By John Q. Hosedrinker 
On September 25, Ukraine’s military intelligence (HUR) reported a successful drone attack on occupied Crimea, destroying two Russian An-26 transport aircraft and two radar stations. This strike is part of a larger effort to eliminate valuable Russian assets on the peninsula. The An-26 aircraft, commonly used for troop and cargo transport, were targeted along with a surface surveillance radar system and a coastal radar station. This attack continues the trend of intensified operations against Russian military infrastructure in Crimea, following similar strikes in recent weeks.
Read the original article here
How well they burn – that’s the key takeaway from this latest Ukrainian operation, which targeted two Russian An-26 transport aircraft and radar stations in occupied Crimea. The HUR, Ukraine’s military intelligence, is reporting significant successes, and the implications are fascinating. The recent strikes on radar installations, and now these aircraft, seem to be paving the way for more frequent and perhaps even more impactful attacks. The Ukrainian forces are clearly identifying and exploiting vulnerabilities in Crimea’s defenses.
The Russian response, at least from the outside looking in, appears to be a desperate scramble to protect key assets. Occupied territories are always a focus point and the oil production, Moscow itself, and all the military installations within the territory seized since 2022 are what the Russians are focusing on. As the saying goes, “burn baby burn,” a phrase that encapsulates the situation’s volatile and destructive nature. One can imagine the atmosphere within Russian command, a combination of panic and attempts to salvage the situation. The use of a satellite map to display the location of the struck An-26 aircraft provides visual confirmation of the damage and loss.
The details of the strikes themselves are intriguing. This operation bears a striking resemblance to the recent strikes on the Be-12 aircraft, also at Kacha Air Base. Considering that these areas are being targeted repeatedly, one would think the Russians would have implemented more robust defenses. The fact that aircraft are still being targeted suggests either a failure in defensive measures, a lack of resources, or perhaps a combination of both. Reports indicate that Russia possessed a significant number of these An-26 aircraft prior to the war, so the destruction of two represents a notable loss, even if it’s a small percentage of their overall fleet. This war seems to be highlighting the excessive quantity of equipment the Russians had.
While the successes are undeniable, it’s worth acknowledging that, based on initial reports, it seems that not all of the drones reached their targets. The precise number of radar stations and aircraft hit is still being clarified. However, even with the possibility of a few misses, the overall impact remains substantial. The destruction of these early warning radar installations is particularly strategic, as it can create openings for future attacks. The Ukrainians appear to be systematically degrading Russia’s ability to monitor and defend its positions in Crimea.
The choice of targets is a critical part of the Ukrainian strategy. The destruction of the An-26 aircraft, which were originally manufactured in Ukraine, further complicates Russia’s ability to replace lost assets. They simply cannot build replacements. The strategic targeting of vital components and connections is a hallmark of the Ukrainian military’s approach. This is not just about inflicting damage; it’s about disrupting the enemy’s ability to operate effectively. This strategy may force the Russians to reposition valuable assets, potentially creating further weaknesses in other areas.
The fact that one of the An-26 aircraft was in active service, belonging to the 318th Separate Composition Aviation Regiment, makes the attack even more significant. It indicates that this wasn’t just a case of striking outdated equipment. The Russians seem to be following orders without proper consideration for previous events. This rigid adherence to procedures is one of the defining characteristics of Russian military structure, this lack of initiative or the ability to adapt quickly. This suggests that the Russian command and control structure may be slow to react to changing threats.