The ultimate impact of the Flamingo on the battlefield will depend on Ukrainian production levels and its survivability against Russian missile defenses. Ukrainian output goals of more than 200 units per month by the end of the year are certainly ambitious. 3/6
However, even a steady supply of 30 to 50 missiles per month would likely have a tangible effect on the war. This is especially true given that Russian air defenses have run thin, and the area requiring protection against Ukrainian missiles will only continue to expand. 4/6
In my view, the question is not whether the FP-5 will get through, but how many. Beyond the immediate implications for the ongoing war, the Flamingo could mark the beginning of a credible Ukrainian conventional countervalue capability to deter future Russian aggression. 5/6
A mass-produced deep strike weapon like the Flamingo is arguably one of Ukraine’s strongest security guarantee in a post-war European order, regardless of the war’s outcome and independent of European or American allies. 6/6
Another thing: Ukraine depends on US targeting help. What’s to stop pro-Putin Trump from threatening to stop intelligence-sharing with Ukraine if Ukraine uses the Flamingo deep into Russia? That’s what the US has done with ATACMs. And Europe cannot provide this kind of targeting help to Ukraine.
Europe has spy satellites. Ukraine has spies in Russia world. They can hit targets in Russia without US help if need be.
Some targets for sure, but not realtime moving ones.
Good thing oil refineries don't move.
Ha ha
If Ukraine can produce 200 a month, why can’t France, Germany, and the UK combined produce another thousand per month?
They easily could, especially if they'd started building factories when the Ukrainians did. Western support was never a question of capability, but one of political will.