How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Huba]

26 minutes ago, sross112 said:

Don't know much about air war stuff, so the question to the airplane fellas; does the F16 bring anything to the table that will improve UAF capabilities? or is it just a filler and going to be all show and no go? 

It really depends on the version of the aircraft and weapons that will come with it, but few things that come to mind::
- way better radars when compared to MiGs and Sukhois
- Link16 giving them networking capability, so no need to emit all the time. Probably it will allow automatic exchange of information with ground based radars too, and firing missiles without turning radars on at all.
- availability of various electronic warfare equipment, depending on what we are willing to send it can be very modern
- ability to use targeting pods to acquire targets and launch PGMs independently, not only at pre-programmed targets
- ability to do CAS with said PGMs against time sensitive targets
- hugely improved SEAD abilities due to integrated EW pods and anti-radar missiles
- ability to carry out anti-shipping missions with Harpoons 
- depending on AIM-120 version they can have quite a reach. In general later C versions should have range as good or better than R-77, and D would be vastly superior to it.
- no matter the AMRAAM version they get, it will be the first time UA Air Force will have medium range fire and forget missiles at it's disposal, making defence against cruise missiles way way easier, and offering hugely increased possibilities in A2A.
 

Edited May 23, 2023 by Huba

[dan/california]

18 minutes ago, sross112 said:

I see the advantage of using an aircraft that can use all the standard NATO weapons and having a type of airframe that is ubiquitous for spare parts, training, and replacements. That all makes sense. In the last couple days someone posted a twitter thread that basically said the F16 would be at a disadvantage against the RuAF as it had inferior radars and shorter range missiles. It made it sound like they really wouldn't add much for capability other than maybe some cruise missile interception. Also said they would be pretty vulnerable to RA AAA systems. 

Don't know much about air war stuff, so the question to the airplane fellas; does the F16 bring anything to the table that will improve UAF capabilities? or is it just a filler and going to be all show and no go? 

It depends massively on the exact model they get. The announced one has a fairly old radar, I am not assuming that is what actually shows up. Furthermore it is hard to overstate the NATO hard points, avionics, and com links. It does matter a great deal exactly what we give them to hang on those hard points. there are three plus generations of stuff to choose from their, too, and the differences matter.

[Harmon Rabb]

Since the Devil Dogs were such a discussed topic today, thought it was appropriate to repost this tweet here.

USMC Commandant Gemeral David H. Berger, recognizing Ukraine's marines on May 23rd.

Edited May 23, 2023 by Harmon Rabb

[FancyCat]

Tho mentioned, worth mentioning Ukraine, as with prior escalatory moves, is probably seeking out the viability of major Ukrainian forces threatening Russian cities and logistics involving active large units. Whether it intends to conquer, is irrelevant, only that Russia must be forced to extend their fortifications from occupied Ukraine into the rest of the Ukrainian-Russian border. Also, good time to underscore, one year following the initial invasion, (plus a few months) and we are expecting Western combat fighter aircraft to Ukraine within a few months, at most a year, coming from atgms and ammo in February 2022. 

certainly Ukraine’s approach to asking for aid, I think can be considered a success. 

[kevinkin]

1 hour ago, Centurian52 said:

That is not how real life works. Debates are sporting events. In the real world we have arguments (not to be confused with fights/shouting matches). Arguments do not have teams. They do not have judges. They do not have points. And they do not have clear winners or losers.

Many think debates in the political arena are a blood sport, so I get where you are coming from. But debating is part of the real world. There have been famous debates, Lincoln - Douglas comes to mind. Tennessee v. Scopes was a trial, but served as an important debate. Galileo's trial in defense of Science. Debating has been an important part of western culture. I agree today they come across as sporting events, but that's the fault of the participants and not the intent of the process. 

[kevinkin]

25 minutes ago, Huba said:

It really depends on the version of the aircraft and weapons that will come with it, but few things that come to mind::

This has probably been mentioned: the F-16 is not the best suited to austere air fields. It is best operated from established NATO like bases. The aircraft has been tested to operated off of highways with limited infrastructure if the need developed. But I read NATO is reluctant for it to be based that way. Where there is a will there is a way. So, behind the scenes a hardened version of the F-16 might be in the works. But, publicly the goal is a long term commitment to Ukraine and its ability to defend itself. 

[Seminole]

 

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

This plus the donated Soviet era aircraft probably brings them back to prewar strength, so that's significant.  The other thing is that the F-16 has capabilities that Soviet type aircraft don't have *and* automatic support for any NATO munition or EW package without the need for special engineering.

It's a really big deal because Russia has been struggling with the depleted Ukrainian airforce with weaponry that they are very familiar with.  Ukraine can now entertain doing very interesting things it previously could not do.

I think the biggest 'threat' posed by Western fighters is the Western supply chain to keep them in the air.

I would expect the real readiness rate of Ukraine's Soviet fighter designs to be pretty abysmal after a year of war.

In addition to the hundreds already retired by the USAF, Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Greece, Poland, Portugal and Romania have F-16s.  A few of those will be phasing out the F-16 for the F-35 anyway.

Hell, the US Navy operated 40 F-16s!

[Seminole]

3 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

This has probably been mentioned: the F-16 is not the best suited to austere air fields. It is best operated from established NATO like bases. The aircraft has been tested to operated off of highways with limited infrastructure if the need developed. But I read NATO is reluctant for it to be based that way. Where there is a will there is a way. So, behind the scenes a hardened version of the F-16 might be in the works. But, publicly the goal is a long term commitment to Ukraine and its ability to defend itself. 

Another reason to commit the Warthogs.

Anyone read A-10s over Kosovo?

I came across this last night, but at the outset I was unaware of how involved the A-10 was in that affair.

from the prologue:

A-10 pilots contributed to several significant and unique Air Force accomplishments during OAF: (1) this operation marked the first time that an airborne forward air controller (AFAC) aircraft led a large force mission package into combat; (2) it also included the first major air campaign in which no friendly aircrews were killed or taken prisoner—A-10 aircrews led the packages that rescued the only two pilots shot down; (3) although the official battle damage assessment (BDA) is incomplete, A-10s most likely destroyed more field-deployed Serb weaponry than any other allied weapon system; and (4) the two-ship AFAC’s first combat test in a 360- degree threat environment was a great success—none of the fighters controlled by A-10 AFACs were lost, only two A-10s received any battle damage, and there were no known collateral civilian casualties.

[Centurian52]

31 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

Many think debates in the political arena are a blood sport, so I get where you are coming from

I never said anything about blood sport. I mean they are a literal sport. Debates have teams, judges, points, and unambiguous winners and losers.

[sburke]

11 minutes ago, Centurian52 said:

I never said anything about blood sport. I mean they are a literal sport. Debates have teams, judges, points, and unambiguous winners and losers.

 

 

[kevinkin]

11 minutes ago, Centurian52 said:

I never said anything about blood sport. I mean they are a literal sport. Debates have teams, judges, points, and unambiguous winners and losers.

I understand now. I related your use of arguments to something like closing arguments in a trial. You mean arguments like those that occur in a pub over the pool table. 

[Fenris]

 

[Centurian52]

Just now, kevinkin said:

You mean arguments like those that occur in a pub over the pool table. 

Sort of. I don't exactly mean the colloquial sense of the word, which I prefer to call a fight or a shouting match in order to distinguish what I mean by argument. I was raised by a logician, so I use the word argument in the sense that philosophers use the word. In philosopher jargon there are two different senses which are both expressed by the word argument. The first meaning is an element of language that is constructed with multiple premises plus a conclusion. The second, which is the sense I was using, is a discussion between two or more people who disagree about something. You use arguments in the first sense to support your position in an argument in the second sense.

It is important to emphasize that an argument in the second sense is not the same thing as a fight. There is no reason for it to be heated or disrespectful (in fact if it starts getting heated, it's time to take a break). The parties in the argument should never (and I mean never) insult each other. It differs from a debate in that there are no judges and there are no winners. In fact your goal shouldn't even really be to win. You should be completely unafraid to concede a point if your opponent has made a good case for it. And you should not defend your position to the death if mounting evidence is making your position unreasonable. The goal in an argument is, ultimately, to learn.

I was raised to believe that arguments are good things. They are how we expose ourselves to different perspectives. They help us grow. You should never be afraid to have an argument with someone. But again, an argument, as I understand the word, is not the same thing as a fight. Fights are not constructive. In contrast to arguments, which help us break out of our echo chambers, fights are likely to keep us in our echo chambers. Fights should always be avoided.

[Vet 0369]

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup, technically.  In reality I think the Marines view the Navy as an aquatic Uber service.

Steve

Yes, you’re absolutely correct. Whenever Sailors would tell us that Marines were part of the Navy and needed the Navy to take them where they needed to go, we’d simply reply, “Yup, everyone needs their taxi service.” That said though, the Navy and Marines have always supported and complemented each other’s missions. Unlike two of the other branches who are constantly trying to “one-up”each other and steal the others funding while still constantly arguing over whether the Army is violating the 1949 Key West Accords that created the Air Force by arming helicopters.

[sross112]

Thank you for the responses on the F16 questions. If I understand it right, the announced ones were the old versions and those probably wouldn't add much. But even then it depends on what avionics, radars, auxiliary pods, and weapon models that are included. 

I'm feeling optimistic today. I'm going to bet that the west sends some fancy upgrades and maybe even newer models. Part of the psychological part of western weapons systems is their ability to out perform the Russian stuff. So I'm thinking the powers that be will make sure whatever package is given will be a good one to give the Kremlin another black eye and maybe make China raise an eyebrow. The messaging is probably just as or more important than the support itself.

[NamEndedAllen]

18 minutes ago, sross112 said:

If I understand it right, the announced ones were the old versions and those probably wouldn't add much

On paper that may well seem correct. The most recent Russian fighters look like formidable opponents. On paper. But we have seen the real world in combat of quite a bit of Russian war fighting equipment. And the quality of Russian training. Likewise, we have seen the real world performance of NATO equipment, as well as the combat performance of the Ukrainian military. So I’ll celebrate the looming addition of F-16s to the fight. 

[The_Capt]

23 minutes ago, sross112 said:

Thank you for the responses on the F16 questions. If I understand it right, the announced ones were the old versions and those probably wouldn't add much. But even then it depends on what avionics, radars, auxiliary pods, and weapon models that are included. 

I'm feeling optimistic today. I'm going to bet that the west sends some fancy upgrades and maybe even newer models. Part of the psychological part of western weapons systems is their ability to out perform the Russian stuff. So I'm thinking the powers that be will make sure whatever package is given will be a good one to give the Kremlin another black eye and maybe make China raise an eyebrow. The messaging is probably just as or more important than the support itself.

I don’t think the age or capabilities of the platforms are deterministic. They need to hook into the Ukrainian C4ISR and carry the AIM 120, as such they are a threat the RuAF cannot discount.  This will reinforce the air denial situation which is about as good as it gets in this war with respect to AirPower.  There is already a lot of noise on dogfight capability but in reality Ukraine just needs a missile carrier that can move quickly and go where the ISR network tells it to.  This, along with other capability stacks up and keeps Russian air power at stand off, which will be critical in a ground offensive.  The F16 is a capable module in a much broader air denial system, so it is good news.

Edited May 24, 2023 by The_Capt

[kevinkin]

2 hours ago, Seminole said:

Another reason to commit the Warthogs.

I am with you. For some reason the A10 has become a polarizing aircraft. Some still love it and others want to fade it out. Maybe it comes from turf wars. Army aviation vs USAF and the role each has in CAS. But having A10s on the sidelines without even giving them a try out in a war desperate for any available firepower is puzzling. 

[kevinkin]

1 hour ago, Centurian52 said:

Sort of. I don't exactly mean the colloquial sense of the word, which I prefer to call a fight or a shouting match in order to distinguish what I mean by argument. I was raised by a logician, so I use the word argument in the sense that philosophers use the word.

We are on the same page. 

[chris talpas]

I have to say I am in awe of Ukraine.

They have done brilliantly on the battlefield both relatively and absolutely.  They have been both student and teacher.

Their president has been masterful at gaining international support and staying in the fray.

They are very good with opsec and consistent messaging

I think they have no equal when it comes to trolling.  This trans border raid is brilliant.  The sinking of the Moskva on the day the snake island stamp gets released.  The constant, truly funny and well done jabs.

The incredible people of Ukraine who are true patriots -your bravery is amazing but needed in this existential threat.

[MikeyD]

Leopard 1A4 with the welded turret has never seen combat, has it? Now that i think of it, has any Leopard 1 seen combat beside the few Canadian examples that went to Afghanistan?

[Battlefront.com]

ISW's summary of the Russians retaking settlements in Belgorod:

Quote

Russian forces likely pushed the RDK and LSR forces at least to the Kozinka border settlement and possibly out of Russian territory as of May 23. Kozinka is located approximately 76km southeast of Sumy City. Russian sources amplified footage of Russian forces firing on RDK and LSR vehicle positions near the Kozinka border checkpoint overnight and claimed that Russian forces recaptured Kozinka and its border checkpoint in the morning.[5] Geolocated footage from Russian state media shows damaged and destroyed vehicles at the checkpoint.[6] Some Russian sources claimed that RDK and LSR forces entrenched themselves in the Kozinka church but that preliminary reports suggest Russian forces may have ousted the Ukrainian forces by the evening.[7] Russian sources claimed that Russian forces began clearing operations in Kozinka and Glotovo (immediately east of Kozinka) on May 23.[8] Geolocated footage posted on May 23 shows the aftermath of shelling Gora Podol (about 6km northwest of Kozinka) and Russian infantry conducting patrols between Grayvoron (about 7km northwest of Kozinka) and Gora Podol, suggesting that RDK and LSR personnel no longer hold or never held positions in the settlement.[9] It is unclear whether the RDK and LSR captured any villages on May 22 or May 23, however. The LSR claimed that LSR and RDK personnel continued to operate in Belgorod Oblast on May 23, however.[10]

Also in the top section is ISW's summary of how Russian bloggers dealt with this:

Quote

The Russian information space largely hyperfixated on speculated goals for the raids and on the conduct of the Russian response. Some Russian milbloggers amplified claims that a drone struck the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) building in Belgorod City and speculated that Ukrainian forces aimed to attack the FSB and Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD) in the raid.[15] Russian sources also amplified a photograph of Colonel General Alexander Lapin posing with a captured vehicle and claimed that Lapin led the counterterrorism operation alongside elements of the 3rd Motorized Rifle Division (20th Guards Combined Arms Army, Western Military District).[16] Many Russian sources praised Lapin for organizing Russian forces to conduct coherent counterterrorism operations after the Russian Border Service failed to repel the raids.[17] Some sources criticized the decision to give Lapin command and noted Lapin’s prior military failures such as the disastrous Siverskyi Donets river crossing near Bilohorivka, Luhansk Oblast in May 2022.[18] Lapin has notably returned to commanding Russian operations in eastern Ukraine after suffering intense criticism for commanding the operations to take Severodonetsk and Lysychansk, and Lapin has not received much praise in the information space since the campaign to undermine him led to Lapin’s dismissal in November 2022.[19] The openness of Russian milbloggers to praise Lapin for commanding the defense against an extremely small and limited border incursion suggests that at least some milblogger factions are amenable to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s tendency to rotate old and disgraced commanders.[20]  The Russian reaction to the raid in the information space and in the reported military activities appears to be a highly disproportionate response to a very small and localized undertaking. Russian forces should not have required significant reinforcements—or the involvement of a colonel general—to repulse a raid conducted by reportedly 13 armored vehicles.[21]

The last bit I bolded.  It's been a while since I've read a snarky smackdown ISW style

This is what I was getting at a few pages ago.  The fact that there was any significant incursion to begin with shows how badly protected the border is to start with.  They could probably have dealt with the situation using less force and high profile "leadership", but they were likely forced into it because a) they couldn't afford to screw it up and b) they didn't want to waste an opportunity to show Russian forces actually taking terrain within a reasonable timeframe.  The fact that it was its own territory is a small detail not worth quibbling over

Steve

[kevinkin]

12 minutes ago, chris talpas said:

consistent messaging

‘I need ammunition, not a ride’ says it all. 

[G.I. Joe]

3 hours ago, sross112 said:

Thank you for the responses on the F16 questions. If I understand it right, the announced ones were the old versions and those probably wouldn't add much. But even then it depends on what avionics, radars, auxiliary pods, and weapon models that are included. 

I'm feeling optimistic today. I'm going to bet that the west sends some fancy upgrades and maybe even newer models. Part of the psychological part of western weapons systems is their ability to out perform the Russian stuff. So I'm thinking the powers that be will make sure whatever package is given will be a good one to give the Kremlin another black eye and maybe make China raise an eyebrow. The messaging is probably just as or more important than the support itself.

The F-16s being retired by European F-35 operators are old A models, but they have received a very comprehensive Mid Life Upgrade program. They are still a very capable platform...

[NamEndedAllen]

This slipped past me while out of town. Is Putin thinking his last best hope might not be China? Apologies if I missed it here.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/5/22/2170685/-Putin-issues-laughable-new-MAGA-approved-sanction-list

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-sanctions-trump-enemies-list-1801793