[Goose]

I think Chuck Pfarrer is a BS artist. Some things he posts are true but a lot is not. IIRC he has said some prior strikes were ATACMS when clearly they were not, that Ukraine held a bridgehead over the Dnipro that they were expanding when all reputable sources were saying these were just raids and in fact it does not appear there ever was a bridgehead...

I have seen other more reputable sources post about the capture of these rigs however as potentially helpful in degrading Russian AD because they held some radars/sensors that extended Russian detection ranges.

This whole issue is very "interesting" in that if Russia operated two to three Mainstays continuously in Russian and international airspace around Ukraine, virtually all aircraft and ships (even small ships) that are moving should be easily detected. They may not have targeting grade data, but they should have designated all the contacts. The fact they do not even attempt to do this is perplexing. They have the aircraft. One wonders if possibly they can't keep them operating continuously because they lack spare parts. An aircraft at 30K ft can see LOTS farther than any surface based radar.

Given this situation, we really can't say how important those search radars on the rigs were to Russia. They may have been important, who knows. Given the Russian command and control issues, one wonders to what extent sensor data even helps. With the S-400s and S-300s operating autonomously, it almost seems like "one weapon, one sensor" is the order of the day.

[Goose]

I think Chuck Pfarrer is a BS artist. Some things he posts are true but a lot is not. IIRC he has said some prior strikes were ATACMS when clearly they were not, that Ukraine held a bridgehead over the Dnipro that they were expanding when all reputable sources were saying these were just raids and in fact it does not appear there ever was a bridgehead...

I have seen other more reputable sources post about the capture of these rigs however as potentially helpful in degrading Russian AD because they held some radars/sensors that extended Russian detection ranges.

This whole issue is very "interesting" in that if Russia operated two to three Mainstays continuously in Russian and international airspace around Ukraine, virtually all aircraft and ships (even small ships) that are moving should be easily detected. They may not have targeting grade data, but they should have designated all the contacts. The fact they do not even attempt to do this is perplexing. They have the aircraft. One wonders if possibly they can't keep them operating continuously because they lack spare parts. An aircraft at 30K ft can see LOTS farther than any surface based radar.

Given this situation, we really can't say how important those search radars on the rigs were to Russia. They may have been important, who knows. Given the Russian command and control issues, one wonders to what extent sensor data even helps. With the S-400s and S-300s operating autonomously, it almost seems like "one weapon, one sensor" is the order of the day.