Two Sovereigns in One Sky: Russia’s Air-Defense System That Shoots Everything — Even Itself
You can tell what a system was built for by what it destroys when things get loud. Russia’s Integrated Air Defense System (IADS) doesn’t just falter under pressure — it snacks on its own. On paper, the split is neat: the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) and the Ground Forces’ air defense (PVO-SV). In practice, it’s two jealous landlords arguing over the same hallway. Two chains of command, two radar pictures, one sky — and a confetti parade made of friendly fuselages.
TL;DR
- Root problem: Two separate air-defense empires — VKS and PVO-SV — police the same sky with different bosses, software, and rules.
- What breaks first: Identification and timing. EW noise and raid tempo shorten decisions to seconds. The centralized “friend/foe” label arrives late; local batteries shoot early.
- What you see on the outside: Low-altitude, predictable VKS routes; cautious sorties; periodic friendly-fire headlines — especially around Crimea and Donbas — when Ukrainian mass raids and jamming push the system into panic mode.
- Why it keeps happening: Culture punishes initiative, training is stove-piped, and “more hardware” keeps getting added to an architecture that doesn’t fuse.
A quick decoder ring (so the rest makes sense)
- VKS: The “Air & Space” side — fighters, bombers, big radars, long-range SAMs like S-400. Centralized command, national-level priorities.
- PVO-SV: The Army’s air-defense — Buk, Tor, Pantsir batteries glued to ground units. Local command, battlefield priorities.
- IFF: “Identification Friend or Foe” — the electronic handshake that says don’t shoot me.
- EW: Electronic Warfare — jamming, spoofing, decoys. Think static on every radio at once.
- SEAD/DEAD: Suppression/Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses — how air forces kick down the door.
- IADS: Integrated Air Defense System — the whole orchestra: radars, missiles, command posts, data links.
1) The factory settings of friendly fire
What changed in 2024–2025? The air war sped up and filled up. Ukraine learned to stack drone swarms, cruise missiles, and heavy jamming in tight windows. Decision time shrank from minutes to seconds. When the picture blurs and the clock screams, Russia’s two-head system does what it was designed to do — serve two masters, not one mission.
What that looks like in the wild: Incident logs pile up over Crimea and Donbas: Su-27s, Su-25s, helicopters — shot down during mass-raid windows. The pattern repeats: split chains, saturated scopes, rules that snap before they flex.
Why that’s structural, not bad luck:
- The VKS runs a central, strategic umbrella aimed at national targets.
- The PVO-SV protects local ground units, answering to the nearest Army boss.
When the spectrum turns into a rave, the central “friend” label lags behind the local gun’s “shoot” impulse. Late label + early trigger = friendly wreckage.
2) Two bosses, no sky king
Professional assessments say the quiet part out loud: low interoperability, limited IFF, thin joint training, and procedural control that collapses under stress. The two services stare at the same sky through different software, incentives, and clocks.
Analysts stitching the doctrine together reach the same verdict: Russia didn’t field the organization for fast, offensive air control. So VKS aviation flies conservative, deconflicted routes — predictable to Ukrainian defenders and uncomfortably close to jumpy friendly SAM rings. Latency kills: approvals run up a tall ladder for VKS; PVO-SV batteries are built to shoot now and explain later.
3) When EW collides with bureaucracy
Meet the jammers — Krasukha, Zhitel, Leer-3. On PowerPoint, they’re elegant. In combat, they jam everything, including Russia’s own data links and IFF handshakes. The “integrated network” turns into overlapping radar puddles. At times, Moscow has reportedly dialed back jamming to stop adding chaos to chaos.
What fills the gap at the console is a crude but survivable human rule: unknown + inbound + jamming = fire. Ukrainian drone crews, even with more flexible coordination, describe making ad-hoc “EW corridors” over chat to avoid frying each other. If the flexible side needs that much improvisation, imagine the slower, split-authority version trying to keep up.
4) It’s not the operators. It’s the operating system.
Across Western and allied professional writing, the same two pathologies show up:
- Training is service-centric. Pre-war exercises rehearsed parallel play, not joint choreography.
- Culture punishes initiative. High power distance means operators are rewarded for following checklists, not for contextual judgment at speed.
Now drop that into Crimea: strategic S-400/S-300 (VKS) and tactical Buk/Pantsir/Tor (PVO-SV) cover the same sky, but answer to different bosses and different clocks. The overlap zones don’t protect — they harvest. And the crops aren’t always enemy.
5) What “a bad night” looks like — step by step
- Stacked raid begins. Drones and missiles enter from several vectors; decoys confuse radars.
- EW goes loud. Jammers disrupt links; track labels flicker; IFF handshakes fail intermittently.
- Clocks drift. The VKS picture updates through a centralized chain; PVO-SV batteries see raw returns first.
- Conflicting IDs. A track the VKS labeled “friend” 30 seconds ago looks “unknown” to a local battery right now.
- The heuristic wins. Local operators apply the panic math — unknown, inbound, jammed — shoot.
- After-action fog. A friendly burns; each chain blames the other’s latency or “non-compliance.” The culture rewards paperwork, not painful fixes.
6) Receipts as short vignettes
- Spring 2023, Donetsk: A Russian Su-34 goes down near Yenakiyeve. Open-source consensus: misidentification by a Russian SAM during a high-tempo window — classic case of the local picture outrunning the central one.
- March–April 2024, Crimea: After heavy Ukrainian raids, the IADS is jittery and saturated. A Su-27 falls to own-side air defense, aligning with public warnings about overload leading to fratricide.
- June 2025, Soledar area: An Su-25 becomes a victim of comms/IFF collapse. Fratricide video circulates; the anatomy — split chains, jammed spectrum, rushed shots — needs no translation.
These are the on-the-record cases. Professional roll-ups argue the real tally is higher than Russian channels admit.
7) Tactical consequences you can see from space
- Low, slow, predictable VKS profiles. Hugging terrain and repeating corridors keeps crews alive in the short term — but hands tomorrow’s routes to Ukrainian SAM/MANPADS teams. That’s the strategic bill for an organization mis-fit to air superiority.
- Air denial for everyone. Stack more ground batteries without unified control and you don’t get safety; you get paralysis. Each added node adds latency and mis-ID risk under EW. The old warning — GBAD that threatens its own aviation — wasn’t snark; it was a forecast.
8) Why “integration tomorrow” never arrives
The 2025 literature is brutally consistent. You see adaptation at the edges — more UAVs, better stand-off strike — but not the painful middle surgery of joint C2/IFF fusion. Real integration means collapsing fiefdoms, changing procurement pipelines, and moving cheese for colonels with spreadsheets. In wartime, the easier political choice is more hardware over fewer seams. Continuity wins. Reform waits in the lobby.
9) What to expect through 2026
- When Ukraine stacks mass raids with jamming, fratricide risk spikes. Short clocks and noisy air turn the VKS–PVO-SV seam into the danger zone.
- Operational caution hardens. Expect fewer sorties, shallower profiles, and rules that tighten right when agility is needed.
- Incidents continue to cluster around overlap zones. Crimea and front-line sectors with mixed strategic/tactical coverage remain the likeliest spots for own-goals — because that’s where the two sovereigns share the same sky.
10) Bottom line
- Cause: Split chains of command (VKS vs PVO-SV), incompatible C2/IFF, and a culture allergic to initiative.
- Mechanism: Under EW and saturation, local batteries act on partial pictures while the centralized label arrives late.
- Effect: Persistent friendly fire, lost initiative, and chronic under-performance in SEAD/DEAD.
- Outlook (2025–2026): Fragmentation endures; there’s no verified theater-level shift to true joint fusion. More layers without integration = more lag, more risk.
Russia built a stunningly dense shield. Without shared authority, a common picture, and fast, unified rules across services, density becomes entropy. The Kremlin’s sky doesn’t integrate — it ricochets.
Key sources (clean list)
- The Kyiv Independent — UK Defence Intelligence update (Apr 6–7, 2024): overload and fratricide risk; Crimea context.
https://kyivindependent.com/uk-military-intelligence-ukrainian-strikes-overload-russian-air-defense-causing-friendly-fire/ - Kyiv Post — 2024–2025 incident reporting, including Su-25 friendly-fire near Soledar and broader fratricide coverage.
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/54473
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/30693 - Joint Air Power Competence Centre (JAPCC) — Russian Air Force performance; interoperability, IFF, and joint-training shortfalls with PVO-SV.
https://www.japcc.org/articles/russian-air-forces-performance-in-ukraine-air-operations-the-fall-of-a-myth/ - Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) — Air-superiority lessons; organizational mis-fit and EW/tempo effects on Russian air employment (Oct 2025).
https://www.csis.org/analysis/air-superiority-twenty-first-century-lessons-iran-and-ukraine - U.S. Army Europe & Africa — How Russia Fights (Jul 2025): C2/integration weaknesses and operational effects.
https://api.army.mil/e2/c/downloads/2025/07/09/daa46f8a/no-25-1060-how-russia-fights-jul-25.pdf - CNA — Russian Concepts of Future Warfare (Aug 2025): doctrinal continuity versus integration reform.
https://www.cna.org/reports/2025/08/Russian-Concepts-of-Future-Warfare-Based-on-Lessons-from-the-Ukraine-War.pdf
If you’re enjoying the content on my blog and would like to dive deeper into exclusive insights, I invite you to check out my Patreon page. It’s a space where you can support my work and get access to behind-the-scenes articles, in-depth analyses, and more. Your support helps me keep creating high-quality content and allows me to explore even more exciting topics. Visit [patreon.com/ChristianBaghai](https://www.patreon.com/ChristianBaghai) and join the community today! Thank you for being a part of this journey!
Why Russia Keeps Shooting at Russia | Patreon
The Pentagon’s Great Lockdown, Super-Sized: How a Badge Policy Swallowed the News Beat | Patreon
When Language Becomes a Target: Switzerland’s Train Attack and Europe’s Silent Collapse | Patreon
The Shahed-136 Drone War: Brutalist Hardware Meets Algorithmic Karma | Patreon
Ukraine’s War Mesh: The Map Started Talking Back (And It Has Notes) | Patreon
France 2025: The Resilience of Suspicion — How the Circus Learned to Fact-Check Itself | Patreon
Ukraine’s FP-5 “Flamingo”: How to Make Air Defense Sweat Through Its Uniform | Patreon
2025: When War Is a Network — and the API Occasionally Shoots Back | Patreon
Russia’s 2025 War Machine: Paranoia, Pressure, and Structural Rot | Patreon
Marble, Missiles, and Symbolic Decay: the West’s luxury brand of impotence | Patreon
Evrazia: When “Civil Society” Wears Combat Boots and a Smile | Patreon
The “Ban” That Isn’t: How One Word Beat a Thousand Footnotes | Patreon
Algorithmic Casualty Warfare: The Next Front Where Death Is Debated | Patreon
When the Rear Becomes the Front | Patreon
The Physics Don’t Lie: How Submarine Appendages Turn Stealth into Stupidity | Patreon
Inside RN’s Digital Crisis Factory: Assembly-Line Outrage With a Warranty on Panic | Patreon
The Long Con at the Network Edge: Static Tundra’s Greatest Hits on Aging Cisco Gear | Patreon
Russia’s Wartime Cyber Web: A Field Guide to the Velvet Wrench | Patreon
Feeding on the Plumbing: How Russia Turns Europe’s Openness Into a Buffet | Patreon
