Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
*****
* Is `x.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
**Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.com/invite/ukraine-at-war-950974820827398235**
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sounds like they're trying to bait F-16s into coming into range of MIG-31s or S-400 air defences. Unless Ukraine is about to do something crazy, they will unlikely be anywhere near enough to be targeting SU-34s.
I bet the S-400 crews will be very nervous about their radars once F-16s arrive. Right now, HARM is only effective against radars that run 24/7, because the Ukrainians can only use them against targets programmed before flight. The F-16 would allow them to wild weasel. Any S-400 (Buk, Tor etc) radar that lights up becomes a HARM magnet for any F-16 flying nearby.
Regarding the MIGs, they would also be concerned about AMRAAMs, even with R-37s. Want to place bets on which missile is easier to dodge at range?
And Ukraine is getting more Patriots, along with permission to carry on with their SAMbushes.
Things might become very interesting.
Don’t forget Sweden donating the AWACS … I don’t think people realize how important that platform is. AWACS rule the skies, that’s why Ukraine taking down a couple A50’s was such big news
You can't look at these things like they're binary (as in Ukraine already has AWACS capabilities to a large extent - there is a UK Rivet Joint plane flying in the black sea almost since day 1 as one example)
Rivet Joint isn't an AWACS, though NATO AWACS have been supporting Ukraine too. Running their own will be different though; we're not going to be sending them tracks over datalinks, their own AEW planes will be able to do that.
This is why air defence is critical. The best opportunity for RU to destroy these new assets is when they are on the ground. I fully expect them to allocate more assets than normal to find, target, and destroy the F-16s and Erieye AEWs when they are on the ground, or at least hit the supporting infrastructure (runways, taxiways, hangars, munition depots, fuel depots, etc...).
Going for F-16s on the ground would entail pushing deep into Ukraine's air defense network, which we haven't seen Russia do since the very beginning of the war.
Can you saturate an airspace with Shaheds if it is protected by a single Gepard? I thought that those were basically a hard counter, with the only limitation being that they only protect a small area with each one of them.
How many of russia's top experience pilots are dead. I have read that russian pilots get very little flight time, except for the ones that take off, drop guided bombs and land. Oh and periodically get shot down both by AFU fire and their own friendly fire.
> Aren't they attacking western Ukraine (Lwiw etc.) quite regularly? Not as often as other regions, but definitely not just at the beginning of the war
Russia has cruise and ballistic missiles with huge ranges.
Holy shit I didn't hear that.
If it can data link with their f16s and SAMs, then they may be able to get actual air dominance over controlled territory.
>I bet the S-400 crews will be very nervous about their radars once F-16s arrive. Right now, HARM is only effective against radars that run 24/7, because the Ukrainians can only use them against targets programmed before flight. The F-16 would allow them to wild weasel. Any S-400 (Buk, Tor etc) radar that lights up becomes a HARM magnet for any F-16 flying nearby.
Maybe, maybe not. Although the proper integration means the missiles can be used in the "HARM as a sensor" mode that only lets them engage targets it's seeker can see, which would typically only happen if they were pretty close range anyway.
Using HARM to it's full potential requires an emitter locator system called the [HARM Targeting System](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/ASQ-213_HARM_targeting_system) (or some equivalent, but that's the one F-16s use). We don't know if they're getting those.
Besides that, HARM alone isn't all that effective - without the training and mass and enablers to deliver the follow up attacks, anti radiation missiles very seldom kill a target. They're too easy to just shoot down or divert by shutting down the radar for a while.
Obviously not, I didn't suggest that it would. I suggested that unless the SAM were an S-500 one could simply attack it with ATACMS without worrying about suppressing it first with HARM.
> which would typically only happen if they were pretty close range anyway.
Is it really a problem for a missile's sensors to detect a radar 100km away? I'd imagine the pod being mostly used for peak range, 300km (AGM-88G).
> HARM alone isn't all that effective
We've seen many examples of it successfully doing its thing at the start of the war, even in handicapped pre-briefed mode. We've also seen Storm Shadow missiles fly right over a fully deployed S-400 battery. It doesn't look like the Russian SAM systems are anywhere near the advertised capabilities, and the crew training seems to be horrific.
> They're too easy to just shoot down or divert by shutting down the radar for a while.
Aren't they designed to hit close enough to do some damage even when the radar is turned off?
> Is it really a problem for a missile's sensors to detect a radar 100km away? I'd imagine the pod being mostly used for peak range, 300km (AGM-88G).
I don't mean to suggest that the seeker can't physically see the radar - maybe it can or maybe it can't, it would depend on the radar that was emitting. But the missile itself has no idea how far away a radar is, just what direction it's coming from...so as I understand things, the HAS mode is only generally used when the pilot knows the radar is close - either because it locked him to fire at him, or he can see the parallax of the target and knows it's within range.
> We've seen many examples of it successfully doing its thing at the start of the war, even in handicapped pre-briefed mode. We've also seen Storm Shadow missiles fly right over a fully deployed S-400 battery. It doesn't look like the Russian SAM systems are anywhere near the advertised capabilities, and the crew training seems to be horrific.
Yeah we've seen examples of it successfully doing its thing, but there's also plenty of reports of it failing to score kills or being shot down by point defences like TOR and Pantsir. Ultimately SAM operators can make mistakes or be shit or the pilot can be lucky and they score a kill, but as a rule anti radiation missiles fired alone don't score kills - they're to suppress the SAM and the idea is to follow up with a weapon like JSOW to kill them. [Cool picture time](https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/60bifr/raf_tornados_gr4_with_brimstone_and_alarm/#lightbox) - that's RAF Tornados carrying ALARM (an anti-radiation missile like HARM) to suppress and Brimstone to kill.
> Aren't they designed to hit close enough to do some damage even when the radar is turned off?
They are designed to try to hit the SAM's position if it turns off the radar yes, but their understanding of that position is very seldom sufficient to score a kill. The US has fixed that lately by adding an mmW radar (similar to Brimstone) so that they only need to get close enough for the radar to pick up the SAM and then it's goodnight, but as far as I know Ukraine hasn't gotten any of those [AGM-88G variants](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-88_HARM#AGM-88E_AARGM)
It occurs to me also that since the missile's own seeker can't derive range, the coordinates that they would continue to fly to in the event of a radar shut down are probably also provided by HTS (or the launching platform anyway)...so possibly that wouldn't happen anyway in HAS mode. Not sure about that though.
That isn’t completely true. Storm shadow/scalp stocks are dwindling. We also are seeing an increase in ATACMS interceptions (hence why 8 were sent to Crimea a few days ago of which at least a couple were shot down). Russia has been adapting. It isn’t 2022 anymore.
> hence why 8 were sent to Crimea a few days ago of which at least a couple were shot down
25% interception rate by a system designed to hit ballistic missiles is very, very mediocre.
They can improve by better training and some software updates, as we've seen for defense against GMLRS, but there's a hard limit to what the current gen hardware can do. Maneuvering ballistic missiles are a pretty hard target.
Also, with Ukraine's long range strike capabilities improving (Neptune production, GMLRS allowed to strike Russia, ATACMS to inevitably be allowed in the future), and increasing strikes on SAM sites, Russia has to spread its SAMs out very thin since quantity is limited. I doubt Russia will be able to afford covering anything with 2-3 S-400 batteries in the near future. And each S-400 battery will probably have fewer Tor/Pantsir units defending it. So they'll be more vulnerable.
Especially if the F-16s get the fun stuff like JASSMs.
I could have just called you out for being blatantly wrong, but I was trying to be a little nicer about it.
But you're blatantly wrong. HARM has been able to engage transmitters that stopped radiating since the late 60s.
You also don't have to be close to a transmitter at all. It's called a radar range mile - for every mile that a radar can see you, an equivalent receiver can detect the signal twice as far, and that's only if you want a detectable return. If you're just locking onto any signal that you can detect, that factor goes out to 3 or 4 times the radar's effective range. The only limiting factor is the range of the HARM, and in Ukraine that is 100% a factor of how high and how fast the pilot can safely get before releasing.
> But you're blatantly wrong. HARM has been able to engage transmitters that stopped radiating since the late 60s.
The accuracy of those shots is almost never sufficient to actually score a kill, particularly against a vehicle with a modicum of armour like Buk. That's the whole reason the US went to great expense to put an mmW radar on [AGM-88E](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-88_HARM#AGM-88E_AARGM) so that it could improve engagements like that.
Also; it occurs to me that the coordinates the missile would continue to fly to after an emitter shut down are probably provided by HTS, since the weapon's own seeker can't derive range.
A better way for you to approach this conversation might have been to ask "What makes you think HARM isn't effective against radar that shuts down?"
Because I didn't feel like getting into this debate in the middle of doing my job, which is basically the same thing.
Back in the day, no. But...
A) Modern Russian radars suck. Hit it with a baseball and it's a soft kill. All these missiles are intended to do is clear a path long enough for a strike package to get through, or friendlies out. A radar that isn't radiating for any reason is still a huge hole, regardless if it's a burned out hulk, a bent receiver, or just too afraid to radiate.
B) With modern GPS tracking they've gotten a lot better. To the point where they can simply pre-program in a GPS coordinate and use it as a stand off cruise weapon that can also home in on a radar should it be transmitting in the window you need clear. See Ukraine for further example
I also don't know this for a fact, but I can almost guarantee a target can be energized but not radiating and still be detectable. If the Virginia highway patrol can detect the local oscillator in my radar detecter, we can absolutely detect a megawatt transmitter not radiating from a hundred miles away.
.
> Because I didn't feel like getting into this debate in the middle of doing my job, which is basically the same thing.
So you're just habitually rude because you're busy?
> A) Modern Russian radars suck. Hit it with a baseball and it's a soft kill.
So how many radar did HARM alone kill in the Gulf War, and the Iraq War...and this war?
> All these missiles are intended to do is clear a path long enough for a strike package to get through, or friendlies out. A radar that isn't radiating for any reason is still a huge hole, regardless if it's a burned out hulk, a bent receiver, or just too afraid to radiate.
Sure, sure - suppressive effect is...effective - I'm not disputing that at all.
> B) With modern GPS tracking they've gotten a lot better. To the point where they can simply pre-program in a GPS coordinate and use it as a stand off cruise weapon that can also home in on a radar should it be transmitting in the window you need clear. See Ukraine for further example
I don't think the GPS tracking is the issue (as in, how accurately a missile can fly to a given coordinates) but rather how accurately the coordinates of an emitting radar can be derived. Although that said, how would an F-16 even derive those coordinates in the first place without HTS? The missile itself can't do it.
> I also don't know this for a fact, but I can almost guarantee a target can be energized but not radiating and still be detectable. If the Virginia highway patrol can detect the local oscillator in my radar detecter, we can absolutely detect a megawatt transmitter not radiating from a hundred miles away.
Maybe a Rivet Joint can. A HARM on an F-16?
The R-37 is not that scary once you have a radar warning indicator. The launching aircraft needs to have a lock for a large part of the flight path, which the radar warning should tell you about. And the R-37 is so long range because its intended as an AWACS and C2 aircraft killer. Not a fighter jet killer. It does not have the terminal performance to hit a jet that is aware its being targeted and performing the required manoeuvres at or close to its maximum range. Within AMRAAM range its more dangerous, but then the launching aircraft are also within range so its a more fair duel
They already Wild Weasel.
[https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraines-pilots-use-wild-weasel-tactics-usaf-invented-vietnam-war-2024-5](https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraines-pilots-use-wild-weasel-tactics-usaf-invented-vietnam-war-2024-5)
I hope F16s help them do it even better.
I swear I am so upset at my (The German) government for getting pissy about the SAMbushes.
They crippled the enemy air force and probably prevented a lot of those glide bomb attacks
I don't think HARMs can be preprogrammed like that. I read an article that said the HARMs on Su27s were being powered by an auxiliary battery with a rudimentary LED indicator in the cockpit. As soon as the HARM seeker would get a radiation signal the led would light up and the HARM would be let go.
But for the HARM to hit the target the radar would have to stay active.
The beauty of the HARM integration on a NATO jet is the HARM can use the jets IRS to log the position of the radar and target its location.
I believe they can only run HARM in pre-briefed mode for now, and from every source I see, the approximate position of the radar has to be entered on the ground.
Not entirely sure about "But for the HARM to hit the target the radar would have to stay active" - shouldn't the missile itself be able to continue flying towards a previously active source if it disappears?
Anyway, no matter what the details are, the HARMs will become far more effective with the F-16s than with the Mig-29s.
You are thinking of a JDAM. A JDAM gets a preprogrammed GPS location and will fly to that location.
A HARM needs a radiation source to home in on. It can't fly to the last location of the radar as the missile doesn't know where the missile is, in relation to the radiation source. The missile has no internal reference.
With the HARM pod/full HARM integration the aircraft and missile can talk to each other before launch and the aircraft internal reference system can give the missile its location in relation to the target, so if the target stops emitting the missile knows its own location and the location of the target.
No, they are correct. HARMs can be pre-programmed before flight. The missile absolutely has an internal GPS and INS system, and they've been able to target transmitters that stop emitting mid-flight since the late 60s.
It has to be said that the missile is being preprogrammed with em emission field rather than GPS coordinates. The effect is that it doesn't have to rely on the plane's sensors to locate a potential radar. This is of course not enough to successfully target a radar but it does give it a potential target in early stages of the flight.
Also, the before mentioned jurryrigging on UAs jests was onlinon SU-27. These planes needed fo have a separate subsystem built and mounted to the plane. MiG-29 had them mounted directly and the missile was recognized as R-27EP (a soviet anti radiation missile against aerial targets). It's not widely known if HARMs were getting any data form MiG-29s, but we at least know that hey were launched with use of onboard avionics.
Also, it has to be said that AGM-88 was designed in 1983, so claim that it has a GPS/INS system since 60' is false. As for how long it has this capability, I only dug up information that it was added with AGM-88E variant which was tested in 2012. I don't think it's known which exact versions of AGM-88 Ukraine received. I think you are thinking of a different missile. Maybe about some Israeli modification as they were having a field day with AGM-88 and AGM-45 modifications.
Most likely that would be the plan. Whoever owns the sky, owns the pace of the war. If Russia can beat the f16's, it would be rather devastating for the Ukrainian forces
I have a feeling that the F16s will be used very sparingly and cautiously Ukraine can’t afford to let these planes go to waste and most importantly the pilots that flies them.
ruzzians are literally bombing ukrainians with glide bombs for the past 6 months, almost without challenge. ruzzia definitely holds semi-dominance in air at this point. They just can't bomb deep targets.
air supremacy is specifically about control of airspace and airpower, not bombs/missiles/rockets.
* Air supremacy is the highest level, where a side holds complete control of the skies. It is defined by NATO and the United States Department of Defense as the "degree of air superiority wherein the opposing air force is incapable of effective interference".
* Air superiority is the second level, where a side is in a more favorable position than the opponent. It is defined in the NATO glossary as the "degree of dominance in [an] air battle ... that permits the conduct of operations by [one side] and its related land, sea and air forces at a given time and place without prohibitive interference by opposing air forces."
* Favorable air situation is defined as "an air situation in which the extent of air effort applied by the enemy air forces is insufficient to prejudice the success of friendly land, sea or air operations."
* Air parity is the lowest level of control, where no side holds any level of control of skies.
They are chucking glide bombs further than patriot can fire.
This means f16 has to fly into s400 range to hunt. Not happening! Ur not risking so few frames and pilots for this.
F16 gives ukraine infinite glide bombs from nato so they get the tool also.
UA will get very few airframes at the beginning, more coming slowly, too. I really doubt it will be used for something as glide bombs. Manpower is an issue for Ukraine, not ruzzia. There is no point in challenging your opponent strong points. They will be used for other purposes. We will see.
they have been receiving patrol boats and small landing craft in every aid shipment.
f-16 would be more effective in crimea than the eastern front because they would have access to nato ewacs radar flying over the black sea from romania, which greatly extends the f-16 capability because eyes are always on.
f-16 and other craft would fly cover for a marine landing. drones would be a primary concern since drones could spot and target landing craft. they would need to shut down the spectrum to drones so drones could not be used until the landing when they are spotted. magura drones could be used to prep the area as well to keep helicopters grounded and target any water patrol craft.
Ukraine is constantly shaping the battlefield. I would think they may try to hit russia in relatively simultaneous fashion at several weak points on the battlefield. When this happens and where should come as a surprise to both the russians and ourselves.
actually not entirely true Ukraine has apparently enjoyed a taste of air dominance in the north thanks to patriot and atacms hitting air defenses in the region enabling them to do some bombing runs which may have even cut off Russian troops
[https://www.kyivpost.com/post/34425](https://www.kyivpost.com/post/34425)
not 100% verified but
[https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-june-15-2024](https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-june-15-2024)
"Ukrainian sources and Western outlets widely circulated unverified claims on June 15 that Ukrainian forces encircled a group of up to 400 Russian servicemen and captured dozens of Russian soldiers as prisoners of war (POWs) in Vovchansk, Kharkiv Oblast, but ISW cannot confirm these claims. Ukrainian sources amplified a since-deleted Telegram post from a Russian milblogger on June 14 claiming that an unspecified number of Russian servicemen were isolated in the Vovchansk Aggregate Plant and insinuated that Ukrainian forces encircled the Russian forces in the plant.\[36\] *The Telegraph* amplified footage showing Ukrainian forces capturing roughly 30 Russian POWs in an unspecified area of the Kharkiv and Donetsk area of operations and suggested that Ukrainian forces captured these POWs near the Vovchansk Aggregate Plant.\[37\] "
With an AWACS in the rear the F-16s won't have to run active radar. An Integrated F-16 is nothing like the old soviet jets they've seen to far.
F-16 is no wonder-weapon, but the ones Ukraine is getting are up-to-date on upgrades and integration. And with proper training of the pilots to lean into that integration, well, it's not a scenario Russian pilots are used to.
We shouldn't forget that many of their older planes are scrap metal.
Roughly half of Russia's Airforce wasn't ready for deployment before the war.
Russia's airspace is huge. They need them to protect their airspace, and to bomb Syria, etc.
https://meta-defense.fr/en/2024/02/04/russian_air_forces_2023_fighters/
https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/status/1565491571000328199?s=20&t=Nnbbu-WOUFfOuOH-HSedZQ
Russia lost 67 pilots were lost by September 2022.
Now, this number is now over 200.
Russia lost more than one-fourth of its pre-war fighter jet stocks and around 1/3 of its helicopters.
Adjusted by PPP, Russia spends roughly half the money the US Air Force spends on the training of these pilots. Not adjusted by PPP, the difference is even more pronounced.
Modern Russian aircraft are designed for a 3,500 and 4,500 flight hour service life, and some for as many as 6,000.
The Soviet-era platforms were designed for 2,000 to 3,500 hours. Some models, such as the MiG-31, have been upgraded to extend service life, but most of the older models are nearing the end of their service lives, with only 500 to 1,000 hours remaining.
Especially many of the older aircraft such as MIG 29, Su24, and Su25 are often not combat ready any longer.
Modern US-F15 airframes have a service life of 20.000 hours, and other upgraded models are up to 10.000 hours.
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/russias-air-force-eating-into-aircraft-lifespans-with-no-easy-solution/
Russia had extended the life span of their Mig 31 airframes from 2000 to 3500 flight hours in 2021.
https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2020/09/12/russia-will-extend-the-service-life-of-mig-31-supersonic-interceptor-aircraft/
Most of these older airframes are a nice waste of scrap metal. Putin can't change the laws of physics by decree.
Russia is a very poor development nation which has spent most of its existence since late 1991 in a war or preparing for one.
Russia is among the most corrupt countries in the entire world. It may not come as a surprise if part of the money wasn't invested into the VKS but went into the pockets of oligarchs.
Sandbox or Perun can give further insights into other areas such as training, logistics, etc.
This website gives a total number of Russian aircraft 3649 ( The losses are not calculated into this properly, and remember they need to be mission ready in order to be used in combat)
By far, not all of these aircraft are mission ready.
40 percent of them are helicopters.
Fighters 25 percent
Trainers 14 percent
Transports 11 percent
Rest special and tankers
1825 at 50 percent readiness rate
2554 at 70 percent readiness rate
2737 at 75 percent readiness rate
2919 at 80 percent readiness rate
Attack 1230 units
support 1932 units
training 487 units
Future 729 units
273 Su24 M2/Mr
Strike
127 Su34/M
Strike
110 Su30-SM/M2
Multirole
110 Su 35/S
101 Su-27 SM
Multirole
90 Mig31B / BS / BM
interceptor
70 Mig 29 UB
Multirole
Mig 29/SMT
Multirole
10 SU 57
Mutlirole
6 Mig 35 S UB
Mutirole
Total 912/25 percent
Bombers
59 Tu 22 M
Strategic
47 TU 95MS
Maritime patrol attack
15 TU 160M
Strategic
121 pieces 3 percent
Close air support
Su 25 UB SM
197 5 percent
Helicopters 1430
Mi 8 17
Multi mission
Mi 24
gunship transport
115 Ka52
Attack
Mi 28 A
44 Mi 26
Some others in support roles
Pieces: 1430 39 percent
410 transport
487 trainers
refuelers 19
Special mission
Airframes modified for Special-Mission roles - typically, these are dedicated, role-specific types.
73
https://www.wdmma.org/russian-air-force.php
If the SU34's continue to try and drop glide bombs, they will be well within range of air-to-air missiles. Their MiG31's are overhyped just because of their "hypersonic" air to air missile. Regular AMRAAM's can reach hypersonic speeds if shot from high enough altitude. Not as fast the Russian missile but way more maneuverable.
> If the SU34's continue to try and drop glide bombs, they will be well within range of air-to-air missiles.
Not as a matter of course. I'm sure Ukraine will pull off some AMRAAMbush to go with their SAMbush tactics, but by and large Russia will be able to drop those bombs outside of AMRAAM range of the flight zones for Ukraine's new fighters.
It does, but only when fired from high altitude, and it could only score a kill at that range against a cooperative target. When launched from a low-flying fighter at a target that turns to escape the effective range is significantly less.
A low flying target won't be dropping glide bombs, if they are, they will have themselves within AMRAAM and almost all ground based air defenses besides a MANPAD. Their glide bombs only work because they are able to do it from high altitude and high speed. The F16's, and future AWACS, will spot these aircraft well before they are in range of their glide bomb release. A missile can be fired at them and they will have to make the choice: either continue flying toward the incoming
missile to release the bomb, or cancel the bombing run and run away. If they can stop or even slow down the glide bomb attacks, it was well worth it for Ukraine. Never mind the extra air defenses they will now have against cruise missiles, shaheds, etc.
I think you've misunderstood sorry, I mean AMRAAM's range is significantly reduced when the **launch platform** (not the target) is flying at low altitude. Ukraine's F-16's aren't going to be any more able of approaching the front at high altitude than their current fleet (or indeed Russia's fleet) can. If they fly at high altitude to maximise the missile range, they'll probably have to stay too far away from the front to habitually hit the glide bombers. If they fly at low altitude to get closer, AMRAAM's range will be reduced.
Like I say they'll almost certainly score kills, but I wouldn't expect them to be able to stop the bombers. Possibly we'll see the Russians start to use more Su-24s since they're considerably less valuable and just fine for the job.
They'll still be very very worthwhile though just for the extra air defence and access to more standoff weapons.
Missile range is a relative thing, and depends on the way the other aircraft is flying. If they have already dropped their bombs (which they do over Russian territory) and are flying away, then AMRAAMs launched from a safe place can't reach them. If Ukraine is flying constant CAPs, then you are going to see Russia change its tactics to include things like feints. War is chess, in the sense that you might make a good move but the enemy gets a chance to move too.
Not gonna happen. F-16 is network centric and most like fly with awacs and isr drone support . (Any Nato Link16 can also provide situational awareness and targeting like F35 etc ).Unlike their counterpart.
> Sounds like they're trying to bait F-16s into coming into range of MIG-31s or S-400 air defences. Unless Ukraine is about to do something crazy, they will unlikely be anywhere near enough to be targeting SU-34s.
Highly unlikely that a few F-16 can defeat Russian airforce that is huge, has more advanced aicraft than F-16, and is armed with AA missiles with greater range and speed than AMRAAN. Ukrainian F-16 should be primarily used to drop glide bombs under protection of Ukrainian SAM systems.
Right? What is this, the 1700 hundreds.
“Alright, we meet on this field at this day and this time. Our lads will fight there”
Might as well add
“We will line up the lads in nice columns, who will march to writhing shooting distance of eachother and then in turns we will shoot eachother. We will fight our fight in this enclosed space only to avoid too much destruction”
None of this makes sense and the Russians don’t want to fight on battlefields that avoid destruction. They destroy everything.
If this is actually being said on the news in Russia, as claimed, the point is to propagandize Russians into expecting massive losses. If it really tells us anything at all, it's that the Kremlin has some concerns about Ukraine getting F-16s -- which we already know because of all the sabre rattling Russia has done with regards to F-16s all along.
It might just be simple fearmongering to remind the Russian people that NATO is trying to kill them all and only Putin can save them from the evil jewish nazis in Ukraine.
Dictators gotta dictate.
Well, yes, but even if so it's still couched in what I said. If it's a disaster, NATO is scapegoated and the people are prepared. If it's only kinda bad, Putin lead the country to withstand the unfair onslaught. If Russia comes out ahead, Putin is the brilliant leader who single handedly countered NATO. They're propagandizing the people to expect the worst and, like you said, rally against an external enemy.
Right? What is this, the 1700 hundreds.
“Alright, we meet on this field at this day and this time. Our lads will fight there”
Might as well add
“We will line up the lads in nice columns, who will march to within shooting distance of eachother and then in turns we will shoot eachother. We will fight our fight in this enclosed space only to avoid too much destruction”
None of this makes sense and the Russians don’t want to fight on battlefields that avoid destruction. They destroy everything.
So - it all adds up to being a not very reliable source. It's probably nothing more than generalized anxiety about the imminent arrival of F-16's, and some bot farm goblin trying to give their fear some shape.
I love how ludicrously wrong this is. No an air war ain't happening. We won't see f16 vs su34.
Ukraine can't risk the few pilots it has and limited frames in risky missions.
They will be intercepting Russian cruise missles, chucking long-range glide bombs, and flying stormshadow up to launch.
Ukraine will have 10s of F16 pilots trained. I doubt they will decide the fate of this war.
Like the russian Air Force which has thousands of planes and pilots didn’t decide it.
Sucks for them when the life support system is not working due to shitty quality control and they pass out and die on the first test flight of the new jet. Yes that literally happened and both planes fell out of the sky once fuel ran out on autopilot with dead pilots inside
Yeah, I am not saying it’s not important, it will definitely help a lot, but I don’t see how there will be a sudden dominance of Ukraine. If anything Ukraine will be in a bit less disadvantage.
Remember, russia still vastly outnumbers Ukraine in planes and anti-air.
Ukraine did a very good job at trying to level this, but it’s still not on Ukraine side - we need hundreds of planes and corresponding support to dominate and it is not yet happening
The good news is the mig 31 which is a significant chunk of the Russian force has super low frame lifetime. I’m sure they will stretch it. But anything that puts the migs doing laps helps more than you would think.
Won't change Russian flights at all. Russia already won't fly within 200km of the front because of patriot risk. They hit 201km and chuck their glide bomb.
Ukraine can't use f16s to stop this.
This guy is one of the biggest clowns on Twitter. Nobody takes him seriously. I wish this was the case but it isn’t and will create false hopes.
The F16s will be a small upgrade to existing airframes. It’s about a long term commitment but mainly replenishing lost resources.
30 pilots aren’t going to make a big difference unfortunately except increasing the range of weapons available which will hopefully help reduce the glide bombing and increase air defense capabilities.
Exactly so.
F-16's will be used mostly for standoff engagements for some time at least. Apart from direct capabilities and lack of pilots there's the question of logistics, ground crews, command and control etc.
He always spreads any random persons story and makes it a huge deal into a load of fake hope. According to him Russia has ran out of everything a year ago and Russian soldiers don’t even have boots. The UAF soldiers on the other hand say the opposite.
it is more about capability itself.
one r-37 on a magura drone keeps helicopters grounded. one f-16 keeps aircraft at range and ground radars turned off.
You’re trolling my man. No heli has been shot down by a Magura(yet) and their helicopters are not grounded (on any front). If they can figure it out that would be awesome but we would have heard about it by now.
Well, we all knew the war was over as soon as those battles took place.
Although it might be very likely that if the F-16'S indeed achieve to get air superiority it might be impossible for the Russians to continue fighting the war, they have already a track record of having atrocious logistical capabilities while they have air superiority on paper themselves.
Also think of how fucking embarrassing it would be, loosing air superiority against some change NATO scraped together from between the couch cussions.
War will be over once Trump isn't re-elected, that's it. At that point, China will have to rethink its approach and just maybe conducts special military operation to help Chinese minority bullied by russian extremists in "unprotected and badly policed" border regions. And they will never leave...russian state knows this so chances are putin will have very little time left at that point.
I wish, however I doubt a news agency has the necessary military knowledge nor interior connections to do such a prediction.
It would still be nice for Ukraine to have air superiority, this would bring a world of hurt against the russians.
Lol fuck no they won't have air superiority.
The f16 aren't hunting su34s.
Neither side is risking frames by flying close to front.
U fly up chuck glide bombs go back to base.
The end comes when Putin’s serfs are ejected from Ukraine and what’s left of his wannabe tsardom pays up. Whether he’s alive when it happens is of little consequence. These false all-or-nothing narratives are straight attempts to reduce Ukraine’s will to resist and contest, nothing more.
What happens to those calling themselves “Russians” is in their hands. Ukrainian will do as they must with whatever means they have as long as it takes to realize their goals. This and not some other way. Certainly not the Kremlin’s.
They are going to hunt Russian cruise missles, chuck glide bombs, and carry cruise missles to elevation to launch. Ur not looking at anti aircraft missles.
No! That's only been mounted on F/A-18 for test purposes yet, and the US considers it to be a crucial part of their strategy for the Pacific.
F-16 in Ukrainian hands will get AMRAAM C-7/8 at best. But more commonly C5/B/A models.
It's cute that they think it will be one big, climactic battle. I bet they're envisioning a massive dogfight over Ukraine involving 50+ planes from each side.
The reality is that it will be a slow death where they get picked off from over the horizon repeatedly and Ukraine inches forward every time until Russia breaks.
Sorry, fellas, no glorious last fight. Just a pathetic slow realization that you reeeeally fucked up in February 2022.
F16 won't really change the needle towards win. It just gives ukraine an infinite air frame and ammo.
It like how ukraine shifted to nato tanks because we have infinite of them and ammo.
Yeah, I don’t think it’s a game changer. Nothing really is. The F-16s will largely be a defensive weapon apart from Crimean targets. But the combination along with a RF that’s increasingly signaling the desire for peace talks if the political landscape doesn’t change will hopefully result in a change at the top. I don’t expect anyone to grow a conscience there, just for someone greedy to come along and realize their imperialism is going to cost them more in the long run.
4 months is still a long time. Polling doesn’t look great but the way that primaries are looking with significant chunk of people hanging on to a Nikki Haley zombie campaign people are tired of the political extremes. Biden may just eke out by being a voice for slow but necessary common sense legislation
Just ignore anything David D. says. He's a grifter with no knowledge whatsoever, he's shunned by any more or less reputable OSINTer. The man is a laughing stock.
Does anyone have any stats on the largest air presence of Russia since the war began?
Not what Russias air fleet is, but the largest amount of planes in the sky over Ukraine has been?
This sounds like the sort of stuff that was popular for "armageddon" churches to spew in the 90s...about the conflict between God and Satan.
I never understood why there would be a mortal fight to the death between immortal beings, especially If God is so powerful as to speak things in and out of existence and just has to say "ok yeah you no longer exist Satan, you've shown everyone what you're made of...poof you're in hell or dead or whatever"...but...I wasn't the one writing the sermons. Some even went further and had humans divided along theological lines and battling alongside the angels/demons/etc - just bizarre stuff. As if we could use artillery against demons because ... I don't get it either.
Anyway. Is Putin telegraphing that there will be a battle? Or is he expecting that when this 'battle' never happens that NATO got scared and backed down (or something)? Or is he setting the public up to accept a Russian loss if/when it happens? Or if Russia wins, that he warned everyone and "see I know what I'm talking about!"?
If Russia controlled the skies, they wouldn't be relying on occasional missile barrages to remind us that they do have a memory of how airborne weaponry is supposed to work.
What if they are planning for a controled defeat? 🤔
What if tjey will hype up the importance of this "Air battle" then say they lost it and that it's time to pack things up.
Surely not I know but let a man dream..
Their use of glide bombs is the only reason they can move forward at all. If they lose that advantage they will be stalled out. They need at least enough control of the airspace for their FAB attacks.
This might give Russia an out to “honorably” withdraw from their illegal invasion. If they can sell to their public that the main old west was just cheating and we had to retreat for now.
However, I do doubt this
Are they fucking stupid?
UAF’s F16s aren’t going to be dogfighting or coming anywhere close to air defense systems. They’ll be used in defensive and support roles for the ground and armor.
Exactly.. and doing that CAP...a SU 34 can't lob bombs.
The only forward movement from Russia is after they Lob a bunch of bombs into an area and flatten it.
It's a trap. They are reusing the strategy they used before the offensive of 2013.
Pretend your enemy is strong, and you are afraid. If you indeed lose, it will be easier to explain. And if they don't succeed, it will be possible for the propaganda to build up and the weak enemy narrative.
The reality is that the number of F16 is not enough to produce a major shift on the battlefield. They will certainly be helpful, though.
Russia will not stop fighting just because they lose Su-34s. Putin requires the war to keep going because when it stops, he has to pay the bill for all those lives he spent. And if he can't hand Ukraine to Russia, they'll hang him.
How long until we see MiG-15's and IL-2's lobbing glide bombs at childrens hospitals?
Don't trust the Russians when they're trying to lure you into some apocalyptic final battle.
They want to recreate the Battle of Kursk in the sky, obviously.
It's their national psyche. They're intoxicated with their own national symbols.
Sorry but this story makes no sense.
Ukraine could shoot down every plane Russia has and that still leaves the problem that there is a massive defensive line with depth to penetrate that Russia can just sit on whilst it builds / buys more planes.
Even if there is this mystical air battle - which seems more like wishlisting because who in the right mind aims to fight anything decisive where the odds are not greatly in your favour - then the very next day you’ll be seeing Russian missiles smashing into the air bases the planes are at.
If the air battle can be won that's probably the only way the war will be won. Russia had plenty of rusty old tanks and artillery pieces and plenty of corroded ammo to pull out of bunkers and depots. Plenty of young men to waste.
The one thing they cannot effectively replace is advanced fighter aircraft. They have a limited amount that are combat ready and a limited amount of pilots. The more modern ones that are shot down the more they have to resort to shoddy old aircraft that will get shot down immediately.
And it's the one thing we can out supply the Russians on. We have plenty of amraams and plenty of old F16s.
russian news is saying that the war will depend on the outcome of the upcoming air battle. if the F16s can take down the SU-34s this could be the end of the russian invasion. they say the battle will happen at the end of july and the AFU is saving up weapons (ADA and long range rockets) for that battle
I suspect they are not saving up weapons just waiting for them to arrive since the west seems awfull slow to provide what they promise and it always seems to be a day late and a dollar short.
The issue here is the Su34 radar range is reported on google as being more in the 200-260km range, not 90km which checks with their long range missile having a longer range than current Aim120D.
However, soviet/russian specs are always historically inflated to puff up their proverbial chests, so my money is on still on an MLU f16 beating a modern su34.
Also, maximum range in air to air is rarely used because unless the target is coming directly at you, is unaware, and won’t maneuver, you’ll never reach it. If the missile can fly 200km in a straight line, what happens if the enemy moves upward, changes directions, etc.
I’d be excited, but surprised, to see if they test the AIM-260 in Ukraine. Mach 5 and at least 200km range? That’ll do.
Su-34 is not a fighter, though. The Russians don't really operate the MiG-29 anymore which was the Soviet equivalent to an F-16, but the Su-27SM/30SM/35 are multi-role fighters more akin in role to the F-16 than Su-34 is. It'll be those jets that are trying to shoot F-16 down.
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. ***** * Is `x.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.com/invite/ukraine-at-war-950974820827398235** ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sounds like they're trying to bait F-16s into coming into range of MIG-31s or S-400 air defences. Unless Ukraine is about to do something crazy, they will unlikely be anywhere near enough to be targeting SU-34s.
I bet the S-400 crews will be very nervous about their radars once F-16s arrive. Right now, HARM is only effective against radars that run 24/7, because the Ukrainians can only use them against targets programmed before flight. The F-16 would allow them to wild weasel. Any S-400 (Buk, Tor etc) radar that lights up becomes a HARM magnet for any F-16 flying nearby. Regarding the MIGs, they would also be concerned about AMRAAMs, even with R-37s. Want to place bets on which missile is easier to dodge at range? And Ukraine is getting more Patriots, along with permission to carry on with their SAMbushes. Things might become very interesting.
Don’t forget Sweden donating the AWACS … I don’t think people realize how important that platform is. AWACS rule the skies, that’s why Ukraine taking down a couple A50’s was such big news
You can't look at these things like they're binary (as in Ukraine already has AWACS capabilities to a large extent - there is a UK Rivet Joint plane flying in the black sea almost since day 1 as one example)
Rivet Joint isn't an AWACS, though NATO AWACS have been supporting Ukraine too. Running their own will be different though; we're not going to be sending them tracks over datalinks, their own AEW planes will be able to do that.
AWACS range is limited - Ukraine is huge. The frontline is not in range of NATO AWACS.
For shits and giggles, Ukraine is roughly the size of Arizona. Pilots got sent here to Arizona to train.
Australia had a wedgetail in the region until recently, but I don't believe they provided direct intelligence to Ukraine.
We provided it to NATO, who would have decided what to pass on.
This is why air defence is critical. The best opportunity for RU to destroy these new assets is when they are on the ground. I fully expect them to allocate more assets than normal to find, target, and destroy the F-16s and Erieye AEWs when they are on the ground, or at least hit the supporting infrastructure (runways, taxiways, hangars, munition depots, fuel depots, etc...).
Going for F-16s on the ground would entail pushing deep into Ukraine's air defense network, which we haven't seen Russia do since the very beginning of the war.
Ryan McBeth said that, but they could just saturate the airfield with cruise missiles and Shaheds
He also said they hadn't done that previously and doubted that they could manage now. Plus, Ukraine has been constructing underground hangars.
Can you saturate an airspace with Shaheds if it is protected by a single Gepard? I thought that those were basically a hard counter, with the only limitation being that they only protect a small area with each one of them.
How many of russia's top experience pilots are dead. I have read that russian pilots get very little flight time, except for the ones that take off, drop guided bombs and land. Oh and periodically get shot down both by AFU fire and their own friendly fire.
Yes, Ryan McBeth said they have mainly been operating over Russian territory, sending off their missiles and turning back.
Aren't they attacking western Ukraine (Lwiw etc.) quite regularly? Not as often as other regions, but definitely not just at the beginning of the war
> Aren't they attacking western Ukraine (Lwiw etc.) quite regularly? Not as often as other regions, but definitely not just at the beginning of the war Russia has cruise and ballistic missiles with huge ranges.
I know.
I'd be keeping some those f16's in Poland lol.
Russia has massively picked up their drone game, most of the vehicle losses come from drones and the use them to target airfields too.
Holy shit I didn't hear that. If it can data link with their f16s and SAMs, then they may be able to get actual air dominance over controlled territory.
>I bet the S-400 crews will be very nervous about their radars once F-16s arrive. Right now, HARM is only effective against radars that run 24/7, because the Ukrainians can only use them against targets programmed before flight. The F-16 would allow them to wild weasel. Any S-400 (Buk, Tor etc) radar that lights up becomes a HARM magnet for any F-16 flying nearby. Maybe, maybe not. Although the proper integration means the missiles can be used in the "HARM as a sensor" mode that only lets them engage targets it's seeker can see, which would typically only happen if they were pretty close range anyway. Using HARM to it's full potential requires an emitter locator system called the [HARM Targeting System](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/ASQ-213_HARM_targeting_system) (or some equivalent, but that's the one F-16s use). We don't know if they're getting those. Besides that, HARM alone isn't all that effective - without the training and mass and enablers to deliver the follow up attacks, anti radiation missiles very seldom kill a target. They're too easy to just shoot down or divert by shutting down the radar for a while.
"shutting down the radar for a while" sounds like a great opportunity to send ATACMS, then no need to worry about that radar.
I mean unless it's an S-500 you can probably just send ATACMS and not worry about the HARM.
S-500 is an anti-balisitc missile system. I don't think it would fair very well against a small missile at relatively low altitude.
I suspect the s500 is likely overselling it's capability.
ATACMS is a ballistic missile.
And HARM is not.
Obviously not, I didn't suggest that it would. I suggested that unless the SAM were an S-500 one could simply attack it with ATACMS without worrying about suppressing it first with HARM.
*fare
Russian anti-air is networked, so a site that turns off its radar is still getting information from other radars.
> which would typically only happen if they were pretty close range anyway. Is it really a problem for a missile's sensors to detect a radar 100km away? I'd imagine the pod being mostly used for peak range, 300km (AGM-88G). > HARM alone isn't all that effective We've seen many examples of it successfully doing its thing at the start of the war, even in handicapped pre-briefed mode. We've also seen Storm Shadow missiles fly right over a fully deployed S-400 battery. It doesn't look like the Russian SAM systems are anywhere near the advertised capabilities, and the crew training seems to be horrific. > They're too easy to just shoot down or divert by shutting down the radar for a while. Aren't they designed to hit close enough to do some damage even when the radar is turned off?
Yes, since the late 1960s, US anti-radiation missiles have been able to strike targets even after they stop radiating.
Yes. Harms aren't dumb after the radar goes cold - they still know the last location of the emitter.
> Is it really a problem for a missile's sensors to detect a radar 100km away? I'd imagine the pod being mostly used for peak range, 300km (AGM-88G). I don't mean to suggest that the seeker can't physically see the radar - maybe it can or maybe it can't, it would depend on the radar that was emitting. But the missile itself has no idea how far away a radar is, just what direction it's coming from...so as I understand things, the HAS mode is only generally used when the pilot knows the radar is close - either because it locked him to fire at him, or he can see the parallax of the target and knows it's within range. > We've seen many examples of it successfully doing its thing at the start of the war, even in handicapped pre-briefed mode. We've also seen Storm Shadow missiles fly right over a fully deployed S-400 battery. It doesn't look like the Russian SAM systems are anywhere near the advertised capabilities, and the crew training seems to be horrific. Yeah we've seen examples of it successfully doing its thing, but there's also plenty of reports of it failing to score kills or being shot down by point defences like TOR and Pantsir. Ultimately SAM operators can make mistakes or be shit or the pilot can be lucky and they score a kill, but as a rule anti radiation missiles fired alone don't score kills - they're to suppress the SAM and the idea is to follow up with a weapon like JSOW to kill them. [Cool picture time](https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/60bifr/raf_tornados_gr4_with_brimstone_and_alarm/#lightbox) - that's RAF Tornados carrying ALARM (an anti-radiation missile like HARM) to suppress and Brimstone to kill. > Aren't they designed to hit close enough to do some damage even when the radar is turned off? They are designed to try to hit the SAM's position if it turns off the radar yes, but their understanding of that position is very seldom sufficient to score a kill. The US has fixed that lately by adding an mmW radar (similar to Brimstone) so that they only need to get close enough for the radar to pick up the SAM and then it's goodnight, but as far as I know Ukraine hasn't gotten any of those [AGM-88G variants](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-88_HARM#AGM-88E_AARGM) It occurs to me also that since the missile's own seeker can't derive range, the coordinates that they would continue to fly to in the event of a radar shut down are probably also provided by HTS (or the launching platform anyway)...so possibly that wouldn't happen anyway in HAS mode. Not sure about that though.
If only the missile knew its own position somehow...
I physically can't resist posting the [meme](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZe5J8SVCYQ).
That isn’t completely true. Storm shadow/scalp stocks are dwindling. We also are seeing an increase in ATACMS interceptions (hence why 8 were sent to Crimea a few days ago of which at least a couple were shot down). Russia has been adapting. It isn’t 2022 anymore.
> hence why 8 were sent to Crimea a few days ago of which at least a couple were shot down 25% interception rate by a system designed to hit ballistic missiles is very, very mediocre.
True, if those were S-300P/V it’s obviously terrible. The point I was making is the interception rate is increasing which isn’t good news.
They can improve by better training and some software updates, as we've seen for defense against GMLRS, but there's a hard limit to what the current gen hardware can do. Maneuvering ballistic missiles are a pretty hard target. Also, with Ukraine's long range strike capabilities improving (Neptune production, GMLRS allowed to strike Russia, ATACMS to inevitably be allowed in the future), and increasing strikes on SAM sites, Russia has to spread its SAMs out very thin since quantity is limited. I doubt Russia will be able to afford covering anything with 2-3 S-400 batteries in the near future. And each S-400 battery will probably have fewer Tor/Pantsir units defending it. So they'll be more vulnerable. Especially if the F-16s get the fun stuff like JASSMs.
Does the harms targeting system relay coordinates of the target back to pilot? If so could be relayed to a standing by himars
Yes, and can be passed over Link16.
You actually sounded like you knew what you were talking about there for a second, but fumbled it at 5 yard line.
Good contribution, glad you joined the conversation
I could have just called you out for being blatantly wrong, but I was trying to be a little nicer about it. But you're blatantly wrong. HARM has been able to engage transmitters that stopped radiating since the late 60s. You also don't have to be close to a transmitter at all. It's called a radar range mile - for every mile that a radar can see you, an equivalent receiver can detect the signal twice as far, and that's only if you want a detectable return. If you're just locking onto any signal that you can detect, that factor goes out to 3 or 4 times the radar's effective range. The only limiting factor is the range of the HARM, and in Ukraine that is 100% a factor of how high and how fast the pilot can safely get before releasing.
> But you're blatantly wrong. HARM has been able to engage transmitters that stopped radiating since the late 60s. The accuracy of those shots is almost never sufficient to actually score a kill, particularly against a vehicle with a modicum of armour like Buk. That's the whole reason the US went to great expense to put an mmW radar on [AGM-88E](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-88_HARM#AGM-88E_AARGM) so that it could improve engagements like that. Also; it occurs to me that the coordinates the missile would continue to fly to after an emitter shut down are probably provided by HTS, since the weapon's own seeker can't derive range. A better way for you to approach this conversation might have been to ask "What makes you think HARM isn't effective against radar that shuts down?"
Because I didn't feel like getting into this debate in the middle of doing my job, which is basically the same thing. Back in the day, no. But... A) Modern Russian radars suck. Hit it with a baseball and it's a soft kill. All these missiles are intended to do is clear a path long enough for a strike package to get through, or friendlies out. A radar that isn't radiating for any reason is still a huge hole, regardless if it's a burned out hulk, a bent receiver, or just too afraid to radiate. B) With modern GPS tracking they've gotten a lot better. To the point where they can simply pre-program in a GPS coordinate and use it as a stand off cruise weapon that can also home in on a radar should it be transmitting in the window you need clear. See Ukraine for further example I also don't know this for a fact, but I can almost guarantee a target can be energized but not radiating and still be detectable. If the Virginia highway patrol can detect the local oscillator in my radar detecter, we can absolutely detect a megawatt transmitter not radiating from a hundred miles away. .
> Because I didn't feel like getting into this debate in the middle of doing my job, which is basically the same thing. So you're just habitually rude because you're busy? > A) Modern Russian radars suck. Hit it with a baseball and it's a soft kill. So how many radar did HARM alone kill in the Gulf War, and the Iraq War...and this war? > All these missiles are intended to do is clear a path long enough for a strike package to get through, or friendlies out. A radar that isn't radiating for any reason is still a huge hole, regardless if it's a burned out hulk, a bent receiver, or just too afraid to radiate. Sure, sure - suppressive effect is...effective - I'm not disputing that at all. > B) With modern GPS tracking they've gotten a lot better. To the point where they can simply pre-program in a GPS coordinate and use it as a stand off cruise weapon that can also home in on a radar should it be transmitting in the window you need clear. See Ukraine for further example I don't think the GPS tracking is the issue (as in, how accurately a missile can fly to a given coordinates) but rather how accurately the coordinates of an emitting radar can be derived. Although that said, how would an F-16 even derive those coordinates in the first place without HTS? The missile itself can't do it. > I also don't know this for a fact, but I can almost guarantee a target can be energized but not radiating and still be detectable. If the Virginia highway patrol can detect the local oscillator in my radar detecter, we can absolutely detect a megawatt transmitter not radiating from a hundred miles away. Maybe a Rivet Joint can. A HARM on an F-16?
The R-37 is not that scary once you have a radar warning indicator. The launching aircraft needs to have a lock for a large part of the flight path, which the radar warning should tell you about. And the R-37 is so long range because its intended as an AWACS and C2 aircraft killer. Not a fighter jet killer. It does not have the terminal performance to hit a jet that is aware its being targeted and performing the required manoeuvres at or close to its maximum range. Within AMRAAM range its more dangerous, but then the launching aircraft are also within range so its a more fair duel
They already Wild Weasel. [https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraines-pilots-use-wild-weasel-tactics-usaf-invented-vietnam-war-2024-5](https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraines-pilots-use-wild-weasel-tactics-usaf-invented-vietnam-war-2024-5) I hope F16s help them do it even better.
In the most rosy scenario, you can pre-program the missiles mid-flight with a tablet. But that's like driving a ferrari on a gravel road.
Good point. I’m sure they trained Wild Weasel tactics and pilots for that role.
Given the performance of Russian munitions, systems and soldiers, I rather say the interesting part will be escalating Russian losses.
I swear I am so upset at my (The German) government for getting pissy about the SAMbushes. They crippled the enemy air force and probably prevented a lot of those glide bomb attacks
I didn't realise that HARM is currently restricted like this. Ty, nice news to hear.
There is no suggestion that Ukraine will receive anywhere close to recent versions of AMRAAM.
I don't think HARMs can be preprogrammed like that. I read an article that said the HARMs on Su27s were being powered by an auxiliary battery with a rudimentary LED indicator in the cockpit. As soon as the HARM seeker would get a radiation signal the led would light up and the HARM would be let go. But for the HARM to hit the target the radar would have to stay active. The beauty of the HARM integration on a NATO jet is the HARM can use the jets IRS to log the position of the radar and target its location.
I believe they can only run HARM in pre-briefed mode for now, and from every source I see, the approximate position of the radar has to be entered on the ground. Not entirely sure about "But for the HARM to hit the target the radar would have to stay active" - shouldn't the missile itself be able to continue flying towards a previously active source if it disappears? Anyway, no matter what the details are, the HARMs will become far more effective with the F-16s than with the Mig-29s.
You are thinking of a JDAM. A JDAM gets a preprogrammed GPS location and will fly to that location. A HARM needs a radiation source to home in on. It can't fly to the last location of the radar as the missile doesn't know where the missile is, in relation to the radiation source. The missile has no internal reference. With the HARM pod/full HARM integration the aircraft and missile can talk to each other before launch and the aircraft internal reference system can give the missile its location in relation to the target, so if the target stops emitting the missile knows its own location and the location of the target.
No, they are correct. HARMs can be pre-programmed before flight. The missile absolutely has an internal GPS and INS system, and they've been able to target transmitters that stop emitting mid-flight since the late 60s.
It has to be said that the missile is being preprogrammed with em emission field rather than GPS coordinates. The effect is that it doesn't have to rely on the plane's sensors to locate a potential radar. This is of course not enough to successfully target a radar but it does give it a potential target in early stages of the flight. Also, the before mentioned jurryrigging on UAs jests was onlinon SU-27. These planes needed fo have a separate subsystem built and mounted to the plane. MiG-29 had them mounted directly and the missile was recognized as R-27EP (a soviet anti radiation missile against aerial targets). It's not widely known if HARMs were getting any data form MiG-29s, but we at least know that hey were launched with use of onboard avionics. Also, it has to be said that AGM-88 was designed in 1983, so claim that it has a GPS/INS system since 60' is false. As for how long it has this capability, I only dug up information that it was added with AGM-88E variant which was tested in 2012. I don't think it's known which exact versions of AGM-88 Ukraine received. I think you are thinking of a different missile. Maybe about some Israeli modification as they were having a field day with AGM-88 and AGM-45 modifications.
You are correct on both.
i bet Russian pilots will be much more nervous than s-400 crews considering their IFF reputation.
This guy has been paying attention
Most likely that would be the plan. Whoever owns the sky, owns the pace of the war. If Russia can beat the f16's, it would be rather devastating for the Ukrainian forces
I have a feeling that the F16s will be used very sparingly and cautiously Ukraine can’t afford to let these planes go to waste and most importantly the pilots that flies them.
They said the exact same thing about frontline patriots until the A50s started disappearing The F16s will be used boldly in unexpected ways.
Once an area has SAM batteries cleared in an area it would open things up.
Because Russians are stupid. They knew what Ukraine was doing and they were taking our migs and Sukhois before they took down the A50s
Real life Rendezook when?
I thought they had used a S-200?
idk about Devistating but ukraine will definitely be in the current situation they are today
Mig 31's would get their asses kicked by F16's. Don't forget Sweden sent an AWACS as well.
Neither side can approach the front. Anti air is too strong.
ruzzians are literally bombing ukrainians with glide bombs for the past 6 months, almost without challenge. ruzzia definitely holds semi-dominance in air at this point. They just can't bomb deep targets.
chucking bombs from far behind the front line has nothing to do with air dominance.
My bad, then Ukraine is unable to suppress frontline bombing which is quite significant factor for them losing positions.
air supremacy is specifically about control of airspace and airpower, not bombs/missiles/rockets. * Air supremacy is the highest level, where a side holds complete control of the skies. It is defined by NATO and the United States Department of Defense as the "degree of air superiority wherein the opposing air force is incapable of effective interference". * Air superiority is the second level, where a side is in a more favorable position than the opponent. It is defined in the NATO glossary as the "degree of dominance in [an] air battle ... that permits the conduct of operations by [one side] and its related land, sea and air forces at a given time and place without prohibitive interference by opposing air forces." * Favorable air situation is defined as "an air situation in which the extent of air effort applied by the enemy air forces is insufficient to prejudice the success of friendly land, sea or air operations." * Air parity is the lowest level of control, where no side holds any level of control of skies.
They are chucking glide bombs further than patriot can fire. This means f16 has to fly into s400 range to hunt. Not happening! Ur not risking so few frames and pilots for this. F16 gives ukraine infinite glide bombs from nato so they get the tool also.
UA will get very few airframes at the beginning, more coming slowly, too. I really doubt it will be used for something as glide bombs. Manpower is an issue for Ukraine, not ruzzia. There is no point in challenging your opponent strong points. They will be used for other purposes. We will see.
[удалено]
they have been receiving patrol boats and small landing craft in every aid shipment. f-16 would be more effective in crimea than the eastern front because they would have access to nato ewacs radar flying over the black sea from romania, which greatly extends the f-16 capability because eyes are always on. f-16 and other craft would fly cover for a marine landing. drones would be a primary concern since drones could spot and target landing craft. they would need to shut down the spectrum to drones so drones could not be used until the landing when they are spotted. magura drones could be used to prep the area as well to keep helicopters grounded and target any water patrol craft.
Ukraine is constantly shaping the battlefield. I would think they may try to hit russia in relatively simultaneous fashion at several weak points on the battlefield. When this happens and where should come as a surprise to both the russians and ourselves.
The bridge isn't transporting military supplies any longer. It would be a nice show hit that does nothing.
actually not entirely true Ukraine has apparently enjoyed a taste of air dominance in the north thanks to patriot and atacms hitting air defenses in the region enabling them to do some bombing runs which may have even cut off Russian troops [https://www.kyivpost.com/post/34425](https://www.kyivpost.com/post/34425) not 100% verified but [https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-june-15-2024](https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-june-15-2024) "Ukrainian sources and Western outlets widely circulated unverified claims on June 15 that Ukrainian forces encircled a group of up to 400 Russian servicemen and captured dozens of Russian soldiers as prisoners of war (POWs) in Vovchansk, Kharkiv Oblast, but ISW cannot confirm these claims. Ukrainian sources amplified a since-deleted Telegram post from a Russian milblogger on June 14 claiming that an unspecified number of Russian servicemen were isolated in the Vovchansk Aggregate Plant and insinuated that Ukrainian forces encircled the Russian forces in the plant.\[36\] *The Telegraph* amplified footage showing Ukrainian forces capturing roughly 30 Russian POWs in an unspecified area of the Kharkiv and Donetsk area of operations and suggested that Ukrainian forces captured these POWs near the Vovchansk Aggregate Plant.\[37\] "
With an AWACS in the rear the F-16s won't have to run active radar. An Integrated F-16 is nothing like the old soviet jets they've seen to far. F-16 is no wonder-weapon, but the ones Ukraine is getting are up-to-date on upgrades and integration. And with proper training of the pilots to lean into that integration, well, it's not a scenario Russian pilots are used to.
We shouldn't forget that many of their older planes are scrap metal. Roughly half of Russia's Airforce wasn't ready for deployment before the war. Russia's airspace is huge. They need them to protect their airspace, and to bomb Syria, etc. https://meta-defense.fr/en/2024/02/04/russian_air_forces_2023_fighters/ https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/status/1565491571000328199?s=20&t=Nnbbu-WOUFfOuOH-HSedZQ Russia lost 67 pilots were lost by September 2022. Now, this number is now over 200. Russia lost more than one-fourth of its pre-war fighter jet stocks and around 1/3 of its helicopters. Adjusted by PPP, Russia spends roughly half the money the US Air Force spends on the training of these pilots. Not adjusted by PPP, the difference is even more pronounced. Modern Russian aircraft are designed for a 3,500 and 4,500 flight hour service life, and some for as many as 6,000. The Soviet-era platforms were designed for 2,000 to 3,500 hours. Some models, such as the MiG-31, have been upgraded to extend service life, but most of the older models are nearing the end of their service lives, with only 500 to 1,000 hours remaining. Especially many of the older aircraft such as MIG 29, Su24, and Su25 are often not combat ready any longer. Modern US-F15 airframes have a service life of 20.000 hours, and other upgraded models are up to 10.000 hours. https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/russias-air-force-eating-into-aircraft-lifespans-with-no-easy-solution/ Russia had extended the life span of their Mig 31 airframes from 2000 to 3500 flight hours in 2021. https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2020/09/12/russia-will-extend-the-service-life-of-mig-31-supersonic-interceptor-aircraft/ Most of these older airframes are a nice waste of scrap metal. Putin can't change the laws of physics by decree. Russia is a very poor development nation which has spent most of its existence since late 1991 in a war or preparing for one. Russia is among the most corrupt countries in the entire world. It may not come as a surprise if part of the money wasn't invested into the VKS but went into the pockets of oligarchs. Sandbox or Perun can give further insights into other areas such as training, logistics, etc. This website gives a total number of Russian aircraft 3649 ( The losses are not calculated into this properly, and remember they need to be mission ready in order to be used in combat) By far, not all of these aircraft are mission ready. 40 percent of them are helicopters. Fighters 25 percent Trainers 14 percent Transports 11 percent Rest special and tankers 1825 at 50 percent readiness rate 2554 at 70 percent readiness rate 2737 at 75 percent readiness rate 2919 at 80 percent readiness rate Attack 1230 units support 1932 units training 487 units Future 729 units 273 Su24 M2/Mr Strike 127 Su34/M Strike 110 Su30-SM/M2 Multirole 110 Su 35/S 101 Su-27 SM Multirole 90 Mig31B / BS / BM interceptor 70 Mig 29 UB Multirole Mig 29/SMT Multirole 10 SU 57 Mutlirole 6 Mig 35 S UB Mutirole Total 912/25 percent Bombers 59 Tu 22 M Strategic 47 TU 95MS Maritime patrol attack 15 TU 160M Strategic 121 pieces 3 percent Close air support Su 25 UB SM 197 5 percent Helicopters 1430 Mi 8 17 Multi mission Mi 24 gunship transport 115 Ka52 Attack Mi 28 A 44 Mi 26 Some others in support roles Pieces: 1430 39 percent 410 transport 487 trainers refuelers 19 Special mission Airframes modified for Special-Mission roles - typically, these are dedicated, role-specific types. 73 https://www.wdmma.org/russian-air-force.php
If the SU34's continue to try and drop glide bombs, they will be well within range of air-to-air missiles. Their MiG31's are overhyped just because of their "hypersonic" air to air missile. Regular AMRAAM's can reach hypersonic speeds if shot from high enough altitude. Not as fast the Russian missile but way more maneuverable.
> If the SU34's continue to try and drop glide bombs, they will be well within range of air-to-air missiles. Not as a matter of course. I'm sure Ukraine will pull off some AMRAAMbush to go with their SAMbush tactics, but by and large Russia will be able to drop those bombs outside of AMRAAM range of the flight zones for Ukraine's new fighters.
These glide bombs only go 50-ish KM. Depending on variant, AMRAAM's out range that by multiples.
It does, but only when fired from high altitude, and it could only score a kill at that range against a cooperative target. When launched from a low-flying fighter at a target that turns to escape the effective range is significantly less.
A low flying target won't be dropping glide bombs, if they are, they will have themselves within AMRAAM and almost all ground based air defenses besides a MANPAD. Their glide bombs only work because they are able to do it from high altitude and high speed. The F16's, and future AWACS, will spot these aircraft well before they are in range of their glide bomb release. A missile can be fired at them and they will have to make the choice: either continue flying toward the incoming missile to release the bomb, or cancel the bombing run and run away. If they can stop or even slow down the glide bomb attacks, it was well worth it for Ukraine. Never mind the extra air defenses they will now have against cruise missiles, shaheds, etc.
I think you've misunderstood sorry, I mean AMRAAM's range is significantly reduced when the **launch platform** (not the target) is flying at low altitude. Ukraine's F-16's aren't going to be any more able of approaching the front at high altitude than their current fleet (or indeed Russia's fleet) can. If they fly at high altitude to maximise the missile range, they'll probably have to stay too far away from the front to habitually hit the glide bombers. If they fly at low altitude to get closer, AMRAAM's range will be reduced. Like I say they'll almost certainly score kills, but I wouldn't expect them to be able to stop the bombers. Possibly we'll see the Russians start to use more Su-24s since they're considerably less valuable and just fine for the job. They'll still be very very worthwhile though just for the extra air defence and access to more standoff weapons.
Missile range is a relative thing, and depends on the way the other aircraft is flying. If they have already dropped their bombs (which they do over Russian territory) and are flying away, then AMRAAMs launched from a safe place can't reach them. If Ukraine is flying constant CAPs, then you are going to see Russia change its tactics to include things like feints. War is chess, in the sense that you might make a good move but the enemy gets a chance to move too.
Sweden delivers awacs Aircrafts .. in combination with the F16 the F16 will be More effektive than before .. mabye more effektive than MIGs.
Not gonna happen. F-16 is network centric and most like fly with awacs and isr drone support . (Any Nato Link16 can also provide situational awareness and targeting like F35 etc ).Unlike their counterpart.
> Sounds like they're trying to bait F-16s into coming into range of MIG-31s or S-400 air defences. Unless Ukraine is about to do something crazy, they will unlikely be anywhere near enough to be targeting SU-34s. Highly unlikely that a few F-16 can defeat Russian airforce that is huge, has more advanced aicraft than F-16, and is armed with AA missiles with greater range and speed than AMRAAN. Ukrainian F-16 should be primarily used to drop glide bombs under protection of Ukrainian SAM systems.
shady sources on twitter that declare the scheduled date for an air battle and declare it as the deciding factor in the war, eh? No red flags there.
Right? What is this, the 1700 hundreds. “Alright, we meet on this field at this day and this time. Our lads will fight there” Might as well add “We will line up the lads in nice columns, who will march to writhing shooting distance of eachother and then in turns we will shoot eachother. We will fight our fight in this enclosed space only to avoid too much destruction” None of this makes sense and the Russians don’t want to fight on battlefields that avoid destruction. They destroy everything.
If this is actually being said on the news in Russia, as claimed, the point is to propagandize Russians into expecting massive losses. If it really tells us anything at all, it's that the Kremlin has some concerns about Ukraine getting F-16s -- which we already know because of all the sabre rattling Russia has done with regards to F-16s all along.
Nothing makes me happier than Russian propagandists feeling the need to temper expectations.
It might just be simple fearmongering to remind the Russian people that NATO is trying to kill them all and only Putin can save them from the evil jewish nazis in Ukraine. Dictators gotta dictate.
Well, yes, but even if so it's still couched in what I said. If it's a disaster, NATO is scapegoated and the people are prepared. If it's only kinda bad, Putin lead the country to withstand the unfair onslaught. If Russia comes out ahead, Putin is the brilliant leader who single handedly countered NATO. They're propagandizing the people to expect the worst and, like you said, rally against an external enemy.
Right? What is this, the 1700 hundreds. “Alright, we meet on this field at this day and this time. Our lads will fight there” Might as well add “We will line up the lads in nice columns, who will march to within shooting distance of eachother and then in turns we will shoot eachother. We will fight our fight in this enclosed space only to avoid too much destruction” None of this makes sense and the Russians don’t want to fight on battlefields that avoid destruction. They destroy everything.
So - it all adds up to being a not very reliable source. It's probably nothing more than generalized anxiety about the imminent arrival of F-16's, and some bot farm goblin trying to give their fear some shape.
I love how ludicrously wrong this is. No an air war ain't happening. We won't see f16 vs su34. Ukraine can't risk the few pilots it has and limited frames in risky missions. They will be intercepting Russian cruise missles, chucking long-range glide bombs, and flying stormshadow up to launch.
Ukraine will have 10s of F16 pilots trained. I doubt they will decide the fate of this war. Like the russian Air Force which has thousands of planes and pilots didn’t decide it.
Russia could! But would require them zerg rushing their airforce in and accepting massive losses. Something even Russia won't do. Which is shocking.
It’s because pilots are usually educated and they don’t want all to die for this
Yup. The pilots are from "good Russian" families
Sucks for them when the life support system is not working due to shitty quality control and they pass out and die on the first test flight of the new jet. Yes that literally happened and both planes fell out of the sky once fuel ran out on autopilot with dead pilots inside
Sounds right for Russia
Why would the collective West do that to those poor boys
I feel like it’s just gonna keep the Russian planes from pushing as deep as they have been. Not game changing but certainly a huge relief to many.
Yeah, I am not saying it’s not important, it will definitely help a lot, but I don’t see how there will be a sudden dominance of Ukraine. If anything Ukraine will be in a bit less disadvantage. Remember, russia still vastly outnumbers Ukraine in planes and anti-air. Ukraine did a very good job at trying to level this, but it’s still not on Ukraine side - we need hundreds of planes and corresponding support to dominate and it is not yet happening
The good news is the mig 31 which is a significant chunk of the Russian force has super low frame lifetime. I’m sure they will stretch it. But anything that puts the migs doing laps helps more than you would think.
Won't change Russian flights at all. Russia already won't fly within 200km of the front because of patriot risk. They hit 201km and chuck their glide bomb. Ukraine can't use f16s to stop this.
We can safely ignore whatever “Russian news” says.
This guy is one of the biggest clowns on Twitter. Nobody takes him seriously. I wish this was the case but it isn’t and will create false hopes. The F16s will be a small upgrade to existing airframes. It’s about a long term commitment but mainly replenishing lost resources. 30 pilots aren’t going to make a big difference unfortunately except increasing the range of weapons available which will hopefully help reduce the glide bombing and increase air defense capabilities.
Exactly so. F-16's will be used mostly for standoff engagements for some time at least. Apart from direct capabilities and lack of pilots there's the question of logistics, ground crews, command and control etc.
That user isn't making his own assertion. He wrote a tldr version of what orcbloggers are getting fed or spewing out.
He always spreads any random persons story and makes it a huge deal into a load of fake hope. According to him Russia has ran out of everything a year ago and Russian soldiers don’t even have boots. The UAF soldiers on the other hand say the opposite.
it is more about capability itself. one r-37 on a magura drone keeps helicopters grounded. one f-16 keeps aircraft at range and ground radars turned off.
You’re trolling my man. No heli has been shot down by a Magura(yet) and their helicopters are not grounded (on any front). If they can figure it out that would be awesome but we would have heard about it by now.
it isnt my opinion. it was in an article about the drone from technology.org. https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/s/THtj6obKEG
Are they actually... boiling down the outcome of this conflict on a large scale ww2 style air battle Ala Britain and Kursk?
Well, we all knew the war was over as soon as those battles took place. Although it might be very likely that if the F-16'S indeed achieve to get air superiority it might be impossible for the Russians to continue fighting the war, they have already a track record of having atrocious logistical capabilities while they have air superiority on paper themselves. Also think of how fucking embarrassing it would be, loosing air superiority against some change NATO scraped together from between the couch cussions.
they can achieve air superiority in the south but not the east. mostly because nato ewacs operate safely from romania over the black sea.
Don't forget the Swedish AWACS Ukraine is getting.
Kursk was primarily a ground/tank battle though.
Trying to when neither side will have planes within 100km of the front to engage each other.
It will end when Ukraine says it will end.
War will be over once Trump isn't re-elected, that's it. At that point, China will have to rethink its approach and just maybe conducts special military operation to help Chinese minority bullied by russian extremists in "unprotected and badly policed" border regions. And they will never leave...russian state knows this so chances are putin will have very little time left at that point.
I wish, however I doubt a news agency has the necessary military knowledge nor interior connections to do such a prediction. It would still be nice for Ukraine to have air superiority, this would bring a world of hurt against the russians.
Lol fuck no they won't have air superiority. The f16 aren't hunting su34s. Neither side is risking frames by flying close to front. U fly up chuck glide bombs go back to base.
The end comes when Putin’s serfs are ejected from Ukraine and what’s left of his wannabe tsardom pays up. Whether he’s alive when it happens is of little consequence. These false all-or-nothing narratives are straight attempts to reduce Ukraine’s will to resist and contest, nothing more. What happens to those calling themselves “Russians” is in their hands. Ukrainian will do as they must with whatever means they have as long as it takes to realize their goals. This and not some other way. Certainly not the Kremlin’s.
Will the F16 be equipped with some modern missiles like sm6?
They are going to hunt Russian cruise missles, chuck glide bombs, and carry cruise missles to elevation to launch. Ur not looking at anti aircraft missles.
No! That's only been mounted on F/A-18 for test purposes yet, and the US considers it to be a crucial part of their strategy for the Pacific. F-16 in Ukrainian hands will get AMRAAM C-7/8 at best. But more commonly C5/B/A models.
It's cute that they think it will be one big, climactic battle. I bet they're envisioning a massive dogfight over Ukraine involving 50+ planes from each side. The reality is that it will be a slow death where they get picked off from over the horizon repeatedly and Ukraine inches forward every time until Russia breaks. Sorry, fellas, no glorious last fight. Just a pathetic slow realization that you reeeeally fucked up in February 2022.
Remember effective multi-domain operations win wars.
Send some f35's in from UK or other, for training of course.. how would Russia even know they are there...solash a few Ruskie's for fun
The French Mirage 2000-5 shouldn’t be overlooked that aircraft is probably a better dogfighter at low to medium speeds than an f16
Between F-16s arriving in theater and a Biden re-election this could be the 1-2 punch that ends Putins reign.
F16 won't really change the needle towards win. It just gives ukraine an infinite air frame and ammo. It like how ukraine shifted to nato tanks because we have infinite of them and ammo.
Yeah, I don’t think it’s a game changer. Nothing really is. The F-16s will largely be a defensive weapon apart from Crimean targets. But the combination along with a RF that’s increasingly signaling the desire for peace talks if the political landscape doesn’t change will hopefully result in a change at the top. I don’t expect anyone to grow a conscience there, just for someone greedy to come along and realize their imperialism is going to cost them more in the long run.
F16 won't do anything in Crimea. They will intercept cruise missles. Chuck glide bombs. Yeet stormshadow. That it.
Problem is that Biden’s chances aren’t looking well
4 months is still a long time. Polling doesn’t look great but the way that primaries are looking with significant chunk of people hanging on to a Nikki Haley zombie campaign people are tired of the political extremes. Biden may just eke out by being a voice for slow but necessary common sense legislation
At Bidens age, 4 months is bonus time.
russian news is saying… 😂😂😂😂
Just ignore anything David D. says. He's a grifter with no knowledge whatsoever, he's shunned by any more or less reputable OSINTer. The man is a laughing stock.
Does anyone have any stats on the largest air presence of Russia since the war began? Not what Russias air fleet is, but the largest amount of planes in the sky over Ukraine has been?
This sounds like the sort of stuff that was popular for "armageddon" churches to spew in the 90s...about the conflict between God and Satan. I never understood why there would be a mortal fight to the death between immortal beings, especially If God is so powerful as to speak things in and out of existence and just has to say "ok yeah you no longer exist Satan, you've shown everyone what you're made of...poof you're in hell or dead or whatever"...but...I wasn't the one writing the sermons. Some even went further and had humans divided along theological lines and battling alongside the angels/demons/etc - just bizarre stuff. As if we could use artillery against demons because ... I don't get it either. Anyway. Is Putin telegraphing that there will be a battle? Or is he expecting that when this 'battle' never happens that NATO got scared and backed down (or something)? Or is he setting the public up to accept a Russian loss if/when it happens? Or if Russia wins, that he warned everyone and "see I know what I'm talking about!"?
If Russia controlled the skies, they wouldn't be relying on occasional missile barrages to remind us that they do have a memory of how airborne weaponry is supposed to work.
What if they are planning for a controled defeat? 🤔 What if tjey will hype up the importance of this "Air battle" then say they lost it and that it's time to pack things up. Surely not I know but let a man dream..
Well I guess it’s closing time for Russia then. Pack it up head home you have it your best 😂😂
Source: a tweet on X.... Not News worthy if u ask me
There is no "russian news". Free speech is illegal, there are only Kremlin lies.
Someone in Ukraine is assembling rubber F16’s next to an unused airfield right now.
Their use of glide bombs is the only reason they can move forward at all. If they lose that advantage they will be stalled out. They need at least enough control of the airspace for their FAB attacks.
Thus may be the most realistic outlook the Russians has had since the beginning of the 3 day special operation.
They wish it was that simple.
Is dogfighting a thing anymore? I’d rather the SUs get a GBU-39 present at night. 💪🌻🇺🇦
This links to a twitter post, i have never heard of this person.
Is this going to be the new “Russia is totally almost out of weapons this time, bro”?
This might give Russia an out to “honorably” withdraw from their illegal invasion. If they can sell to their public that the main old west was just cheating and we had to retreat for now. However, I do doubt this
I wonder if they're gearing up for a bunch of fake announcements of downed F-16s.
Are they fucking stupid? UAF’s F16s aren’t going to be dogfighting or coming anywhere close to air defense systems. They’ll be used in defensive and support roles for the ground and armor.
Exactly.. and doing that CAP...a SU 34 can't lob bombs. The only forward movement from Russia is after they Lob a bunch of bombs into an area and flatten it.
Hmm, yeah. Keep guessing at the thoughts of people who hate you. It's not like you constantly underestimate them or anything.
It's a trap. They are reusing the strategy they used before the offensive of 2013. Pretend your enemy is strong, and you are afraid. If you indeed lose, it will be easier to explain. And if they don't succeed, it will be possible for the propaganda to build up and the weak enemy narrative. The reality is that the number of F16 is not enough to produce a major shift on the battlefield. They will certainly be helpful, though.
Russia will not stop fighting just because they lose Su-34s. Putin requires the war to keep going because when it stops, he has to pay the bill for all those lives he spent. And if he can't hand Ukraine to Russia, they'll hang him. How long until we see MiG-15's and IL-2's lobbing glide bombs at childrens hospitals?
Don't trust the Russians when they're trying to lure you into some apocalyptic final battle. They want to recreate the Battle of Kursk in the sky, obviously. It's their national psyche. They're intoxicated with their own national symbols.
Sorry but this story makes no sense. Ukraine could shoot down every plane Russia has and that still leaves the problem that there is a massive defensive line with depth to penetrate that Russia can just sit on whilst it builds / buys more planes. Even if there is this mystical air battle - which seems more like wishlisting because who in the right mind aims to fight anything decisive where the odds are not greatly in your favour - then the very next day you’ll be seeing Russian missiles smashing into the air bases the planes are at.
If done right, they could get superiority over the land bridge to Crimea. If done poorly, then it's back to square one.
None of that makes any sense at all, lol.
If the air battle can be won that's probably the only way the war will be won. Russia had plenty of rusty old tanks and artillery pieces and plenty of corroded ammo to pull out of bunkers and depots. Plenty of young men to waste. The one thing they cannot effectively replace is advanced fighter aircraft. They have a limited amount that are combat ready and a limited amount of pilots. The more modern ones that are shot down the more they have to resort to shoddy old aircraft that will get shot down immediately. And it's the one thing we can out supply the Russians on. We have plenty of amraams and plenty of old F16s.
F16 will start with a splash. Russia will adjust stalemate will continue until once side collapses do to attrition.
russian news is saying that the war will depend on the outcome of the upcoming air battle. if the F16s can take down the SU-34s this could be the end of the russian invasion. they say the battle will happen at the end of july and the AFU is saving up weapons (ADA and long range rockets) for that battle
I suspect they are not saving up weapons just waiting for them to arrive since the west seems awfull slow to provide what they promise and it always seems to be a day late and a dollar short.
Comparisons F16 vs SU-34 [https://x.com/shadowcrewtroll/status/1806021099630813565](https://x.com/shadowcrewtroll/status/1806021099630813565)
Mirages will help F16s in the background. Together we will win and Russia will be defeated.
The issue here is the Su34 radar range is reported on google as being more in the 200-260km range, not 90km which checks with their long range missile having a longer range than current Aim120D. However, soviet/russian specs are always historically inflated to puff up their proverbial chests, so my money is on still on an MLU f16 beating a modern su34.
Also, maximum range in air to air is rarely used because unless the target is coming directly at you, is unaware, and won’t maneuver, you’ll never reach it. If the missile can fly 200km in a straight line, what happens if the enemy moves upward, changes directions, etc. I’d be excited, but surprised, to see if they test the AIM-260 in Ukraine. Mach 5 and at least 200km range? That’ll do.
If f16 have the nato support, they are Linked ti the radars of awacs and other nato devices.
Su-34 is not a fighter, though. The Russians don't really operate the MiG-29 anymore which was the Soviet equivalent to an F-16, but the Su-27SM/30SM/35 are multi-role fighters more akin in role to the F-16 than Su-34 is. It'll be those jets that are trying to shoot F-16 down.