F-16s will hardly be any different than MiGs in Ukies’ hands. I’ve been calling for giving them the F-22s which would actually them to penetrate AD. They were made with extreme expense to kill Russian stuff so might as well let them do that instead of just getting retired having done nothing at all.
Not even close. I think the Mig-29 is cute as a button, but it's a crap design. Here are the following advantages the F-16s will have over anything they fly against: >SEAD capability >YGBSM
(You Gotta Be Shitting Me: wild weasel runs) >The ability to maneuver kill SAMs >RWR that actually works, actually lets you fight back and use countermeasures, and even tells you where the missile is >Engines that work reliably >Radar and sensor systems that are actually halfway decent, just not the latest and greatest the US has >Sensor-linking with the upgrade packages on those F-16s in particular >Easy integration with US weapon systems with all features intact, save for those relying on the sniper pod
>le scary face
HIMARS has the advantage of being able to pop up, fire off rockets based on western intel, and run like fuck, the F-16 will have to go high altitude to actually launch anything besides cruise missiles, in which case all it's really doing is padding their missile count once they run out of SCALPs
With the US I would assume "introduced" means IOC, so production representative vehicles being actually shipped out to units whereas "first flight" would likely be developmental tests of the prototype airframe after it has been verified on the ground that it's safe for flight.
>but the F-16 has had substantial upgrades
Don't worry we will strip all of those out before we send them over. Can't risk compromising our decades old military technology.
What's this "we" business? America isn't sending the F-16's, Denmark and the Netherlands are. Literally not a single piece of tech America has sent to Ukraine has been "nerfed" in any capacity and the only thing that will are the Abrams by having their DU inserts removed. Without the DU inserts the turret is still going to be as strong as a 2A6's (and if you try to claim that any of the 2A6's in Ukraine, sans the one apparently hit directly by artillery which NO tank can survive, were taken out through the turret you're a retard.). All it's taken has been Cold War era surplus to not only stop Russia's advance in Ukraine but for Ukraine to also push Russia out of 90% of the territory they had originally occupied after the invasion.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Literally not a single piece of tech America has sent to Ukraine has been "nerfed" in any capacity
m777s had their digital stuff removed
HIMARS was geofenced
1 month ago
Anonymous
I wasn't aware of that, my mistake then. Still, with all the equipment that's been sent, having only 2 pieces of tech have some sensitive stuff stripped is pretty good.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Didn't we also not include the longest range munitions for HIMARS as well?
1 month ago
Anonymous
That doesn't count as intentionally nerfing equipment we've given them though and is just us withholding the good shit. Believe me, I WISH we gave them ATCAM's among other more modern stuff, but I bet if Ukraine started to lose significant ground we might start sending better stuff. Thankfully it seems our tactics so far of only giving Ukraine Cold War stuff to bleed Russia dry have been working quite well. It's sad to say, but we don't WANT the war to end too quickly as the Ukrainians need to inflict as much damage and death upon the Russians as possible. If we gave Ukraine all the good stuff right now, Russia would pull out of Ukraine AND make excuses to her people that it took all of NATO to fight Russia off and they'd just rebuild over a few decades and try again. But bleeding Russia dry will mean there will be no rebuilding as the immense damage to their economy and population becomes irreparable.
I hate this image, I love almost all 4th gen fighters and this image is no context garbage, let's break it down (ignoring Gen 3, because Gen 3 is a cluster fuck and soviet the MiG-21 wasn't a good fighter, it was an interceptor)
MiG-29 >Iraqi MiG-29s were MiG-29A (9.12B), these were downgraded even more than warsaw pact MiG-29s, and were sold to Iraq with just R-60MKs, they got absolutely wiped in the Gulf war because of course they would, Imagine having to fight aircraft with long range FOX-1s when you're stuck with shit tier short range FOX-2s >2 Syrian MiG-29s shot down of the same type by IAF F-15Cs, same shit >Serb MiG-29Bs shot down during the kosovo war, better aircraft, but at the time still very outdated, no FOX-3s against NATO aircraft which is a horrible situation >Eritrean MiG-29s were shot down by Russian Mercs in Su-27s, unknown variants, but almost definitely pilot skill issues (fucking Eritrea lmao)
MiG-25 >actually performed pretty decently in the Iran Iraq war, it's kill count is actually wrong both here and from what migflug lists, it had 10 kills in the Iran-iraq war including an F-14, before losing their first MiG-25 to an Iraninan F-14 >it also shot down a F-18 during the gulf war and a Reaper during the NFZ (the reaper actually attempted to engage the MiG with an ATAS but lost) >2 were apparently downed from accidently border violations into Iran but this is hard to source, 2 were lost by Syria, 1, in the iran-iraq war, 1 in the NFZ and 2 in the gulf war
Su-27 >not listed here because it has a good K/D lol
and now western aircraft
F-14 >almost all kills achieved by Iran shooting down Iraqi garbage 3rd gens, the rest gotten by the USA doing the same to libya and iraq
F-15 >almost all kills gotten by Israel shooting down mostly 3rd gen garbage and some export model 4th gens, the rest gotten by the USA and saudi arabia doing the same.
F-16
See above!
Shooting down 3rd gen aircraft is seal clubbing, the differences aren't even funny
Are you willing to have an actual discussion or are you just going to shitpost at me? If we're talking about the actual specifications of the aircraft why would we ever use downgraded garbage that is no better than the gen 3 shit it replaced as a standard against the best aircraft that NATO was fielding?
1 month ago
Anonymous
I'm calling out your retarded argument that it doesn't count because it was unfair to the other side. It doesn't matter. Statistics don't take into account fairness, and you can cope about how reality doesn't align to your perception of it, or accept that American built air superiority is unparalleled.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Then by that metric statics' are irrelevant as peer aircraft of the time could just as easily wipe the floor with Gen 3 and downgraded gen 4 aircraft. What a fucking ridiculous argument to make.
>Mig engines are fine
They could be, potentially, but not in Russian hands. >Doesn't mention electronics, avionics, or sensor equipment at all
Stop thinking you're an expert because you made a paper stat spreadsheet.
>but not in russian hands
Poorly maintaining Ukrainian MiG engines is Russias fault? Why would they maintain F-16 engines any better? >Doesn't mention electronics, avionics, or sensor equipment at all
Because I responded to what was said? I said yeah it has Link-16 which is a plus over their old MiG-29s, and yes F-16 MLUs have better avionics, I wouldn't argue against that, I only argued that the MiG-29 could maneuver kill SAMs and had fine engines, I didn't mention any of those because they weren't brought up. I swear literally everyone on this fucking board just wants to condescend actually having a discussion is fucking impossible.
1 month ago
Anonymous
How the fuck is your reading comprehension this bad? This thread is about how the F-16 will (or won't) make a difference against Russia. Russian maintenance, repairs, and design compromises are dogshit garbage tier. >Mig-29 can maneuver kill SAMs
It's theoretically capable in that it can maneuver to notch and can dive, but only if it can see and display the threat. The lesser quantity and quality of information available to the Mig pilot is a tremendous liability, comparatively speaking, and if the Mig could pull of wild weasel shenanigans, Russia would have been doing so. I suppose it's possible this is a pilot or doctrinal issue, but then, we've seen some pretty desperate ass-pulls in other parts of the Russian military. >Just wants to condescend >Posted "wrong and retarded on multiple counts"
Do you understand what kind of person you are?
1 month ago
Anonymous
> Russian maintenance, repairs, and design compromises are dogshit garbage tier.
I can agree on tanks, ships, ect but not on aircraft >It's theoretically capable in that it can maneuver to notch and can dive, but only if it can see and display the threat. The lesser quantity and quality of information available to the Mig pilot is a tremendous liability, comparatively speaking, and if the Mig could pull of wild weasel shenanigans, Russia would have been doing so. I suppose it's possible this is a pilot or doctrinal issue, but then, we've seen some pretty desperate ass-pulls in other parts of the Russian military.
you said "the ability to maneuver kill SAMs" I said "the MiG-29 can already maneuver kill SAMs" you shifted the goal posts to avionics, I replied to literally the only thing you said about defeating SAMs, if you'd only mentioned better avionics and sensors and not mentioned maneuver killing I wouldn't have brought it up at all >Do you understand what kind of person you are?
Yes, you brought up 3 wrong and retarded points being a slightly improved RWR, maneuver killing SAMs which they can already do, and engines, Russian engines are completely fine, and I have no idea what their sub par maintenance has to do with Ukrainians getting F-16s, if it's the MiG-29s of the UkrAF having poor engines thats their fault for not maintaining them and I have no idea how F-16s would be better.
Speaking of F4s, didn't the nips and maybe the Greeks or Israelis upgrade the shit out of theirs? Surely there have to be a few of those laying around somewhere we could send.
>Says the pink haired moron hiding out on his blue board where he can cry to chud mods
>trannies >garden gnomes >women >leftists >globalhomo
Are there any other boogeyman to get off your chest?
You forgot literal gay shit you found on telegram or Twitter
1 month ago
Anonymous
post skin untouchable
1 month ago
Anonymous
You really need to ask your cultist arbiters to give you a new script
1 month ago
Anonymous
>benchod gets triggered and uploads a google photo
brown
1 month ago
Anonymous
>that filename in a non-american date format from may >no timestamp >it's an image copy
Oh you're definitely not white.
>Triggered blue haired transvestites
1 month ago
Anonymous
>he thinks a storage path proves anything
I thought indians had a way with technology? Do they not know you can transfer data between phone folders in the same way as a computer?
1 month ago
Anonymous
>that filename in a non-american date format from may >no timestamp >it's an image copy
Oh you're definitely not white.
He's a Russian Diaspora that lives in the US.
He also shills for the Bradley for DnC reasons, despite at the same time shilling against the evil wect
1 month ago
Anonymous
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Only Russians hate liberals
Pffft hahahahahahahaha
1 month ago
Anonymous
>strawman
Your IQ is somewhere in the room temperature Celsius range I assume.
1 month ago
Anonymous
How is it a strawman dumb fuck? It's right off the image itself
1 month ago
Anonymous
The image never implies that only Russians hate liberals, moron.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>that filename in a non-american date format from may >no timestamp >it's an image copy
Oh you're definitely not white.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Pretending people are scared of you just makes you look like a child, James Gomez Rahjput the 3rd
Again no those F-16 Block 20 MLU will be shot down like any other cold war era fighter that's been used most likely by the Mig-31 running sweeps of the border
If they were the actually decent Block 50 then sure they're su-30 equivalent but no the block 20 is at best an equivalent to the original Mig-29 9.13 it was a direct competitor to and inferior to the Su-27
If you're gonna hype up some new wunderwaffe do some research it makes everyone on PrepHole look like fucking retards if you don't
>bro there's gonna be ace combat dogfighting and the slavshit will win!!!
Anon, don't suggest absurd things in an attempt to dispel other absurdities. The real threat to both sides is the SAM saturation.
What else are they gonna send before it turns into depleting your own airforce the tphoons are trash
Rafale will never be sent
Gripen maybe but that fucker is food for yak-9s
F-15 literally never the US would never give it away
The best ukraine will ever get is F/A-18s probably the shitty early ones with a non functioning IRST and bad radar set and it's rusted worn out airframe that problem should be in a museum or boneyard by now
>F-15 literally never the US would never give it away
Not so much that they won't want to give it up, but it's the US's pride and joy due to over 100 AA victories with zero losses. They would never risk losing that perfect record by giving it to someone with subpar support.
They just ditched the C models and dumped them on NG units if not just sending the problem children to the Boneyard. Even the shittiest F-15 in service over the last 10 years kicks the dick off the best Russian aircraft, but their massive AA network could force them into defensive maneuvers that could cost them a fight. The US isn't taking that chance.
No, it only has 120Cs because they're block-15/20 MLUs and worse radars than Su-35/Su-30s, all this will do is prevent Russia from using anything older than Su-27SM2s, which I doubt they were doing in the first place, as well as escorting attack aircraft some of the time. They wont fair any better against SAMs either really, they're not going to be able to operate at high altitude at all.
Not even close. I think the Mig-29 is cute as a button, but it's a crap design. Here are the following advantages the F-16s will have over anything they fly against: >SEAD capability >YGBSM
(You Gotta Be Shitting Me: wild weasel runs) >The ability to maneuver kill SAMs >RWR that actually works, actually lets you fight back and use countermeasures, and even tells you where the missile is >Engines that work reliably >Radar and sensor systems that are actually halfway decent, just not the latest and greatest the US has >Sensor-linking with the upgrade packages on those F-16s in particular >Easy integration with US weapon systems with all features intact, save for those relying on the sniper pod
You are wrong and retarded on multiple counts >MiG-29 can maneuver SAMs just fine >RWR is visually harder to read, but doesn't have 6-8 seconds of delay like F-16 RWR, it also has a visual indicator of how far the missile actually is >What the fuck do you even mean? MiG engines are fine >sure it has link-16 >sure
>They're getting block 20/MLU
That package has the avionics and weapons integration of a Block 50/52, along with most of the extras like having every airframe wired for recon/targeting pods out of the box.
One vital thing its missing is a block-50/52 radar, it's still stuck with the old radar which is horrible for fighting Su-35/Su-30
https://i.imgur.com/7ZciYTK.jpg
well, the F-16 has way better RWR and radar than the MiG-29, so that’s definitely an improvement
Just because the old soviet RWR doesn't have a screen doesn't mean it's bad, it's actually very intuitive if you're trained to read it.
It has no latency, tells you where the missile is and how far away it is, it's inferior to screen based RWR because they provide you more information, just because you're too fucking stupid to read it in DCS doesn't mean it's bad. They moved away from it because screen based RWR is more information dense and easier to read at a glance. I said it's not bad not equal or better than AN/ALR-56M
No anon, they're not, 120Cs are outranged by R-37s and R-77ms which are the main missiles being used by RuAF right now, all BVR engagements with F-16s will almost definitely be done under IADS coverage as well.
F-16's will shut down Ukrainian airspace for Russians with no contest. Frontline remains an aerial no-mans-land but Ukraine proper will have ukie air superiority. Russians only have a handful of fighters that can go toe-to-toe with '16s and they are not going to attack inside ukrainian AD bubble.
>A handful
at least 329 VKS aircraft outrange the F-16AM MLUs radar, as well as being able to carry either or both R-37M and R-77M, which outrange the 120Cs that Ukraine might receive. Russia has air superiority right now, which is why they can drop a lot more FAB glide bombs than ukraine can, they're essentially reduced to doing suicide runs with Su-25s at treeline level, or throwing SS/SCALPs with Su-24s. Air superiority does not mean Air supremacy, this is a distinction that is often forgot.
R-77s and R-37s exist in low numbers, evidenced by the fact that Russian combat aircraft are commonly sighted with R-27s. Motor range advantage is irrelevant when Russian radars can't take advantage of it, MiG-31 has a powerful PESA but that's pretty much it for modern Russian radars
Would you like to provide a source for that? We've seen videos and confirmation of R-77 and R-37 usage, they've been in production for a while now and are also commonly sighted. Russia has actually quite liberally volleyed R-37s in ukraine, and R-77-1s have been in major production for a long time. Seeing R-27s in use is like seeing 3BM42 in use and saying "haha look 3BM59/60 isn't being used!!"
1 month ago
Anonymous
As it is, ukies only have R-27s at best meaning even a handful of planes armes with active AAMs can deny significant airspace. With AMRAAMs Russians will lose this advantage and can't risk the airframes anymore.
And saying Svinets isn't used is mostly true because the old garbage they are fielding can't equip it.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Svinets is fielded in T-72B3s, T-80BVMs and T-90s, T-72B3s are still common place, but even they were using 3BM42 until western tank deliveries were announced.
>Russians will lose this advantage
They'll just field more R-77 and R-37 aircraft, R-27s couldnt deny any airspace because they were drastically out ranged, sure it'll marginally close the gap, but all it requires is fielding the better missiles they already have.
1 month ago
Anonymous
If they had the R-77s to field in large numbers they'd have been using them already, and ukraine wouldn't still have a contested airspace
1 month ago
Anonymous
They literally have been using them anon, they've been using R-37s more because of range advantages >wouldn't still have a contested airspace
The contested airspace comes from Ukrainian air defence, but russia still has air superiority, which is why they can drop glide bombs more than ukranians can
>Mig engines are fine
They could be, potentially, but not in Russian hands. >Doesn't mention electronics, avionics, or sensor equipment at all
Stop thinking you're an expert because you made a paper stat spreadsheet.
No but will probably managed full denial.
At best which is still alot it will act as a flying SEAD, Air Defense, Long rang artillery missile wagon with some AWACS ability.
Stratgically useful but dont expect the front line to see it doing CAS anytime soon.
This. Still Russians currently have air superiority over Ukies so leveling that is another step necessary for full liberation. Considering what we saw at Snek island I beleive they will be put to good use.
>soon
from what ive read they're not gonna be active over Ukraine for quite some time >ukies not being all that savvy on sending flight capable personnel when they could be trained on comblock stuff >language barriers with the ones they want to send >F-16 training not being streamlined to 'we need pilots asap' requirements
best of luck to them, truly, but i wouldn't be surprised if the whole F-16s for Ukraine thing is a 'we a re 100% with you' kind of thing with future NATO integration/membership in mind
the F16s the Dutch/Danes have donated are very much in active service or in deep reserves, and thus not immediately deployable
its big news this week, perhaps the enxt one too, but we'll have to sit and wait for quite some time before our donation will be noticeable on/over the battlefiedl
I agree that we won't see them until 2024 but >language barriers
They are pilots. Fighter pilots
Not tank drivers. Or soldiers.
All of them speak English and half of them probably are engineers or some shit.
>F-16 MLU >air superiority
Maybe against mig-21 but everything russia and even ukraine fields is objectively better than those piles of shit the MLU were never designed to fly this long their airframes are nearing the point of it might actually kill the pilot if its flown too aggressively besides they'll only receive Aim-120A/B which are inferior to the sparrows they superceded that's an objective fact and it's a reason why the Aim-120 program nearly failed due to that scandal I'm also not gonna mention the shitty radar it's not even PESA just a 60s era PD
>bro there's gonna be ace combat dogfighting and the slavshit will win!!!
Anon, don't suggest absurd things in an attempt to dispel other absurdities. The real threat to both sides is the SAM saturation.
>bro there's gonna be ace combat dogfighting and the slavshit will win!!!
I never mention dogfighting and again the 66 is a bad radar set compared to everything else being used its a mid life PD set
Western F-16s are actually well maintained and have unlimited spare parts available. This is the whole reason they're sending them. The original plan was sending more migs, however they found out those pieces of shit had orders of magnitude less time until failure than advertised, and basically were falling apart immediately.
The only reason Ukraine wants F-16's isn't for fighting Russian jets. They don't even fly over anymore Ukraine anyways. It's because they can wield more NATO toys. Now they have to fuck with their MIGs to carry NATO stuff and sometimes it doesn't even work. Like with the HARM. It didn't work. The only succes story is StormShadow.
doubt it
very difficult operating environment
and the russians seldom operate over ukraine for long anyway
maybe they can pick off some helicopters idk
>F16 kino will soon be unleased
Sooner began is sooner done, but it will still be 2025 by the time the bulk of the aircraft are in country, piloted and ready to fight >will ukies get air superiority?
Not over the whole front line, 50-odd Block 50/52 equivalent F-16s wont offer enough additional SEAD/DEAD to overcome the Russian air defenses, and they offer basically nothing the current air fleet doesn't to deal with the R-37 threat.
What this will do is make it absolutely impossible for the Russians to attrition the Ukrainian air force to the point where the VKS could hope to take air superiority, and will offer a significantly superior platform for western air launched munitions. This might allow a longer reach over the Black Sea hunting ships, or even a concentrated enough attack with a mix of western PGMs to open up a localized hole in Russian air defenses to support an offensive push.
>They're getting block 20/MLU
That package has the avionics and weapons integration of a Block 50/52, along with most of the extras like having every airframe wired for recon/targeting pods out of the box.
> This might allow a longer reach over the Black Sea hunting ships >Ukrainian F-16’s launching Ace Combat-tier raids on the Black Sea Fleet while they’re in port
They have them they just all sucked.
Kinzal was supposed to be thier NATO killer taking out airbases and hubs ignoring defenses.
Atleast that was how they were advertised.
>3025
They will be flying missions this year no later than November.
Ukrainians only really have 6 planes at the moment flying 6 sorties a day. That's insane. They need the planes or more planes. F 16s actually work btw.
this has to be a paid talking point, as if lack of capable SEAD platforms isn't critical, and as if air defense wasn't the determining factor of air superiority in this context of two sub-par air forces.
That's been my thinking so far on this too. Moderate improvement in capability, but likely nothing game changing. MiG-31s still outrange them on paper as well.
this has to be a paid talking point, as if lack of capable SEAD platforms isn't critical, and as if air defense wasn't the determining factor of air superiority in this context of two sub-par air forces.
>as if lack of capable SEAD platforms isn't critical, and as if air defense wasn't the determining factor of air superiority in this context of two sub-par air forces.
You're not wrong, but I don't think these older F-16s will provide enough of a boost in effectiveness over Ukraine's current bootleg Wild Weasel tactics.
That being said, it would be fucking hilarious if this is all it takes for Ukraine to gain air superiority.
The important part isn't the jet. Nor is it the 20 or so Challengers or whatever. It's the fact that little by little the Ukrainians are getting Western gear, familiarizing themselves with it, and 3-4 years from now the Ukrainians will be fully integrated into Western kit, and the 70s-90s surplus will practically never end once they are on the F16 train at the same time that everyone else is switching to the F35.
I've literally met people IRL who range from average retard who only watches the news to die hard NAFO fag and they do call shit like the F-16 wunderwaffe but it might just be a euro thing
Not even plebbitors talk like that. It's just journalists and their stupid clickbait articles for boomers. >You won't believe what the new Ukrainian fighter plane can do. Worst putins nightmare is arriving!
the f-16 is the only operational aircraft the west can afford to get rid of as the f-35 becomes operational. it isn't a gamechanger but the best we can do
maybe some f/a-18s too but why complicate things
If the variants Ukraine is receiving has AESA radars, then the Russian air force will have way less options for any kind of interception. Obviously jet on jet encounters aren't going to be too common regardless of what happens. But AESA will ensure that basically no Russian jet has good chances going straight on, so the only thing that has a chance to take out their F-16s would be ground based systems.
Why are people trying to compare the F16 to migs and pretending like hhey are going to be used to dogfight Russian aircraft? These planes are going to be used the same as Ukraine's' current air power. Fly in low under radar, hit a ground target, then get back home before any response can be made.
Wouldn't supplying more surface to air be more effective than supplying aircraft that need constant upkeep and repair by well trained ground crews and extensive pilot training?
>F16 kino will soon be unleased
Yup, only takes a week or two to train a couple pilots. They should be able to mop up the Russian army in a few days, because F16s are that good.
F-16's will shut down Ukrainian airspace for Russians with no contest. Frontline remains an aerial no-mans-land but Ukraine proper will have ukie air superiority. Russians only have a handful of fighters that can go toe-to-toe with '16s and they are not going to attack inside ukrainian AD bubble.
Literally no fucking different than it is now.
Russian aircraft are not entering Ukraine proper, they are shooting from the maximum stand off distances back in Russian territory with glide bombs or using shitty drones.
The F16s will not be a threat greater than the Ukrainian air defense systems already pose.
The western air defense provided is a solid shield defending the airspace and before that the soviet air defense was doing a good enough job too.
>The western air defense provided is a solid shield defending the airspace
Bro which fucking dimension are you in most of those systems are scrapmetal by now. Whens the last time you heard about ukr patriots? Thats right, months ago because they got wiped out by kinzhals. Ukr air force doesnt exist, ukr AD doesnt exist, Russia reigns supreme in the sky over Ukraine.
For fucks sake we just spent the entire summer watching ka-52s cheekily turning entire columns of western equipment to junk without UA AD even showing up
>months ago because they got wiped out by kinzhals
There was one close buffet that needed a day or two to fix, and they seem perfectly capable of shooting down your favorite kinjals, which are a glorified high-altitude launched cruise missile.
>the main goal was to hurt our feelings, not to discuss weapons
That's interesting. Why would a shill focus on feelings rather than on dedication of the board? Apparently vatniks realize they are incompetent, so any attempt to spread propaganda in a discussion is doomed.
Congratulations, PrepHole, we buck-broke them just by existing.
Why would it hurt? Vehicles are lost in war. It seems like Vatniks think that Ukraine losing ~30 Bradley's and a handful of Leopards is somehow demoralizing. Why would you think that? Is it because YOU had this idea of Western equipment being invincible? Because we certainly never thought our vehicles were invincible. And now that some are destroyed you feel like that shows how weak they are? Do we need to bring out the statistics of all the Russian vehicles lost? Ukraine could lose 100 Bradley's for all we care; we'll just give them 200 more.
You might be under the mistaken impression that the West will cut off aid to Ukraine for some unclear reason. We won't. Our citizens are LOVING seeing Russians die in a war that they started. And Putin's pride has turned into a golden opportunity for the West to bleed Russia dry.
Your next statement will probably be, "Yeah u mad lul *~~))" in which case I will pre-emptively make my response to that here: "I accept your concession"
The fuck is going on in this thread, did /chug/ have an aneurysm?
So, the F-16 performance will be based on which Block it would be, there are many differences between them. I don't expect Indians and 4chan to know any of this.
Looking at MLU compared to block 70 and upwards. It has both full missile and bomb capability, as well as Link16 network. It only misses the Center Pedestal Display of Block 70/72.
Seems way better than any Mig-29 that I can find, it will depend what armament it receives.
Pajeets will now proceed to seethe and spam NAFO chud pics.
I hope they’ll lead to more effective use of the bombs and missiles that were designed for NATO planes but Ukraine currently used with soviet planes.
Those bombs can be pretty smart so it’s probably a lot more effective when integrated with a NATO plane.
Air superiority is unlikely but it will lead to more bombs being delivered to their Z recipient.
Russian AD will probably limit what the f16 can do to the kind of stuff use the ukranian airforce currently does. I doubt they trained ukranian wild weasels
that's nice buddy, we'll get you back to where you belong
[...]
1 month ago
Anonymous
Pretending people are scared of you just makes you look like a child, James Gomez Rahjput the 3rd
>Get off my blue board safe space reeee!
What the actual fuck are you sperging about now you dumb, supremely retarded moronstain?
You're posting in a Twitter screen cap thread you ultra retarded gorilla moron
1 month ago
Anonymous
>no don't make fun of me!
I bet you live in a third world shithole.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>he thinks a storage path proves anything
I thought indians had a way with technology? Do they not know you can transfer data between phone folders in the same way as a computer?
[...]
He's a Russian Diaspora that lives in the US.
He also shills for the Bradley for DnC reasons, despite at the same time shilling against the evil wect
https://i.imgur.com/Z0QzmpO.jpg
Imagine LARPING so hard you start coming up with shit like this. It's truly a good thing the suicide rate is so high among the LGBT
>Block 20MLU
So these are older airframes than the Ukraine's own Soviet Su-27s. And, at best, it'll be several dozens of them. And it will take years of training/integrating before they can actually do combat missions.
I mean, of course if this actually ends up happening (before the Ukraine collapses or surrenders, that is) then the delivery of these planes would be very good thing. All the western arms sent to the Ukraine provide essential training to Russians, who need to learn how to fight against these systems in a future war against NATO proper. That means Russian AD operators and fighter pilots will all get experience on dealing with enemy's most commonly used aircraft, including registering their radar signatures. It’s better to go up against them now, in ukrainian hands and low numbers, rather than experiencing them for the first time in a full-fledged war against NATO where hundreds/thousands of them are deployed at the same time in a far more uncontrollable setting.
>will ukies get air superiority?
No. Russia has thousands of fighters and bombers, Ukraine will get around 100 F-16s, that's like 1/50s of Russian pre-war aircraft units.
>The first western fighter unit that had the chance to face the Fulcrum in mock air combats has been the 510th Fighter Squadron (FS) “Buzzards” belonging to the 31st Fighter Wing (FW) from Aviano Air Base in northern Italy, which flew against LuftwaffeJagdgeschwader 73 (JG 73)MiG-29s in May 1995 during a German Fulcrum deployment to Decimomannu Air Base, on the southern tip of Sardinia.
>As told by Capt. Mike McCoy one of the 510th FS F-16 pilots that flew against JG 73 MiG-29s, the most impressive aspect of the Fulcrum’s performance for the American pilots was its low-speed maneuverability combined with its helmet mounted sight system. “In a low-speed fight, fighting the Fulcrum is similar to fighting an F-18 Hornet, but the Fulcrum has a thrust advantage over the Hornet. An F-18 can really crank its nose around if you get into a slow-speed fight, but it has to lose altitude to regain the energy, which allows us to get on top of them. The MiG has about the same nose authority at slow speeds, but it can regain energy much faster. Plus the MiG pilots have that forty five-degree cone in front of them into which they can fire an Archer and eat you up.”
>But as McCoy explained even if the helmet mounted sight system proved to be a formidable threat, it was not an insurmountable one. “Some of their capabilities were more wicked than we originally thought, we had to respect the helmet-mounted sight, which made our decisions to anchor more difficult. In other words, when I got close in, I had to consider that helmet mounted sight. Every time I got near a Fulcrum’s nose, I was releasing flares to defeat an Archer coming off his rail.” An impression confirmed also by Lt. Col. Gary West, another Viper pilot and back then Commander of the 510th. “Before coming here, some of our pilots may have thought of the MiG’s helmet-mounted sight as an end-all to a BFM fight, We have found that it is not as lethal as we had expected. We encountered some positions-particularly in an across-the-circle shot or a high-low shot and in a slow-speed fight-where a Fulcrum pilot can look up forty-five degrees and take a shot while his nose is still off. That capability has changed some of the pilots’ ideas on how they should approach a MiG-29 in a neutral fight. Below 200 knots, the MiG-29 has incredible nose-pointing capability down to below 100 knots. The F-16, however, enjoys an advantage in the 200 knot-plus regime. At higher speeds, we can power above them to go to the vertical. And our turn rate is significantly better. By being patient and by keeping airspeed up around 325 knots, an F-16 can bring the MiG-29 to its nose. But the pilot must still be careful of the across-the-circle shot with that helmet-mounted display.”
>McCoy and other two USAF pilots had the chance to fly in German Fulcrums and they explained some of the several limitations of the MiG-29. “Their visibility is not that good, their disadvantage is a real advantage for us. F-16 pilots sit high in the cockpit. All the MiG-29 pilots who sat in our cockpit wanted to look around with the canopy closed. They were impressed that they could turn around and look at the tail and even see the engine can. Besides visibility, I expected better turning performance, the MiG-29 is not a continuous nine-g machine like the F-16.” >A claim confirmed also by Capt. Michael Raubbach, then Fulcrum pilot of the JG 73. “Our visibility is not as good as an F-16 or even an F-15. We can’t see directly behind us. We have to look out the side slightly to see behind us, which doesn’t allow us to maintain a visual contact and an optimum lift vector at the same time. This shortcoming can be a real problem, especially when flying against an aircraft as small as the F-16.”
>The lack of the continuous nine-g capability of the Fulcrum instead, was due to the nature of the specification that brought to life the MiG-29, as explained by Capt. Oliver Prunk, then JG 73 operations officer. “The aircraft was not built for close-in dog fighting, though it is aerodynamically capable of it, the East Germans flew it as a point defense interceptor, like a MiG-21. They were not allowed to max perform the airplane, to explore its capabilities or their own capabilities. Sorties lasted about thirty minutes. The airplane was designed to scramble, jettison the tank, go supersonic, shoot its missiles, and go home.” >Other limitations were experienced when the centerline fuel tank was carried by the aircraft, such as the inability of the fighter to fly supersonic with the tank attached, an operational scenario that also limited the MiG-29 to four g’s when the tank had fuel remaining.
>Nevertheless despite these shortcomings the Fulcrum remained a formidable adversary to fight as told by McCoy. “The experience confirmed what I knew about the MiG-29’s ability to turn and to fight in the phone booth. It is an awesome airplane in this regime. The awe, though, fades away after that first turn in. The biggest adrenaline rush was getting to that point. After that, I started evaluating it as a weapon.” McCoy was echoed by by West who said that the glamour of the Fulcrum could distract the pilots when they saw the MiG-29 for the first time. “When Western pilots merge with a MiG for the first time, they tend to stare at it in awe, instead of flying their jets and fighting, they are enamored by this Soviet-built aircraft that they have spent their lives learning about. Pilots lose this sense of wonder after a first encounter. It is no longer a potential distraction. They are going to know what type of fight to fight and exactly where they may be in trouble. No one can learn these things by reading reports. Air-to-air fighting is a perishable skill. But the lessons we learned here won’t be forgotten. These pilots will know at the merge exactly what they are up against. They will have more confidence. And they know they are flying an aircraft that is superior in maneuverability, power, and avionics.” >West concludes: “When our pilots first arrived here, they almost tripped over themselves because their eyes were glued to the ramp and those MiG-29s. After a few days, though, those MiGs became just like any other aircraft. And that’s the way it should be.”
>But as McCoy explained even if the helmet mounted sight system proved to be a formidable threat, it was not an insurmountable one. “Some of their capabilities were more wicked than we originally thought, we had to respect the helmet-mounted sight, which made our decisions to anchor more difficult. In other words, when I got close in, I had to consider that helmet mounted sight. Every time I got near a Fulcrum’s nose, I was releasing flares to defeat an Archer coming off his rail.” An impression confirmed also by Lt. Col. Gary West, another Viper pilot and back then Commander of the 510th. “Before coming here, some of our pilots may have thought of the MiG’s helmet-mounted sight as an end-all to a BFM fight, We have found that it is not as lethal as we had expected. We encountered some positions-particularly in an across-the-circle shot or a high-low shot and in a slow-speed fight-where a Fulcrum pilot can look up forty-five degrees and take a shot while his nose is still off. That capability has changed some of the pilots’ ideas on how they should approach a MiG-29 in a neutral fight. Below 200 knots, the MiG-29 has incredible nose-pointing capability down to below 100 knots. The F-16, however, enjoys an advantage in the 200 knot-plus regime. At higher speeds, we can power above them to go to the vertical. And our turn rate is significantly better. By being patient and by keeping airspeed up around 325 knots, an F-16 can bring the MiG-29 to its nose. But the pilot must still be careful of the across-the-circle shot with that helmet-mounted display.”
https://i.imgur.com/DCz8iEd.jpg
>McCoy and other two USAF pilots had the chance to fly in German Fulcrums and they explained some of the several limitations of the MiG-29. “Their visibility is not that good, their disadvantage is a real advantage for us. F-16 pilots sit high in the cockpit. All the MiG-29 pilots who sat in our cockpit wanted to look around with the canopy closed. They were impressed that they could turn around and look at the tail and even see the engine can. Besides visibility, I expected better turning performance, the MiG-29 is not a continuous nine-g machine like the F-16.” >A claim confirmed also by Capt. Michael Raubbach, then Fulcrum pilot of the JG 73. “Our visibility is not as good as an F-16 or even an F-15. We can’t see directly behind us. We have to look out the side slightly to see behind us, which doesn’t allow us to maintain a visual contact and an optimum lift vector at the same time. This shortcoming can be a real problem, especially when flying against an aircraft as small as the F-16.”
>The lack of the continuous nine-g capability of the Fulcrum instead, was due to the nature of the specification that brought to life the MiG-29, as explained by Capt. Oliver Prunk, then JG 73 operations officer. “The aircraft was not built for close-in dog fighting, though it is aerodynamically capable of it, the East Germans flew it as a point defense interceptor, like a MiG-21. They were not allowed to max perform the airplane, to explore its capabilities or their own capabilities. Sorties lasted about thirty minutes. The airplane was designed to scramble, jettison the tank, go supersonic, shoot its missiles, and go home.” >Other limitations were experienced when the centerline fuel tank was carried by the aircraft, such as the inability of the fighter to fly supersonic with the tank attached, an operational scenario that also limited the MiG-29 to four g’s when the tank had fuel remaining.
https://i.imgur.com/gGH9d2F.jpg
>Nevertheless despite these shortcomings the Fulcrum remained a formidable adversary to fight as told by McCoy. “The experience confirmed what I knew about the MiG-29’s ability to turn and to fight in the phone booth. It is an awesome airplane in this regime. The awe, though, fades away after that first turn in. The biggest adrenaline rush was getting to that point. After that, I started evaluating it as a weapon.” McCoy was echoed by by West who said that the glamour of the Fulcrum could distract the pilots when they saw the MiG-29 for the first time. “When Western pilots merge with a MiG for the first time, they tend to stare at it in awe, instead of flying their jets and fighting, they are enamored by this Soviet-built aircraft that they have spent their lives learning about. Pilots lose this sense of wonder after a first encounter. It is no longer a potential distraction. They are going to know what type of fight to fight and exactly where they may be in trouble. No one can learn these things by reading reports. Air-to-air fighting is a perishable skill. But the lessons we learned here won’t be forgotten. These pilots will know at the merge exactly what they are up against. They will have more confidence. And they know they are flying an aircraft that is superior in maneuverability, power, and avionics.” >West concludes: “When our pilots first arrived here, they almost tripped over themselves because their eyes were glued to the ramp and those MiG-29s. After a few days, though, those MiGs became just like any other aircraft. And that’s the way it should be.”
Interesting but all completely irrelevant to Ukraine because the F16s are not going there to dogfight Russian fighters. They're going there to function as weapons platforms for all sorts of western munitions the Fulcrums can't carry. Including long-range anti-air missiles that will force Russian planes further away from the front lines so the Russian air force has that much more difficulty supporting the defensive lines. And improved SEAD.
Ukes get to Have Airforce again. Maybe they get some antiradiation missiles but just having planes doesn't mean they can sead. I hope we're going to help get them that capacity
No. Air superiority is hard. It takes years of training to build a proper air force. F-16's will give them a more sustainable air force where they can get weapons, spares and more airframes easier. It will help them take the fight to Russia. But air superiority is impossible. Doing so would require a massive campaign striking air bases in Russia to destroy the VKS.
Best case scenario is the skies become even more contested and Russians are unable or unwilling to risk their aircraft directly supporting their ground troops.
The fuck is going on in this thread, did /chug/ have an aneurysm?
So, the F-16 performance will be based on which Block it would be, there are many differences between them. I don't expect Indians and 4chan to know any of this.
F-16s will hardly be any different than MiGs in Ukies’ hands. I’ve been calling for giving them the F-22s which would actually them to penetrate AD. They were made with extreme expense to kill Russian stuff so might as well let them do that instead of just getting retired having done nothing at all.
so what the chugtards say is true?
Not even close. I think the Mig-29 is cute as a button, but it's a crap design. Here are the following advantages the F-16s will have over anything they fly against:
>SEAD capability
>YGBSM
(You Gotta Be Shitting Me: wild weasel runs)
>The ability to maneuver kill SAMs
>RWR that actually works, actually lets you fight back and use countermeasures, and even tells you where the missile is
>Engines that work reliably
>Radar and sensor systems that are actually halfway decent, just not the latest and greatest the US has
>Sensor-linking with the upgrade packages on those F-16s in particular
>Easy integration with US weapon systems with all features intact, save for those relying on the sniper pod
The PrepHoleope PrepHoleucPrepHole PrepHoleage will make them invincible, just like the Leopards
jesus christ even vatmoron memes are half assed and barely functional.
Still blows my mind that they spoonfed this shit to 4chan in 2016.
I chuckled
Russia forever owns the phrase cope cage. Thanks to PrepHole. by all means seethe harder vatmoron.
You are a fat tub of gay shit, but you gave me a great idea. Someone draw an illustration of an F-16 with explosive reactive armor on it.
>just like the Leopards
More like (HI)MARS. F-16 is a launching platform for western weapons by the first place.
>le scary face
HIMARS has the advantage of being able to pop up, fire off rockets based on western intel, and run like fuck, the F-16 will have to go high altitude to actually launch anything besides cruise missiles, in which case all it's really doing is padding their missile count once they run out of SCALPs
>run out of SCALPs
Taurus and JASSMs will also be on the menu eventually, so they'll have enough fireworks for another year at least
Didn't the F-16 pre-date the MiG-29 by decades?
F16
>First flight 1974
>Introduced 1978
MiG-29
>first flight 1977
>Introduced 1983
*i have no idea what 'introduced' exactly encompasses
so do take it with a cubic foot of salt
With the US I would assume "introduced" means IOC, so production representative vehicles being actually shipped out to units whereas "first flight" would likely be developmental tests of the prototype airframe after it has been verified on the ground that it's safe for flight.
No, but the F-16 has had substantial upgrades over the MiG-29
>but the F-16 has had substantial upgrades
Don't worry we will strip all of those out before we send them over. Can't risk compromising our decades old military technology.
What's this "we" business? America isn't sending the F-16's, Denmark and the Netherlands are. Literally not a single piece of tech America has sent to Ukraine has been "nerfed" in any capacity and the only thing that will are the Abrams by having their DU inserts removed. Without the DU inserts the turret is still going to be as strong as a 2A6's (and if you try to claim that any of the 2A6's in Ukraine, sans the one apparently hit directly by artillery which NO tank can survive, were taken out through the turret you're a retard.). All it's taken has been Cold War era surplus to not only stop Russia's advance in Ukraine but for Ukraine to also push Russia out of 90% of the territory they had originally occupied after the invasion.
>Literally not a single piece of tech America has sent to Ukraine has been "nerfed" in any capacity
m777s had their digital stuff removed
HIMARS was geofenced
I wasn't aware of that, my mistake then. Still, with all the equipment that's been sent, having only 2 pieces of tech have some sensitive stuff stripped is pretty good.
Didn't we also not include the longest range munitions for HIMARS as well?
That doesn't count as intentionally nerfing equipment we've given them though and is just us withholding the good shit. Believe me, I WISH we gave them ATCAM's among other more modern stuff, but I bet if Ukraine started to lose significant ground we might start sending better stuff. Thankfully it seems our tactics so far of only giving Ukraine Cold War stuff to bleed Russia dry have been working quite well. It's sad to say, but we don't WANT the war to end too quickly as the Ukrainians need to inflict as much damage and death upon the Russians as possible. If we gave Ukraine all the good stuff right now, Russia would pull out of Ukraine AND make excuses to her people that it took all of NATO to fight Russia off and they'd just rebuild over a few decades and try again. But bleeding Russia dry will mean there will be no rebuilding as the immense damage to their economy and population becomes irreparable.
>Didn't [Very specific question that you would only ask if you already knew the answer]?
Pure 4chantard garbage.
I hate this image, I love almost all 4th gen fighters and this image is no context garbage, let's break it down (ignoring Gen 3, because Gen 3 is a cluster fuck and soviet the MiG-21 wasn't a good fighter, it was an interceptor)
MiG-29
>Iraqi MiG-29s were MiG-29A (9.12B), these were downgraded even more than warsaw pact MiG-29s, and were sold to Iraq with just R-60MKs, they got absolutely wiped in the Gulf war because of course they would, Imagine having to fight aircraft with long range FOX-1s when you're stuck with shit tier short range FOX-2s
>2 Syrian MiG-29s shot down of the same type by IAF F-15Cs, same shit
>Serb MiG-29Bs shot down during the kosovo war, better aircraft, but at the time still very outdated, no FOX-3s against NATO aircraft which is a horrible situation
>Eritrean MiG-29s were shot down by Russian Mercs in Su-27s, unknown variants, but almost definitely pilot skill issues (fucking Eritrea lmao)
MiG-25
>actually performed pretty decently in the Iran Iraq war, it's kill count is actually wrong both here and from what migflug lists, it had 10 kills in the Iran-iraq war including an F-14, before losing their first MiG-25 to an Iraninan F-14
>it also shot down a F-18 during the gulf war and a Reaper during the NFZ (the reaper actually attempted to engage the MiG with an ATAS but lost)
>2 were apparently downed from accidently border violations into Iran but this is hard to source, 2 were lost by Syria, 1, in the iran-iraq war, 1 in the NFZ and 2 in the gulf war
Su-27
>not listed here because it has a good K/D lol
and now western aircraft
F-14
>almost all kills achieved by Iran shooting down Iraqi garbage 3rd gens, the rest gotten by the USA doing the same to libya and iraq
F-15
>almost all kills gotten by Israel shooting down mostly 3rd gen garbage and some export model 4th gens, the rest gotten by the USA and saudi arabia doing the same.
F-16
See above!
Shooting down 3rd gen aircraft is seal clubbing, the differences aren't even funny
>No it doesn't count because it was too one sided! Okay???
Are you willing to have an actual discussion or are you just going to shitpost at me? If we're talking about the actual specifications of the aircraft why would we ever use downgraded garbage that is no better than the gen 3 shit it replaced as a standard against the best aircraft that NATO was fielding?
I'm calling out your retarded argument that it doesn't count because it was unfair to the other side. It doesn't matter. Statistics don't take into account fairness, and you can cope about how reality doesn't align to your perception of it, or accept that American built air superiority is unparalleled.
Then by that metric statics' are irrelevant as peer aircraft of the time could just as easily wipe the floor with Gen 3 and downgraded gen 4 aircraft. What a fucking ridiculous argument to make.
>but not in russian hands
Poorly maintaining Ukrainian MiG engines is Russias fault? Why would they maintain F-16 engines any better?
>Doesn't mention electronics, avionics, or sensor equipment at all
Because I responded to what was said? I said yeah it has Link-16 which is a plus over their old MiG-29s, and yes F-16 MLUs have better avionics, I wouldn't argue against that, I only argued that the MiG-29 could maneuver kill SAMs and had fine engines, I didn't mention any of those because they weren't brought up. I swear literally everyone on this fucking board just wants to condescend actually having a discussion is fucking impossible.
How the fuck is your reading comprehension this bad? This thread is about how the F-16 will (or won't) make a difference against Russia. Russian maintenance, repairs, and design compromises are dogshit garbage tier.
>Mig-29 can maneuver kill SAMs
It's theoretically capable in that it can maneuver to notch and can dive, but only if it can see and display the threat. The lesser quantity and quality of information available to the Mig pilot is a tremendous liability, comparatively speaking, and if the Mig could pull of wild weasel shenanigans, Russia would have been doing so. I suppose it's possible this is a pilot or doctrinal issue, but then, we've seen some pretty desperate ass-pulls in other parts of the Russian military.
>Just wants to condescend
>Posted "wrong and retarded on multiple counts"
Do you understand what kind of person you are?
> Russian maintenance, repairs, and design compromises are dogshit garbage tier.
I can agree on tanks, ships, ect but not on aircraft
>It's theoretically capable in that it can maneuver to notch and can dive, but only if it can see and display the threat. The lesser quantity and quality of information available to the Mig pilot is a tremendous liability, comparatively speaking, and if the Mig could pull of wild weasel shenanigans, Russia would have been doing so. I suppose it's possible this is a pilot or doctrinal issue, but then, we've seen some pretty desperate ass-pulls in other parts of the Russian military.
you said "the ability to maneuver kill SAMs" I said "the MiG-29 can already maneuver kill SAMs" you shifted the goal posts to avionics, I replied to literally the only thing you said about defeating SAMs, if you'd only mentioned better avionics and sensors and not mentioned maneuver killing I wouldn't have brought it up at all
>Do you understand what kind of person you are?
Yes, you brought up 3 wrong and retarded points being a slightly improved RWR, maneuver killing SAMs which they can already do, and engines, Russian engines are completely fine, and I have no idea what their sub par maintenance has to do with Ukrainians getting F-16s, if it's the MiG-29s of the UkrAF having poor engines thats their fault for not maintaining them and I have no idea how F-16s would be better.
That's addressed in the "muh excuses" part of the meme
>context is excuses
How well do you think an F-15 with only AIM-9Bs would perform against a SU-30 with R-77s?
> we dindu choose the gooder weapons sad.jpg
Superior version
Speaking of F4s, didn't the nips and maybe the Greeks or Israelis upgrade the shit out of theirs? Surely there have to be a few of those laying around somewhere we could send.
Has to be Greece, they have 34. Israel and Japan have none.
>4chan said
I trust my magic 8 ball more than the special ed classroom of PrepHole
We get it, you're scared of 4chan
>scared
when I see someone in a motorized wheelchair trying to cross the street and nobody will press the button for them, I feel pity.
>Says the pink haired moron hiding out on his blue board where he can cry to chud mods
>trannies
>garden gnomes
>women
>leftists
>globalhomo
Are there any other boogeyman to get off your chest?
The only people who are scared of 4chan are... I wanted to give a witty remark, but actually no one is.
See
You forgot literal gay shit you found on telegram or Twitter
post skin untouchable
You really need to ask your cultist arbiters to give you a new script
>benchod gets triggered and uploads a google photo
brown
>Triggered blue haired transvestites
>he thinks a storage path proves anything
I thought indians had a way with technology? Do they not know you can transfer data between phone folders in the same way as a computer?
He's a Russian Diaspora that lives in the US.
He also shills for the Bradley for DnC reasons, despite at the same time shilling against the evil wect
>Only Russians hate liberals
Pffft hahahahahahahaha
>strawman
Your IQ is somewhere in the room temperature Celsius range I assume.
How is it a strawman dumb fuck? It's right off the image itself
The image never implies that only Russians hate liberals, moron.
>that filename in a non-american date format from may
>no timestamp
>it's an image copy
Oh you're definitely not white.
Pretending people are scared of you just makes you look like a child, James Gomez Rahjput the 3rd
>haha you're just scared of me
https://www.ekathimerini.com/news/1218190/greece-to-train-ukrainian-f-16-pilots-zelenskyy-says/
Greece will train Ukrainian pilots
>will ukies get air superiority?
In about a year, yes. They're not arriving until mid/late 2024 I believe.
6 weeks is the bet. There's alot of poles who can fly them and hate Russians who would become Ukrainian to make alot of money. 6 weeks, I think 8.
Again no those F-16 Block 20 MLU will be shot down like any other cold war era fighter that's been used most likely by the Mig-31 running sweeps of the border
If they were the actually decent Block 50 then sure they're su-30 equivalent but no the block 20 is at best an equivalent to the original Mig-29 9.13 it was a direct competitor to and inferior to the Su-27
If you're gonna hype up some new wunderwaffe do some research it makes everyone on PrepHole look like fucking retards if you don't
>bro there's gonna be ace combat dogfighting and the slavshit will win!!!
Anon, don't suggest absurd things in an attempt to dispel other absurdities. The real threat to both sides is the SAM saturation.
acting like this isn't the tip of the iceberg
What else are they gonna send before it turns into depleting your own airforce the tphoons are trash
Rafale will never be sent
Gripen maybe but that fucker is food for yak-9s
F-15 literally never the US would never give it away
The best ukraine will ever get is F/A-18s probably the shitty early ones with a non functioning IRST and bad radar set and it's rusted worn out airframe that problem should be in a museum or boneyard by now
>F-15 literally never the US would never give it away
Not so much that they won't want to give it up, but it's the US's pride and joy due to over 100 AA victories with zero losses. They would never risk losing that perfect record by giving it to someone with subpar support.
They just ditched the C models and dumped them on NG units if not just sending the problem children to the Boneyard. Even the shittiest F-15 in service over the last 10 years kicks the dick off the best Russian aircraft, but their massive AA network could force them into defensive maneuvers that could cost them a fight. The US isn't taking that chance.
Australia was considering sending f-18
>A Block 20 with late-2000's upgrades is equivalent to a mid-80's Block 20 with no upgrades.
What?
Anon it'll take months to prepare the infrastructure and train the tech guys.
No, it only has 120Cs because they're block-15/20 MLUs and worse radars than Su-35/Su-30s, all this will do is prevent Russia from using anything older than Su-27SM2s, which I doubt they were doing in the first place, as well as escorting attack aircraft some of the time. They wont fair any better against SAMs either really, they're not going to be able to operate at high altitude at all.
You are wrong and retarded on multiple counts
>MiG-29 can maneuver SAMs just fine
>RWR is visually harder to read, but doesn't have 6-8 seconds of delay like F-16 RWR, it also has a visual indicator of how far the missile actually is
>What the fuck do you even mean? MiG engines are fine
>sure it has link-16
>sure
One vital thing its missing is a block-50/52 radar, it's still stuck with the old radar which is horrible for fighting Su-35/Su-30
Just because the old soviet RWR doesn't have a screen doesn't mean it's bad, it's actually very intuitive if you're trained to read it.
>SPO-15 is equal or better than AN/ALR-56M
lol, lmao
It has no latency, tells you where the missile is and how far away it is, it's inferior to screen based RWR because they provide you more information, just because you're too fucking stupid to read it in DCS doesn't mean it's bad. They moved away from it because screen based RWR is more information dense and easier to read at a glance. I said it's not bad not equal or better than AN/ALR-56M
so we agree
the F-16 has a way better RWR
No, it's not way better, it's better but it's not a massive difference like people make it out to be.
>20s readiness time
>+/-15° vertical accuracy
>+/-10° horizontal accuracy
120-C5s are enough to take out these Rus rabble
Use them all up they are going for 75% off anyway
No anon, they're not, 120Cs are outranged by R-37s and R-77ms which are the main missiles being used by RuAF right now, all BVR engagements with F-16s will almost definitely be done under IADS coverage as well.
>A handful
at least 329 VKS aircraft outrange the F-16AM MLUs radar, as well as being able to carry either or both R-37M and R-77M, which outrange the 120Cs that Ukraine might receive. Russia has air superiority right now, which is why they can drop a lot more FAB glide bombs than ukraine can, they're essentially reduced to doing suicide runs with Su-25s at treeline level, or throwing SS/SCALPs with Su-24s. Air superiority does not mean Air supremacy, this is a distinction that is often forgot.
R-77s and R-37s exist in low numbers, evidenced by the fact that Russian combat aircraft are commonly sighted with R-27s. Motor range advantage is irrelevant when Russian radars can't take advantage of it, MiG-31 has a powerful PESA but that's pretty much it for modern Russian radars
Would you like to provide a source for that? We've seen videos and confirmation of R-77 and R-37 usage, they've been in production for a while now and are also commonly sighted. Russia has actually quite liberally volleyed R-37s in ukraine, and R-77-1s have been in major production for a long time. Seeing R-27s in use is like seeing 3BM42 in use and saying "haha look 3BM59/60 isn't being used!!"
As it is, ukies only have R-27s at best meaning even a handful of planes armes with active AAMs can deny significant airspace. With AMRAAMs Russians will lose this advantage and can't risk the airframes anymore.
And saying Svinets isn't used is mostly true because the old garbage they are fielding can't equip it.
Svinets is fielded in T-72B3s, T-80BVMs and T-90s, T-72B3s are still common place, but even they were using 3BM42 until western tank deliveries were announced.
>Russians will lose this advantage
They'll just field more R-77 and R-37 aircraft, R-27s couldnt deny any airspace because they were drastically out ranged, sure it'll marginally close the gap, but all it requires is fielding the better missiles they already have.
If they had the R-77s to field in large numbers they'd have been using them already, and ukraine wouldn't still have a contested airspace
They literally have been using them anon, they've been using R-37s more because of range advantages
>wouldn't still have a contested airspace
The contested airspace comes from Ukrainian air defence, but russia still has air superiority, which is why they can drop glide bombs more than ukranians can
>Mig engines are fine
They could be, potentially, but not in Russian hands.
>Doesn't mention electronics, avionics, or sensor equipment at all
Stop thinking you're an expert because you made a paper stat spreadsheet.
No but will probably managed full denial.
At best which is still alot it will act as a flying SEAD, Air Defense, Long rang artillery missile wagon with some AWACS ability.
Stratgically useful but dont expect the front line to see it doing CAS anytime soon.
This. Still Russians currently have air superiority over Ukies so leveling that is another step necessary for full liberation. Considering what we saw at Snek island I beleive they will be put to good use.
>soon
from what ive read they're not gonna be active over Ukraine for quite some time
>ukies not being all that savvy on sending flight capable personnel when they could be trained on comblock stuff
>language barriers with the ones they want to send
>F-16 training not being streamlined to 'we need pilots asap' requirements
best of luck to them, truly, but i wouldn't be surprised if the whole F-16s for Ukraine thing is a 'we a re 100% with you' kind of thing with future NATO integration/membership in mind
the F16s the Dutch/Danes have donated are very much in active service or in deep reserves, and thus not immediately deployable
its big news this week, perhaps the enxt one too, but we'll have to sit and wait for quite some time before our donation will be noticeable on/over the battlefiedl
I agree that we won't see them until 2024 but
>language barriers
They are pilots. Fighter pilots
Not tank drivers. Or soldiers.
All of them speak English and half of them probably are engineers or some shit.
>F-16 MLU
>air superiority
Maybe against mig-21 but everything russia and even ukraine fields is objectively better than those piles of shit the MLU were never designed to fly this long their airframes are nearing the point of it might actually kill the pilot if its flown too aggressively besides they'll only receive Aim-120A/B which are inferior to the sparrows they superceded that's an objective fact and it's a reason why the Aim-120 program nearly failed due to that scandal I'm also not gonna mention the shitty radar it's not even PESA just a 60s era PD
Incredible you'd post this and be wrong about virtually everything.
Name one thing I was wrong about
>bro there's gonna be ace combat dogfighting and the slavshit will win!!!
I never mention dogfighting and again the 66 is a bad radar set compared to everything else being used its a mid life PD set
Western F-16s are actually well maintained and have unlimited spare parts available. This is the whole reason they're sending them. The original plan was sending more migs, however they found out those pieces of shit had orders of magnitude less time until failure than advertised, and basically were falling apart immediately.
There are also no soviet planes left in west.
WHEN MOTHERFUCKERS WHEN?
The only reason Ukraine wants F-16's isn't for fighting Russian jets. They don't even fly over anymore Ukraine anyways. It's because they can wield more NATO toys. Now they have to fuck with their MIGs to carry NATO stuff and sometimes it doesn't even work. Like with the HARM. It didn't work. The only succes story is StormShadow.
doubt it
very difficult operating environment
and the russians seldom operate over ukraine for long anyway
maybe they can pick off some helicopters idk
>F16 kino will soon be unleased
Sooner began is sooner done, but it will still be 2025 by the time the bulk of the aircraft are in country, piloted and ready to fight
>will ukies get air superiority?
Not over the whole front line, 50-odd Block 50/52 equivalent F-16s wont offer enough additional SEAD/DEAD to overcome the Russian air defenses, and they offer basically nothing the current air fleet doesn't to deal with the R-37 threat.
What this will do is make it absolutely impossible for the Russians to attrition the Ukrainian air force to the point where the VKS could hope to take air superiority, and will offer a significantly superior platform for western air launched munitions. This might allow a longer reach over the Black Sea hunting ships, or even a concentrated enough attack with a mix of western PGMs to open up a localized hole in Russian air defenses to support an offensive push.
>Not over the whole front line, 50-odd Block 50/52 equivalent F-16s
They're getting block 20/MLU
>They're getting block 20/MLU
That package has the avionics and weapons integration of a Block 50/52, along with most of the extras like having every airframe wired for recon/targeting pods out of the box.
Denmark only operates F-16 MLU
and the Netherlands only operates F-16 MLU both are upgraded to block 20 standard from original block 10/15
Do you think Block 20 MLU means they were earlier models upgraded to Block 20 standards or something?
Do you have any proofs to back up that claim?
> This might allow a longer reach over the Black Sea hunting ships
>Ukrainian F-16’s launching Ace Combat-tier raids on the Black Sea Fleet while they’re in port
What's funny is Russia is basically Belka right now except with no wunderwaffe.
They have them they just all sucked.
Kinzal was supposed to be thier NATO killer taking out airbases and hubs ignoring defenses.
Atleast that was how they were advertised.
>3025
They will be flying missions this year no later than November.
Ukrainians only really have 6 planes at the moment flying 6 sorties a day. That's insane. They need the planes or more planes. F 16s actually work btw.
Lets be clear.
The F16 will not singlehandedly clear the sky or solo the russian air force.
The f16 WILL allow Ukraine to better integrate western weapons like HARM and JDAMs, and will allow Ukraine better sustainability with its airforce.
this has to be a paid talking point, as if lack of capable SEAD platforms isn't critical, and as if air defense wasn't the determining factor of air superiority in this context of two sub-par air forces.
That's been my thinking so far on this too. Moderate improvement in capability, but likely nothing game changing. MiG-31s still outrange them on paper as well.
>as if lack of capable SEAD platforms isn't critical, and as if air defense wasn't the determining factor of air superiority in this context of two sub-par air forces.
You're not wrong, but I don't think these older F-16s will provide enough of a boost in effectiveness over Ukraine's current bootleg Wild Weasel tactics.
That being said, it would be fucking hilarious if this is all it takes for Ukraine to gain air superiority.
The important part isn't the jet. Nor is it the 20 or so Challengers or whatever. It's the fact that little by little the Ukrainians are getting Western gear, familiarizing themselves with it, and 3-4 years from now the Ukrainians will be fully integrated into Western kit, and the 70s-90s surplus will practically never end once they are on the F16 train at the same time that everyone else is switching to the F35.
>3-4 years from now
3 to 4 years from now ukraine and russia wont even have fighting age males anymore.
Does anyone actually call shit getting sent to Ukraine "Game changers" or "Wunderwaffes" I always assumed it was either normies or vatniks
Journalist scum.
I've literally met people IRL who range from average retard who only watches the news to die hard NAFO fag and they do call shit like the F-16 wunderwaffe but it might just be a euro thing
Not even plebbitors talk like that. It's just journalists and their stupid clickbait articles for boomers.
>You won't believe what the new Ukrainian fighter plane can do. Worst putins nightmare is arriving!
the f-16 is the only operational aircraft the west can afford to get rid of as the f-35 becomes operational. it isn't a gamechanger but the best we can do
maybe some f/a-18s too but why complicate things
If the variants Ukraine is receiving has AESA radars, then the Russian air force will have way less options for any kind of interception. Obviously jet on jet encounters aren't going to be too common regardless of what happens. But AESA will ensure that basically no Russian jet has good chances going straight on, so the only thing that has a chance to take out their F-16s would be ground based systems.
>F16 kino will soon be unleased
You think that sometime in 2024 is soon?
>F16 buzzword will soon be unleased
Literal fucking thirdworlder holy shit.
better than 90% of russias current planes
Why are people trying to compare the F16 to migs and pretending like hhey are going to be used to dogfight Russian aircraft? These planes are going to be used the same as Ukraine's' current air power. Fly in low under radar, hit a ground target, then get back home before any response can be made.
In some interview ukie offical said that f 16 will be mosty used as AA, intercepting saheds and other cruise missles.
Wouldn't supplying more surface to air be more effective than supplying aircraft that need constant upkeep and repair by well trained ground crews and extensive pilot training?
I don't know, that is what I heard. Migs 29 also mostly were being used to chase and shoot down saheds
>F16 kino will soon be unleased
Yup, only takes a week or two to train a couple pilots. They should be able to mop up the Russian army in a few days, because F16s are that good.
well, the F-16 has way better RWR and radar than the MiG-29, so that’s definitely an improvement
> Ace Combat.jpg
You can double that payload with Peregrines with 0 loss in capability.
F-16's will shut down Ukrainian airspace for Russians with no contest. Frontline remains an aerial no-mans-land but Ukraine proper will have ukie air superiority. Russians only have a handful of fighters that can go toe-to-toe with '16s and they are not going to attack inside ukrainian AD bubble.
Literally no fucking different than it is now.
Russian aircraft are not entering Ukraine proper, they are shooting from the maximum stand off distances back in Russian territory with glide bombs or using shitty drones.
The F16s will not be a threat greater than the Ukrainian air defense systems already pose.
The western air defense provided is a solid shield defending the airspace and before that the soviet air defense was doing a good enough job too.
>The western air defense provided is a solid shield defending the airspace
Bro which fucking dimension are you in most of those systems are scrapmetal by now. Whens the last time you heard about ukr patriots? Thats right, months ago because they got wiped out by kinzhals. Ukr air force doesnt exist, ukr AD doesnt exist, Russia reigns supreme in the sky over Ukraine.
For fucks sake we just spent the entire summer watching ka-52s cheekily turning entire columns of western equipment to junk without UA AD even showing up
Its over man, the memes were always just memes
>most of those systems are scrapmetal by now
may we see it?
If there was no air defense they would have air superiority and be carpet bombing by now.
Why are Russian aircraft respecting the air space?
Yes some air defense assets were lost but there's so fucking many of them, it's like a minefield, it only takes a few to contest the skies.
That's didn't happen
My polish detector is going off.
I'm American but okay you tried. What blew up in Russia. Chug shills are out.
You write at a 3rd grade level.
How about you show us the destroyed patriots then?
>months ago because they got wiped out by kinzhals
There was one close buffet that needed a day or two to fix, and they seem perfectly capable of shooting down your favorite kinjals, which are a glorified high-altitude launched cruise missile.
>F-16 kino will soon be unl-ACK!
>he can only post the same photo from months ago
yikes.
It hurts the PrepHoleoper as much as ever
>the main goal was to hurt our feelings, not to discuss weapons
That's interesting. Why would a shill focus on feelings rather than on dedication of the board? Apparently vatniks realize they are incompetent, so any attempt to spread propaganda in a discussion is doomed.
Congratulations, PrepHole, we buck-broke them just by existing.
Why would it hurt? Vehicles are lost in war. It seems like Vatniks think that Ukraine losing ~30 Bradley's and a handful of Leopards is somehow demoralizing. Why would you think that? Is it because YOU had this idea of Western equipment being invincible? Because we certainly never thought our vehicles were invincible. And now that some are destroyed you feel like that shows how weak they are? Do we need to bring out the statistics of all the Russian vehicles lost? Ukraine could lose 100 Bradley's for all we care; we'll just give them 200 more.
You might be under the mistaken impression that the West will cut off aid to Ukraine for some unclear reason. We won't. Our citizens are LOVING seeing Russians die in a war that they started. And Putin's pride has turned into a golden opportunity for the West to bleed Russia dry.
Your next statement will probably be, "Yeah u mad lul *~~))" in which case I will pre-emptively make my response to that here: "I accept your concession"
Paid shills.
You are retarded.
Looking at MLU compared to block 70 and upwards. It has both full missile and bomb capability, as well as Link16 network. It only misses the Center Pedestal Display of Block 70/72.
Seems way better than any Mig-29 that I can find, it will depend what armament it receives.
Pajeets will now proceed to seethe and spam NAFO chud pics.
>Russia wasn't able to repeat this after months of combat.
>All vehicles recovered
Feels good.
3 of the vehicles in that image are operational and moving. 4 got recovered. 2 lost.
Does this in it's wording mean it will be easier for Australia to donate it's FA/18's?
'''when the conditions for such a transfer are met''
2 more weeks
I hope they’ll lead to more effective use of the bombs and missiles that were designed for NATO planes but Ukraine currently used with soviet planes.
Those bombs can be pretty smart so it’s probably a lot more effective when integrated with a NATO plane.
Air superiority is unlikely but it will lead to more bombs being delivered to their Z recipient.
Russian AD will probably limit what the f16 can do to the kind of stuff use the ukranian airforce currently does. I doubt they trained ukranian wild weasels
Will these be flown by the Ghost of Ukraine too?
>rent free
>That time we all believed decade old video game footage was real life is in your head rent free
Okay sure. lol
>we
only ziggers believed ghost of anything. brave
>Rent free except it never happened!!!
You fuckin gays use THE EXACT SAME platforms ghost of Ukraine shit was shared all over. Your life's a joke lol
that's nice buddy, we'll get you back to where you belong
>Get off my blue board safe space reeee!
You're posting in a Twitter screen cap thread you ultra retarded gorilla moron
>no don't make fun of me!
I bet you live in a third world shithole.
Imagine LARPING so hard you start coming up with shit like this. It's truly a good thing the suicide rate is so high among the LGBT
What the actual fuck are you sperging about now you dumb, supremely retarded moronstain?
>We all
Speak for yourself, motherfucker
Ukies can't even operate the ground vehicles right, they'll crash these F16s in a day
How did you like the communication with 4chan tourist?
Ching chong bing bong?
>Block 20MLU
So these are older airframes than the Ukraine's own Soviet Su-27s. And, at best, it'll be several dozens of them. And it will take years of training/integrating before they can actually do combat missions.
I mean, of course if this actually ends up happening (before the Ukraine collapses or surrenders, that is) then the delivery of these planes would be very good thing. All the western arms sent to the Ukraine provide essential training to Russians, who need to learn how to fight against these systems in a future war against NATO proper. That means Russian AD operators and fighter pilots will all get experience on dealing with enemy's most commonly used aircraft, including registering their radar signatures. It’s better to go up against them now, in ukrainian hands and low numbers, rather than experiencing them for the first time in a full-fledged war against NATO where hundreds/thousands of them are deployed at the same time in a far more uncontrollable setting.
>will ukies get air superiority?
No. Russia has thousands of fighters and bombers, Ukraine will get around 100 F-16s, that's like 1/50s of Russian pre-war aircraft units.
Russia has thousands of fighters and bombers
I distinctly remember them saying the same thing about tanks.
This.
If they had thousands, this is what the opening day would have looked like.
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/f-16-vs-mig-29-when-the-mighty-viper-dogfighted-with-the-fulcrum-for-the-first-time/
>The first western fighter unit that had the chance to face the Fulcrum in mock air combats has been the 510th Fighter Squadron (FS) “Buzzards” belonging to the 31st Fighter Wing (FW) from Aviano Air Base in northern Italy, which flew against LuftwaffeJagdgeschwader 73 (JG 73)MiG-29s in May 1995 during a German Fulcrum deployment to Decimomannu Air Base, on the southern tip of Sardinia.
>As told by Capt. Mike McCoy one of the 510th FS F-16 pilots that flew against JG 73 MiG-29s, the most impressive aspect of the Fulcrum’s performance for the American pilots was its low-speed maneuverability combined with its helmet mounted sight system. “In a low-speed fight, fighting the Fulcrum is similar to fighting an F-18 Hornet, but the Fulcrum has a thrust advantage over the Hornet. An F-18 can really crank its nose around if you get into a slow-speed fight, but it has to lose altitude to regain the energy, which allows us to get on top of them. The MiG has about the same nose authority at slow speeds, but it can regain energy much faster. Plus the MiG pilots have that forty five-degree cone in front of them into which they can fire an Archer and eat you up.”
>But as McCoy explained even if the helmet mounted sight system proved to be a formidable threat, it was not an insurmountable one. “Some of their capabilities were more wicked than we originally thought, we had to respect the helmet-mounted sight, which made our decisions to anchor more difficult. In other words, when I got close in, I had to consider that helmet mounted sight. Every time I got near a Fulcrum’s nose, I was releasing flares to defeat an Archer coming off his rail.” An impression confirmed also by Lt. Col. Gary West, another Viper pilot and back then Commander of the 510th. “Before coming here, some of our pilots may have thought of the MiG’s helmet-mounted sight as an end-all to a BFM fight, We have found that it is not as lethal as we had expected. We encountered some positions-particularly in an across-the-circle shot or a high-low shot and in a slow-speed fight-where a Fulcrum pilot can look up forty-five degrees and take a shot while his nose is still off. That capability has changed some of the pilots’ ideas on how they should approach a MiG-29 in a neutral fight. Below 200 knots, the MiG-29 has incredible nose-pointing capability down to below 100 knots. The F-16, however, enjoys an advantage in the 200 knot-plus regime. At higher speeds, we can power above them to go to the vertical. And our turn rate is significantly better. By being patient and by keeping airspeed up around 325 knots, an F-16 can bring the MiG-29 to its nose. But the pilot must still be careful of the across-the-circle shot with that helmet-mounted display.”
>McCoy and other two USAF pilots had the chance to fly in German Fulcrums and they explained some of the several limitations of the MiG-29. “Their visibility is not that good, their disadvantage is a real advantage for us. F-16 pilots sit high in the cockpit. All the MiG-29 pilots who sat in our cockpit wanted to look around with the canopy closed. They were impressed that they could turn around and look at the tail and even see the engine can. Besides visibility, I expected better turning performance, the MiG-29 is not a continuous nine-g machine like the F-16.”
>A claim confirmed also by Capt. Michael Raubbach, then Fulcrum pilot of the JG 73. “Our visibility is not as good as an F-16 or even an F-15. We can’t see directly behind us. We have to look out the side slightly to see behind us, which doesn’t allow us to maintain a visual contact and an optimum lift vector at the same time. This shortcoming can be a real problem, especially when flying against an aircraft as small as the F-16.”
>The lack of the continuous nine-g capability of the Fulcrum instead, was due to the nature of the specification that brought to life the MiG-29, as explained by Capt. Oliver Prunk, then JG 73 operations officer. “The aircraft was not built for close-in dog fighting, though it is aerodynamically capable of it, the East Germans flew it as a point defense interceptor, like a MiG-21. They were not allowed to max perform the airplane, to explore its capabilities or their own capabilities. Sorties lasted about thirty minutes. The airplane was designed to scramble, jettison the tank, go supersonic, shoot its missiles, and go home.”
>Other limitations were experienced when the centerline fuel tank was carried by the aircraft, such as the inability of the fighter to fly supersonic with the tank attached, an operational scenario that also limited the MiG-29 to four g’s when the tank had fuel remaining.
>Nevertheless despite these shortcomings the Fulcrum remained a formidable adversary to fight as told by McCoy. “The experience confirmed what I knew about the MiG-29’s ability to turn and to fight in the phone booth. It is an awesome airplane in this regime. The awe, though, fades away after that first turn in. The biggest adrenaline rush was getting to that point. After that, I started evaluating it as a weapon.” McCoy was echoed by by West who said that the glamour of the Fulcrum could distract the pilots when they saw the MiG-29 for the first time. “When Western pilots merge with a MiG for the first time, they tend to stare at it in awe, instead of flying their jets and fighting, they are enamored by this Soviet-built aircraft that they have spent their lives learning about. Pilots lose this sense of wonder after a first encounter. It is no longer a potential distraction. They are going to know what type of fight to fight and exactly where they may be in trouble. No one can learn these things by reading reports. Air-to-air fighting is a perishable skill. But the lessons we learned here won’t be forgotten. These pilots will know at the merge exactly what they are up against. They will have more confidence. And they know they are flying an aircraft that is superior in maneuverability, power, and avionics.”
>West concludes: “When our pilots first arrived here, they almost tripped over themselves because their eyes were glued to the ramp and those MiG-29s. After a few days, though, those MiGs became just like any other aircraft. And that’s the way it should be.”
Interesting but all completely irrelevant to Ukraine because the F16s are not going there to dogfight Russian fighters. They're going there to function as weapons platforms for all sorts of western munitions the Fulcrums can't carry. Including long-range anti-air missiles that will force Russian planes further away from the front lines so the Russian air force has that much more difficulty supporting the defensive lines. And improved SEAD.
Ukes get to Have Airforce again. Maybe they get some antiradiation missiles but just having planes doesn't mean they can sead. I hope we're going to help get them that capacity
What is even the point? Those planes wont last a week against Mig-31s carrying R-37.
You know, just like their last airforce
>will ukies get air superiority?
No. Air superiority is hard. It takes years of training to build a proper air force. F-16's will give them a more sustainable air force where they can get weapons, spares and more airframes easier. It will help them take the fight to Russia. But air superiority is impossible. Doing so would require a massive campaign striking air bases in Russia to destroy the VKS.
Best case scenario is the skies become even more contested and Russians are unable or unwilling to risk their aircraft directly supporting their ground troops.
F-16's can be shot down, just like any other jet. They aren't special.
The fuck is going on in this thread, did /chug/ have an aneurysm?
So, the F-16 performance will be based on which Block it would be, there are many differences between them. I don't expect Indians and 4chan to know any of this.
Anyone know which block the F-16s will be?
Shouldn't matter too much as eurofag f-16s were continuously upgraded over their time in service
The Belgian examples should be MLU's..
only parity, unless we see 350+ airframes pledged and delivered in short timeframe