Genuine question:. How do F16s help Ukraine when both sides are landlocked due to S300 and S400 anti air cover?

Genuine question:
How do F16’s help Ukraine when both sides are landlocked due to S300 and S400 anti air cover?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They don't really which is why they're hesitant to give them some. I think giving Ukraine longer range HIMARS and more tanks would be a lot better then F16s

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Not a Wing nut, but the way it's been explained to me:
    SAMs contest a set area, you have to deploy it, rotate it and can't ever cover everything. You have to pick what you protect and hope the enemy doesn't guess you are not elsewhere.
    For the purpouses of Air Superiority you are basically static.

    An airframe lets you move (super) rapidly between hotspots due to early warning systems, allowing you to cover a drastically wider area.

    On the offensive side, F16s can run a hell of a lot more missions thatn anything UAF is flying rn. They basically can never stand up to the enemy in a one on one fight (unless its a ground attack craft).

    >>But they have their owne territory covered by SAMs!
    Which you can suppress with SEAD missions. You can't hovewer suppres enemy AirSuper fighters.

    That's my 2cents

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      This is more or less my understanding as well. The mere presence of F-16s with HARMs is enough to threaten enemy SAMs and force them to keep their radars off. MANPADs will be unaffected by this, but with the SAMs coverage being diminished the F-16s won't be forced to stay on the deck and will be less vulnerable. This leaves enemy fighters as the primary threat, and they are already unable to operate effectively in Ukrainian airspace, being forced to hurl R-37s from inside Russia, which will be easier to detect and evade when you have proper RWR and more open sky.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I don't want to get bogged down in a "Western tech = awesomesauce; Soviet tech = LE BAD!" but a modern-rish F-16 Block is just superior to a MiG-29 with their domestic upgrades.
    Soviet fighters were built for ground control intercept. The pilot is there to push buttons, fly the aircraft where told to, and employ weapons. So, when you have enemy AWACS, MiG-31s and long range missiles to worry about while dodging SAMs, you're screwed. And they don't have Fox-3 missiles.
    On the other hand, Western fighters are designed for situational awareness. Getting F-16s would mean better RWR, datalink with NATO AWACS, true HARM integration, neat tricks like air to ground radar with moving target track, the AIM-120 with true fire and forget capability, and most significantly a reliable source of weapons and spare parts.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah this, I'm not sure if Ukraine has /any/ real time, airborne, link 16 capable radar location systems atm. They have whatever information they get (potentially time delayed) from NATO E-3s and USAF aircraft. They have satellite ELINT/MASINT/IMINT/SAR from allies. Their ground signals intercept stations might be able to detect and locate an enemy SAM radar or something. A HIMARS battery might then be able to do something with that.

      But they don't to my knowledge have a platform that can locate something from the air in real time, transmit that location to a buddy aircraft, then immediately target it with a missile. F-16 with HARMs and HTS can do that, all with the same platform, all without needing specialty aircraft or specialty loadouts.

      It could potentially shorten the kill chain from 5-10 minutes (by which time a S-300 radar can displace) to 1-2 minutes. That might not lead to all Russian SAM systems being destroyed, but it will prevent Russian SAMs from being static for any period of time.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Oh forgot. Depending on how the MiG-29s have their HARMs integrated, an F-16 pilot with HTS might be able to call out the location and type of radar over the radio for the MiG-29 pilot to plug into his HARMs. This is something that is automatic on F-16s thanks to their datalink but even then, you can still fire at a waypoint if you have it preprogrammed or can be bothered to type the location in manually.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Is Delta BCS strictly land based or something?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Not familiar with what that is, care to fill me in?

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    F-16s have NATO datalink so it can actually work properly with AWACS and more.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    AA is not and has not been stable during this conflict. You will notice the more capability and variety of capability Ukraine has got, the more they play around with attrition. It hasn't just been about range, it's been about timing cyber attacks you can use exactly once when you have your variety of drones to fly missions, it's about how good your intel is that tells you to his such-and-such location and suddenly AA doesn't have ammunition, blah blah.

    Having F-16's means it's "worth" targeting RF AA more seriously, which in turn means you can counter RF su-25 attacks better, which helps in the defence of Bakhmut because they have been getting attacked by air recently in those flanking movements.

    If all you're really doing is blindly launching rockets and fricking off in support of bakhmut, what does enemy AA really mean to you? If you have F-16 that would wreck absolute face in the air, then you start many more missions to destroy and otherwise attrit enemy AA.

    I'm starting to understand why combined arms is like this fricking unattainable holy grails for some countries.

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They don't (much), it's a PiS meme meant to demoralize.

    Containerize all russoids and dump them in the ocean tho.

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Wild Weasel

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Fricking this.

      >how does a SEAD aircraft help accomplish SEAD in an area that needs SEAD

      OP is a genuine moron.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Fricking this.

      >how does a SEAD aircraft help accomplish SEAD in an area that needs SEAD

      OP is a genuine moron.

      Ukroshit pilots are either Cold War dinosaurs or young and mostly inexperienced nobodies with their small amount of flight hours being basic shit done with Migs.
      They can't into SEAD and they would need at least a year of intense training on the new planes which realistically speaking, won't happen in a war where Ukrainian conscripts do 5 weeks of basic before being put in a trench to get splattered by drone spotted artillery.
      F-16s are shiny big ticket meme items that are more symbolic of Western support rather than anything useful, same as the tanks.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        the moron downplaying 80's tanks ´with functional thermals that can spot a vatnik sucking his superiors dick from 5 miles and FCS that can put a 120mm through their head, is kinda right.

        f16 would be a similiarly huge upgrade over slavshit garbage that doesn't even have functional navigation or a radar that is actually better than 50's american garbage.
        Remember russia was 10 years behind western computer designs before they gave up in 80's.
        Flying a mig or sukhoi and then going to F-16 is like going from playing connect-4 to playing high frontier 4 all with all the expansions.
        Even the fricking sim manual falcon 4.0 is around 800 pages and it doesn't even simulate all the systems. And yes, flying the plane is summarized in around 3 sentences, rest is all systems to make vatniks cope and seethe about how sending f-16's won't do anything.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Somehow the landlocked Ukrainians are deploying jdams, so I guess they'll use them for that.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    If Ukrainian pilots are downed, they return to the fight. If Russian pilots are downed, they become POWs. Definitely more viable for Ukraine to use jets even if there are SAMs everywhere.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    OP must be a Pootin stooge to question USA hardware.
    Obviously, USA F-16 combined with modern NATO main battle tanks will cause russian army to collapse and allow zelensky to put fancy office and discotech wirh big mirror ball for colored lights in Kremlin
    ha ha- every slav know just 12 F-16 and 100 NATO tank will cause Ukraine to win.
    2 more week Pootin stooge

    • 1 year ago
      1-Bravo-Foxtrot-Alpha

      >and discotech wirh big mirror ball for colored lights
      Slava Techno House!

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Which was captured recently, the R-73, or R-77? Think it was an intact R-77, should be able to develop countermeasures specific to it

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >1. Superior sensors
    The ELINT equipment on even older F-16s is leagues ahead of what Ukrainian Migs have right now. Better Radar, better RWR (pic related), better Datalink, the works. That will drastically increase survivability alone.
    >2. NATO weapons integration.
    While UA planes have been able to utilize things like JDAMs and HARMs, they're likely doing so in a very jerry-rigged manner. HARMs are likely running in Pre-Brief mode, which simply means GPS co-ords are input on the ground. The target cannot be specified in the Air, using F-16s will give them that capability. Better HARM utilization alone could very likely break the SAM deadlock you're talking about.
    Obviously, something that was designed to use these weapons from the get-go is going to be superior to the Black person-rigging they've resorted to so far, as well as opening up new weapons that can't even be bodged onto the rails. AMRAAMs are one such example, Ukraine doesn't even have ARH Missiles (fox-3) right now. Also, it would allow Ukraine to draw from NATO stockpiles.

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Why isn't land-based SEAD more common? Seems a lot safer than doing it by air.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      That's just regular warfare but your grunt walks into a SAM battery

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      No one really expected to fight this kind of trench warfare between two armies with virtually no air force between them when they were designing anti-radiation weapons. The US always assumes that air defense would be set up near targets its aircraft would want to strike, and thus built their whole SEAD strategy around using the first wave of aircraft to neutralize those defenses.
      A HIMARS launched ARM would be pretty cool, but you'd have to get the enemy to turn on its radar, which is a lot easier if you're in an aircraft than it is if you're a missile launcher.
      The current war is trouble for traditional NATO SEAD because Ukraine doesn't have enough planes, period.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Aren't HIMARS volleys often intercepted? That would make them turn on their radars.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          wut, where you've heard that?

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Recent Pidorian cope.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          According to Russia, every HARMs the Ukrainians have fired have been intercepted.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Launching ARMs from ground vehicles was done by Israel. And now there's SEAD loitering munitions like the IAI Harpy.
      The nuance with aircraft SEAD is the Wild Weasel mission (actually "trolling" for SAMs, that's where the term came from - you use your own aircraft as bait) or having to *suppress* defenses just to clear a path for whatever mission you wanted to do in the air. If you don't use aircraft until your ground based SEAD can figure out where the radars are and destroy them, the enemy defense essentially mission killed your air force.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        What if you only wanted attrition the enemy air defense without following through with aircraft? What if you wanted to protect your conventional warhead missiles by mixing in ARM in the same volley? Ukraine has ballistic missiles like the tochka. These certainly are targets for AD.

        I've played too much Wargame: Red Dragon. Maybe my way of thinking is too video-gamey and doesn't apply to reality.

        wut, where you've heard that?

        I can't recall. It might be my imagination. However, why wouldn't the Russians attempt to shoot down a HIMARS volley?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >However, why wouldn't the Russians attempt to shoot down a HIMARS volley?
          because they can't shoot it down, duh.
          remember that bridge in kherson?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          In that case, a IAI Harpy analogue or directly striking the SAM site with missiles would do the trick.
          I don't know how much of the Ukrainian Tochka-U munitions remain.

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Probs by going 20:1 against soviet air assets and btfoing SAMs with western HARMs that arent Black person rigged to migs. Cant wait for the cope.

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    New built F-16V Block 70's should be given to the Ukraine Air Force.

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Two words: SEAD and SNEED

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Aircraft are still useful even if you don't have complete freedom of action in the air. Modern aircraft with precision standoff weapons are especially useful if you don't have complete freedom of action in the air. Modern aircraft that can carry out SEAD are essential to obtaining more freedom of action in the air.

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >How do F16’s help Ukraine
    toss 50 000 JDAM-ERs on Russias frontline units from max range

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Last I read, Russia flying around 200 sorties a day — very little — and Ukraine was flying around 10-20 day…basically NOTHING. Last year someone from the Pentagon told the press Ukrainian air assets haven’t had a large impact on the war which is why they didn’t believe in the jets for Ukraine deal at the time.

    F-16s will have even less of impact unless the pilots get a huge amount of training in SEAD…while Russians are currently using JDAMs (Thor or something like that?)

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *