Ukraine using WW2 Spitfire-style planes to shoot down Russian drones in humiliating blow to Putin

UKRAINE are using WW2-style planes to hunt down Russian drones on the battlefield in a blow to Vladimir Putin's increasingly desperate war effort.
Air Marshal Greg Bagwell, a retired RAF commander, told The Sun Ukraine has taken inspiration from Britain's famous Spitfires and are making headway in the skies against Vlad's meatgrinder troops.
Read more: www.thesun.co.....
The Sun delivers breaking news, latest gossip and incredible exclusives around the world with hubs in London, New York, Scotland and Ireland.
Covering topics from news, money and sport along with our famous Fabulous Magazine, The Sun is the biggest news brand in the UK and one of the fastest growing news sites in the US.
Stay tuned for video clips across the biggest news stories and segments from The Sun’s expert journalists.
Become a Sun Subscriber and hit the bell to be the first to know.
Read The Sun: www.thesun.co....
Like The Sun on Facebook: / thesun
Follow The Sun on X: / thesun
Follow The Sun on TikTok: / thesun
Subscribe to The Sun on Snapchat: / 1633225139
#thesun #ukraine #russia

[@GustavG10]

'Spitfire style planes' lol , by the Sun's logic almost every light GA aircraft is Spitfire style.

[@Furudal]

Well closer to a spitfire than a mig29, that’s probably what they are going fo and it’s accurate

[@SS-yt2sq]

Gen Zer likely. only similarity is they both are prop driven. what a buffoon

[@hoppie8693]

@@Furudal That is like saying that I drive a Formula one type car to work when I use my little Fiat because that is closer to it than to my semitrailer. These aircraft and lets say a Spitfire Mk. IX have nothing in common except the fact that they are propeller driven.

[@UserUser-ww2nj]

@@hoppie8693 A clue is in the description of the video " Spitfire style

[@Furudal]

@@hoppie8693 your semi can run probably 100k km between maintenance and oil change, the Fiat probably 20 to 30k, the F1 car needs an engine rebuild after only 1000 km or lesss

[@prototype_0xD1]

Slow drones need slow moving fire platforms to be able to shoot them down. Use an appropriate tool for a problem at hand.

[@Unmannedair]

The problem isn't the speed, is the size... Those drones are small and hard to hit

[@mrbaab5932]

If the platform is slow only, how does the platform catch up to the drone?

[@alberthofmann420]

So what you are saying is that the US is keeping the A10 in the end? 🤔

[@firstnamerequiredlastnameo3473]

This was a problem that troubled the WW2 German rocket airplanes. They traveled so fast that they passed through the Allied bomber formations before they could get more than a few shots. Those rocket planes were over 100 MPH faster than the bombers, and their cannon firing rate was too slow for that speed. When your target speed is not much more than your stalling speed, you definitely have a mismatch problem.

[@firstnamerequiredlastnameo3473]

@@mrbaab5932 Easy. the attacker is still faster than the target drone, just not too much faster or else able to slow down enough to provide more aiming time to focus the bullet stream.

[@Sheepo-gk9yx]

maybe do some more research before you call it a "spitfire-style 1914 airplane"

[@alicet4339]

Nice try cotton, try 1938. You where only off by 24 years.

[@XavierAncarno]

🤣🤣🤣

[@StefanHoffmann84]

wait till the Russians come with the Me-262-Style 1871 Kaiser-Plane.

[@VincentNajger1]

How can a brit be so ignorant of iconic WW2 stuff? lmao

[@plusxz821]

​@@StefanHoffmann84*the red barón starts playing*

[@ergosum5260]

WWII spitfire style Except it's a trainer designed in 1976, great research team there.

[@jannespor8178]

V1s were shot down by Spitfires, Mosquitoes, Tempests, but not Hurricanes.

[@johnhough7738]

I didn't know that, live and learn. Is there are "why" or a "why not" in there?

[@kengilbert2620]

@@johnhough7738 Hurricanes would have been far too slow. By the time the V1's were in the air the Spit Marks were way faster than the ones that served during Battle of Britain. The faster Typhoons and Tempest had replaced the Hurricane in the European theatre.

[@prashanthb6521]

Mosquitoes mostly because they had range and speed.

[@jameskjx]

shot down - or (what seems mad the days) - flying alongside, and tipping it over with your wing... also Meteors of course...

[@jeffslade1892]

A little unfair. We keep hearing that the Hurri was not fast enough, but it was a very stable gun platform and 300+mph. The Hurri was almost obsolete by 1939 and by the time of the V1 being used for ground attack, the Hurri-bomber role (Hurricane IV). Such as V1 launch sites in France, but these were defended by flak and bombed up the Hurri could barely manage 200mph and would get mauled. But they still went.

[@irisaviation852]

This guy talks some rubbish. This is a great training aircraft and can fly slow enough to shoot down drones. First flew in 1976 and still used now.

[@VickersDoorter]

He dyes his hair. Not a good look on a man. A proper man.

[@insertnamehere001]

When did he say it was a bad training aircraft? And using propeller planes in a active warzone is asking to be shot down, like he says. Are you saying it's safe to fly these with guided missiles around?

[@UserUser-ww2nj]

@@insertnamehere001 They are not being flown in the active war zone but further in from the front lines well out of SAM range

[@irisaviation852]

@@insertnamehere001 do helicopters have those spinning things? Do the drone have the spinning things? This aircraft is not WW2, flies at the correct speed to shoot down drones and is used as a trainer. What’s your point again?

[@glennjames7107]

It's not shooting quadcoptors down. It cant stop, and it cant turn with it. This is bs. Just more propaganda from the Sun !

[@jeffslade1892]

You may not want a "sniper" in an aircraft but an "air-gunner" as they are not the same skill set. My late father was particularly effective in the back seat of a Lancaster but pretty hopeless with a rifle.

[@PatrickLipsinic]

WHAT?!? A Yak52 is nothing like a Spitfire.

[@CrashesAndDestruction]

This guy saying the Yak-52 is from WW1 is insane.....

[@FernandoLopez-w5l]

you are insane in your interpretation. the guy said, "WW1 era". your mind is just idiotic

[@fordhouse8b]

He is not saying that. He is talking about the Yak-52 using what is basically WW1 era tactics.

[@joaogomes9405]

@@fordhouse8b Such as flying at the enemy and shooting them? That's not WW1 era tactics, that's just what you do in a plane with guns. If the gun isn't attached to the plane, then it's being held by someone in the plane.

[@fordhouse8b]

@@joaogomes9405 I didn’t mean to say his comments were necessarily accurate. Nor am I saying you were right. I know nothing of WWI aerial tactics. All I meant to point out is that he was not saying the Yak-52 was a WWI era plane. He was talking about WWI era tactics, whether he was doing so accurately or not I will leave to more knowledgable people.

[@Kruegernator123]

Spitfires were used to shoot V-1s down in British airspace. This Yak-52 is beings used to shoot down Russian loitering munitions.

[@guydreamr]

In which The Sun vividly illustrates the Circle of Life.

[@jimmyandersson8520]

this isnt even close to a spitfire

[@DailyGrindAus]

He's an Air Marshall? Clearly knows little about props - the Yak 52 is a trainer, great power to weight ratio and most definitely not of the WW1ilk.

[@williamzk9083]

The Yak-52 has a maximum speed of only 177mph which is enough to intercept the Shahed 136 which is only 115mph. Designed in South Africa by Dennel and purchased via a front company.

[@johndell3642]

Listen to it all again. He's not saying the aircraft is 1914, he's saying the tactics are 1914.

[@bongobrandy6297]

That's a mighty fine overstuffed armchair you parking in, cadet ckernl.

[@richardmarsden5610.]

Oh how sweet. You finally popped your cherry 🍒 and posted your first ever comment in 15 years. Classic example of a recently purchased bot farm account

[@DailyGrindAus]

@@richardmarsden5610. Are you commenting to me? I have commented plenty of times over a number of years. Well before bots, there were trolls....

[@billestew7535]

I was thinking this a couple of weeks ago,something like an AN2 Colt armed with PKM machine guns,AN2 has great legs and the right speed, maybe not a great gun platform for air to air but they are plentiful

[@randywatkins3306]

HAY MAN WAR IS WAR ! TIME DOESN'T MATTER , WINNING ! WINNING MATTER'S !😊

[@joedance14]

The YAK52 is NOT a Spitfire-style aircraft. Not even close. A basic trainer. Nothing wrong with that - trainers are essential. But definitely not in the same class as a Spitfire.

[@SS-yt2sq]

to the dolt writing the headline, they both have props, ergo same. incredible

[@johnhough7738]

Cost and effectiveness. If a drone is cheap and effective, brilliant. If a drone is costly and effective, that too is good; for the droner (no so for the dronee ...) I used to think about training marksmen to knock down drones ... why not just recruit duck-hunters and other such? (That would indeed be win/win, no?)

[@crzy11000]

Ducks are all shot at less than 50 yardsIt would be incredibly hard to get within 50 yards of a drone.

[@johnhough7738]

I wouldn't like to be within 50 yards of a drone either, dead or alive (drone, not me).

[@LS-uv9gg]

"of". Blown out *OF* the sky.

[@mads2a]

The use of the Yak-52 to deal with drones, particularly the Shahed and similar kinds of kamikaze drones, is genius. Those drones are relatively slow, slower even than the World War 2 era fighter planes specially the later models. The Yak-52 can loiter for a lot longer than jet planes and can be armed with machine guns. The Ukrainians are teaching the world how to fight a modern war using old equipment and win. Long Live Ukraine!

[@coldspirit9904]

ww1 style planes had the double wing stack style...lol..i agree with the title of this video...they do look more like spitfires...

[@thegoatslayer7403]

War, war never changes

[@southernknight9983]

Humiliating Putin? This won't even effect the outcome of any battle.

[@temmy9]

How is this humiliating to putin?

[@NineSeptims]

Agreed. Highly opinionated title that is overdone.

[@tonyyarbray]

the only thing "spitfire style" about that slow moving trainer is it has a propeller and wings and a tail

[@firstnamerequiredlastnameo3473]

and a human pilot stuck in there somewhere.

[@paulmurgatroyd6372]

Wouldn't it be more of a Yak 'style' aircraft than a Spitfire 'style'?

[@nadyamullen6098]

He sure loves that word "relatively"

[@jonjdoe]

Those are nothing like Spitfires, other than both have propellers.

[@dronepilot260rc]

That design is sick!

[@paulwilliamson2370]

This is not a Spitfire type aircraft. It is most comparable to either the Harvard or the American version the Texan. Both were WW2 trainer aircraft.

[@joaogomes9405]

WW2 predates this plane by a lot, since it was first flown in 1976. the Yak 52 is closer to the NDN Firecracker or the Short Tucano

[@mortenkpke5728]

Spot on. Good to hear the Air Marshal's assessment. I have flown a number of fighters, and believe me, it is hard to hit a target with a gun mounted to an airplane. Even harder when it is flying. And the drones are small. And plenty of them. Continue to innovate, we cannot shape a future without having a proper cost-effective defence against drones.

[@markeh1971]

Hi, cost effective in terms of money, resources and manpower. You are going to have to have ground defences - guns as well as airborne, maybe even non manned. Take care M.

[@stnaes-tf4ow]

The only thing humiliating here is Ukraine doesn't have enough modern war planes, so they have to resort to WW2 planes. Anyone with half-a-brain would expect that a big plane with machine guns is capable of shooting down small drones with no protection against machine gun fire

[@АлексейСмирнов-к4л]

Ukraine had several hundred combat aircraft - SU-27, MIG-29, SU-25, SU-24. Where did they all go?

[@patefreeman1106]

If you had watched a certain Simpson episode you would know that flying a jet fighter going at Mach 2 might not be the best choice to shoot down what basically a flying bomb with a propeller. You can use a missile but that will be costly and generally overkill, using old relics of war isn’t that rare anyways in the war look for example Russians using bolt actions.

[@pipopoikapelaa5468]

​@@patefreeman1106Missiles also have a high chance of straight up just missing a drone because they are too small to trigger a missiles fuze.

[@mr.lumbergh]

This makes a lot of sense. Jets overtake slow-moving drones too quickly, but propeller driven planes have more time to acquire them.

[@LinuxMaster9]

Have fun acquiring an object the size of a book or binder while you are traveling at more than 56 knots (stall speed) (~64 mph). If it was a Predator drone, that would be one thing. But DGI? Good luck wasting fuel. But then again, Ukraine aint paying for any of that NATO is.

[@mr.lumbergh]

@@LinuxMaster9 "But then again, Ukraine aint paying for any of that NATO is." Damn good thing they are, too. Are you naive enough to think Putin plans on stopping at Ukraine?

[@pipopoikapelaa5468]

​@@LinuxMaster9A lot of the time the drones Ukrainians shoot down this way are long range surveillance drones. Which usually are around the size of said predator drones.

[@jeffreyplum5259]

Murphy's Law of Combat: "If it Stupid and it Works, It ain't Stupid! " The aircraft reminds me of the AT-6 Texan, advanced trainer of WW2. They were armed as part of advanced training. Nothing says these drone hunters cannot be armed cleverly as well. Ukraine is becoming known for using what work wherever it comes from. Good for them God bless them all.

[@bigbadcivic2]

this is like the "turtle tank" of ukraine. sometime it is the simple things that work. this works both ways.

[@bryanst.martin7134]

KUDOs to AM Bagwell, for his astute explanation.

[@everTriumph]

YAK 52 has been used as a handy aerobatic aircraft. Not in the same league a Extra's, but not as expensive either. The 'tipping' of the V1 actually caused the internal Gyro to topple, and the poor thing no longer knew which way was up, never mind change its course, so gravity took over pilotage.

[@duartesimoes508]

Then the Londoners said "The poor thing is going down!" 😀

[@firstnamerequiredlastnameo3473]

Cute description of mechanical confusion.

[@steelpanther9568]

The aircraft has fuel and oil systems permitting inverted flight for as long as two minutes. The engine drives a two-bladed counter-clockwise rotating, variable pitch, wood and fiberglass laminate propeller. At 998 kg (2,200 lb) empty weight, the Yak-52 is responsive and very capable as an aerobatic aircraft. 🇺🇦😎👍🏼

[@jonnybloggs6790]

So if that’s all true why are they not just going back to ww1 era weapons to fight each other with instead of taking all our tax money to fund expensive bombs ana technology that they don’t even use it’s crazy

[@timberwoof]

Yeah, that WWI technology was more amazing than most people know, right? ;-)

[@baddream9668]

Hi Folks, His mention of fighters flipping V1 rockets is not really accurate. There was not contact. The air pressure change from a fighter's wing close to the V1 wing would set it off course.

[@timberwoof]

This is similar to how as airliner can send a Cessna off course.

[@jz7692]

Anti Aircraft was famously moved for cities to the coast to combat V1s. The then recently US produced proximity fuse helped. The allied aircraft would then fly in zones beyond the Anti Aircraft fence. "Kent became known as "Bomb Alley"". This was known as layered defence. Of course ground attack & spotters for launch sites were also utilized.

[@richardvernon317]

The British had very good radar cover of the Kent coast by 1944. Chain Home Low (CHL) Radars had a range of 60 miles and could see down to 500 feet. Chain Home Extra Low (CHEL) radars could track aircraft at 50 Feet out to 15 miles).

[@J2897Tutorials]

I wonder if a falconry could be hired to introduce a flock of golden-eagles trained specifically to hunt drones in exchange for food.

[@J2897Tutorials]

Pretty big: jagKnS2mE7w

[@akostadinov]

Maybe easier to train crows.

[@J2897Tutorials]

@@akostadinov Crows are meant to be very intelligent too according to some studies.

[@richardmarsden5610.]

WOW. Now that maybe the DUMBEST THING that I have ever heard.😂😂😂

[@PiDsPagePrototypes]

Birds will hunt Drones, but as the police who tried it in the Netherlands found, those same birds can also attack kids flying cheap quadcopters in parks...

[@crimfan]

Bring back the Boulton-Paul Defiant!

[@DDayJayke]

It isn't humiliating. It is an unarmed drone that could have been taken down by small arms fire. If it shot down a Su-34 or Su-25, that would be humiliating, but this is no different than the US using an F-22 to pop a spy balloon. The only thing people will remember about this, will be the fact that journalists think any plane with propellors and guns is a Spitfire. It was a Yak at best. Hell, it could have been a Bf-109 and they'd still say "Spitfire-style"

[@J2897Tutorials]

Human snipers sound pretty awkward in the air I think. It might be better to use autonomous machines that can adjust their aim based on the inputs from various sensors.

[@StanleyPinchak]

Like a radar guided machine gun?

[@J2897Tutorials]

@@StanleyPinchak I was thinking of visual sensors (cameras, including IR), wind sensors, gyroscopes - I'd just load the AI with every sensor available to see which combination provides the most accuracy at the highest possible speed. But sure, radar could be used in locating targets.

[@TheosLogos]

Humans being amazed that old tools are still used is pretty sad...

[@donaldalvord3604]

the Spitfire was quite successful at intercepting V-1s

[@god1971b]

Not dumb, using slow maneuvering aircraft is an excellent idea. wonder if there a few Argentinian IA-58 Pucara available.

[@Kruegernator123]

Hundreds of armchair aerospace designers got filtered by the video title.

[@patrickllt]

Wow......never thought this day would come

[@STDRACO777]

this is interesting for something far behind the lines but yes, With modern day infantry guns they would be easy targets. easier than drones.

[@robertwoodroffe123]

My father was both a champion wing shot ( shotgun ) and rifle and machine gun. Ended becoming command of first nz WW2 sniper squad!

[@hereigoagain5050]

Thanks Air Marshal Greg. Common-tators claim some of you facts are wrong, but your analysis is spot on.

[@timberwoof]

It's simple to confirm from independent sources that some of his claims are wrong. He's right in some things and wrong in others. The research to figure out which is which makes him redundant.

[@hereigoagain5050]

@@timberwoof Sure, but does that invalidate his conclusions about drones and air defense?

[@timberwoof]

@@hereigoagain5050 Not necessarily. Since his expertise is in doubt, I'd try to get confirmation.

[@stevenleek1254]

A Well presented historical contex!

[@topeagle6248]

I wander how you dealt with the drone that was flying over Gatwick airport !

[@BurchellAtTheWharf]

Wooden planes gonna be maken a comeback eh

[@jonnybloggs6790]

Same as the horse and cart along with the use of sticks and stones and harsh language to fight future wars ….crazy eh especially when they have stolen all our tax money and this is what we get

[@BurchellAtTheWharf]

@@jonnybloggs6790 soon sticks and stones will be highteck if things don't settle down

[@StanleyPinchak]

There are cardboard drones

[@BurchellAtTheWharf]

@@StanleyPinchak what is cardboard made out of? Recycled paper What is paper made out of ? Would pulp

[@StanleyPinchak]

@@BurchellAtTheWharf Are you also autistic?

[@arthurswart4436]

Literally...

[@joblo341]

You provided a good summary of the evolution of flight in WWI. In the case of drones in Ukr keep suggesting adding a rope/wire "tail", approximately like a kite tail. Then the "attacking" drones flies above and in front of the target, letting the tail tangle in the props. An/or add hooks to "trip"/unbalance the enemy drone.

[@edhenderson1655]

Flipping the wing of a WW-II V-1 Doodlebug upset the internal gyroscope causing it to crash. It didn't go somewhere else, it spiraled down and crashed.

[@frank834skinner3]

Send in the mosquitos!

[@firstnamerequiredlastnameo3473]

You can have all those mico-vampires flying around at our house!

[@timduck8506]

That looks nothing like a spitfire! it looks more like stuka.

[@bhuddy1832]

Looks a lot more like a Texan, than a Spit,,, At least to my old eyes...

[@idiot-cd6pl]

The main problem is that drones fly very slowly compared to a jet fighter and the fighter would fall out of the sky if it tried to fly that slowly, even many of the modern day trainers couldn't fly that slowly. This was used to great effect in WW2 by the Russians (re the night witches) were these old trainers were so slow that even the Me109 couldn't shoot them down.

[@boboharradine2673]

Wouldn't it be easier to just make dones that hunt drones

[@DCrypt1]

Anduril makes such systems

[@boboharradine2673]

@@DCrypt1 sshhh don't tell everyone, the shotgun out the windows, is more sporting when the target is people

[@scurra1163]

@@DCrypt1 But at around a quarter million each; you might as well just use AA missiles.

[@DCrypt1]

@@scurra1163 Not sure if Anduril's drones are one-time use and get destroyed when they kinetic hard kill but I'm pretty sure they can still land and be reusable. Of course it's still widely expensive, Uncle Sam loves spending everyone's taxpayer money on war.

[@victorrisk6098]

Very knowledgeable Gentleman! Thank you Sir!

[@ChristLink-Channel]

Except that he doesn't know a Yak from a Spitfire...

[@_tiredofidiocy_]

"They went back in time" Israeli soldiers: "hold my beer" ** roll out the trebuchet **

[@improvisedsurvival5967]

Great Bofors got spitfire covered

[@ianraybetron4300]

Maybe Ukraine could get some Warthogs to join in the fun.

[@denlsgoulden2307]

Spitfire style planes ??? The only thing they have in common with the Spitfire is that they are a low wing mono plane, thats where any simularity ends !!!

[@robertwoodroffe123]

There are multiple types!! Fixed wing , propeller , jet powered, rotor , with subcategories of fpv , gps , ………. Etc

[@glenbolderson9279]

Im sorry that the Ukraine Air Force?...ya...Putin is SO humiliated....

[@Michael-mh2tw]

How is this humiliating

[@catdaddyjack4873]

Literally???

[@weltraumaffe4155]

Ever see a V1 Doodlebug get wing flipped WWII style.

[@FarmerDrew]

Remake of Snoopy And The Robot Baron

[@buzzsawncgo2751]

At the risk of showing my age, what you are seeing is a poor mans AC130. Initiated in Vietnam aboard an old WWII era two motor cargo plane

[@sabian8700]

No, I don't think ukies using a manned cheap aircraft to shoot down a cheap drone is in anyway humiliating to Russia but the other way around, last time Ukies used a mig-29 to shoot down Gerans only to get hit by one and loose the Mig, the purpose of drones isn't just unmanned tasks but to expose valuable manned Targets only a matter of time before a drone hits this yak-52

[@LeveretteJamesClifford1955]

The fighters that used wings to flip the V1 would cause the V1 to roll over and fly straight into the ground and explode or end up a mangled mess from meeting the immovable thing called the earth!

[@NoWarFools]

Ah yes that’s where the real experts gather. At the Sun KZbin channel. Good Lord

[@butterfinger1171]

Kamikaze rc planes would be an inexpensive alternative to take out drones

[@allrequiredfields]

Man, we've really only brushed the surface of what drone warfare is going to be. We haven't seen a piece of equipment upset the balance of warfare like this since like the invention of smart bombs - and at 1/400th the price.

[@pavelavietor1]

the Russ always fought European wars in attrition, and they continue to exist . saludos

[@stevenparent7886]

They are finding out how to fight drones, which is good, I hope the U.S. Military is taking notes.

[@GabbieGirl007]

They act like the USA wouldn't use the Beechcraft AT-6 Texan II in this type of situation. It makes perfect sense to use a slow and powerful fire platform on a slow and small moving target. Using a SU-27/SU-25 Wouldn't make sense because it would be a sitting duck and would be wwaaaayyyyy to valuable to loose.

[@jumpferjoy1st]

Why doesn't Ukraine, or any country that wishes to have something to combat drones, not move back to Bofors 40mm L70. Later in life it had a proximity fuse round. So between the radar control and the proximity fuse, it would be a highly cost effective way to combat drones. A cheap way of having a Gepard like anti air weapon.

[@quintrapnell3605]

The counter drone swarm is in development

[@Ozark-nq9uu]

It's not humiliating for Putin. 😂 It just shows that Ukraine is out of options. 😂

[@dserrao7188]

Just an fyi….they used pistols at first… not rifles. Doesn’t matter though, no matter how you slice it, it was “difficult” at best.

[@A.Mad.Lad89]

Does the SUN know what a spitfire is?

[@frgv4060]

The cost equation is incorrect. It is not the cost of the drone itself but the cost of the damage it can do that defines your defense expense. But, of course, the cheaper you deal with it, the better. Edit: This “expert” is saying something like it is ridiculous to use a some thousand quid bulletproof vest to stop a 1 quid bullet. Great logic 😂

[@whatsgoingon71]

I imagine they have an old geezer with a fowl piece sitting in the passenger seat. 😊

[@alyssinwilliams4570]

Isnt the yak-52 a prop-driven aircraft from the *1970s*, not 1930s?

[@flyboyone]

This is very cool of the UAF!!!!!! Chinese version of the YAK-52, the CJ-6 was armed with two 7.62 machine guns. Now, that was probably only effective for primary and initial cadet "Introduction to Aerial Weapons" training to demonstrate the concept of "Aiming Lead" and to show Cadets. In practice, without a full stabilised targeting computer with a HUD display. It is actually very difficult to hit another aerial target!

[@ChuckyRed06]

This is actually a very effective way to combat slow flying drones. faster aircraft will stall trying to slow down to chase them

[@Dag_Nabbit_]

Blow out the sky? Bizarre metaphor.

[@madmadmal]

Not Spitfires or anything related, clickbait.

[@bryanst.martin7134]

When the poop hits the fan... Is that the internet? Because there is a lot of poo flying.

[@benjaminpohl3104]

Spitfire-style plane... British exceptionalism much?

[@martinmatte1518]

In fact, Ukraine just needs more Gepards, Skyranger or other Mantis systems. Germany delivered around 60-90 Gepards and just a few Skyrangers, since they go to Ukraine, straight from the production line. I wonder if other countries have simliar systems, for a more layered air defense, but it doesn´t seem so. Ukraine probably will end up with a mix of ground based systems and new air-to-air drones. Electronic warfare is a huge factor here, as well.

[@jonathanbuzzard1376]

Germany has a lot of Gepards in storage. Frankly, everyone needs a modern equivalent and hundreds of them. Though vehicle mounted DragonFire systems are probably the way to go with the very low cost of operations. At £10 a shot they will be forever cheaper than a drone.

[@Fenix_fer]

¿Por qué no usan un autogiro que es más maniobrable y no necesita de pistas de despegue?

[@alexchernavsky7717]

Spot on

[@choloxsamurai3647]

Bro that's not even close to a spitfire😂😂

[@ianperry9914]

An Air Marshall .!!! what drivle

[@andym4695]

Hmm. How much would it cost to start building spitfires? Arm them with rudimentary radars and .303 machine guns? I'd think a mil would do it, the ammo would be cheap, the gas would be cheap. You might even be able to make them remote control or something, though a piloted craft would be unjammable.

[@TheCaptainSplatter]

I mean you want a slower moving plane. Not a fast jet