Aircraft shelters, enclosures, airbases defense etc

[Mr.T]

Hardened shelters are not likely to be built quick olde fahioned HAS were extremely expenisve ,mostly due to blast doors , not the concrete canopy itself , first step would be just canopies to protect from satelite imageriy as ultimately Ukrainians can send UAVs only on designated targets. There are thousands of military and civilian facilites that cant all be protected . If you start with simple drone attacks any where in the west there is magnitudes less AD to protect anything

Ironicaly enough Soviets mostly built hardened shelters for 'front line' aviation in airfields near NATO so Ukraine, East Germany ....etc so most HAS are actually outside Russia.


Kinda like these or aluminum hangars. as unlike HAS shelters that were typically designed to protect against 100-200kg bomb blast these need to provide protection against light sub 20kg warheads.

Enclosures To Defend F-15Es From Drone Attacks Eyed At Seymour Johnson AFB

The threat posed by lower-end drones isn't just overseas and now a U.S. F-15E base is looking to cocoon its jets from them.

www.twz.com

 

[Elysium]

Honestly, if recon satellites can see aircraft going into and exiting the shelters, what good are they against NATO knowing what's in them? By the way I'm honestly baffled by the Russian's inability to police their own airspace even around their military bases. You could declare an 5km-wide no-fly zone around Akhtubinsk air base, so you'd know if anything flies in that you don't know about, it's not friendly.

 

[Mr.T]

Honestly, if recon satellites can see aircraft going into and exiting the shelters, what good are they against NATO knowing what's in them? By the way I'm honestly baffled by the Russian's inability to police their own airspace even around their military bases. You could declare an 5km-wide no-fly zone around Akhtubinsk air base, so you'd know if anything flies in that you don't know about, it's not friendly.

Satelites make photos in specific time intervals when they are in position , there is no seeing going in and out of shelters beyond random glimpse

Given these drones like Tekever have tiny warhead they need practicaly direct hit on target to score a kill and as they are purely GPS not man in the loop , any shelter ends up being a shell game

You can declare no fly zones as much as you like , it you do not have AD assets in place , is like declaring gun free zone.

 

[Forest Green]

Honestly, if recon satellites can see aircraft going into and exiting the shelters, what good are they against NATO knowing what's in them? By the way I'm honestly baffled by the Russian's inability to police their own airspace even around their military bases. You could declare an 5km-wide no-fly zone around Akhtubinsk air base, so you'd know if anything flies in that you don't know about, it's not friendly.

Perhaps they already tried that but ended up destroying even more of their own air force in the air, except with the pilots included.

 

[Josh_TN]

Honestly, if recon satellites can see aircraft going into and exiting the shelters, what good are they against NATO knowing what's in them? By the way I'm honestly baffled by the Russian's inability to police their own airspace even around their military bases. You could declare an 5km-wide no-fly zone around Akhtubinsk air base, so you'd know if anything flies in that you don't know about, it's not friendly.

Image reconnaissance satellites typically are in low polar orbits and are overhead for seconds at a time. As such they can only take still shots every few days; they do not dwell over targets (excluding a few PRC birds geosynchronous orbit).

 

[Mr.T]

Some Interesting info on the Aircraft shelters of cold war , lots of interesting links

USAFE TAB-VEE shelters and their genesis

Air Force Civil Engineer

books.google.nl