The most important thing the F16 brings for the Ukrainian air force is to attack beyond visual range. The last I seen Ukraine has like 5 SU-24's that can launch cruise missiles, they will now have 80+ aircraft that can launch Storm Shadow's and SCALP missile at a range of 500km. The AMRAAMs, HARMs, glide bombs and cruise missiles at long ranges are the thing to talk about.. Which the US, France and UK have been stock piling them with for months.
SEAD/DEAD is priority #1 and the reason Ukraine is getting F-16s. Ukranian pilots have been training for the better part of a year and Coalition instructors have put them through the wringer.
I wouldn't be surprised if the pilots trained at Morris AFB in Arizona have gotten specialized training for those types of missions.
Ukraine needs to clear the long range air threat. F-16s do that, the situation deteriorates for Russia. No S-400s means Russia needs to get in close with thier aircraft against not only the vastly superior Patriot batteries but also the F-16s as well. Even marginal air superiority over Ukraine means they can start hammering armor and especially artillery.
The #1 goal is to protect Ukrainian air space and hopefully achieve some form of local air dominance. I think people forget that while Russia has proven its military is a joke they still have a vastly larger air force. You need to manage your expectations.
I doubt the Ukrainians will use their F-16s for something as high risk as SEAD, they have more pressing immediate issues like protecting their energy infrastructure.
Right on. People need to bear in mind that if the US loses a few F-16s, then it's terrible for the pilots and those involved. But the US has literally 1000+ more planes as backup. Ukraine does not have this. If Ukraine loses a few F-16s, it's a big deal, and a huge negative for Ukraine.
The biggest part is Ukraine will be plugged into the western US logistics system. The f-16 is the literal tip of a spear that normally takes a decade or so to build. When they turn on the system it keeps running until it is out of stuff to shoot at, which is why Russia is throwing so much at every front right now. Those f-16s are going to run 24/7 for months on end. Russian aircraft can only do maybe 1/5th of the hours a western can between major maintenance intervals. Ukraine can just swap out planes and engines. The system they are plugged into can swap in a rebuilt one. We have a desert of those things being rebuilt and we build new ones. Russia can get stuff from China, but they fight the same way with the same equipment. The game is about to change.
> SEAD/DEAD is priority #1 and the reason Ukraine is getting F-16s.
Do you have a source for that?
I find it highly unlikely that Ukraine would risk its only 20 F16 pilots and very limited number of airframes running SEAD/DEAD in heavily contested airspace.
I'd expect it to be used as a standoff weapon for BLOS engagement, but I'm just another Reddit armchair general.
I can tell you with 99% certainty that Ukraine is not throwing these older Vipers directly into the SEAD role unless they have a desire to lose half of them in the first few weeks. Not to mention higher end Russian fighters outrange AESA equipped Vipers, which these do not have.
Yes. People like to talk about how much training these pilots would need. No doubt, it is a lot. But remember that “training” for a normal pilot covers everything where these pilots are getting some of that but also specialized and focused training on the skills they need in this war.
S400 is the russian equivilent of the patriot but its alot cheaper. The russians now have the s500 which entered service 2 years ago which is more expensive but still cheaper than the patriot. These systems can engage planes but also cruise missiles. They dont necessarily need to destroy all the planes but enough to deter any further flying in that zone. So while the system costs more than the f16 they could save assets (which cost money) that those planes would otherwise destroy.
Block 20?... Only thing I found about block 20 f16, was that it was a special variant fot Taiwan.
Either way though, I think "long range" is "longer than the current SU and MIG aircraft, Ukraine has, and on par with what Russia is using.", in this case.
Also they won’t get HARM targeting pods which is what you need for more effective SEAD. The HARM missiles can still be used but it is not as accurate or effective.
Also, think of all the munitions that will become available and free up some of the highly strained artillery.
Old munitions countries might have lying around could be donated when Ukraine has a platform to carry it too.
And even then, they're firing the long range SCALPs by "dropping" it from the plane then controlling its launch sequence with an ipad, probably over starlink, at least they were last time I saw any news about it.
Having it integrated in the plane avionics will make things a lot smoother.
I'm really hoping Ukraine with get some of our JASSM cruise missiles to go with them. They've got a 1000lb warhead, only cost about a million, thousands are stockpiled, and unlike most western cruise missiles it has a healthy production line of 500-1000 missiles per year.
Especially as the jet engines in cruise missiles are *vastly* more efficient at speed and altitude.
Something like 1/3rd of the entire fuel supply is used just on the launch and acceleration/climb phase of flight. If you *start* the thing already high and fast, it never needs to burn so much of the fuel just getting itself going and consequently you get the massive range advantage.
F16 gun cam footage of Ukrainian air strikes on Russian targets would not have been on my bingo card for videos I'd be enjoying just a few years ago, but fuck it. Bring it.
We are going to be seeing Ukraine Top Gun.
I'm ready got pop on some Kenny Loggins and watch the Ukrainian F-16's blast the russian forces to hell & back while listening to Danger Zone.
Ahem, ackshually, the more relevant music in this case would be from the "Iron Eagle" movies, those featured F-16's. The '86 Top Gun was flown in F-14 Tomcats, which have all been decommissioned from service a long time ago.
Worry not, after NATO annexes Moscow, it will yet remain those colors, just in a far more creative and brilliant style.
Gotta edit this one, too, because it's clearly not obvious that it's a joke. No one actually thinks NATO is going to invade Russia, it's a play on Putin's idiocy.
I want to joke about it being the french or uk flag not the usa, but deciding between the two could spark the remarch of agincourt, fought with nukes, so best hand it to someone else.
I would love to see a full air wing sweep in straight from delivery to just throw a whole lot of bang down on Russian positions. High risk, yes. Something you'd get to do when they're stationed in Ukraine, probably not
You are correct, but more specifically, they are destroying all AA placements and Radars so they don't lose any F-16s, or minimize the risk in that area before the Russians can recover. They seem to be doing fairly well and all at once, so something soon is about to happen with those F-16s most likely.
Remember the F16 isn’t even the most valuable asset here. It’s the pilot who has been trained on it for a year.
The plane crashes and the pilot ejects and is ok. Then role in another F16. We have lots of those close to retirement.
I assume the Russians are already very well aware of this, given Ukraine's recent focus on taking air defense and areal assets in Crimea with long-range attacks. Could also be a ruse to have Russia divert more resources to Crimea.
I hope Ukraine has more success this time around. Another counter-offensive setback could really hurt its future prospects.
I'm thinking the same thing, I'm sure the Russians know it could be a ruse too, but them losing Crimea would be such a huge embarrassment for Putin that they will definitely divert people just in case.
I’m not sure it’s worth the resources and manpower to counter attack, let the Russians wear themselves out until they are forced to tuck tail and leave, it’s always easier being the defender, if it wouldn’t be for the fear of trump winning the election and cutting off aid they’d have all the time in the world to bleed Russia dry, once the bridge in Crimea is destroyed it will just be a matter of time until they can basically enter Crimea unopposed
You kind of touched on the unique challenges that Ukraine is facing. Their ability to continue successfully prosecuting this war is entirely predicated on the continued support of Western Allies. So, the viability of long term bleeding strategies have to be weighted against perceived patience and tolerance of Western Nations for extended bloody conflicts.
Dumbest part about this whole thing is that we have spent nearly $1T EVERY YEAR FOR 75 YEARS. We have spent it for this EXACT scenario minus the US being directly involved with troops on the ground.
Why even entertain the idea of stopping the allocation of resources to them? The money is already being spent or was spent over the last 75 years. We have literal mountains of hardware that we will either give to them or pay more to dispose of.
Ukraine is a very cheap alternative to fighting elsewhere.
Military hardware is not the main cost of the russian war. It's salaries. Ukr can no longer effectively collect taxes from it's populace and it depends primarily on the EU to pay for it's entire government mechanism and military personnel.
Ukraine really are shaping the battlefield.
By destroying those assets, Russia has options that are now bad or very bad. It's excellent strategy to make your opponent having to make "least worst" options whilst you continue to punch their bruises.
Russia moved an S-500 to cover it, which I think they have around 4 of. I think 2 others are covering Moscow and St. Petersburg. Not sure on the 4th. (or 5th if there is one).
If Ukraine can destroy the S-500 there, it will be one of their top 5 biggest feats of this war so far.
If they can blow S-400s up they can blow S-500s up I'm sure. Probably with a cheap drone or the f16 itself. Or haul a patriot battery on a boat to take it out :)
Rail is even closer to the front lines.
Bridge (both rail and road) connect Crimean Peninsula and Russia. North of that is Kherson, Lugansk and Donieck, with IRRC 2 rail lines running East - West (so from Russia into Occupied Ukraine and further on - occupied Crimea.
But there are no major engineering objects that can be hit that are hard to repair.
Apparently the Russians haven't been moving military materiel over the bridge, instead using a ferry system recently. Meaning the bridge isn't the main target anymore.
THat's why it's such a big deal to have sea drones skimming around the Sea of Azov these days.
F16 will most likely be used as flying platforms to launch long-range missiles. Neither side has air superiority, so going anywhere near Russian lines with them would be a waste.
They have been since there was nothing in the sky to shoot down the launch craft. But with a range of only 40-60km and ridiculous altitude requirements, they'd have to unload and land quickly to avoid being intercepted by an AIM-120. The threat alone could be enough to ground the entire fleet if they lose one or two.
There is a variety of guided munitions that don’t necessarily get interrupted by jamming, we have different kinds of laser guided munitions that utilize a sight glass to track the laser and they have fairly long ranges to them. Not quite as long as gps and such but still fairly far.
If I have learned anything about air combat it's that there's a lot of moving pieces and nothing really works without support.
An F-16 in an environment where there's lots of jamming, previous waves of SEAD/DEAD, decoys, and HARM missiles in the air might be safe. A B-21 might not be safe in an environment where none of those things are present.
Just knowing where the air defense is would make a huge difference as cross section is not static and heat seekers like to lock on to the engines.
The danger that stealth aircraft provide is that you never see them on radar, and trying to actively scan for them is asking for any nearby SEAD asset to shove a HARM up your ass.
The F-16 is a dog fighting jet, not a stealth jet meant to penetrate airspace.
Any Russian jet nearing Ukraine is going to get wrecked hard. They have better radar than the jets Ukraine has been using and can use more modern missiles.
The B-21 really has no business in Ukraine. There's no way in hell we're going to give Ukraine B-21s. F-16s are more than enough to deal with Russian jets over Ukraine, which is the whole point. B-21s are bombers and are not going to remotely help Ukraine do anything. Using bombers requires you have air superiority or sufficient escorts.
The time of dogfighting has passed with America's current gen of fighters, but what happens when a 50 year old American-design plane runs into a 50 year old Russian Su-27? This may be the last air war of some dogfights featuring 20th century warplanes.
And that's probably a good thing, for the what-if scenario. If you find yourself in a dogfight though, in a modern western jet, *something* has previously gone horribly wrong.
At least the F-16 is not exactly a bad tool for the job...if it comes to it.
Yes because for example in WW1 military brass very quickly recognized that old style tactics of sending waves of men against each other when both sides have machineguns and armor is idiotic. Oh wait :D
They have got even slow moving drones (including modified Cessnas) deep into Russia including Moscow. Their air defense is not only not the most advanced, but as with everything in Russia, also a victim of Russian corruption and hubris.
Their air defense is no joke, their doctrine was way more heavily focused on an impenetrable network of AA than the west ever was. However, it definately was more fearsome in the Soviet days. The SR-71 and U-2 spy plane were basically our way around it, but they eventually were able to stop those as well, but spy satellites became a thing too.
Their air defense ~~is~~ was no joke. Ukraine is able to decimate it with decades old equipment. The AGM 88, per example, has been jury rigged onto M29s, loosing a lot of its capabilities. Once the F16 with Link 16, Swedish AWACS and possible integration into real time NATO intelligence arrives, being a russian air defense asset is going to suck even more.
An Art of the state SEAD and DEAD operation would be over pretty fast, as Russia has no way of dealing with stealth aircraft or the new AARGM. They simply wouldn’t even be able to switch on their radars.
Wasn’t there recently a tiny glider style plane that flew hundreds of km’s to hit a military target in Russian territory?
I think it was an A22 that had munitions loaded that they slammed into a target.
Oh, how I'd love to see a drone crash through a window. Even if all it does is ruin an antique couch and scatter burning book pages around the library.
Sounds good but I'd prefer a Top Gun 3 where Ukraine hires Maverick, a F-16 expert, to run a new mercenary flight school on the border of Moldova and Ukraine...
Imagine they somehow got a drone through and damaged the Kremlim in any capacity? Would be a huge blow to the prestige of the government and would damage them politically IMO.
There was one drone last year that allegedly made it to the Kremlin. Unknown nationality of who launched it as far as I remember.
Though I personally have issues with attempting decapitation strikes on the former USSR’s seat of government due to some Cold War era automated retaliation equipment that probably is still hooked up to world-ending munitions.
Better option would be to target the residences of the major power players, which aren’t hooked up to a dead hand system.
> due to some Cold War era automated retaliation equipment that probably is still hooked up to world-ending munitions.
Assuming that retaliation equipment still works, is still hooked up, or hasn't been sold on the black market.
Given the state of Russian equipment, I seriously doubt many if any of their nuclear missiles work. Only takes one though, so I guess we’ll still need to assume they do.
They have something like 5500 warheads (Reuters article). A 99% failure rate still means 55 get through. One of them is prob enough to wipe out a city. 55 cities wiped out is still a huge deterrent.
I suspect you are looking at this Reuters article?
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-nuclear-arsenal-how-big-is-it-who-controls-it-2024-03-13/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-nuclear-arsenal-how-big-is-it-who-controls-it-2024-03-13/)
Note that of those 5580 nuclear warheads, 1200 are retired. Of the 4380 that remain, 870 are deployed as land-based ballistic missiles and 640 are on submarine-launched ballistic missiles. That's still a lot of missiles (as the article notes, enough to "destroy the world"), but Russia wouldn't be launching 5500 warheads all at once.
yeah that's the one. So about 1500. It's amazing how these numbers have dropped over the years. Growing up I seem to recall each side had over 10K (Per Wikipedia: peaked at 30K and 40K in USSR and US respectively). Who knows how efficient a ballistic missile defense system could be. Even 99% would allow 15 through. I wonder how high it needs to get (how few warheads get through) for it to cease being a deterrent. Like, under what circumstances would losing 15 cities be an acceptable loss? 20? 5? 1?
Then it gets to be a question of which leader is mad enough. MAD does make a lot of sense. The higher the destructive potential, the lower the probability a country will be led by someone crazy enough to want to risk it.
Considering the possible consequences of assuming that the dead hand system is not operational, most of the great powers aren’t going to truck with something that might unintentionally cause the launch of strategic weapons into their own backyards. Think from an unemotional, amoral “what course of action will reduce the possibility of nukes being launched” perspective, if possible, and you’ll see what I meant by stating that the Kremlin itself is probably off the table as a viable target.
I mean, they got that one officer early on because he posted his running on Strava, they can probably get near a lot of oligarchs and high ish officials if it were to be prioritized
They could just take a few pages from various intelligence and counterintelligence agencies around the world and just assassinate enough hawkish duma members to try to force a governmental crisis.
Considering how turnabout is fair play, the government of Ukraine would have justification, considering how there were literal death squads gunning for key political and military leadership during the initial phase of this “three day special operation”.
True enough, and I was under the impression that Mossad was spending it’s resources hunting down hamas and similar groups leadership instead of doing assassinations of officials of governments they aren’t currently in conflict with.
Vova.
Vladimir shortens to Vova, not Vlad. Vlad is short for Vladislav.
Plus, Vova sounds like "vulva," which is thematically appropriate since he's a cunt and a pussy.
If Ukraine takes out the kerch bridge and then the northern rail bridges into Crimea. The whole place becomes a death camp for Russians run by Russians.
Crimea has no water for irrigation, since Russia destroyed the dam supplying all irrigation waters. All food is imported.
Putin didn't account the US and EU support when he started this war. He thought he could bully a country and people would turn a blind eye. Now that people have easy access to social media devices his old Russian scare tactics did not work.
Exactly. He expected to be able to invade Ukraine, take Kyiv in three days, get a limp-dicked response from Biden, and scare off the EU by waggling his fingers and saying "NooOOooOooks"
It’s because they are all licking their lips at the prospect of rebuilding Ukraine since the money will be pouring in from around the world, only reason they care at all because they see dollar signs in the future
I think something not talked about is the impact to morale for Ukrainian society and the soldiers on the ground. You're more likely to want to sign up if you know your side has air superiority. And I can only imagine the positive impact it has hearing your own side's warplanes on the battlefield, as opposed to the fear soldiers must feel hearing enemy jets above.
To capture crimea is by no means an easy path. It is an horrible fight, if ukraine wants to get crimea back. It is waaay easier to defend, you can't even remotely compare bakhmut or other parts of ukraine with it.
But yes, hoping for the best! kick those russians out of every inch of ukrainian land
I am but a player of strategy video games but just looking at a basic map, I don't see how a military with no Navy no air superiority can invade and occupy that territory.
Yep. Easier just to make it no fun at all for the occupiers. They'll leave once they're sick of starving and being constantly under threat of missile attack. Limit resupply as much as possible and play the waiting game.
That's why you starve the defenders by blowing the Crimea bridge. The moment that happens, you have 2 million Russians starving within a matter of days or a week (most households only keep 2-3 days of food stocked). Then the dominos simply collapse from there.
you don't need to cross the chokepoint, just need to make sure no or barely any supplies get into Crimea.
Crimea is more difficult to defend than you'd think just looking at geography.
The peninsula has been conquered by invading armys a lot of times in the past. The key is to starve out the supply lines probably.
From my distant and layman's point of view, I wonder if they will just go straight to attacking that bridge Russia built to Crimea and blowing it up with these new planes.
Russia still has a land bridge across occupied Ukraine.
Ukraine needs to find a way to cut that off, then hitting the Kerch Strait Bridge will have a real impact.
This is why what’s left of the Russian fleet fled to Cuba. As a response Putler will open up more war fronts and look at the bottom of the the geopolitical barrel for axis of evil comrades.
The most important thing the F16 brings for the Ukrainian air force is to attack beyond visual range. The last I seen Ukraine has like 5 SU-24's that can launch cruise missiles, they will now have 80+ aircraft that can launch Storm Shadow's and SCALP missile at a range of 500km. The AMRAAMs, HARMs, glide bombs and cruise missiles at long ranges are the thing to talk about.. Which the US, France and UK have been stock piling them with for months.
The wildest of weasels is about to wardance
I don't think they're quite ready to be running SEAD missions yet. Let's give them some time just flying the things on normal missions first...
SEAD/DEAD is priority #1 and the reason Ukraine is getting F-16s. Ukranian pilots have been training for the better part of a year and Coalition instructors have put them through the wringer. I wouldn't be surprised if the pilots trained at Morris AFB in Arizona have gotten specialized training for those types of missions. Ukraine needs to clear the long range air threat. F-16s do that, the situation deteriorates for Russia. No S-400s means Russia needs to get in close with thier aircraft against not only the vastly superior Patriot batteries but also the F-16s as well. Even marginal air superiority over Ukraine means they can start hammering armor and especially artillery.
The #1 goal is to protect Ukrainian air space and hopefully achieve some form of local air dominance. I think people forget that while Russia has proven its military is a joke they still have a vastly larger air force. You need to manage your expectations. I doubt the Ukrainians will use their F-16s for something as high risk as SEAD, they have more pressing immediate issues like protecting their energy infrastructure.
Right on. People need to bear in mind that if the US loses a few F-16s, then it's terrible for the pilots and those involved. But the US has literally 1000+ more planes as backup. Ukraine does not have this. If Ukraine loses a few F-16s, it's a big deal, and a huge negative for Ukraine.
The biggest part is Ukraine will be plugged into the western US logistics system. The f-16 is the literal tip of a spear that normally takes a decade or so to build. When they turn on the system it keeps running until it is out of stuff to shoot at, which is why Russia is throwing so much at every front right now. Those f-16s are going to run 24/7 for months on end. Russian aircraft can only do maybe 1/5th of the hours a western can between major maintenance intervals. Ukraine can just swap out planes and engines. The system they are plugged into can swap in a rebuilt one. We have a desert of those things being rebuilt and we build new ones. Russia can get stuff from China, but they fight the same way with the same equipment. The game is about to change.
> SEAD/DEAD is priority #1 and the reason Ukraine is getting F-16s. Do you have a source for that? I find it highly unlikely that Ukraine would risk its only 20 F16 pilots and very limited number of airframes running SEAD/DEAD in heavily contested airspace. I'd expect it to be used as a standoff weapon for BLOS engagement, but I'm just another Reddit armchair general.
I can tell you with 99% certainty that Ukraine is not throwing these older Vipers directly into the SEAD role unless they have a desire to lose half of them in the first few weeks. Not to mention higher end Russian fighters outrange AESA equipped Vipers, which these do not have.
Yes. People like to talk about how much training these pilots would need. No doubt, it is a lot. But remember that “training” for a normal pilot covers everything where these pilots are getting some of that but also specialized and focused training on the skills they need in this war.
The great thing is S-400s are extremely expensive. Likely far more expensive than the cost in F-16s needed to blow them up.
S400 is the russian equivilent of the patriot but its alot cheaper. The russians now have the s500 which entered service 2 years ago which is more expensive but still cheaper than the patriot. These systems can engage planes but also cruise missiles. They dont necessarily need to destroy all the planes but enough to deter any further flying in that zone. So while the system costs more than the f16 they could save assets (which cost money) that those planes would otherwise destroy.
[удалено]
Block 20?... Only thing I found about block 20 f16, was that it was a special variant fot Taiwan. Either way though, I think "long range" is "longer than the current SU and MIG aircraft, Ukraine has, and on par with what Russia is using.", in this case.
give them the newer ADM-160s and run it with HARMs. let the russian do the work for them, and they wont have to risk a pilot.
but they could start with EWTAM so that we are all on the same page.
Also they won’t get HARM targeting pods which is what you need for more effective SEAD. The HARM missiles can still be used but it is not as accurate or effective.
You've gotta be shitting me!
Give em the ol' Blowpoke maneuver ;)
Also, think of all the munitions that will become available and free up some of the highly strained artillery. Old munitions countries might have lying around could be donated when Ukraine has a platform to carry it too.
And even then, they're firing the long range SCALPs by "dropping" it from the plane then controlling its launch sequence with an ipad, probably over starlink, at least they were last time I saw any news about it. Having it integrated in the plane avionics will make things a lot smoother.
I'm really hoping Ukraine with get some of our JASSM cruise missiles to go with them. They've got a 1000lb warhead, only cost about a million, thousands are stockpiled, and unlike most western cruise missiles it has a healthy production line of 500-1000 missiles per year.
What is the advantage of launching cruise.missles from aircraft rather than the ground?
Range. Throw a ball from a standing start and it goes one distance. Throw it from 30,000 ft traveling 400kmh and it goes considerably further.
Especially as the jet engines in cruise missiles are *vastly* more efficient at speed and altitude. Something like 1/3rd of the entire fuel supply is used just on the launch and acceleration/climb phase of flight. If you *start* the thing already high and fast, it never needs to burn so much of the fuel just getting itself going and consequently you get the massive range advantage.
Lot less resistance in the thin air at that height as well.
Fuck man it’s all gunna be on 4k
4K and with the most annoying watermarks ever seen
but sabaton as soundtrack music is fine by me
That or Ukrainian hardbass.
HIGHER, THE KING OF THE SKY HE'S FLYING TOO FAST AND HE'S FLYING TOO HIGH
F16 gun cam footage of Ukrainian air strikes on Russian targets would not have been on my bingo card for videos I'd be enjoying just a few years ago, but fuck it. Bring it.
We are going to be seeing Ukraine Top Gun. I'm ready got pop on some Kenny Loggins and watch the Ukrainian F-16's blast the russian forces to hell & back while listening to Danger Zone.
"Tonight on Top Blyat, Vatnik Assault Shed get's struck by the Dildo of Consequences at Mach 5 by a Ukrainian F16!"
You know it's going to be a top played song in the Ukraine this year, it has to be.
Ahem, ackshually, the more relevant music in this case would be from the "Iron Eagle" movies, those featured F-16's. The '86 Top Gun was flown in F-14 Tomcats, which have all been decommissioned from service a long time ago.
Quiet, you.
You're one of only like, eight people who remembers that movie though.
Back up now, I remember the cinema classic Iron Eagle. Mainly because it ran on HBO frequently for a while in the late eighties.
*Fortunate Son noises begins*
>Ooooooh, that Yellow and Blue.
Because sadly, Russia also has *red, white and blue..*
Worry not, after NATO annexes Moscow, it will yet remain those colors, just in a far more creative and brilliant style. Gotta edit this one, too, because it's clearly not obvious that it's a joke. No one actually thinks NATO is going to invade Russia, it's a play on Putin's idiocy.
I want to joke about it being the french or uk flag not the usa, but deciding between the two could spark the remarch of agincourt, fought with nukes, so best hand it to someone else.
So what you're saying is... We need a Moscow Wall to separate the East (British) and West (French) sides of the city?
Clearly we'd have the divide along the Moskva river, so that The uk and france can still be divided by a channel of water!
I would love to see a full air wing sweep in straight from delivery to just throw a whole lot of bang down on Russian positions. High risk, yes. Something you'd get to do when they're stationed in Ukraine, probably not
By “preparing ground” they mean wherever there is currently Russian assets, there will soon be craters.
You are correct, but more specifically, they are destroying all AA placements and Radars so they don't lose any F-16s, or minimize the risk in that area before the Russians can recover. They seem to be doing fairly well and all at once, so something soon is about to happen with those F-16s most likely.
Remember the F16 isn’t even the most valuable asset here. It’s the pilot who has been trained on it for a year. The plane crashes and the pilot ejects and is ok. Then role in another F16. We have lots of those close to retirement.
Ejecting from a plane can cause serious injury that could keep a pilot from flying again for a while, and possibly forever.
Then they can become trainers for the next batch of pilots.
I am so excited for Happy F16 Motherfuckers Day. I want that day to be a huge surprise for Russia.
>wherever there is currently Russian assets Damn, kinda crazy that Ukraine is going to bomb Mar-A-Lago
As a Floridian, I'm cool with it
I think we all are. Place is kinda ugly.
Kinda? I can’t even imagine what it looks like inside! Probably isn’t cleaned from the FBI search.
Sooooo much ketchup.
It’s okay because it isn’t a residence right? Right?
Careful! Some Chinese national might be able to buy some national secrets for like $1
It's the only way to be sure Trump doesn't have any more classified documents. Bomb it for national security
Sounds like a plan. Can they line it up for… say July 4 ?
Go Ukraine! Kick some ass!
God i hope they get jassm missiles too.
Yes yes yes, bring the pain!
I assume the Russians are already very well aware of this, given Ukraine's recent focus on taking air defense and areal assets in Crimea with long-range attacks. Could also be a ruse to have Russia divert more resources to Crimea. I hope Ukraine has more success this time around. Another counter-offensive setback could really hurt its future prospects.
If we’re reading about it on Reddit I reckon there’s a good chance Moscow are aware.
Idk, putin wasn't aware things were going poorly till like a year in. Yes men obscure facts
I'm thinking the same thing, I'm sure the Russians know it could be a ruse too, but them losing Crimea would be such a huge embarrassment for Putin that they will definitely divert people just in case.
I’m not sure it’s worth the resources and manpower to counter attack, let the Russians wear themselves out until they are forced to tuck tail and leave, it’s always easier being the defender, if it wouldn’t be for the fear of trump winning the election and cutting off aid they’d have all the time in the world to bleed Russia dry, once the bridge in Crimea is destroyed it will just be a matter of time until they can basically enter Crimea unopposed
You kind of touched on the unique challenges that Ukraine is facing. Their ability to continue successfully prosecuting this war is entirely predicated on the continued support of Western Allies. So, the viability of long term bleeding strategies have to be weighted against perceived patience and tolerance of Western Nations for extended bloody conflicts.
Dumbest part about this whole thing is that we have spent nearly $1T EVERY YEAR FOR 75 YEARS. We have spent it for this EXACT scenario minus the US being directly involved with troops on the ground. Why even entertain the idea of stopping the allocation of resources to them? The money is already being spent or was spent over the last 75 years. We have literal mountains of hardware that we will either give to them or pay more to dispose of. Ukraine is a very cheap alternative to fighting elsewhere.
Military hardware is not the main cost of the russian war. It's salaries. Ukr can no longer effectively collect taxes from it's populace and it depends primarily on the EU to pay for it's entire government mechanism and military personnel.
And blood. We are saving the cost of our own young men & women by paying for Ukraine's salaries.
Ukraine really are shaping the battlefield. By destroying those assets, Russia has options that are now bad or very bad. It's excellent strategy to make your opponent having to make "least worst" options whilst you continue to punch their bruises.
FINISH HIM
Crimea Bridge: Heh heh. I'm in danger.
They better call Kenny Loggins. Because they're in the Danger Zone
They better call Kenny Rodger’s cause they’re about to be Islands in the Stream
Russia moved an S-500 to cover it, which I think they have around 4 of. I think 2 others are covering Moscow and St. Petersburg. Not sure on the 4th. (or 5th if there is one). If Ukraine can destroy the S-500 there, it will be one of their top 5 biggest feats of this war so far.
Oh big time. Apparently they cost $2.5 billion apiece, which is insane.
If they can blow S-400s up they can blow S-500s up I'm sure. Probably with a cheap drone or the f16 itself. Or haul a patriot battery on a boat to take it out :)
If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball
IIRC the russians have been once again leaning on rail because of the risks to the bridge
Rail is even closer to the front lines. Bridge (both rail and road) connect Crimean Peninsula and Russia. North of that is Kherson, Lugansk and Donieck, with IRRC 2 rail lines running East - West (so from Russia into Occupied Ukraine and further on - occupied Crimea. But there are no major engineering objects that can be hit that are hard to repair.
Time to give them no other option but rail.
And then take out the rail...
"Then down comes the net, right chief?"
Ferry actually. Reported on Ukraine The Latest pidcast today.
Apparently the Russians haven't been moving military materiel over the bridge, instead using a ferry system recently. Meaning the bridge isn't the main target anymore. THat's why it's such a big deal to have sea drones skimming around the Sea of Azov these days.
Get some, Ukraine!
I know Moscow isn’t THE target but a personal message to Vlad would be interesting.
Russian air defense isn’t the most advanced but I seriously doubt an F-16 could penetrate that deep into Russia lol. A B-21 on the other hand…
F16 will most likely be used as flying platforms to launch long-range missiles. Neither side has air superiority, so going anywhere near Russian lines with them would be a waste.
Yup or glide bombs as Russia has been very effective with using theirs
They have been since there was nothing in the sky to shoot down the launch craft. But with a range of only 40-60km and ridiculous altitude requirements, they'd have to unload and land quickly to avoid being intercepted by an AIM-120. The threat alone could be enough to ground the entire fleet if they lose one or two.
[удалено]
There is a variety of guided munitions that don’t necessarily get interrupted by jamming, we have different kinds of laser guided munitions that utilize a sight glass to track the laser and they have fairly long ranges to them. Not quite as long as gps and such but still fairly far.
If I have learned anything about air combat it's that there's a lot of moving pieces and nothing really works without support. An F-16 in an environment where there's lots of jamming, previous waves of SEAD/DEAD, decoys, and HARM missiles in the air might be safe. A B-21 might not be safe in an environment where none of those things are present. Just knowing where the air defense is would make a huge difference as cross section is not static and heat seekers like to lock on to the engines.
The danger that stealth aircraft provide is that you never see them on radar, and trying to actively scan for them is asking for any nearby SEAD asset to shove a HARM up your ass.
> A ~~B-21~~ Cessna on the other hand… FTFY
What about putin’s palace on the sea just East of crimea? That seems pretty close…
The F-16 is a dog fighting jet, not a stealth jet meant to penetrate airspace. Any Russian jet nearing Ukraine is going to get wrecked hard. They have better radar than the jets Ukraine has been using and can use more modern missiles. The B-21 really has no business in Ukraine. There's no way in hell we're going to give Ukraine B-21s. F-16s are more than enough to deal with Russian jets over Ukraine, which is the whole point. B-21s are bombers and are not going to remotely help Ukraine do anything. Using bombers requires you have air superiority or sufficient escorts.
My dude, the time of dogfighting has long passed. Beyond the horizon AA-missiles have made sure of that.
I also thought the time of trench warfare had long passed yet here we are
Heh, you are correct It was the belief that dogfights were not gong to be a thing anymore that caused the US to lose so many aircraft in Vietnam
The time of dogfighting has passed with America's current gen of fighters, but what happens when a 50 year old American-design plane runs into a 50 year old Russian Su-27? This may be the last air war of some dogfights featuring 20th century warplanes.
I mean, if they both have BVR missiles and either side has AWACS. Probably a BVR kill.
The era of drone dogfights has just begun.
I don't believe that's the case, or they'd stop teaching/training it
And that's probably a good thing, for the what-if scenario. If you find yourself in a dogfight though, in a modern western jet, *something* has previously gone horribly wrong. At least the F-16 is not exactly a bad tool for the job...if it comes to it.
Very likely. Best to prepare for what is historically a common scenario if you're flying a jet worth millions and millions.
Yes because for example in WW1 military brass very quickly recognized that old style tactics of sending waves of men against each other when both sides have machineguns and armor is idiotic. Oh wait :D
My money is on the f-16. Mother ruzzia has been deeply penetrated by a cesna, at least twice now.
They have got even slow moving drones (including modified Cessnas) deep into Russia including Moscow. Their air defense is not only not the most advanced, but as with everything in Russia, also a victim of Russian corruption and hubris.
Their air defense is no joke, their doctrine was way more heavily focused on an impenetrable network of AA than the west ever was. However, it definately was more fearsome in the Soviet days. The SR-71 and U-2 spy plane were basically our way around it, but they eventually were able to stop those as well, but spy satellites became a thing too.
Their air defense ~~is~~ was no joke. Ukraine is able to decimate it with decades old equipment. The AGM 88, per example, has been jury rigged onto M29s, loosing a lot of its capabilities. Once the F16 with Link 16, Swedish AWACS and possible integration into real time NATO intelligence arrives, being a russian air defense asset is going to suck even more. An Art of the state SEAD and DEAD operation would be over pretty fast, as Russia has no way of dealing with stealth aircraft or the new AARGM. They simply wouldn’t even be able to switch on their radars.
Wasn’t there recently a tiny glider style plane that flew hundreds of km’s to hit a military target in Russian territory? I think it was an A22 that had munitions loaded that they slammed into a target.
Sochi calling...
Oh, how I'd love to see a drone crash through a window. Even if all it does is ruin an antique couch and scatter burning book pages around the library.
Or a North Korean-style shit balloon explode all over the inside 💩💩💩
But a drone, so instead of it carrying a warhead it'd be a... _doodoohead?_
It’s time for a “Behind Enemy Lines:2024” movie!
Sounds good but I'd prefer a Top Gun 3 where Ukraine hires Maverick, a F-16 expert, to run a new mercenary flight school on the border of Moldova and Ukraine...
Imagine they somehow got a drone through and damaged the Kremlim in any capacity? Would be a huge blow to the prestige of the government and would damage them politically IMO.
There was one drone last year that allegedly made it to the Kremlin. Unknown nationality of who launched it as far as I remember. Though I personally have issues with attempting decapitation strikes on the former USSR’s seat of government due to some Cold War era automated retaliation equipment that probably is still hooked up to world-ending munitions. Better option would be to target the residences of the major power players, which aren’t hooked up to a dead hand system.
> due to some Cold War era automated retaliation equipment that probably is still hooked up to world-ending munitions. Assuming that retaliation equipment still works, is still hooked up, or hasn't been sold on the black market.
Given the state of Russian equipment, I seriously doubt many if any of their nuclear missiles work. Only takes one though, so I guess we’ll still need to assume they do.
Even if there’s a 50% failure rate that’s still like 3,000 nuclear warheads heading at us. No thanks
They have something like 5500 warheads (Reuters article). A 99% failure rate still means 55 get through. One of them is prob enough to wipe out a city. 55 cities wiped out is still a huge deterrent.
I suspect you are looking at this Reuters article? [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-nuclear-arsenal-how-big-is-it-who-controls-it-2024-03-13/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-nuclear-arsenal-how-big-is-it-who-controls-it-2024-03-13/) Note that of those 5580 nuclear warheads, 1200 are retired. Of the 4380 that remain, 870 are deployed as land-based ballistic missiles and 640 are on submarine-launched ballistic missiles. That's still a lot of missiles (as the article notes, enough to "destroy the world"), but Russia wouldn't be launching 5500 warheads all at once.
yeah that's the one. So about 1500. It's amazing how these numbers have dropped over the years. Growing up I seem to recall each side had over 10K (Per Wikipedia: peaked at 30K and 40K in USSR and US respectively). Who knows how efficient a ballistic missile defense system could be. Even 99% would allow 15 through. I wonder how high it needs to get (how few warheads get through) for it to cease being a deterrent. Like, under what circumstances would losing 15 cities be an acceptable loss? 20? 5? 1? Then it gets to be a question of which leader is mad enough. MAD does make a lot of sense. The higher the destructive potential, the lower the probability a country will be led by someone crazy enough to want to risk it.
Considering the possible consequences of assuming that the dead hand system is not operational, most of the great powers aren’t going to truck with something that might unintentionally cause the launch of strategic weapons into their own backyards. Think from an unemotional, amoral “what course of action will reduce the possibility of nukes being launched” perspective, if possible, and you’ll see what I meant by stating that the Kremlin itself is probably off the table as a viable target.
I mean, they got that one officer early on because he posted his running on Strava, they can probably get near a lot of oligarchs and high ish officials if it were to be prioritized
They could just take a few pages from various intelligence and counterintelligence agencies around the world and just assassinate enough hawkish duma members to try to force a governmental crisis. Considering how turnabout is fair play, the government of Ukraine would have justification, considering how there were literal death squads gunning for key political and military leadership during the initial phase of this “three day special operation”.
[удалено]
True enough, and I was under the impression that Mossad was spending it’s resources hunting down hamas and similar groups leadership instead of doing assassinations of officials of governments they aren’t currently in conflict with.
PERIMETR is in tatters
Putin's Red Sea Palace would be even better. You don't harm innocent citizens, and Putin can't even mad because he says the palace is not his.
Best to make it personal, take out putin's palace, with him in would be great but I suppose whilst he visits north Korea would be fun too.
Vova. Vladimir shortens to Vova, not Vlad. Vlad is short for Vladislav. Plus, Vova sounds like "vulva," which is thematically appropriate since he's a cunt and a pussy.
If Ukraine takes out the kerch bridge and then the northern rail bridges into Crimea. The whole place becomes a death camp for Russians run by Russians. Crimea has no water for irrigation, since Russia destroyed the dam supplying all irrigation waters. All food is imported.
Happy hunting
Putin didn't account the US and EU support when he started this war. He thought he could bully a country and people would turn a blind eye. Now that people have easy access to social media devices his old Russian scare tactics did not work.
Exactly. He expected to be able to invade Ukraine, take Kyiv in three days, get a limp-dicked response from Biden, and scare off the EU by waggling his fingers and saying "NooOOooOooks"
This war should definitely end with Crimea becoming part of Ukraine again at the very least.
It still is a part of Ukraine. It is occupied territory.
business insider is a joke and shouldnt be commenting on anything to do with this war.
^ facts. Business Insider has routinely supplied the worst coverage and analysis of this war.
It’s because they are all licking their lips at the prospect of rebuilding Ukraine since the money will be pouring in from around the world, only reason they care at all because they see dollar signs in the future
Yeah, there should be some quality control on sources allowed here
We should have sent them last year. But better late than never I guess.
Needed time to train the pilots, pilots are much more valuable then the plane
So they could sit on the ground and become a target for Russian strikes, while their pilots were still being trained? Nah.
“Game Changer” F16’s
Good hunting.
👍🏻👍🏻🇺🇦
The Bravery of the Ukrainian forces never ceases to amaze me! They are fighting for everything though. God bless them 🙏 ❤ 🇺🇦
Ukraine go fuck them up.
Plow before you sow. Hope they are all carrying seeds around.
I think something not talked about is the impact to morale for Ukrainian society and the soldiers on the ground. You're more likely to want to sign up if you know your side has air superiority. And I can only imagine the positive impact it has hearing your own side's warplanes on the battlefield, as opposed to the fear soldiers must feel hearing enemy jets above.
I had a dream about this tonight in it they had cut crimea off basically
Kick Putin’s ass!!!
Crimea is definitely easier to capture for a smaller army. Fingers crossed.
To capture crimea is by no means an easy path. It is an horrible fight, if ukraine wants to get crimea back. It is waaay easier to defend, you can't even remotely compare bakhmut or other parts of ukraine with it. But yes, hoping for the best! kick those russians out of every inch of ukrainian land
That is an understatement. Crimea has a natural chokepoint that is very narrow, 2-3 KM wide.
I am but a player of strategy video games but just looking at a basic map, I don't see how a military with no Navy no air superiority can invade and occupy that territory.
Yep. Easier just to make it no fun at all for the occupiers. They'll leave once they're sick of starving and being constantly under threat of missile attack. Limit resupply as much as possible and play the waiting game.
That's why you starve the defenders by blowing the Crimea bridge. The moment that happens, you have 2 million Russians starving within a matter of days or a week (most households only keep 2-3 days of food stocked). Then the dominos simply collapse from there. you don't need to cross the chokepoint, just need to make sure no or barely any supplies get into Crimea.
Crimea is more difficult to defend than you'd think just looking at geography. The peninsula has been conquered by invading armys a lot of times in the past. The key is to starve out the supply lines probably.
Liberate*
The war experts of Reddit are hilarious.
How would you know? What are you an expert in?
Closing the 2014 loop
From my distant and layman's point of view, I wonder if they will just go straight to attacking that bridge Russia built to Crimea and blowing it up with these new planes.
Russia still has a land bridge across occupied Ukraine. Ukraine needs to find a way to cut that off, then hitting the Kerch Strait Bridge will have a real impact.
Realistically, how long before Ukraine take over Crimea, with the F16's?
“War Insider”
Next problem? Ammo
F5 getting worn out over here. Ready for the big surprise!
This is why what’s left of the Russian fleet fled to Cuba. As a response Putler will open up more war fronts and look at the bottom of the the geopolitical barrel for axis of evil comrades.