matter of luck, not "Ukronazi superiority".

[@malcolm824]

More UK videos would be great

[@geoff8361]

& all the American fighters will sit & watch it all happening!!!

[@lostsoul4680]

I think this assumes Russia could get all those tu 160s, and even tu22 or bears over to us without being spotted or intercepted by other nato assets fyrther forward. Even if they did ut would be a 1 shot proposition as theyd never get home. Also i dare say we wouldnt be over Ukraine without US support and they or nato e3s could help fill the gap.

[@fredsas12]

That's true. The UK is extremely safe from Russian attack just by virtue of its location as the Western most European NATO nation with effectively all of NATO sitting between us and and Russia. The only way is through the North Sea, and that would be "naturally" defended by other NATO and friendly nations themselves. We wouldn't even need article 5.

[@volodumurkalunyak4651]

Major part of those tu 160s and tu 22 would be shot down over Ukrainian territory. Assuming all of those would be there only to launch an attack on United Kingdom is really far-fetched.

[@henrygibson9613]

Would the type 45 radar and typhoons be on data link?

[@TheFreshman321]

Yes correct.

[@grimreapers]

yes

[@michaelc318]

I think you would be surprised what the British have we are not going to advertise what we have.

[@jonathondavies8347]

plus you have the complication of fuel burn. time to get on target, engage, and return to base unless refuelled mid air, which would be pointless.

[@RealtalkManc]

Putin is currently sat at home watching this thinking “thanks guys”

[@mwtrolle]

The bombers would be tracked by Norway and they would send some fighters follow them. As they started to fire some if not all would be shot down. The RAF and Royal Navy would have had time to get somewhat ready. Also from what we have seen in Ukraine it’s not likely the bombers all would make it to the launch point. They are probably all badly maintained. :P

[@zilfondel]

While I agree that the bombers would be shit down as soon as they launched their missiles, I have one counterpoint. Russia has several times flown bombers all the way across the Arctic and pacific ocean to off the coast of Seattle with their bear bombers. They have very long range and are very capable, although in what numbers is not known.

[@mwtrolle]

@@zilfondel Don't really help, there are radars in Iceland, and Greenland as well, and flying over Canada or the US is simply out of the question. If they fly really low they probably do not have enough range to make it. Anyway, there are ships in the area as well they would have to dodge if that's even possible then it would force them to change direction a lot using even more fuel. Then there are the AWACS planes flying in the area as well. There is simply no way they can get in position to fire their missiles before getting intercepted. Besides maybe if it comes like a Pearl Harbor attack, completely out of the blue. I'm sure NATO and the UK are ready in case Russia should try something like that, anyway it would be a one-off attack after that WW3 would start and Russia could not send planes up anywhere outside their A2/AD cover.

[@tarqscam8491]

I appreciate your content however. The missile has to come a long way. Past other countries. RAF Mildenhall/Lakenheath have detection systems.

[@hgh96]

Acording to NATO countries half of the russian cruise missiles fail to reach the target in Ukraine

[@hgh96]

@Kotomine Berndrewd NATO never mentioned Ghost of Kyiv.

[@Penfold101]

Putin: “Write that down, write that down!”