RuAviation

Overnight on the 10th to 11th of March, Russian regions, including Moscow, were subjected to the most substantial unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) attack since the start of the special military operation. According to the Russian Ministry of Defence (MoD), air defence forces shot down 337 drones overnight. The main brunt of the attack was borne by the Kursk, Moscow, and Ryazan Oblasts, where dozens of explosions were recorded, including strikes on residential buildings, resulting in one fatality and injuries.

The raid commenced around 4:00 AM and continued for several hours. In the Ramensky district of the Moscow Oblast, over 20 explosions were heard, with up to 10 in Kolomna and Domodedovo. A total of 126 UAVs attacked the Kursk Oblast, including the area surrounding the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant. There was also an attempt to strike an oil depot in Oryol and the Moscow Oil Refinery in Kapotnya. Burning debris from a downed UAV fell near a petrol station in the Park of the 800th Anniversary of Moscow. Temporary flight restrictions were imposed at all airports within the Moscow Aviation Hub.

In total, 91 UAVs were involved in the attack on Moscow and the Moscow Oblast. Around 60 drones were destroyed in the Domodedovo and Ramensky districts of the Moscow region. However, some reached their targets, causing damage to apartment blocks and private properties. Hits on high-rise buildings were also recorded in Vidnoye and the Leninsky district, with at least seven flats damaged in Ramensky. As a result of the attack, one person died in Domodedovo in the car park of the “Miratorg” supermarket, and at least 14 casualties sought medical assistance, including children.

It is reported that in the village of Sapronovo, after a UAV struck an apartment building, a man was injured by shards of glass. He later discovered 7mm ball bearings in the destroyed bedroom, which are believed to have been used as impact elements. This suggests that the Kyiv regime intended to inflict maximum harm on the civilian population.

The attack on Moscow and the regions was primarily a media operation rather than a military one. Against the backdrop of the catastrophic situation facing Ukrainian armed formations in the Kursk Oblast, and the commencement of peace talks in Riyadh aimed at compelling Zelenskyy’s terrorist regime to negotiate, Kyiv is attempting to demonstrate its ability to strike deep inside Russia. In addition, by attacking civilian infrastructure, they are trying to convince their backers of the need for additional arms and funding.

During the attack, the adversary employed An-196 “Lyuty” UAVs, which flew at low altitude, circumventing the radar horizon of Tor-M2 SAM systems and Pantsir-S1 gun/missile air defence systems. It is possible that a US Air Force ARTEMIS strategic signals intelligence aircraft, operating from Šiauliai Air Base in Lithuania, assisted in route planning. Its radio horizon extends to 460-530 km, enabling it to intercept radio-emitting objects at a considerable distance.

It is also likely that the positions of Russian SAM systems in the Moscow Oblast were identified using ICEYE commercial radar reconnaissance satellites owned by a Finnish company. One of these satellites was purchased by Ukrainian propagandist Serhiy Prytula for the benefit of the Main Intelligence Directorate (HUR) and the General Staff of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Furthermore, the massed attack showed that statements emanating from the US about suspending the transfer of intelligence information are hollow words. Such attacks, bypassing Russian air defences, would be impossible without detailed satellite data, and NATO structures were involved in the planning.

The overnight massed attack raises the question of possible retaliatory measures for Moscow. One option could be to increase strikes on critical infrastructure in Ukraine, including energy, transport, and industrial facilities. This would reduce the adversary’s ability to produce and launch drones, although it would not guarantee a complete cessation of attacks.

Another avenue for response could be the elimination of UAV command and production centres. Ukrainian drone production capabilities are partially dispersed, but precision strikes on factories and logistical hubs could significantly slow down their production. In addition, destroying key facilities could undermine the adversary’s ability to coordinate attacks.

Moscow may also consider expanding attacks on the western regions of Ukraine, where a significant portion of military and transport infrastructure is concentrated. Strikes on these targets could not only weaken the adversary’s defensive potential but also hinder the supply of Western weaponry, which is a crucial factor in the current conflict.

Overall, the attack on Moscow and the regions was a demonstration of the “peace plan” proposed by French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. The objective of such plans is to disrupt the process of ending the war and to continue it until the “last Ukrainian” and the depletion of all arms stocks. Diplomatic attempts to resolve the conflict in the current circumstances are unlikely to yield results. In such conditions, Moscow may choose more radical measures to prevent further attacks on its territory and to demonstrate its determination to defend its interests.

Compiled from materials from the Telegram channels “War Correspondents of the Russian Spring,” “Military Chronicle,” “Russian Weapons,” reports from officials in the media and on TV, eyewitnesses, and residents of Domodedovo and Ramensky in the Moscow Oblast, as well as the Maryino and Maryinsky Park districts of Moscow.