Ukraine Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Abominable said:

That wasn't my recollection. By that logic, Russia would be fine with America transferring F-35s over so long as they didn't take off from a NATO base?

Click to expand...

There are all sorts of laws of war with regards to this stuff. Just providing passage through your airspace for those F-35s is enough to make you a cobelligerent. Notice how the US and NATO spend no time thinking if they should sanction Belarus just for providing transit for Russian troops over their territory. When Belarus neither invaded Ukraine nor fired a single shot. So, no, it isn't as simple as taking off from a NATO airbase. It gets more complicated. And even if you ship those aircraft in crates and they get assembled in Ukraine there is no guarantee that Russia won't strike the logistics bases used to transport those aircraft. Just like the US bombed the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos back in the Vietnam War. Russia might bomb those logistics bases and transport routes even if they are outside Ukraine. It depends on how far they want to escalate.

Abominable said:

Also, how do you know they haven't mated the jets with western missiles, or integrated the jets with NATO AWACS? A month is a long time.

Click to expand...

You must think this is a bunch of LEGO or something. If it was that easy why didn't Poland do that in the years they had their own MiG-29s they wanted to upgrade to NATO standard? A month isn't a long time by the standards of changing the avionics on an aircraft. It might take at least 6 months. And that is assuming you have the upgrade packages available and tested. And then you have the problem of physical interfaces. The wires and rails aren't even the same on Soviet and NATO standard. You can make an aircraft compatible with both but that is non-trivial. Then you would have to train crews to operate the new avionics and systems. Good luck. Ukraine at this rate will also run out of pilots before they run out of aircraft. And it typically takes two years to train a pilot.

gelgoog said:

There are all sorts of laws of war with regards to this stuff. Just providing passage through your airspace for those F-35s is enough to make you a cobelligerent. Notice how the US and NATO spend no time thinking if they should sanction Belarus just for providing transit for Russian troops over their territory. When Belarus neither invaded Ukraine nor fired a single shot. So, no, it isn't as simple as taking off from a NATO airbase. It gets more complicated. And even if you ship those aircraft in crates and they get assembled in Ukraine there is no guarantee that Russia won't strike the logistics bases used to transport those aircraft. Just like the US bombed the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos back in the Vietnam War. Russia might bomb those logistics bases and transport routes even if they are outside Ukraine. It depends on how far they want to escalate.

Click to expand...

So if its Ukraine receiving cold war era migs in warsaw pact, Russia is okay with them being transferred as long as they don't take off from a NATO base.
Whereas for a more modern jet then it becomes a casus belli.

I think you're covering for the uncomfortable fact that Russia's bluff got called. NATO learnt the old schoolboy trick that it's easier to get forgiveness than permission.

I think the Russian strategy is poor. They should be letting almost everything into the Ukraine, not threatening NATO when they do send things in. That makes you look weak.

Threatening NATO about sending platforms in and then doing nothing when NATO does that is one of the worst strategies for Russia to adopt.

gelgoog said:

You must think this is a bunch of LEGO or something. If it was that easy why didn't Poland do that in the years they had their own MiG-29s they wanted to upgrade to NATO standard? A month isn't a long time by the standards of changing the avionics on an aircraft. It might take at least 6 months. And that is assuming you have the upgrade packages available and tested. And then you have the problem of physical interfaces. The wires and rails aren't even the same on Soviet and NATO standard. You can make an aircraft compatible with both but that is non-trivial. Then you would have to train crews to operate the new avionics and systems. Good luck.

Click to expand...

You are underestimating how much resources NATO are pumping into the Ukrainian war effort, financial and human. I hope the Russian military aren't as blasé as you are.

gelgoog said:

I think you guys are spinning gold out of straw. The US made public a few days ago it was going to send some Mi-17 helicopters they had stored which were supposed to go to Afghanistan into Ukraine. Those are the "aircraft". Ukraine had lots of Su-27, MiG-29, and Su-25 aircraft which they kept hidden after the initial Russian strikes. And they still send one or two out every once in a while and they promptly get shot down. Even if you sent to Ukraine all the MiG-29 in NATO, most of them Polish, it would make no difference. The early Fulcrums did not even have a proper radar and are highly vulnerable to long range attacks with missiles like the R-77-1. Without a ground defense radar network to cue them in they are basically flying blind there without a proper tactical picture.

Click to expand...

The US already disclosed they would be sending Mi-17s in the $800 million package, while they're keeping the lid on this one except for vague details.

Abominable said:

So if its Ukraine receiving cold war era migs in warsaw pact, Russia is okay with them being transferred as long as they don't take off from a NATO base.
Whereas for a more modern jet then it becomes a casus belli.
I think you're covering for the uncomfortable fact that Russia's bluff got called. NATO learnt the old schoolboy trick that it's easier to get forgiveness than permission.
I think the Russian strategy is poor. They should be letting almost everything into the Ukraine, not threatening NATO when they do send things in. That makes you look weak.
Threatening NATO about sending platforms in and then doing nothing when NATO does that is one of the worst strategies for Russia to adopt.
You are underestimating how much resources NATO are pumping into the Ukrainian war effort, financial and human. I hope the Russian military aren't as blasé as you are.

Click to expand...

No, you are mixing stuff up. If we are talking about sending combat aircraft either over NATO airspace or from NATO airbases to Ukraine that makes those NATO countries cobelligerents and is a casus belli. It does not matter if it is MiG-29, F-35, helicopters, whatever. You say "Russia's bluff got called". Well Russia shot down a transport aircraft near Odessa just the other day. And they bombed the logistics facilities at Lviv more recently with Kh-101 missiles.

And if you think Russia wants the weapons supplies to stop makes them look weak, how about US government bawling their eyes out that Russia was supplying weapons to Iraq in 2003 when the Iraqis had some RPG-29s and knocked out like 3 M1 tanks? Such crybabies. RPG-29s supplied back when the Soviet Union was still around. Heaven forbid if Russia actually supplied Iraq with modern ATGMs like Kornet.

gelgoog said:

Well Russia shot down a transport aircraft near Odessa just the other day.

Click to expand...

And Ukraine says they shot down IL-76s full of paratroopers early in the war. Proof, please.

In other news:


Also, there are rumors of another $800M package coming from the US on top of what has already been given.

RottenPanzer said:

I guess those fighters already entered service in UAF since few days ago and explained why Ukraine still could sorties in the Donbass as claimed by Russian MoD of shooting down Su-24,Su-27 and MiG-29...

Click to expand...

Apparently, the planes Ukraine got were the Moldavian MiG-29's the US bought years ago to stop them from falling in Iranian hands.

They were already in a shitty condition back then, who knows how are they now; probably only worth it for spare parts.

sheogorath said:

Apparently, the planes Ukraine got were the Moldavian MiG-29's the US bought years ago to stop them from falling in Iranian hands.

Click to expand...

Are they the ones that were handed over to the opfor training company in the US? The US has been flying those for a while, but there are not many.

anzha said:

Are they the ones that were handed over to the opfor training company in the US? The US has been flying those for a while, but there are not many.

Click to expand...

I think these are different. These were 21 Mig-29s that were nuclear-capable and the US bought in 1997 before Iran could buy them.

sheogorath said:

I think these are different. These were 21 Mig-29s that were nuclear-capable and the US bought in 1997 before Iran could buy them.

Click to expand...

At best they are good for parts unless the US actually restored them.

Apparently Ukraine's military request from March got leaked. Zelensky must have cooked up a big rock of crack before putting this out, some of it makes no sense. 24 American F15/16/18 (I assume they mean either, not 24 of all three), 24 Gripens for free? Who will pay for all of this?? A good portion of the platforms are Russian...does he expect Russia to sell them to him?

To me it looks like the shopping list of a homeless guy who wins the lottery. Which I guess is close to what has happened.