BREAKING : UK 🇬🇧 & Netherlands 🇳🇱 have agreed to form an international coalition to provide Ukraine 🇺🇦 with F-16s!!

[Litwin]

The Netherlands has got a good reasons to support Ukraine since the plane MH 17 of the Malaysian airlines shot down by the Moscow empire . Time of revenge is coming.




and

 

[Litwin]

I say : Give Ukraine the 'Wings for freedom' that it needs to provide air cover to the 9 tank brigades !

 

[Litwin]

 

[Litwin]

 

[para bellum]

Appears F-16's for Ukraine is going to be a reality.

The White House says the US will support the International effort led by the Netherlands and UK. Also said there are no objections to NATO allies providing jets.

A document from the AZ ANG was leaked to the press (it had already been shared with NATO allies). They assessed the training would only take 4 months.

The assessment was based on 9 simulator sessions with 2 Ukrainian pilots. One was a MiG-29 driver and the other flew Su-27's.

Notable takeaways:

They received no formal training on the F-16 in the classroom.
Both pilots were already above the "B-course" level and proficient in BFM and ACM.
They were both able to execute a flame-out landing after watching it done just once in the sim.
They successfully executed mock attacks based on parameters given to them while flying the sim.
They were not comfortable with NATO flying formations, and quickly reverted to the formations they use in Ukraine.
Their English was not very good and they had difficulty with the F-16's avionics. However they improved rapidly over the 2 weeks. Additional English language coursework will be needed for all Ukrainian pilots.

 

[Litwin]

Appears F-16's for Ukraine is going to be a reality.

The White House says the US will support the International effort led by the Netherlands and UK. Also said there are no objections to NATO allies providing jets.

A document from the AZ ANG was leaked to the press (it had already been shared with NATO allies). They assessed the training would only take 4 months.

The assessment was based on 9 simulator sessions with 2 Ukrainian pilots. One was a MiG-29 driver and the other flew Su-27's.

Notable takeaways:

They received no formal training on the F-16 in the classroom.
Both pilots were already above the "B-course" level and proficient in BFM and ACM.
They were both able to execute a flame-out landing after watching it done just once in the sim.
They successfully executed mock attacks based on parameters given to them while flying the sim.
They were not comfortable with NATO flying formations, and quickly reverted to the formations they use in Ukraine.
Their English was not very good and they had difficulty with the F-16's avionics. However they improved rapidly over the 2 weeks. Additional English language coursework will be needed for all Ukrainian pilots.

 

[JohnDB]

Training pilots is all well and good. 5 months for experienced military pilots.

But it takes 9 full time maintenance staff to keep one flying. And maintenence staff doesn't grow on trees for these kinds of machines. It takes 5 years to train them. So unless there have been a bunch of Ukrainians training on maintaining these for a while....there's something stinky here.

 

[para bellum]

Training pilots is all well and good. 5 months for experienced military pilots.

But it takes 9 full time maintenance staff to keep one flying. And maintenence staff doesn't grow on trees for these kinds of machines. It takes 5 years to train them. So unless there have been a bunch of Ukrainians training on maintaining these for a while....there's something stinky here.

It doesn't take 5 years to train a maintainer- not the flight line guys. That's longer than a lot of them even sign up for. Someone who already holds an A&P can be certified on Viper maintenance in months, not years.

Ukraine's F-16's would go out of country for depot work, there is a ton of existing infrastructure in Europe for supporting Vipers. It's probably the most supported fast jet in Europe, and they can even go to Turkey for full blown MLU's. That's putting it back on the assembly jig and zero-timing the airframe.

I have always maintained the Gripen is the more appropriate platform for Ukraine, but the F-16 still beats Gripen in airframe availability and support infrastructure.

I also think the F-18 is a good option-almost as good support as the Viper, and more a more rugged platform (and no nasty hydrazene to deal with). Plus a lot of F-18's in excellent condition out there, or becoming available by the end of the decade. The Ozzie Hugbugs or the practically new Kuwaiti Hornets don't need anything but a new home...

 

[JohnDB]

It doesn't take 5 years to train a maintainer- not the flight line guys. That's longer than a lot of them even sign up for. Someone who already holds an A&P can be certified on Viper maintenance in months, not years.

Ukraine's F-16's would go out of country for depot work, there is a ton of existing infrastructure in Europe for supporting Vipers. It's probably the most supported fast jet in Europe, and they can even go to Turkey for full blown MLU's. That's putting it back on the assembly jig and zero-timing the airframe.

I have always maintained the Gripen is the more appropriate platform for Ukraine, but the F-16 still beats Gripen in airframe availability and support infrastructure.

I also think the F-18 is a good option-almost as good support as the Viper, and more a more rugged platform (and no nasty hydrazene to deal with). Plus a lot of F-18's in excellent condition out there, or becoming available by the end of the decade. The Ozzie Hugbugs or the practically new Kuwaiti Hornets don't need anything but a new home...

I agree that the gripen would be a great aircraft for Ukrainians....it was specifically designed to battle against Russia in this particular war.....however there aren't many produced.

F-16s requires 9 different crewman to maintain.....each. it's extremely maintenance heavy. Parts aren't going to be a problem as these things have been exported everywhere. But it does take time for these guys to sufficiently learn English in order to properly maintain the craft. The communications, radar, hydraulics, countermeasures and etc.

Loading them with the munitions is not what I'm talking about. This is wartime stuff....these planes will likely come back to base with a few extra holes in them.

Then there's the runway maintenance. The F-16 needs an immaculate runway as the air intake is on the belly. Leaves from vegetation on a runway are disasters. These are going to take time for everyone in Ukraine to get up to speed on but if they have some previous experience on other aircraft it will help. I'm still thinking that it's going to require months and months of training.

Where NATO or whomever (the WHOLE WORLD is supporting Ukraine) gives them some jets they can't go back to NATO for maintenance....that would be outside the rules of engagement.

Right now for some reason Russia has not attempted to attack a single train or convoy of munitions as they arrive in Ukraine....and there have been a lot of them. Kinda odd IMHO. Ukraine certainly doesn't use restraint with Russian munitions deliveries.

Training to understand repair and maintain a fighter jet is not that easy. This is complicated stuff. I had a stepson who did blackhawks....it's highly specialized stuff.

 

[Litwin]

I agree that the gripen would be a great aircraft for Ukrainians....it was specifically designed to battle against Russia in this particular war.....however there aren't many produced.

F-16s requires 9 different crewman to maintain.....each. it's extremely maintenance heavy. Parts aren't going to be a problem as these things have been exported everywhere. But it does take time for these guys to sufficiently learn English in order to properly maintain the craft. The communications, radar, hydraulics, countermeasures and etc.

Loading them with the munitions is not what I'm talking about. This is wartime stuff....these planes will likely come back to base with a few extra holes in them.

Then there's the runway maintenance. The F-16 needs an immaculate runway as the air intake is on the belly. Leaves from vegetation on a runway are disasters. These are going to take time for everyone in Ukraine to get up to speed on but if they have some previous experience on other aircraft it will help. I'm still thinking that it's going to require months and months of training.

Where NATO or whomever (the WHOLE WORLD is supporting Ukraine) gives them some jets they can't go back to NATO for maintenance....that would be outside the rules of engagement.

Right now for some reason Russia has not attempted to attack a single train or convoy of munitions as they arrive in Ukraine....and there have been a lot of them. Kinda odd IMHO. Ukraine certainly doesn't use restraint with Russian munitions deliveries.

Training to understand repair and maintain a fighter jet is not that easy. This is complicated stuff. I had a stepson who did blackhawks....it's highly specialized stuff.

 

[JohnDB]

As the new F-22s come online....everyone wants them and to get rid of their expensive F-16s. Selling parts to Ukraine is profitable.
Where the F-16 is a great general purpose warfighter....if only we could get the Gripen being produced fast enough. It would be better. Low maintenance, small runway, and can even land on a highway.

But I am glad that they are getting them. The Russians can't compete against 4th gen fighters now....especially 5th generation.

The F-22? I don't think they have seen one yet except in pictures. (Joke)

 

[Litwin]

As the new F-22s come online....everyone wants them and to get rid of their expensive F-16s. Selling parts to Ukraine is profitable.
Where the F-16 is a great general purpose warfighter....if only we could get the Gripen being produced fast enough. It would be better. Low maintenance, small runway, and can even land on a highway.

But I am glad that they are getting them. The Russians can't compete against 4th gen fighters now....especially 5th generation.

The F-22? I don't think they have seen one yet except in pictures. (Joke)

"if only we could get the Gripen being produced fast enough. It would be better. Low maintenance, small runway, and can even land on a highway."
how fast can it be produced , how many produced already ?

 

[Litwin]

Appears F-16's for Ukraine is going to be a reality.

The White House says the US will support the International effort led by the Netherlands and UK. Also said there are no objections to NATO allies providing jets.

A document from the AZ ANG was leaked to the press (it had already been shared with NATO allies). They assessed the training would only take 4 months.

The assessment was based on 9 simulator sessions with 2 Ukrainian pilots. One was a MiG-29 driver and the other flew Su-27's.

Notable takeaways:

They received no formal training on the F-16 in the classroom.
Both pilots were already above the "B-course" level and proficient in BFM and ACM.
They were both able to execute a flame-out landing after watching it done just once in the sim.
They successfully executed mock attacks based on parameters given to them while flying the sim.
They were not comfortable with NATO flying formations, and quickly reverted to the formations they use in Ukraine.
Their English was not very good and they had difficulty with the F-16's avionics. However they improved rapidly over the 2 weeks. Additional English language coursework will be needed for all Ukrainian pilots.

 

[para bellum]

Rumor is 45 Dutch and Danish F-16 AM/BM MLU. They will go to SABCA in Belgium for some overhaul and upgrades while the training is going on.

These jets were completely overhauled between 1997 and 2003, upgraded to Block 50/52 avionics and received an airframe life extension in the MLU. They had some other upgrades like mission computers and beefier centerline hardpoints to allow the full range of weapons and targeting pods that USAF Vipers carry.

These will be a big step-up for Ukraine, but they are not the latest and greatest in the F-16 world and don't have an AESA radar, they have the AN/APG-66(V)2A that received some upgrades to enable better ground imaging.

 

[Silver Cat]

Training pilots is all well and good. 5 months for experienced military pilots.

But it takes 9 full time maintenance staff to keep one flying. And maintenence staff doesn't grow on trees for these kinds of machines. It takes 5 years to train them. So unless there have been a bunch of Ukrainians training on maintaining these for a while....there's something stinky here.

When they say "Give us F-16s" they mean "Give us F-16s, pilots and maintenance staff, all kinds of supplies and forces to defend those airbases".
You know, something that the Russians had been doing in Korea and Vietnam.

There are few questions -First, F-16s, can't do anything against S-400s, and what the Kievan regime really needs, is F-35s and F-22s. But even then it will be quite challenging to fight against Su-57s, S-500s and Iskanders (especially in this sandbox, called Ukraine).
Second - Ukraine is much more important for Russia than Korea and Cuba ever been for the USA. So, if F-22s and F-35s will demonstrate their effectiveness, the Russians will use nukes.

 

[JohnDB]

When they say "Give us F-16s" they mean "Give us F-16s, pilots and maintenance staff, all kinds of supplies and forces to defend those airbases".
You know, something that the Russians had been doing in Korea and Vietnam.

There are few questions -First, F-16s, can't do anything against S-400s, and what the Kievan regime really needs, is F-35s and F-22s. But even then it will be quite challenging to fight against Su-57s, S-500s and Iskanders (especially in this sandbox, called Ukraine).
Second - Ukraine is much more important for Russia than Korea and Cuba ever been for the USA. So, if F-22s and F-35s will demonstrate their effectiveness, the Russians will use nukes.

First off....all of the "invincible " Russian equipment and missiles have been anything but invincible. Especially when Russia has issues with coordinating defenses or attacks with other divisions. It's like the largest Achilles Heel ever....and it's been exploited and will continue to be until Russians stop being so selfish. And if they weren't so selfish they wouldn't have started this war to start with.

Exactly who was "liberated" in Bakhmut? How is destroying an entire city over the course of 8 months liberating it?

And then finally you claim that Russia would rather destroy the whole world (which is not supporting Russia but is supporting Ukraine) than to face losing this war....that it started and can end anytime Russian troops leave Ukranian soil.

And somehow Russia is more righteous than the WHOLE WORLD with these attitudes?

 

[José]

Originally posted by JohnDB
Exactly who was "liberated" in Bakhmut? How is destroying an entire city over the course of 8 months liberating it?

We agree with you that America's disastrous involvement in Ukraine turned what would be a brief military conflict with limited material damage and few deaths into a paroxistic spectacle of wholesale carnage and destruction.

 

[Silver Cat]

First off....all of the "invincible " Russian equipment and missiles have been anything but invincible. Especially when Russia has issues with coordinating defenses or attacks with other divisions. It's like the largest Achilles Heel ever....and it's been exploited and will continue to be until Russians stop being so selfish. And if they weren't so selfish they wouldn't have started this war to start with.

There is no, and there couldn't be any "invincible" equipment (Russian, American or whoever else). Technically, they didn't started a war. They started a special military operation. We, humans, are social animals. "Collective selfishness" is one of our things. "Attack against one of us means an attack against all of us". Kievan regime decided to attack Donbass Republics, recognized by the Russian Federation as independent states, and this means, that they attacked the Russian Federation itself.

Exactly who was "liberated" in Bakhmut? How is destroying an entire city over the course of 8 months liberating it?

Actually, more than 9 thousands of civilians were saved there. What is also important - more than 50 thousand of Nazies were killed there.

And then finally you claim that Russia would rather destroy the whole world (which is not supporting Russia but is supporting Ukraine) than to face losing this war....that it started and can end anytime Russian troops leave Ukranian soil.

No, they can't. There are more than twenty million of Russian civilians in Southern and Eastern regions of Ukraine. What is also important - NATO forces in Ukraine is a lesser acceptable for Russia than Soviet ballistic missiles were acceptable for the USA back in 1962.

And somehow Russia is more righteous than the WHOLE WORLD with these attitudes?

They are not going to destroy the "whole world", and they hardly can do it. They are going to destroy only NATO. And it was NATO, who started Drang nach Osten, not Russia.

 

[Litwin]

First off....all of the "invincible " Russian equipment and missiles have been anything but invincible. Especially when Russia has issues with coordinating defenses or attacks with other divisions. It's like the largest Achilles Heel ever....and it's been exploited and will continue to be until Russians stop being so selfish. And if they weren't so selfish they wouldn't have started this war to start with.

Exactly who was "liberated" in Bakhmut? How is destroying an entire city over the course of 8 months liberating it?

And then finally you claim that Russia would rather destroy the whole world (which is not supporting Russia but is supporting Ukraine) than to face losing this war....that it started and can end anytime Russian troops leave Ukranian soil.

And somehow Russia is more righteous than the WHOLE WORLD with these attitudes?

 

[para bellum]

I also think the F-18 is a good option-almost as good support as the Viper, and more a more rugged platform (and no nasty hydrazene to deal with). Plus a lot of F-18's in excellent condition out there, or becoming available by the end of the decade. The Ozzie Hugbugs or the practically new Kuwaiti Hornets don't need anything but a new home...

This I mentioned a couple weeks ago- the buzz is the Ozzie F/A-18 "Hugbugs" are seriously on the table. The WH has given it the green light, it's up to the Aussies and Ukrainians to work out the details.

There are 41 frames. About 3 dozen would be ready to go after a few months of maintenance/prep work. They could take the half-dozen frames that are not really flyable and cannibalize them for spares.

These are better suited for Ukraine than the F-16's. For one thing the landing gear is designed to be slammed down onto a pitching flight deck, not greased in on a pristine 8000 foot runway like the Viper's.

And these have never landed on a carrier- they haven't had the hard life that USN Hornets get.

These jets were given a total overhaul by Boeing under the HUG program. New avionics and mission computers, GPS, comms, IFF, radar warning receivers and jammers, new outboard weapons bus, APG-73 radars, and complete center barrel replacements. The program ran from 2002 to 2010, the jets were brought up to C/D standards and the air frames were zero-timed.

F-18's are tough and deadly and they just happen to be very easy to fly. The Hugbugs can carry the full range of NATO weapons that Ukraine could ask for, and are true strike platforms.

These would be much more effective for Ukraine than the F-16 MLU's, imho. Fingers crossed...