Ukraine’s Defence Intelligence Directorate (HUR) has said a covert operation inside Russia damaged two Russian fighter aircraft, a Su-30 and a Su-27, at a military airfield near the city of Lipetsk.

In a statement dated 22 December, HUR said a fire broke out overnight between 20 and 21 December at a Russian military aerodrome “near Lipetsk”, and that two “high-value” aircraft were put out of action. The agency said the operation was carried out by a member of a “resistance movement” operating inside the Russian Federation.

HUR identified the aircraft as a Su-27 and a Su-30 with board numbers “12” and “82”. It said the planning phase lasted about two weeks and included studying patrol routes and guard rotation schedules. The statement claimed the operative was able to enter the facility, ignite the aircraft inside a protective aviation hangar, and leave the airfield without interference.

HUR estimated the combined value of the two aircraft at up to $100 million, though such figures are difficult to confirm independently and can vary depending on configuration, condition, and accounting method.

There was no independent, on-the-record confirmation from Russian authorities in the sources available at the time of writing.

Why Lipetsk matters

The Lipetsk-2 air base, sometimes described in open-source material as Lipetsk Air Base, is associated with Russian military aviation training and test activity, including a state centre responsible for combat employment and retraining of aircrew. Lipetsk has also been linked in past reporting to aircraft and munitions storage, which has made it a recurrent subject of Ukrainian claims about strikes or sabotage against Russian aviation infrastructure.

In August 2024, Ukraine said it had struck a Russian military airfield in the Lipetsk region, damaging stocks of guided bombs and setting off secondary explosions, underlining that the area was already within range of long-distance attacks behind the front line.

What is known about the alleged incident

HUR’s account describes a targeted operation aimed at disabling two specific aircraft rather than a broader strike on fuel, munitions, or infrastructure. The emphasis in the statement is on access, timing, and the ability to reach aircraft within a hangar environment.

If the aircraft were indeed damaged beyond short-term repair, the practical impact would depend on their operational role and whether the airframes were assigned to active combat tasks, training, or testing. Su-30 variants are generally used as multi-role fighters, while Su-27 variants are primarily associated with air superiority and interception roles, though both have been adapted across missions and modernised in multiple sub-variants. The statement does not specify the exact sub-models involved.

The claim that an internal “resistance” actor executed the operation fits a wider pattern in which Ukrainian agencies have publicly attributed some attacks inside Russia to sabotage, arson, or partisan activity rather than drones or missiles. In parallel, Ukraine has also reported a series of strikes on Russian aviation assets in occupied Ukrainian territory, including claims in recent days relating to attacks on the Belbek airfield in Crimea.

Strategic context

Since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion, Ukraine has sought to disrupt Russian air operations not only at the front but also by targeting aircraft, air defence systems, and logistics nodes deeper in Russian-controlled territory. Operations described as sabotage are harder to verify than missile or drone strikes because physical evidence is limited, official acknowledgement is uncommon, and access to sites is restricted.

Even when operational effects are modest, such incidents can force additional security measures at airfields, increase guard requirements, and complicate routine activity, particularly at facilities with training or testing functions.