It sets a precedent for sending planes. I don’t know why everyone is talking about F-16s though. Doesn’t America have other fighters they could send first?
They should cheekily give Ukraine some F-35s straight out of the Air Force inventory, base them in Poland and Romania, and send the pilots and maintainers there on vacation with all their equipment. If Russia complains, just tell them turnabout is fair play.
Ukraine can be given demonstration squadrons of various western military aircraft to evaluate for possible future purchases. Maybe with pilots and munitions. Seeing flights of F-35s shooting AARGM and AIM-120s for six months would go a long way towards securing future sales for Lockmart.
>does this open to the door for F-16s?
It's a step but those are still a long way away. They need to be trained for > half a year first.
Hopefully we give Slovakia/Poland half price F-16 replacements
>Doesn’t America have other fighters they could send first?
I mean the US flies F35s, F22s, F16s, and F15s. F16s are the cheapest by far
F16s are comparable to a MiG-29 while the F35 and F22 are 5th Gen.
>a squadron or F-22s in Ukraine
homie, the ukraine will never be able to pay them back, not even if you give them for free
You want them to win the war or to get for 1000 years into debt?
Either F-22s or "something like them" is almost certainly going to be flying escort for all American assets in international airspace over the Black Sea after the destruction of the Reaper this week. Including all the new U.S. assets that are being tasked to that theater. Whatever drunk Ivanoshitvich that flew his plane into it is going to get gulagged for life for tripping that wire.
>Whatever drunk Ivanoshitvich that flew his plane into it is going to get gulagged for life for tripping that wire.
wrong:
«The state-owned Russian news agency RIA is reporting that Russia’s defence secretary, Sergei Shoigu, has presented state awards to the pilots of the Su-27 planes involved in the drone incident over the Black Sea for “preventing the violation of the borders of the special operation area by the American MQ-9 Reaper drone”.»
Any F-16s Ukraine would get would be a lot more advanced than the MiG-29s they have. Their MiGs have never been upgraded. The US F-16 fleet as seen a lot of upgrades. Even the oldest ones in storage are probably upgraded to a 90's standard.
For example, Ukraine doesn't have an active radar homing missile. Only semi active. F-16s have amraam. They probably wouldn't get the latest but even early ones would be a major upgrade
>I don’t know why everyone is talking about F-16s though. Doesn’t America have other fighters they could send first?
F16s are nearly ideal for donations to Ukraine. They're not the most modern or best performers (the newest variants are solidly 4th+ generation, however), but they can definitely go toe to toe with anything Russia is commonly flying or using as air defense. The biggest advantages, though, are the fact that they're VERY cheap for their capabilities, and many countries all over both Europe and the rest of the world use them. That means donated airframes will be common. Countries from Norway and Italy to Pakistan could donate a few each and result in a sizable air force. The commonality means that, even more than the airframes, replacement parts will also be commonly available. Even if a country like Pakistan doesn't want to send actual F16s, they could possibly send important spare parts. And, again, because of the commonality of useage, places to train pilots will be more widely available, so training a number of pilots would not put a big strain on any one country's facilities. Like, you can train pilots in Greece, Indonesia, Denmark, and Thailand if necessary. Similarly, all these operators of F16s could contribute a small number of technical maintenance crews to train Ukrainian counterparts. If Italy donates a dozen F16s, they don't need to also send a dozen ground crews to train the Ukrainians...Romania, Portugal, and Poland can do so.
This stuff isn't true (or at least not to the same extent) for many other planes the US or west could send. There are only 3-4 countries flying F15s and F15Es, and some, like Taiwan and South Korea aren't going to want to be reducing their fleets right now for obvious reasons.
F16s were designed from the ground up to be able to be cheap (relative) mass produced NATO fighters that beat anything in a dogfight (at the time and still mostly anything now) but can also do SEAD. They would be a solid pick. Not that I think israelitekarine should get them, but it would be fun to see the vatBlack folk seeth over it.
>A few hundred guys get killed/captured in Mariupol >Azov doesn’t exist
Please explain how there’s 45k of them right now then and how the unit (the original Azov from 2014) that was supposed to have been destroy is now a Brigade
US does have a lot of civilian fighter jets that could be bought and provided to Ukraine. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/update-usaf-awards-usd64-billion-combat-air-force-aggressor-training-contract
F-16s are the cheapest and most numerous NATO planes worldwide. There are thousands of them (a good portion of which is just sitting in mothballs) they're very capable, and they're cheap and easy to maintain with a massive surplus of spare parts.
As several other people explained with great clarity (and have been for the entire last year), the United States *IS* sending the best possible option first. It's called the F-16. (You) dense motherfricker.
Technically, the U.S. isn't even sending their own planes (yet). They have just given open-season release to every other country in the world to export them directly to Ukraine as they see fit. Sort of the exactly opposite position that Germany took with the Leopard 2 when they forbid every other country on the planet from trying to help.
Fortunately, Germany woke the frick up since then. A little bit.
That's something to keep in mind, BTW. Every single item that the U.S. has given or sold itself has also been given full export release to every other country in the world. Plus a lot more than "only" what the U.S. has directly provided. There are over 100 countries that COULD be supporting or donating equipment to Ukraine, if only they weren't such puking fricking cowards.
> t. picrel, an out-dated graphic of who the cowards are and who the heroes are
Either F-22s or "something like them" is almost certainly going to be flying escort for all American assets in international airspace over the Black Sea after the destruction of the Reaper this week. Including all the new U.S. assets that are being tasked to that theater. Whatever drunk Ivanoshitvich that flew his plane into it is going to get gulagged for life for tripping that wire.
The US should give Malaysia F-35/F-15EX/F-18F in exchange for their Mig-29 for Ukraine
Nice. I read a bit about Russia reaction to hearing that Poland announcing they sending their MiG-29.
Lot's of cope. Saying they aren't worried because all jets Ukraine will receive will be destroyed. And something about that West if humiliating Ukraine by giving them jets that Poland wants to get rid off.
Latter is kinda right. But better to give those machines a swan song send off than let them be scarped within the next decade, anyway.
With Slovakian MiG on the way, Vatniks are probably worry that soon Ukies will be starting CAS and SEAD
>or we nook you
I wish those morons would realize threats like this will only make it worse for them. They keep threatening everyone sending shit basically forcing them to keep doing it.
Yeah, it like Schrödinger's Lend Lease Act: simultaneously a pathetic and meaningless gesture that the Kremlin finds risible and yet also such a provocative escalation that can only be interpreted as an existential threat.
>humiliating Ukraine by giving them jets that Poland wants to get rid off. >Latter is kinda right.
Not really. Not entirely. The MiGs that are being donated have two important factors that can't be beaten by any other option right now:
1) Ukraine has pilots already trained and experienced in flying those airframes. This can barely be emphasized enough.
2) The aircraft being supplied have been very thoroughly upgraded and full maintained to NATO standards, vastly surpassing anything in vatnik inventory.
So, 1) has an argument that the West SHOULD have been training Ukrainian pilots on other airframes since the invasion, if not before. The criticism is valid (I support it myself), but that doesn't change the situation of Reality as we are experiencing right now. we can't change stupid mistakes of the past ... but, we can (and are) correcting at least some of them currently and into the future. Sending upgraded hardware into the theater that can be immediately used is one solid if small correction. A rider on that: the West HAS been training Ukrainians on other airframes. OpSec is tight on that, but we know it has been taking place for months. The most expedited training curriculum is 100 days minimum, and that puts a very green pilot into a combat role immediately ... not ideal.
And, 2) there have been numerous upgrades performed on these airframes over the last year. They can now load and fire some very serious Western ordnance. these were capabilities that weren't deemed "necessary" prior to the Ukraine invasion and have been developed since then. Some were experimental thought exercises prior to the invasion, and some new innovations have been developed. We are now seeing some mature versions of those upgrades being installed and will be very nasty surprises when they show up on the battlefield.
That would make the alliance more secure to get rid of ancient soviet crap for more modern western stuff though. Also simplifies logistics if everyone's at least rocking some variant of F-16, F-15, F-18 or whatever.
Slovaks have no choice. If Fico wins this year's elections, he would cancel the purchase of F-16s and suck Putin's wiener for spare parts, so he can keep the MiGs going for another decade.
JDAMs have a max range of just under 30km iirc
that's well within range of a modern SAM system, but mig 29s are fast and stand a decent chance of survival.
JDAMs have a max range of just under 30km iirc
that's well within range of a modern SAM system, but mig 29s are fast and stand a decent chance of survival.
Does Russia operate any 29s?
Ukraine was given JDAM-ERs, which have an effective range of 72km.
And yes, Russia still operates MiG-29s. They built them, after all.
https://i.imgur.com/ipmOTnP.jpg
Here's a visual representation.
Remember that 72km range is likely a high altitude release. Ukrainian jets fly low to avoid detection and engagement, so they would probably have greatly reduced effective range, even if the Ukrainian jets performed a pop up maneuver just prior to launch. They're still extremely useful for CAS but I doubt max range strikes will happen often/at all to compliment HIMARs.
There was a concept for a powered JDAM floated around with a lot more range but reduced warhead size, that would be a good fit but at this point you're pretty much supplying a cruise missile so might as well just give them tomahawks lol.
Slovakia is buying F16s from the US. Because of that, they retired their MiG29s and are giving them to Ukraine. Other NATO countries are providing air patrols over Slovakia until they get up to speed with their new F16s (supposed to be delivered in 2024).
Interesting thing is those Slovakian migs aren't just standard MiG-29's like the Ukes are already using, they're Mig-29AS's. A modernized variant with some amount of NATO integration. >"Slovakia opted for a unique modernization program for its Fulcrums, resulting in the ‘NATO-compatible’ MiG-29AS and MiG-29UBS, with the upgrade being integrated by Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG with participation from Rockwell Collins and BAE Systems, between 2005 and 2008. The aircraft received AN/APX-113 identification friend or foe (IFF), AN/ARC-210 radio, AN/ARN-147 VHF omnidirectional range/instrument landing system (VOR/ILS) as well as the AN/ARN-153 tactical air navigation (TACAN) system. A Russian MFI-54 display and PUS-29 data input panel were provided in the wienerpit."
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/slovakias-mig-29s-are-officially-heading-to-ukraines-air-force
Unfortunately that's true. Many NATO stuff will be either removed or downgraded to prevent Russia from putting hand on it. That's at least one of the reasons.
Second reason is that Ukraine Air Force is still using Soviet era Metric numerical System for their hardware while never NATO stuff uses Imperial. That can create a serious compatibility issues for calibration of weapons system. That's why MiG are first Jets to be given. Ex-Warsaw Pact countries that joined NATO still have some know how expertise and documentations that let some weaker or older NATO hardware that they were adopting during their doctrine transitioning period.
>Second reason is that Ukraine Air Force is still using Soviet era Metric numerical System for their hardware while never NATO stuff uses Imperial.
Complete bullshit. Even the US military uses metric, same as every NATO member.
Knots, nautical miles (distance) and feet (altitude) are the international units used in aviation because aviation stems from naval traditions.
Eastern nations like former Soviet countries and China use metric.
For frick's sake. Yes, the US military uses metric. However, western aviation uses knots/nautical miles/feet. So the USAF, USN and USMC aviators use those.
>Second reason is that Ukraine Air Force is still using Soviet era Metric numerical System for their hardware while never NATO stuff uses Imperial.
Complete bullshit. Even the US military uses metric, same as every NATO member.
>Second reason is that Ukraine Air Force is still using Soviet era Metric numerical System for their hardware while never NATO stuff uses Imperial.
Complete bullshit. Even the US military uses metric, same as every NATO member.
>US military uses metric
It uses a mix, but yeah he’s full of shit
>Second reason is that Ukraine Air Force is still using Soviet era Metric numerical System for their hardware while never NATO stuff uses Imperial.
Complete bullshit. Even the US military uses metric, same as every NATO member.
>Second reason is that Ukraine Air Force is still using Soviet era Metric numerical System for their hardware while never NATO stuff uses Imperial.
Complete bullshit. Even the US military uses metric, same as every NATO member.
>Second reason is that Ukraine Air Force is still using Soviet era Metric numerical System for their hardware while never NATO stuff uses Imperial.
Complete bullshit. Even the US military uses metric, same as every NATO member.
all nato mig29 were modernized similar way to be able to cooperate with western wingmen and comand&control,
how much of it is classified is unknown but hopefully some of it will remain as migs29 age shows(apart of antiquated missiles) in its weak radar and BVR situational awareness - things that can be remedied by ground control.
>How useful is the MiG-29 in Ukraine
It will be useful enough. Ukraine has experience with the plane and you can expect the european to be in a better condition than russia's equipment.
After the reunification germany inherited some MIG-29s. They upgraded them, and their avionics, to NATO standards and did excercise against US F-16s and F-15s.
Afterwards they sold them to poland for 22€ and the polish upgraded their MIGs too.
Even though I support it and think it would be kino to see, it's not so much that I want to see Ukrainian F-16s in the sky. What I REALLY want is to see AMRAAM finally fulfill its destiny to skullfrick every remaining Soviet fighter airframe.
Does anybody know if it's theoretically possible to jury-rig a MiG-29 to mount AIM-120Ds the way they somehow managed to slap together AGM-88 HARM capability? The idea of the AFU spamming Fox Three kills from further than the max range of an AIM-54 Phoenix is great all on its own, but flinging them off of a bunch of Fulcrums would be the cherry on the post-Cold War cake.
Frick, I want to see it so damned bad: Flankers trying to pull 10-g turns to live up to all that supermaneuvrability hype, only to get rawdogged by a missile launched over 150km away. Extra credit points if an Su-57 shows up and we all get to find out just how stealth that RCS really is.
You could theoretically launch them "Mad dog", without a target lock since you would only need a launch signal but that's sub-optimal for a lot of reasons. Anything else would require a NATO Data bus in order to get the Radar to talk to the missile and vice versa afaik.
I suppose that the F-16 would be the more rational choice, then. (Although, if Putin really is amassing a huge number of airframes on the border as part of his next hopium-fueled game-changer? I kind of wonder if entire squadrons could be taken out BVR by launching a pack of Mad Dogs into the proverbial Meat Locker.)
All panes are useless in ukraine since russia has a large supply of AA weapons that they didn't have to use up to this point. Planes would be only useful if ukraine how a very large supply of them.
What Ukraine needs are some hot B2s with 100 megaton payloads.
It sets a precedent for sending planes. I don’t know why everyone is talking about F-16s though. Doesn’t America have other fighters they could send first?
Like what? F15Es?
They should cheekily give Ukraine some F-35s straight out of the Air Force inventory, base them in Poland and Romania, and send the pilots and maintainers there on vacation with all their equipment. If Russia complains, just tell them turnabout is fair play.
Ukraine can be given demonstration squadrons of various western military aircraft to evaluate for possible future purchases. Maybe with pilots and munitions. Seeing flights of F-35s shooting AARGM and AIM-120s for six months would go a long way towards securing future sales for Lockmart.
kino as frick
>does this open to the door for F-16s?
It's a step but those are still a long way away. They need to be trained for > half a year first.
Hopefully we give Slovakia/Poland half price F-16 replacements
>Doesn’t America have other fighters they could send first?
I mean the US flies F35s, F22s, F16s, and F15s. F16s are the cheapest by far
F16s are comparable to a MiG-29 while the F35 and F22 are 5th Gen.
Would it really be an act of war to have a squadron or F-22s in Ukraine? Just four?
>a squadron or F-22s
Unironically the worst choice out of F16/22/35 for Ukraine.
I think he meant pilots included
Still the worst choice. F22 is air-supremacy while 16/35 are multi-role
>a squadron or F-22s in Ukraine
homie, the ukraine will never be able to pay them back, not even if you give them for free
You want them to win the war or to get for 1000 years into debt?
I think the US wants both tbh
fricks sake I keep using to be honest and it keeps catching me
>keep using to be honest and it keeps catching me
Add a "q" to it, tbqh
or a "2" 2bh
Either F-22s or "something like them" is almost certainly going to be flying escort for all American assets in international airspace over the Black Sea after the destruction of the Reaper this week. Including all the new U.S. assets that are being tasked to that theater. Whatever drunk Ivanoshitvich that flew his plane into it is going to get gulagged for life for tripping that wire.
>Whatever drunk Ivanoshitvich that flew his plane into it is going to get gulagged for life for tripping that wire.
wrong:
«The state-owned Russian news agency RIA is reporting that Russia’s defence secretary, Sergei Shoigu, has presented state awards to the pilots of the Su-27 planes involved in the drone incident over the Black Sea for “preventing the violation of the borders of the special operation area by the American MQ-9 Reaper drone”.»
If only Ukraine had surplus pilots and had already started training on such platforms.
Hmm.
Yeah too bad they started only a month ago instead of 6 months ago
That's not when they started. Training of Uke pilots began early '22.
Any F-16s Ukraine would get would be a lot more advanced than the MiG-29s they have. Their MiGs have never been upgraded. The US F-16 fleet as seen a lot of upgrades. Even the oldest ones in storage are probably upgraded to a 90's standard.
For example, Ukraine doesn't have an active radar homing missile. Only semi active. F-16s have amraam. They probably wouldn't get the latest but even early ones would be a major upgrade
>I don’t know why everyone is talking about F-16s though. Doesn’t America have other fighters they could send first?
F16s are nearly ideal for donations to Ukraine. They're not the most modern or best performers (the newest variants are solidly 4th+ generation, however), but they can definitely go toe to toe with anything Russia is commonly flying or using as air defense. The biggest advantages, though, are the fact that they're VERY cheap for their capabilities, and many countries all over both Europe and the rest of the world use them. That means donated airframes will be common. Countries from Norway and Italy to Pakistan could donate a few each and result in a sizable air force. The commonality means that, even more than the airframes, replacement parts will also be commonly available. Even if a country like Pakistan doesn't want to send actual F16s, they could possibly send important spare parts. And, again, because of the commonality of useage, places to train pilots will be more widely available, so training a number of pilots would not put a big strain on any one country's facilities. Like, you can train pilots in Greece, Indonesia, Denmark, and Thailand if necessary. Similarly, all these operators of F16s could contribute a small number of technical maintenance crews to train Ukrainian counterparts. If Italy donates a dozen F16s, they don't need to also send a dozen ground crews to train the Ukrainians...Romania, Portugal, and Poland can do so.
This stuff isn't true (or at least not to the same extent) for many other planes the US or west could send. There are only 3-4 countries flying F15s and F15Es, and some, like Taiwan and South Korea aren't going to want to be reducing their fleets right now for obvious reasons.
Quality post, anon. Thank you for saying what shouldn't need to be said ... but, we're surrounded by fricking morons so apparently it does.
F16s were designed from the ground up to be able to be cheap (relative) mass produced NATO fighters that beat anything in a dogfight (at the time and still mostly anything now) but can also do SEAD. They would be a solid pick. Not that I think israelitekarine should get them, but it would be fun to see the vatBlack folk seeth over it.
Seeing how they’re only going to go up against Vatniks flying similar planes instead of a competent military they’ll do fine
>Jewkraine
Implying pic related or forces that support them wouldn’t get them
these Black folk got merked in the first phase of the war (on purpose). hardly exist anymore. remember right sector?
source: your butthole
>A few hundred guys get killed/captured in Mariupol
>Azov doesn’t exist
Please explain how there’s 45k of them right now then and how the unit (the original Azov from 2014) that was supposed to have been destroy is now a Brigade
US does have a lot of civilian fighter jets that could be bought and provided to Ukraine. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/update-usaf-awards-usd64-billion-combat-air-force-aggressor-training-contract
F-16s are the cheapest and most numerous NATO planes worldwide. There are thousands of them (a good portion of which is just sitting in mothballs) they're very capable, and they're cheap and easy to maintain with a massive surplus of spare parts.
As several other people explained with great clarity (and have been for the entire last year), the United States *IS* sending the best possible option first. It's called the F-16. (You) dense motherfricker.
Technically, the U.S. isn't even sending their own planes (yet). They have just given open-season release to every other country in the world to export them directly to Ukraine as they see fit. Sort of the exactly opposite position that Germany took with the Leopard 2 when they forbid every other country on the planet from trying to help.
Fortunately, Germany woke the frick up since then. A little bit.
That's something to keep in mind, BTW. Every single item that the U.S. has given or sold itself has also been given full export release to every other country in the world. Plus a lot more than "only" what the U.S. has directly provided. There are over 100 countries that COULD be supporting or donating equipment to Ukraine, if only they weren't such puking fricking cowards.
> t. picrel, an out-dated graphic of who the cowards are and who the heroes are
The US should give Malaysia F-35/F-15EX/F-18F in exchange for their Mig-29 for Ukraine
>18 Su-30MMD for 38 F-35A
>F-35 one engine
>SU-30 two engine
obviously double the amount of F-35s are needed for a fair trade, plus an additional 2 for air shows
While the trade won't be that lopsided don't be surprised if Malaysia comes out ahead. There aren't many Mig-29s or Su-27/30s available on the market.
Nice. I read a bit about Russia reaction to hearing that Poland announcing they sending their MiG-29.
Lot's of cope. Saying they aren't worried because all jets Ukraine will receive will be destroyed. And something about that West if humiliating Ukraine by giving them jets that Poland wants to get rid off.
Latter is kinda right. But better to give those machines a swan song send off than let them be scarped within the next decade, anyway.
With Slovakian MiG on the way, Vatniks are probably worry that soon Ukies will be starting CAS and SEAD
I love how every response from Russia is.
>Ha, you sending THAT? Pathetic. We will destroy immediately
>But also, stop escalating or we nook you
>or we nook you
I wish those morons would realize threats like this will only make it worse for them. They keep threatening everyone sending shit basically forcing them to keep doing it.
Yeah, it like Schrödinger's Lend Lease Act: simultaneously a pathetic and meaningless gesture that the Kremlin finds risible and yet also such a provocative escalation that can only be interpreted as an existential threat.
it's **
>humiliating Ukraine by giving them jets that Poland wants to get rid off.
>Latter is kinda right.
Not really. Not entirely. The MiGs that are being donated have two important factors that can't be beaten by any other option right now:
1) Ukraine has pilots already trained and experienced in flying those airframes. This can barely be emphasized enough.
2) The aircraft being supplied have been very thoroughly upgraded and full maintained to NATO standards, vastly surpassing anything in vatnik inventory.
So, 1) has an argument that the West SHOULD have been training Ukrainian pilots on other airframes since the invasion, if not before. The criticism is valid (I support it myself), but that doesn't change the situation of Reality as we are experiencing right now. we can't change stupid mistakes of the past ... but, we can (and are) correcting at least some of them currently and into the future. Sending upgraded hardware into the theater that can be immediately used is one solid if small correction. A rider on that: the West HAS been training Ukrainians on other airframes. OpSec is tight on that, but we know it has been taking place for months. The most expedited training curriculum is 100 days minimum, and that puts a very green pilot into a combat role immediately ... not ideal.
And, 2) there have been numerous upgrades performed on these airframes over the last year. They can now load and fire some very serious Western ordnance. these were capabilities that weren't deemed "necessary" prior to the Ukraine invasion and have been developed since then. Some were experimental thought exercises prior to the invasion, and some new innovations have been developed. We are now seeing some mature versions of those upgrades being installed and will be very nasty surprises when they show up on the battlefield.
> tl;dr -- Russia. Is. Fricked.
Slovakia wasn't even flying those MiGs because they ran out of spare parts since Russia wouldn't send any
Polish ones are modernized, Slovak ones are good for spare parts lol
Doesn't matter they send all their crap away so the gibBlack folk will get free western modern replacement.
That would make the alliance more secure to get rid of ancient soviet crap for more modern western stuff though. Also simplifies logistics if everyone's at least rocking some variant of F-16, F-15, F-18 or whatever.
Slovaks have no choice. If Fico wins this year's elections, he would cancel the purchase of F-16s and suck Putin's wiener for spare parts, so he can keep the MiGs going for another decade.
it got repainted and it looks nice okay?
gone like tears in the rain
Speaking of spare parts.....
>Malaysia, cough up. You're not even able to use those bits.
How far can a MiG-29 throw a JDAM without running the risk of getting shot down near the front?
Can any of you clever frickers draw us a map?
JDAMs have a max range of just under 30km iirc
that's well within range of a modern SAM system, but mig 29s are fast and stand a decent chance of survival.
Does Russia operate any 29s?
Ukraine was given JDAM-ERs, which have an effective range of 72km.
And yes, Russia still operates MiG-29s. They built them, after all.
Here's a visual representation.
Remember that 72km range is likely a high altitude release. Ukrainian jets fly low to avoid detection and engagement, so they would probably have greatly reduced effective range, even if the Ukrainian jets performed a pop up maneuver just prior to launch. They're still extremely useful for CAS but I doubt max range strikes will happen often/at all to compliment HIMARs.
There was a concept for a powered JDAM floated around with a lot more range but reduced warhead size, that would be a good fit but at this point you're pretty much supplying a cruise missile so might as well just give them tomahawks lol.
Slovakia is buying F16s from the US. Because of that, they retired their MiG29s and are giving them to Ukraine. Other NATO countries are providing air patrols over Slovakia until they get up to speed with their new F16s (supposed to be delivered in 2024).
Interesting thing is those Slovakian migs aren't just standard MiG-29's like the Ukes are already using, they're Mig-29AS's. A modernized variant with some amount of NATO integration.
>"Slovakia opted for a unique modernization program for its Fulcrums, resulting in the ‘NATO-compatible’ MiG-29AS and MiG-29UBS, with the upgrade being integrated by Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG with participation from Rockwell Collins and BAE Systems, between 2005 and 2008. The aircraft received AN/APX-113 identification friend or foe (IFF), AN/ARC-210 radio, AN/ARN-147 VHF omnidirectional range/instrument landing system (VOR/ILS) as well as the AN/ARN-153 tactical air navigation (TACAN) system. A Russian MFI-54 display and PUS-29 data input panel were provided in the wienerpit."
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/slovakias-mig-29s-are-officially-heading-to-ukraines-air-force
NATO stuff is being removed because it's classified.
Do you have a source for that? I haven't seen anything about that.
Unfortunately that's true. Many NATO stuff will be either removed or downgraded to prevent Russia from putting hand on it. That's at least one of the reasons.
Second reason is that Ukraine Air Force is still using Soviet era Metric numerical System for their hardware while never NATO stuff uses Imperial. That can create a serious compatibility issues for calibration of weapons system. That's why MiG are first Jets to be given. Ex-Warsaw Pact countries that joined NATO still have some know how expertise and documentations that let some weaker or older NATO hardware that they were adopting during their doctrine transitioning period.
>NATO stuff uses Imperial
No they don't.
Knots, nautical miles (distance) and feet (altitude) are the international units used in aviation because aviation stems from naval traditions.
Eastern nations like former Soviet countries and China use metric.
For frick's sake. Yes, the US military uses metric. However, western aviation uses knots/nautical miles/feet. So the USAF, USN and USMC aviators use those.
>t. Never been around aircraft, ever
Portuguese Air Force F-16
>Second reason is that Ukraine Air Force is still using Soviet era Metric numerical System for their hardware while never NATO stuff uses Imperial.
Complete bullshit. Even the US military uses metric, same as every NATO member.
>US military uses metric
It uses a mix, but yeah he’s full of shit
OKay. So, you're completely moronic. Nice to know. (You) blithering, lying frickwit.
You're going to have to back that up. Because you're lying.
all nato mig29 were modernized similar way to be able to cooperate with western wingmen and comand&control,
how much of it is classified is unknown but hopefully some of it will remain as migs29 age shows(apart of antiquated missiles) in its weak radar and BVR situational awareness - things that can be remedied by ground control.
>13 MiG-29
Russia will shot them all down in a matter of single week, just like they shot down 1 polish yesterday near Donetsk.
But can they carry Storm Shadows?
I was wondering about Brimstone.
Brimstone is already in Ukraine in its ground launch configuration
>How useful is the MiG-29 in Ukraine
It will be useful enough. Ukraine has experience with the plane and you can expect the european to be in a better condition than russia's equipment.
After the reunification germany inherited some MIG-29s. They upgraded them, and their avionics, to NATO standards and did excercise against US F-16s and F-15s.
Afterwards they sold them to poland for 22€ and the polish upgraded their MIGs too.
Finally, cant wait for the boomer seethe.
might as well fix my shit
Luftwaffe F-104
Even though I support it and think it would be kino to see, it's not so much that I want to see Ukrainian F-16s in the sky. What I REALLY want is to see AMRAAM finally fulfill its destiny to skullfrick every remaining Soviet fighter airframe.
Does anybody know if it's theoretically possible to jury-rig a MiG-29 to mount AIM-120Ds the way they somehow managed to slap together AGM-88 HARM capability? The idea of the AFU spamming Fox Three kills from further than the max range of an AIM-54 Phoenix is great all on its own, but flinging them off of a bunch of Fulcrums would be the cherry on the post-Cold War cake.
Frick, I want to see it so damned bad: Flankers trying to pull 10-g turns to live up to all that supermaneuvrability hype, only to get rawdogged by a missile launched over 150km away. Extra credit points if an Su-57 shows up and we all get to find out just how stealth that RCS really is.
You could theoretically launch them "Mad dog", without a target lock since you would only need a launch signal but that's sub-optimal for a lot of reasons. Anything else would require a NATO Data bus in order to get the Radar to talk to the missile and vice versa afaik.
I suppose that the F-16 would be the more rational choice, then. (Although, if Putin really is amassing a huge number of airframes on the border as part of his next hopium-fueled game-changer? I kind of wonder if entire squadrons could be taken out BVR by launching a pack of Mad Dogs into the proverbial Meat Locker.)
SOON
I kek'd like crazy when I realized that Russian squadrons are named after Vodka brands.
Slovakia has been the unsung heroic ally this whole conflict, bless them
aren't they getting latest NATO stuff in return?
All panes are useless in ukraine since russia has a large supply of AA weapons that they didn't have to use up to this point. Planes would be only useful if ukraine how a very large supply of them.
how's any AA going to lock onto a F-22 or F-35?
The same way any AA does
AI
>and does this open to the door for F-16s
If we go by the logic of the provision of tanks, yes.