What happens if Ukraine gains air superiority? Posted on May 20, 2023 by PrepHole Contributor What happens if Ukraine gains air superiority?
you are probably in a dream
Navy seals unleashed
Is this real??
yeah, unfortunately for HATO marines it is
Navy seal commander reporting in
russian navy seals
What kind of weapons stocks (new or old) can NATO give that would be most game-changing?
AMRAAMs, HARMs and JDAMs.
>AMRAAMs, HARMs and JDAMs.
they are literally already using all of those
No apparently when theyre fired from an f16 they become hyper powered god weapons that will destroy the entire russian AD network and shoot down their entire airforce. How do you not know that?
moron sensor integration is a thing on non moron weapons.
>Verification not required.
>Vatnig doesn't understand how weapons and avionics interact
It's almost poetic
They're only launching AMRAAM from the ground via NASAMs - you get much better range on them launching them from altitude with momentum behind them. AMRAAM or any other Western Fox-3 would be especially significant because they're fire-and-forget, each missile has its own radar so it can guide itself onto the target post launch - right now Ukraine only has Fox-1s, ie. the missile can only use the radar of the plane that launched it to track, meaning that the launching aircraft has to keep its nose pointed in the direction of the target right up until impact. This has been the biggest qualitive advantage Russia has had over Ukraine in air combat so far so this will be the biggest way in which the F-16 can level the playing field.
The HARM, while it's been pretty useful so far, can't communicate with its host aircraft in the ghetto-rigged configuration by which it's installed to Ukraine's Migs and Flankers. On F16 that would be different potentially leading to the weapon being more deadly and flexible to use.
JDAMs probably wouldn't be too different, but still probably easier and more convenient to use with an aircraft it's natively compatible with instead of ghetto-rigging it.
Plus there's other stuff besides that the F-16 can use, like JSOW glide bombs, Harpoon anti-ship missiles, Maverick air-to-ground missiles and the JASSM cruise missile if the US really want to get serious. It's an extremely versatile aircraft in terms of ordnance, which is probably the main reason that it's become the workhorse aircraft for the USAF and like half of the rest of NATO. If they really want to make my PP hard, then perhaps the UK and/or France could step in and make modifications for the Viper to be compatible with Meteor missiles - that would go beyond levelling the playing field in air-to-air and turn it into an overmatch in favour of Ukraine.
>. On F16 that would be different potentially leading to the weapon being more deadly and flexible to use.
how? all the HARMs ukraine uses have to be lobbed in seeker mode, because the s300 and s400 completely outranges them
how are these magical avionics going to overcome basic reality?
Well, that may be true right now, but with longer-range missiles being given to Ukraine I think it's pretty much inevitable that Russia's going to be forced to spread their AD assets thinner than they've done so far. I think having the option to use the HARM in self-protect or target-of-opportunity mode might be useful to have. Probably a fringe benefit in the grand scheme of things compared to being compatible with AMRAAM but a benefit all the same.
>AMRAAMs, HARMs and JDAMs.
Don't forget JASSM, JSOW, Maverick and Harpoon.
wtf how many wunderwaffe do NATO have ?
The next one will surely turn the conflict.
NATO should have learned in Afghanistan that equipment doesn't win wars. Men do.
>NATO should have learned in Afghanistan that equipment doesn't win wars. Men do.
I mean Afghanistan fell when all the NATO men left so that checks I guess. Until then the Taliban couldn't really do much of anything to threaten them.
>Get in the T-34, pidor
>you are needed at the front
Pidors aren't men and have nothing to fight for unlike the Ukrainians they wish to enslave yet again.
Constabulary operations are vastly more difficult than nation-state war which is why they should not be fought. Nation-state war is what the US and NATO are good at. Ask Saddam whose Russian gear got blasted to junk.
You are brown.
>equipment doesn't win wars. Men do
I will think about that while watching another video of severally intoxicated mobniks
>wtf how many wunderwaffe do NATO have ?
Umm... all of them.
They get to drop bombs on Russians instead of missiles which probably saves the West a lot of money as bombs are a lot cheaper.
>What happens if Ukraine gains air superiority?
You wake up
I just can't see that happening. I mean how many fucking F-16s would they have to send and train for that to even be remotely possible? In that leak they said that Russia still had like 90% of it's Air Defenses operational
SEAD that shit and it won't be.
It would mean you need to put down crack pipe hohol
PLANE IS PLANE!
SEND ANOTHER WAVE
Russians don't have a shortage of planes, they have a shortage of pilots.
A lot of the planes they "have" are in dogshit shape, too. And ground crews are overworked, low-skill, and not numerous enough.
One birds worth of maintainers can keep several flying, but not without spare parts....
jesus christ just picture the cope when t-32 obr. 2023 and IL-2 obr. 2023 has to fight nato anno 1991
THE crack pipe, faggostani pidor.
thats a warcrime
Total zigger death, I guess.
When the Russians are forced to fly An-2s chucking grenades out the window as air support, they'll call it a marked improvement over the Frogfoot because it can fly slowly over a target.
Depends on what you mean by superiority. Ukraine already can already deny Russian access to the Ukrainian controlled airspace so they have some level of superiority over territory they control. They also are targeting Russian planes in Russian air space. What they want is to supress Russian air defenses over occupied territory so they can conduct air to ground missions. I assume that is what you meant by "air superiority".
The long range strikes into Russia (making them redeploy units), loss of planes, use of stockpiled missiles, the large size of Russia to cover, and the attrition of missile systems has inevitably stretched/degraded the Russian air defense network. That said, the ground based air defense robust and multilayered and it will probably never be completely taken out no matter what Ukraine does. It would take hundreds of fighters and tens of thousands of sorties to operate with a high degree of freedom.
That said, even if it is never fully supressed, every time it gets a bit worse Ukraine gets a bit more freedom. If Ukraine gets enough F-16s/trained pilots and they come up with the right combo of mission, weapon, and tactics, it is likely they will be able to start doing more air missions over certain areas of the front line to use precision munitions to target things like bases, command centers, logistics hubs, and so forth with air to ground bombs. It would also allow them to gain valuable intelligence about Russian ground troops by using the planes/drones to provide a bird's eye view of the battlefield and identify targets for ground forces.
Could they retake Bakhmut now that Russia controls it?
Donetsk children become endangered specie.
Calling all SMEs and DCS "Generals." How long does it take a trainee to learn to fight in F16? How long does it take a trained pilot to transition to F16. Give you low and high estimates.
DCS doesn't accurately replicate the true fighting environment a pilot would face. If you only need to take off, drop a bomb in a field and land again that can be taught in an afternoon. Real life is flying "blind" into an incredibly complex threat environment where you need to avoid killing friends and civilians while the enemy can be anything from far away su-27s to a manpad right under you. Even the most complex DCS mission is aggressor wargame level at best
Go ask on f16.net if you care.
Obviously they can then strike targets with impunity
79th was based. Might even still be. I worked on all birds in picrel.
>a full year of ukie shilling on how russia is losing >thousands of threads saying russia will never take bakhmut.
>russia finally takes bakhmut
Complete dead silence, all ukraine threads magically vanish into the void.
God i hate glowies so much.
If you are going to shill this hard you have to stick around and take the beating too.
noone here aware that missile kinematics means ukrotards will get CAP-clapped in everything unless its f-22/35 lmao
So now the f-35 is good? Vatniks really can't stay on script.
It's more a matter of simple physics. The Russians have been for months just slinging R-37M from long range and avoiding even medium range. It's not very high Pk but having to go defensive over and over means you can't do your job either. Nothing that an F-16 can mount except a rushed Meteor integration can come close to the range of an R-37M, especially since the US isn't exporting 120-D to other NATO countries.
You are a moron.
There's not a single meteor user that has integrated the weapon into an F-16. The Computer architecture of the F-16 is old and adding a new weapon that also relies on datalinking to be effective is no simple matter.
They might get grippen
Not likely due to the roach in Constantinople..
by your account, Ukraine should have lost its air force long ago...
a good movie.
Is it even possible in today's warfare for anyone but the US to get air superiority? Reliable AA is so prevalent.
it is possible. Russia had air superiority against georgia
They have been shooting all the Russian jets out of the sky, what makes you think a handful of vipers will magically gain air dominance. They are going to get shot down as well. And definitely if they try to bomb Moscow or some shit.
Monkey will threaten nooks and send another 20,000 Russians to die at a 1:5 k/d ratio.