8:21
The explosion of a Moscow oil refinery tank, which sent its lid high into the air, was the result of friendly fire. This underscored the challenges facing Russia's air defense system as Ukraine escalates its drone attacks, according to a New York Times article. The publication verified and, with the help of experts, analyzed numerous videos from social media showing a powerful explosion at an oil storage facility in Moscow on Thursday. The experts confirmed that the explosion was caused not by a Ukrainian drone, but by a Russian anti-aircraft missile. This is best illustrated in a video originally published on the Chinese social media platform Douyin. The video captured the tracks of two anti-aircraft missiles
launched from the ground. This was an attempt to intercept Ukrainian drones flying near the Kapotnya oil refinery. Judging by the missile's signature, it flew at a low trajectory toward the fuel tank, which exploded upon impact. Experts stated that the missile's appearance was consistent with that of a projectile fired from a man-portable air defense system or MANPADS, which soldiers use to engage incoming threats. The video strongly supports the idea that this was a MANPADS launch, given the low trajectory and the thin, smoke-free contrail from the launch early in the flight, said Michael Clark, a British security expert and professor
of defense studies. The authors noted that the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East demonstrated that defending against large swarms of cheap drones is one of the most difficult challenges in modern warfare. Older air defense systems, like those protecting the Russian capital, are expensive. They were designed to intercept incoming aircraft or missiles. The use of such systems against the drones that Russia and now Ukraine are launching in large numbers was never intended, the article says. Russia likely faces the same challenges as Ukraine in intercepting hundreds of drones. Intercepting them with large anti-aircraft missiles designed to intercept combat aircraft is very expensive and would quickly deplete
stockpiles, so it's necessary to find inexpensive alternatives, said Alister Saddington, a professor of military aeronautics at Cranfield University in England. He said MANPADS were not necessarily a good alternative, noting that firing them at low altitude in an urban environment showed the desperation of the situation, perhaps in this case with unforeseen consequences. As a reminder, on June 18th, a drone attack on a Moscow oil refinery damaged numerous processing units, including the Euro plus oil processing unit, which was commissioned in 2020 as part of the refinery's modernization program. The General Staff confirmed that following the Ukrainian attack, the Moscow oil
refinery suspended oil refining for an indefinite period. Damage was confirmed to the integrated oil refining unit, three RVs, 10,000 tanks, and one RV is 30,000 tank on the Moscow oil refinery's premises. The military reported that various types of drones were used in the strike on the oil refinery, including Luty, Firepoint, Begemot, and decoy drones. Firepoint drones were the most common as they're in service with almost every brigade. Armament expert Ivan Konovalov believes this attack demonstrated the significant difficulties of Russia's air defenses near Moscow, particularly because they are experiencing a significant shortage of various types of weapons.
Oh.
