news

They'd probably be lugged around on land, because of the range of the system a TLAM launched from Lviv can still hit Moscow and St Petersburg. I highly doubt that Ukraine has suitable ships to carry the Mk 70 system, the "Ukrainian Navy", if it can be called that, mainly consists of unmanned surface vessels that can be rigged with explosives, launch short range surface to air missiles, or launch drones, manned patrol boats to shoot down incoming drones, and Neptune missiles. I doubt that Russia has the capability to take out launchers on land in Lviv in a time sensitive manner though. However they aren't being sent yet (according to public information), so this is very much talking about hypotheticals. But it is very much technically possible. As for delivery, a Mk 70 container can fit in the back of a C-17 that lands in Poland, and be sent over the Polish border by land. The super heavy trucks and support vehicles/command centres from the Typhon aren't required, just need a truck that can tow the container and an energy source, and some ability to program the missile, if the goal is to shoot some missiles deep into Russia. Effectiveness would be comprised as you rightfully point out, but if the primary goal is to launch missiles into Russia, it's still doable. Throughout the war, Ukraine and NATO have been willing to heavily compromise on optimal effectiveness in order to get a capability on the battlefield, which is what I'm basing my thoughts on here. Jerry rigging Storm Shadow/SCALP-EG cruise missiles to be launched from Su-24s, and HARM anti radiation missiles from MiG 29s and Su-27s as escorts, is in no way optimally effective for instance. But Ukraine still did it, and have at least hit things of note with these attacks, including damaging a Kilo class submarines and damaging or destroying multiple landing ships.

Ukrainian airstrikes on Russia have mainly been more of an annoyance up until now, targeting warehouses, drone operator locations, and trenches/fortified positions, but they are progressing as Ukraine gets more planes. Recently they started destroying bridges with JDAM ER glide bombs, and deploying multiple aircraft at once. The Russian response is very much "kill the archer and not the arrow", bombing Ukrainian airbases, airports, and support infrastructure during their nightly air raids. The low altitude attack vector limits the kind of airstrikes Ukraine carry out, but it also limits Russian ground based air defences ability to shoot down Ukrainian aircraft. If Russia wants to shoot down Ukrainian strike packages directly, Russian fighter jets are going to have to get closer to the line of contact and engage in closer range fights, with R-77 missiles at least. Launching R-37Ms from safely within Russian controlled skies is no longer working to disrupt strikes. Ex Russian Air Force pilot FighterBomber alluded to such a few weeks ago, that Russian commanders were finally allowing the air force to engage in closer range fights (he sarcastically compared it to the moon landing in terms of significance). Russia has the capability to suppress Ukraine's efforts before the Ukrainian Air Force becomes a more serious threat (even if it means Russia taking losses now), so it would be an error to allow Ukraine to rebuild the air force.