60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
reuters.com
60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
1–10 of 10 posts
Re: 60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
#2What is considered as "fail"?
Re: 60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
#3What is considered as "fail"?
> can include anything from launch failures to a missile failing to explode on impact.
Re: 60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
#4What is considered as "fail"?
Missing the target and hitting civilians?
Is it a war crime if your missle misses its target because of failure?
Re: 60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
#5What is considered as "fail"?
Missing the target and hitting civilians? Is it a war crime if your missle misses its target because of failure?
Double event like missing the target and anyway hitting some civilians is rare, let us be honest. Hitting some special civilians might be not a failure for an attacker.
Re: 60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
#6Re: 60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
#7Perhaps Russian soldiers are purposely sabotaging the missiles?
Re: 60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
> can include anything from launch failures to a missile failing to explode on impact.
If people or/and expensive gear were too protected for that kind of missile was it fail in the field?
By that definition, sure. As long as the protection included something that actively broke the missiles.
Re: 60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
> can include anything from launch failures to a missile failing to explode on impact.
If people or/and expensive gear were too protected for that kind of missile was it fail in the field?
If they were protected from the explosion? By that definition, no. It worked. Just not well enough.
Re: 60% of Russian missiles fail in the field
#10So, they decided to launch more at once: https://theins.ru/news/249702