[V__]

I would be really interested in a deep analysis. Ukraine doesn't have air superiority and the war has evolved into trench warfare.. thus drones are a very usefull tool.

But would this still be the case for a conflict with US involvement?

[tim333]

If you think of the Iraq or Afghanistan wars, maybe not during the initial attack but once there were troops on the ground they would likely be vulnerable.

[rtkwe]

The major threat is SAM and other anti air. Maybe the US's stealth or long range cruise missiles would be enough to knock down and keep down the opponents anti air coverage but it's not guaranteed. Neither side has been able to gain safe access to the skies in this whole conflict, modern AA is just able to cover such a wide area it's hard to get ground assets close enough to strike.

[pjc50]

> Maybe the US's stealth or long range cruise missiles would be enough to knock down and keep down the opponents anti air coverage but it's not guaranteed.

That's what those capabilities are designed to do ("SEAD"), but they're very expensive. And so strategic that the US wasn't willing to let the Ukranians have any.

[rtkwe]

Of course yeah, the main thing is they've not really been tested in a while against OpFor radar or AA so I have some reservations about it actually working long term. The last time they really tested at all was 2003 during the second Iraq war. Even if they can knock out dedicated AA manpads could still pose a significant threat they haven't had to encounter in a while.

If they work like they should on paper and can keep the opponents pinned to the ground under US air supremacy it'll be great but there's always that little doubt that it will work as well against a more evenly match opponent like a theoretical US v Russia/China when it's not punching down so far.