https://www.yahoo.com/news/sabotage-ukra...09980.html
This article illustrates, among other things, the importance of timing. I think it is pretty clear that the manufacturer did everything possible to get the Neptune missiles delivered before Russia actually invaded. They didn't argue that the contractual delivery date hadn't arrived yet, and I bet a lot of people worked a significant amount of (probably unpaid) overtime to make it happen. That is what has to happen when you are at war or there is a threat of war. Unfortunately, the weapons and supplies given by the US and NATO don't seem to have this required urgency behind them. It is bad enough that the decision making process to deliver something is pretty slow. That may just be unavoidable because consensus might require a lot of discussion/cajoling. However, once the decision has been made, not expediting its execution can result in very negative events. Imagine the Neptune missile shipment was delivered on March 20, not Feb 20. The "West" needs to move at the speed of war, not the speed of CalTrans.
The "sabotage" issue is a tricky one. IMO it is entirely possible the same component was damaged in all the missiles because it was incorrectly installed by the same technician who didn't have proper training/experience. These were the first "production" run. Stuff happens. It could also be a design flaw that makes the component prone to damage during installation or transport. Obviously I don't know, but I think that possibility cannot be easily discounted.
This article illustrates, among other things, the importance of timing. I think it is pretty clear that the manufacturer did everything possible to get the Neptune missiles delivered before Russia actually invaded. They didn't argue that the contractual delivery date hadn't arrived yet, and I bet a lot of people worked a significant amount of (probably unpaid) overtime to make it happen. That is what has to happen when you are at war or there is a threat of war. Unfortunately, the weapons and supplies given by the US and NATO don't seem to have this required urgency behind them. It is bad enough that the decision making process to deliver something is pretty slow. That may just be unavoidable because consensus might require a lot of discussion/cajoling. However, once the decision has been made, not expediting its execution can result in very negative events. Imagine the Neptune missile shipment was delivered on March 20, not Feb 20. The "West" needs to move at the speed of war, not the speed of CalTrans.
The "sabotage" issue is a tricky one. IMO it is entirely possible the same component was damaged in all the missiles because it was incorrectly installed by the same technician who didn't have proper training/experience. These were the first "production" run. Stuff happens. It could also be a design flaw that makes the component prone to damage during installation or transport. Obviously I don't know, but I think that possibility cannot be easily discounted.