• AnalogNotDigital@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 days ago

    Yeah, if you set a bomb off on a plane that is most likely fuel laden, you’re not going to be able to fly that plane again. If the air frame isn’t completely destroyed, it’s going to take months or years to repair, functionally rendering it destroyed.

    • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 days ago

      Right my point is we don’t know how many “targeted” planes were actually hit. Like does that mean they launched drones with the intention of hitting them? Does it mean Zelinsky pointed to a satellite image and said “try to get that plane on the airfield”? I hope they get as many as possible but I’m still a little skeptical of the 40 plane claim. Let’s wait and see, satellite images will be able to prove it one way or another.

        • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Yeah I’ve seen drone footage of 4-5 planes burning though, not 40. It would not be the first time Ukraine has made a big exaggerated claim.

          Edit: “🇺🇦 Andriy Kovalenko, head of Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation, reports that at least 13 Russian aircraft were destroyed and additional aircraft damaged during Ukraine’s large-scale operation “Spiderweb” on June 1.” Downvote me all you want. Source

          • NotJohnSmith@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            All I’d say is that isn’t an exaggerated claim. They said 41 targeted, any assumption about how many were hit is not coming from them.

            Equally, the quote you have provided confirms just that they know of at least 13 destroyed. It could be 41 were hit but only 13 destroyed.

            This also implies:

            1. they are still assessing the total impact and 2. arguably are doing exactly the opposite of what you stated by only counting known destruction and not exaggerating