The War in the Ukraine
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
Belgians, Danes, British and Dutch, the first to offer support
Mockery has been removed from this post.
Ban #1: mocking language and inflammatory language from the warning before
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think the US is talking about the Bryansk shoot downs that Mi-8 got hit with a much smaller missile. A PAC 2 has a 200lb warhead the Mi-8 would have been coming down in pieces.
The difficulty of sending the F-16 to Ukraine probably lies around aircraft maintenance.
The F-16 will likely require maintainers from Western military which are in short supply.
Furthermore, any attacks on air bases could create large numbers of western casualties which exacerbates the first point, and also is bad optics.
F-16 is clearly not made for unprepared runway, it will need an airport or a nice clean highway to operate. Having more jet would help for sure but not for long in that hostile environment from difficult maintenances, rugged facilities and under anti-aircraft systems watch from liftoff to landing. Giving them AH64 or AH1 would be way more useful than a couple of F-16.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I have a feeling the Poles might risk allowing F16s to operate from their air bases and dare the Russians to attack and trigger article 5.
They will probably try to salami slice, with pronouncements that the F16s will only go after cruise missiles and drones, unless engage by Russian manned aircraft first, and will probably keep them to the west of Ukraine and supported with NATO AWACS and Ukrainian SAMs to make it extra hard and risky for the Russians to try and hunt them down.
It will be a major escalation, but that is to be expected since the Russians have not reacted appropriately to all previous NATO escalations. It will be a massive risk, but past Russian inaction makes it more likely for them to risk it.
Something like that was going to happen at the start of this war when the Poles were offering Mig-29s. The plan was to operate them from Polish bases.
Putin said if you do that, we will strike Poland and declare war on NATO. I doubt the Americans would start doing that now if they didn't a year ago.
Helicopters are more maintenance heavy than aircraft though. Plus, they are much more vulnerable to MANPAD's. As for the F-16's, I have been listening to some aircraft experts talking about the Gripen being the ideal candidate due to its ruggedness and ability to take off from rough runways. Its only drawback is that Sweden can't produce enough of it to replace hypothetical donations. I guess that may be one of the major reasons why they chose the F-16's (excluding the mic wants money argument).
Also, I hate to bring back the Patriot battery argument, but CNN (yes I know one should take them along with the US government with a bunch of salt) reported this quote in this :
"Without the jets, Ukraine is having to improvise, officials say. Defense officials and congressional staffers told CNN that Ukrainian troops have in recent weeks used the US-made Patriot air defense system to shoot down at least one faraway Russian fighter jet. The Russian jets have largely been staying behind Russian defensive lines, making them difficult for Ukraine to target with shorter-range systems like NASAMs".
If the above quote is true, that means at least one of the Patriots is close to the Ukrainian-Russian border.
Yeah Gripen would be a nice choice for them but beside going near ground in man pad zone doing fast tossing of bomb and diving back, nothing survive in the air at medium and high altitude over Ukraine from both sides.
That applies to all aircraft. It is an inherent risk, and it depends on the armament of the aircraft. I'm not too familiar with aircraft armament and sensors, but if Ukraine at the very least can arm themselves with AIM-120'S or even Meteor's and coordinate anti-aircraft efforts, they can at the very least reduce the Russian Air Force's superior air control. None of them are magic bullets though, but they definitely would help a lot.