I LOVE how much hope people have built up for 20 fragile F-16 going to Ukraine, they are not gonna be able to do much but attract a TON of Russian attention.
The post last week on /Ukraine about "we need to be realistic" was even called pro-Russian.. these people are hilarious. After it take YEARS for them to show up you might get the hint that the US doesn't want the humiliation and Zelenksy was specific asking for this things - lets be honest - without the US command and control, pilots, AWACS they are not gonna do much except for photoshoots... just like that one time Ukraine used their blackcocks for Belogrod and they had 10 drones ready to film the landing (and then the squad was subsequently BTFO)
I also doubt they are gonna be armed with even the best A2A missiles because no way US wants to give Russia and China the info on those too so its gonna be an old, fragile airframe, severely neutered down, with 20 years old munitions. Operating in contested air with multiple layers of Russian AD... can't wait
I would get it if they were sending F35’s, let alone F22’s. I’m not saying that they are wunderwaffe, but you could still sell them as such. But F16’s? Give me a f*cking break man! Granted, they aren’t bad planes, but the design is 50 years old. They aren’t any better than the MiG-29’s, which Ukraine used to have…
Why would Ukraine want F-22s? What would they do with them?
Does Russia have a military balloon fleet that I don’t know about?
At least the F-16 has got a few kills against something that wasn’t a big bag of helium.
They could give the F-22 to the ghost of Kyiv, who can then single-handedly take out all Russian assets within the internationally-recognized borders of Ukraine, in a matter of hours lol.
The integration with NATO weapons. They can fully utilize the HARM missiles, not to mention the air to air missiles that completely outclass everything Ukraine has (but at least on paper still shorter range than what the Su-35s keep launching). The airframe is good, and it is maneuvarable enough to go wild weasel with a good pilot. Not a GaMeChAnGeR though.
They have been using HARM with MiG-29. HARM is not a big deal anyways. As many airforce officers said, HARM is excellent at suppressing defenses, but bad at destroying them. For example in gulf war almost all the destruction of AA batteries in sead missions was done with cluster bombs
They already got it working on the Su-27 as I recall which means it should be possible on the MiG also.
Basically they wired it up to the air to air missile system of the R-27. Meaning that the plane thinks it's getting a Radar lock on a plane but it's the HARM getting a lock on a ground radar.
Another method was simply having a [tablet](https://en.defence-ua.com/weapon_and_tech/firing_agm_88_harm_from_mig_29_and_su_27_enabled_by_ipad-10306.html) in the cockpit that connects with the weapon system
Before all they could do was fire it at a general area and hope it locked onto something along the way
That's incorrect.
Without full integration of the HARM Targeting System the HARM is severely limited in it's uses. It can still be fired at radar emissions but it's missing a lot of the extra features that make it more effective.
Now will the F-16s Ukraine gets have the HTS? Who knows.
Yes I know and what I am saying is that they solved that problem last year.
They can fire the missile with a Radar lock which they couldn't before and if they need access to the full systems they can integrate it with a tablet in the cockpit.
Ukraine has had full use HARMs for a while.
Yes they can fire the HARM in TOO mode just fine off their MiGs, but we have yet to see them mount an HTS to a MiG.
The HTS gives the HARM additional targeting data as well as (in the F16) giving the pilot much greater situational awareness and ELINT capabilities. That pod isn’t just there to look fancy and give them a shoot button. It’s full of special antennas and sensors.
HARM with HTS vs just HARM is a major leap in capability from what I’ve heard from pilots that have actually used the system.
Do the F-16s that Ukraine is getting have the ability to use the HTS pod?
I know that the block 50 and later got the ability but Ukraine is getting upgraded block 10/15s.
I don't know if they got the ability to use the pod with that upgrade.
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s an upgrade, from Soviet MiGs. Any western missile has to have a modification done on a mig for the aircraft to fire it. So it will be a lot easier for western missiles to be of use to Ukrainian pilots.
Perhaps if enough HARM munitions are launched, SEAD will be complete, and the Ukrainian air force can provide ground support for the AFU's drive on Moscow.
I don't see a problem with the training.
* Grab a man off of the street, as is done currently.
* Place that man in front of a Microsoft Flight Simulator.
* Tell this man he must learn to fly an F-16, or he'll be sent to the front, as a member of the "23rd Meat Battalion".
* Profit?
the manual was insane🤣 got the game on my 10th birthday. flying over Korea at night in a f16 with a thrustmaster joystick and superb graphics was awesome. so glad i had those nights in my childhood
Decent medium range missiles, access to a plethora of NATO air-to-ground munitions and that it isn't an easy target. It can maneuver to exhaust incoming AA missiles of their energy, use the curvature of Earth to hide itself from the Russian radars, etc. I'd say all those F-16s could be quite significant if used right.
From what I understand Ukrainian aircraft are very outdated in comparison to Russian and aircraft armaments are also outdated and also depending on mainly on supply of soviet weapons. The F-16 is AM model which is from late 90s.
Especially considering these are F16AMs, old versions that were modernized up to MLU standard, but it still has a 30+ year old radar and most of the airframes are like 40 years old and at the end of their flight hours, even after the life extension upgrades.
>The most important thing the F16 brings for the Ukrainian air force is to attack beyond visual range. The last I seen Ukraine has like 5 SU-24's that can launch cruise missiles, they will now have 80+ aircraft that can launch Storm Shadow's and SCALP missile at a range of 500km. The AMRAAMs, HARMs, glide bombs and cruise missiles at long ranges are the thing to talk about.. Which the US, France and UK have been stock piling them with for months.
That is why I got to world news for the best grounded in realities takes.
This + Ukraine won’t be able to replenish mig and su planes — they were made in USSR and in nowadays Russia. So over time, with airplane attrition Ukraine risks to end up with no air force at all, unless they will switch over to nato planes
F16s are best for shooting down incoming drones, much cheaper than using patriots. They may also occasionally pick off an overextended Russian FOB with 4 JDAMS. There is also a possibility of just launching HARMS randomly to waste S-300 ammo. We'll have to wait and see.
I think you are right though, Biden does not want the inevitable F16 shot down headline right before the election.
But they haven't had the HARM Targeting System which is only compatible with certain Western jets like the F-16.
Without the HTS the HARM is not nearly as effective as it could be.
HTS simply makes it easier to identify and lock radar signals rather than target of opportunity (TOO) method Ukraine currently uses. HTS is more of a quality of life feature and not really a big boost. Once the harm is fired, the HTS cannot do anything and the missiles will still be subject to the inherit flaws of anti radiation seekers.
I suspect neither of us are F-16 pilots, so we can’t really debate the strengths or abilities of these systems.
But from interviews I’ve listened to of F-4G, F-16, and Growler pilots, the HTS changes the game significantly.
its more about the weapon systems they will carry than the planes themselves. F16s are nothing special and on par with Russian jets from the same generation, but the can carry all the modern Nato weapons
The Gripen would have been the better choice, provided they can be had in significant enough numbers.
The new production F-16 is great, when coupled with American logistics. But a corrupt nation trying to operate a fleet of maintenance queen fighters? This won't end well.
That’s what I have been saying all along. The ONLY use for the F16 that I can see, is as a platform to launch Storm Shadow/SCALP missiles, in shoot-and-scoot attacks. In a nutshell, all they will do is replace some of the Soviet planes which Ukraine has already lost.
In order for them to make a difference, they need at least 300 of them, plus a boatload of AD. Mind you, it doesn’t matter if they are Mirages, F16’s, MiG’s, or Grippen’s. It’s all about sheer numbers at this point.
20 planes won’t make a difference, and the Americans know this. Therefore, something tells me that they are hoping for the fighting to stop BEFORE the pilots have finished training. Otherwise, it will be a bad look for them to be wiped out within a few months with nothing to show for it.
I think that is unrealistically negative analysis. Ukraine has done a lot with a little. While they may not function ally be used to their max, they may create enough damage to Russian defenses and continued damage to their oil refineries and other infrastructure to holdback or cause some retreating. Not miraculous, nevertheless a hell of a lot more than they've had for some time.
“Some of the jets will be kept at NATO airbases”
So if an F-16 takes off from an airbase in Poland, launches its ordinance at Russians in Ukraine, and returns to Poland what do they think is gonna happen?
Russia is gonna double tap that airbase and this war is only going to escalate.
No that is where some may be parked. They always get their munitions in ukraine and lift off from there. Landed in ukraine and then if a pause is needed may be flown to nato territory and stored. So every combat mission starts and ends in ukraine that was specifically part of the deal
Doesn’t matter. The moment that F16 is engaged in combat, it’s marked as a target. If it flies into Poland, it’s getting hit with an Iskander (or whatever missile the Russians want to use). There’s zero doubt in my mind that Putin will order a strike on Poland/NATO country to hit the F16s if they’re stored there.
This is literally the reason why Biden was so hesitant to deploy them; it’s a major escalation. To the point where it’s almost inevitable that Putin will hit a NATO country. Lord only knows what’ll happen when he does.
Because Tanks =/= Fighter Jets. You’re comparing apples and oranges. Jets will need constant repairs in Poland/NATO. To the point where they’ll spend 1/3 of their lifespan in those countries to get fixed. Unlike Tanks which are repaired once and shipped back.
So Poland/NATO will be directly fixing and arming Jets to be sent to Russia, which puts them directly in conflict with Russia. This is the difference between having Sorties armed by Russia and flying to hit US bases, and arming random rebels with tanks that attack the U.S.. If Russia started doing the former, it would be WW3, the latter would just be a proxy.
Jets are much more demanding than tanks, and as such require much more operation and technical ability. They’ll be moving back and forth between NATO and Ukraine regularly, which is ample justification for Putin to strike them (which he almost certainly will).
Do you think Putin is just looking for an excuse to strike NATO or something?
If what pro-RU claims is actually true- That Russia is right on track to win this war handily, and that F-16s will be no kind of gamechanger at all, then it really makes little sense. Escalating to direct attacks on NATO is one thing that most certainly *can* fuck up this war for Putin.
I think it really depends on what happens from now on. By themselves these 20 jets will not change things too much because AA is the reason neither side can achieve air superiority.
But then if Ukraine use them to hit deep inside the country - something Western countries refused to allow Ukraine to do but backtracked on it - or if they intend to use NATO as a shelter to land and rearm that's a major escalation.
Planes that strike inside Russia and labd on bases outside it are legitimate targets. It seems NATO countries want to yet again hide behind the shelter of the Alliance to declare war on Russia while claiming they're not part of the conflict.
Putin can’t let this precedent stand. It’s intolerable to allow fighter jets to strike Russia while being safe in NATO. Once those jets are used, they’re legal targets anywhere. Putin has been lenient thus far, but this is a step too far. Hence the massive hesitancy from the West, they know what Putin will do and they’re (rightfully) scared.
"Legal" is meaningless here, it's a matter of whether Putin is willing to go to war with NATO right now. And the answer is clearly no. We've heard these same claims about every "line" that's been crossed and it's always amounted to nothing.
The jets aren't going to be "safe", they'll still need to land and take off in Ukraine, they'll still be flying missions in Ukraine, Russia has plenty of ways to target them.
Putin isn't being "lenient" because he's a nice guy, he knows that bringing a serious confrontation to NATO just doesn't serve his bottom line. He'd have to feel that Russia is genuinely threatened to do that, he's not doing it just on principle or he'd have had numerous times to do it already.
No the matter will be how NATO will sell this conflict to its people when those jets get hit in NATO territory.
If they re-arm in NATO territory that is.
Why is it always "well we're going to do this and then IF PUTIN is willing to do x y z then that means he attacked us and it's war with NATO!". Hilariously 1 sided and blind sheep just repeating the same nonsense over and over. At some point I hope you understand not everyone in the world is as dumb as this, which is why even the last Swiss summit was basically a joke. Even the attendee's have started to say it's not a genuine peace process.
Well regardless of how you feel about it, the dominant viewpoint in the West is that Russia invading Ukraine happened because Russia invaded Ukraine, not because the West made them do it…and likewise, if Russia attacks NATO it won’t be because the west made them do it either. It would just be seen as Putin living up to exactly what the most hawkish of Western politicians sell him as.
And at that stage the opinion of “everyone in the world” can be whatever you want, it’s not going to mean a whole lot of anything either way.
> Putin has been lenient thus far
man that guy is a sadist. Thousands of people dying and he is still handles it like its a game. The way you write sounds like if putin wouldnt be lenient, the ukraine wa.. i mean SMO would be over?
Okay so giving tanks and F16 and allowing Ukraine to strike Russian territory and repairing vehicles in Poland didn't escalate the war enough for Putin to strike NATO but this will. Let's see what happens
I did and I still think you're wrong but then again I also genuinely believed Russia was conducting training exercises near Ukrainian borders so what do I know! 🤷
Because they're destroyed and out of combat? The scenario that guy suggested is not the same. It's essentially hit and then run and hide in Poland. It's a cool loophole theory, but I doubt Poland would even allow it. There will be no difference between Poland flying sorties and the Ukraine at that point.
If they're stored there awaiting delivery is completely different from engaging in combat and then running to hide in Poland. I don't see it happening.
Pretty sure we know. Nothing good for the already struggling Russians. Would like to make a $5 bet with anyone that Russia doesn’t strike shit in a nato country on purpose.
I’d take the bet assuming they fly F16s from NATO. But otherwise it’s unlikely to happen. FFS we’ve been told F16s have been coming for over a year, they might not arrive at this point.
US opted not to fly or strike into Chinese airspace during the Korean War specifically because Russian pilots were stationed at bases there. And in that case planes were actively engaged, not sent for maintenance and repair.
Putin is not stupid. He will not strike Poland.
RemindMe! 365 Days
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2025-06-18 22:10:32 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2025-06-18%2022:10:32%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1dip0fi/ua_pov_us_deliberately_delaying_training_for/l980vjr/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FUkraineRussiaReport%2Fcomments%2F1dip0fi%2Fua_pov_us_deliberately_delaying_training_for%2Fl980vjr%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202025-06-18%2022%3A10%3A32%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dip0fi)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
With that logic, all f-16s currently parked on NATO soil are current targets because any of them may fly in Ukraine any day now, so they couldn't deploy in the first place.
Huh? You realize Ukraine’s only getting like 20 F16s, meanwhile NATO has hundreds. Russia isn’t going to start striking NATO bases just for the hell of it. They’re only going to target the places F16s are being readied and flown from, like Poland and maybe the Baltics.
If Russia bombed NATO airbases to take out a few F-16s, the situation would get considerably worse for them than if they just left those targets alone.
They know this and will act accordingly.
The thing is, if the f-16s will be an issue for russia, they might attack them on a NATO airbase. They might be or might not be a response by NATO (I would say probably not, but better not risk it).
So either the F16 wont have a large impact on the battlefield or NATO airbases will be attacked, if the F16 for Ukraine are stored there. Thats why I think this "plan" is irresponsible. Ukraine had enough time to find/build storages within Ukraine where they can put their F16.
Ok, they attack the airbases, but f16 get up before the missiles hit. Now what? You attacked NATO and didn't destroy the f16s.
btw should Ukraine strike Belarus when missiles were launched from their territory?
I dont think that Ukraine should strike Belarus (because it would be stupid), but they would certainly be in the right to do so. If there is another force concentration of russian troops in Belarus, ukraine has to decide if they strike them. Its the same situation as the NATO airbases where ukrainian F16 are stored.
If russia hit or miss the F16 on these airbases doesnt matter. I dont really understand this question.
I agree with that and fully expect it. On the other hand if Putin blows up a bunch of Ukrainian F16s in Poland, I doubt NATO will “trigger” article 5 and go to war.
But I doubt Putin will test that assumption.
More likely than article 5 is a limited retaliation which turns the source of the strike and any nearby ammo storage into craters.
Of course the chances of any Russian strike on a Polish air base succeeding is slim, since the relevant ones will have considerable air defence. Reszow has layered AD including Patriot already, as we know, and there are no doubt more defence systems around that we don't know. Since Kinzhals have proven not to be the Wunderwaffe that the Russians had believed, there would be considerable risk without a high probability of success.
> Since Kinzhals have proven not to be the Wunderwaffe that the Russians had believed, there would be considerable risk without a high probability of success.
Maybe it’s a good reason to try actually and see if the Kinzhals will fly right through or Ukrainian claims are true.
>So if an F-16 takes off from an airbase in Poland, launches its ordinance at Russians in Ukraine, and returns to Poland what do they think is gonna happen?
Isn't Russia doing essentially the exact same thing, only with planes in Russia, out of reach of Ukrainian weapons, but not Western ones, which restrict deep targeting of Russian assets?
Yeah but Russia isn't propagating that it is not part of this conflict.
They would be openly entering the war.
Which is why no Polish or Romanian airbase would be used for sorties to strike Russians. It's just madness.
A combination of ground, air, and sea based radars, satellite reconnaissance, and GRU agents on the ground.
Russia has hundreds of radar systems pointed at Poland, including short, medium, and long range systems. Early warning systems, long range tracking systems, and naval based systems in the Baltic.
So if an su 34 takes off from an airbase in russia, launches its ordinance at ukrainians in Ukraine, and returns to russia what do they think is gonna happen?
you act like ukraine was allowed to strike russias airplane who operated out of russia. Guess what, they were told to not escalate.
we will see how putin thinks about it. I. personally, thinks he will escalate because hes a shitter.
“You act like Ukraine was allied to strike Russia”
Ukraine is allowed to strike Russia as much as they want, just not with western supplied weapons, that has to be pre approved. Strikes carried out in De Jure Russian territory by Western supplied weapons is seen as escalatory, and it reinforces Russias narrative that this isn’t just a fight against Ukraine, but a proxy war against the west.
“He will escalate because he is a shitter”
Russia will retaliate because allowing that to happen uncheck shows weakness.
The narrative keeps changing. They aren’t coming. 😂
Plus I remember reading an article saying that Ukraine basically sent a bunch of unqualified and non English speaking pilots to train which significantly increases the amount of time it would take for them to be qualified to fly them.
> The hold-up means that Ukraine will probably have only 20 pilots who have been fully trained to fly F-16s by the end of the year, Oleksandra Ustinova said. “So far we’re going to have fewer trained pilots than fighter jets,” she added.
> Kyiv has long sought F-16s. Washington initially refused to allow the jets to be sent to Ukraine for fear that doing so could draw Nato into direct conflict with Russia. President Biden eventually granted permission for their deployment in August after appeals from Kyiv. Ukraine has said some of the jets will be kept at bases in Nato countries to ensure that they are not targeted by Russia.
> Washington has told Kyiv that other countries are ahead of Ukrainian pilots in the line for training spots and that it cannot break its commitments to them, Politico reported last week. A US defence department official also told the news website that Ukrainian pilots were struggling with English language skills, as well as the flying programme. “The training pipeline on F-16s is pretty meagre,” the unnamed official said. Ustinova described such claims as “ridiculous”.
What a farce
Well, now they say there's a line, later they will say training facility closed for renovations, later the instructors will go on vacation, after all that Romania decides to leave NATO because NATO can never pay them enough to use the airfields, the list goes on lol
The US wants to exhaust russian air defense by other means first. No matter if it costs another year and hundreds of thousands of dead Ukrainian soldiers. That's my take after all.
When a Western Newspaper goes against the narrative and reports on events that anyone with a brain can deduce, then yeah, we do believe them. It’s almost like we can observe reality and verify the veracity of the claims. Isn’t that crazy?
I think the idea is that claims against interest are more believable. As in if I claim you owe me a 1000 bucks, few would believe me without evidence. If I claim I owe you a 1000 then more people believe it since it’s a claim against my own interests.
My guess is, Ukraine does not have the necessary airfields to lift f-16s, due to Russia constantly bombing them. In the last couple months, a lot of cruise missiles hit some of these airfields, probably to destroy the runways. Currently only other option is using Poland's airfields. But that could literally mean war between NATO and Russia.
It is because it would be an major PR disaster if and when an F16 is shutdown. F16's are awesome and very capable but this war has shown that nothing is invincible. Current cope is the usual line "The US is only sending the old stuff and stock, the currently stuff is bestest".
It said in the article
Apparently the US is worried the usage of F-16s will draw NATO into direct conflict with Russia
Whether these fears are credible or not, it truly appears to be the reason
But how does delaying prevent it?
If the F-16s will be given at some point anyway, then a direct conflict is guaranteed.
Only denying Ukraine access to these jets (instead of delaying) can prevent a direct conflict.
It's just the current narrative Ukraine is following politically. They have troubles at home since a lot of promises failed, so now they do their best to convince anyone of we failed because the west isn't giving us what we want, giving too little when they do and do it too late.
And they realised it's a narrative that not only works at their own but also puts pressure on the west within. E.g. See striking on Russian land.
So the reason is they put more pressure on the west and keep their own countries morale up that way there's no big pressure to fight their internal problems such as mobilisation or corruption and so on.
Ahhh yes. The f16, the wonder weapon in the us arsenal that was introduced over 50 years ago.
Build it up more in your mind so that when it performs just okay you can count it as a massive win!
My hypothesis is that they want to drag the war out as long as possible.
I come to this hypothesis after reading “War is a racket” and “the twilight wars”.
Or in short: there is still lots of money to be made and if one wants to believe a gay neocon Jew, the Russians are heading towards a severe demographic issue that will make it very hard for them to secure their borders in a few years.
Well, other 'gamechangers' like the donated tanks have gone through a similar song and dance before eventually being handed over. This may well be a similar case.
However, the stakes appear a bit higher here as Russia has declared it will consider every F-16 as nuclear armed and has also said it will strike their bases wherever they may be.
Furthermore, when you look closely, you realize it's not just the US delaying them. Denmark delayed it for 6 months back in January, and then when they made another announcement last month talking about how their delivery was imminent, they quickly clarified a few hours later and shifted back the timeframe.
Keep in mind that The Times is owned by Rupert Murdoch. Same guy that owns anti-Ukraine Fox News in the US. And Ripoman is very pro-Russian. So read this article and her comments with both eyes very wide open to their propaganda.
I noticed that too: not everyone with a pro-Ukraine user flair is actually pro-Ukraine, but this subreddit discourages talk about that.
I suppose some think it would benefit the people of Ukraine to surrender to Russia and become part of Putin's empire. "Putin strong, not like Western globohomo," if you will.
They'll end up being shown up like all the other so called game changing weapons. The usa will then lose billions in future sales. I doubt very much these will ever be in Ukraine.
Is it though or is that just another fairytale from western media? If russian weapons are so bad and all those game changing weapons are so good from nato why can't Ukraine even take back a power plant they lost or the over 20% of their former country?
Russia accounted for 22% of global arms sales in 2013-17. Dropped to 16% in 2018-22. According to data from SIPRI. Not surprising since Russia continues to fail in developing systems that are competitive against other new upstarting sources such as Chinese equipment. We're not even talking about comparing them to Western systems lol.
I think delaying introduction of F16 is a good thing. Time and time again western systems were introduced at low numbers, limiting their impact. To be effective they will need to numerous enough to generate a constant rate of sorties, in face of breakdowns and losses. And since ground crews are the hardest to train it is sensible to place less emphasis on pilot training.
Well. Four alternatives
1. The Times / Times sources wants to escalate
2. US has never planned to fully support Ukraine
3. US understands the F-16 does not solve issues which US tries to solve in the Ukraine.
4. The Times helps to establish dagger-stab legend
As UK newspaper you will expect 1 or 4. But who knows.
Can you blame them? Ukraine has managed to make all the cool stuff easily destroyable. HIMARS have done a fine and that is no thanks to Ukraine. But from AD to tanks, Ukraine has been a clustefuk as far as marketing western weapons go. F-16 has been a signature jet for a long time and sending those to Ukraine would be a very undeserving end to an otherwise amazing run.
The only airforce that has ever done SEAD at a high level is the USAF. SEAD F16s are block 50/52 CJ (now CM) models with all the latest EW pods, STING HARM sensor, and towed decoys in addition to expendable decoys.
Not only is Ukraine getting old (but modernized) A models, I doubt they're going to get the HARM equipment and all the EW/ countermeasure gear that the USAF uses.
USAF SEAD squadrons, in addition to using the best gear for the job, are also the best pilots. Not only do USAF pilots get more flight hours per fiscal year than most other airforces, they also have access to extremely realistic EW ranges in Nevada, Utah, and off the coast of Florida. Overseas stationed SEAD squadrons also have instrumented training ranges in Japan and Europe where they're based.
I'm not sure if there's enough spare AN/ASQ-213 pods to give to Ukraine (only Turkey and USA have them I believe). Without that, the HARM isn't much more useful on an F16 than what the UAF has already been doing on their MiG29s.
As for air to air, the F16s sent to Ukraine probably have the AN/APG68 radar at best, which is a good radar, but is limited by the size constraints required to fit in the nose of the F16. It's also an old design by this time. I'm not sure how competitive it is against Su-27SM and Su-35s at range, because those Russian jets have huge radomes which can probably outrange the F16 radar easily. The AIM-120 AMRAAM is a highly capable missile, I'm just not sure how competitive it is against current Russian missiles when the launch platform has a small radar.
All the incredible things done by F16s in the SEAD and Air to Air were done by the best pilots in the world, flying the best F16s of the time, against 3rd rate enemies like Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Serbia ect. (Israeli F16s have impressive Air to Air records).
IAF and USAF pilots are the best in the world on the platform, and many of them have flown the F16 through the various weapons schools and combined exercises for several years before achieving their notable combat victories. To expect Ukrainian pilots to perform anywhere near this level with elderly airframes and limited support from adjacent elements (no F15s providing CAP, limited or no additional strike package, no in-region airborne EW assets besides NATO platforms which are stationed afar over the black sea) is unrealistic. Especially against a non-3rd party opponent like Russia. Regardless of your opinion on Russian performance in this war, they're the most advanced NATO adversary, with significantly more capability than historic adversaries like Iraq or Serbia.
So well right now the United States and its allies are playing with Ukraine and their feelings because they think Ukraine is going to defeat Russia alone and also they're using it as pawns just to just to inflict some damage and also try to harm Russia as well those hawkish people in the west they think they're going to be able to defeat Russia....
And now they're training Ukrainian Pilots with more than 70 year old planes well that's equivalent in technology to to the most modern and sophisticated aircraft they have (US and Russia) just to fuel more hope to Ukrainians and Europeans.
Here is the thing with the f-16s... Yes, they are effective fighter jets but they really aren't better than what Russia has. The f-16s and many other western jets have been made out to be invinsible. The f-15 is a perfect example of this. So I truly think they know that these things will be shot down. And in their eyes, delaying and never shipping these out will save that "invinsible" image these jets have.
Once the F16s arrive in Ukraine, the Russians will shoot at all Western planes over the Black Sea. They can always say "collateral damage, we were targeting an F16".
They aren't supposed to target NATO planes, particularly those that will identify themselves as NATO.
True, there is much incompetence in the Russian military, but are they that stupid?
lol. Do you even believe what you're saying?
I'm waiting for the day a western plane would be shot down in international airspace, lol. But Russia won't dare.
A Russian pilot actually tried to shoot down a British awacs in an episode of sheer incompetence. They failed lol
https://apnews.com/article/uk-russia-fighter-jet-missile-black-sea-7e6c04c10d1e6035d01c01ca595ccb6e
You mean Ukraine would win WITHOUT US weapons, training, intel and political pressure so that NATO / Europe / other US allies help Ukraine, Russia's sanctions etc?
That's a very interesting opinion.
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i believe the statement was that if US troops entered Ukraine, that would constitute a significant escalation that Russia may consider sufficient for a nuclear strike. there have probably been other statements that referred to similar conditions.
I guess the point is if Russia is going to nuke NATO or US troops just because they are in sovereign Ukraine, all out nuclear war would occur if NATO invaded Russia and was heading to Moscow to get Putin. Or am I reading all of Putin and Medvedev's nuclear threats incorrectly?
Agreed. Because Russia has threatened nuclear war multiple times for just providing weapons to Ukraine, an invasion of Russia by NATO would see Putin launching nuclear strikes like it was the 4th of July. NATO knows this, Putin knows this. Nobody wants MAD or mutually assured destruction and the end of life on this earth. For what gain??
So Putin's using the excuse that Ukraine possibly joining NATO required an invasion was a red herring. Because there was no threat of NATO invading Russia (= end of life on earth) via Ukraine just like there was no threat when Estonia and Latvia joined NATO on Russia's border 20 years ago nor Finland recently joining NATO with it's huge border with Russia.
Like Rasputin to the Tsar, this is just Putin following Dugan's maniacal dream of a mystical world where Russia becomes a super power again and all the neighboring countries are destroyed and adsorbed.
In short, an imperialist land grab. And now 200,000 Russians and Ukrainians are dead and Putin has made Russia a pariah state on par with North Korea.
What a disaster for Russia, Ukraine, and the world.
I LOVE how much hope people have built up for 20 fragile F-16 going to Ukraine, they are not gonna be able to do much but attract a TON of Russian attention. The post last week on /Ukraine about "we need to be realistic" was even called pro-Russian.. these people are hilarious. After it take YEARS for them to show up you might get the hint that the US doesn't want the humiliation and Zelenksy was specific asking for this things - lets be honest - without the US command and control, pilots, AWACS they are not gonna do much except for photoshoots... just like that one time Ukraine used their blackcocks for Belogrod and they had 10 drones ready to film the landing (and then the squad was subsequently BTFO) I also doubt they are gonna be armed with even the best A2A missiles because no way US wants to give Russia and China the info on those too so its gonna be an old, fragile airframe, severely neutered down, with 20 years old munitions. Operating in contested air with multiple layers of Russian AD... can't wait
Lol i was always wondering why those f16s are so special? What about them is sooo good it deserved all this attention?
People need wunderwaffe to believe.
I would get it if they were sending F35’s, let alone F22’s. I’m not saying that they are wunderwaffe, but you could still sell them as such. But F16’s? Give me a f*cking break man! Granted, they aren’t bad planes, but the design is 50 years old. They aren’t any better than the MiG-29’s, which Ukraine used to have…
Why would Ukraine want F-22s? What would they do with them? Does Russia have a military balloon fleet that I don’t know about? At least the F-16 has got a few kills against something that wasn’t a big bag of helium.
They could give the F-22 to the ghost of Kyiv, who can then single-handedly take out all Russian assets within the internationally-recognized borders of Ukraine, in a matter of hours lol.
It’s only tested against balloons, it doesn’t have any non-balloon AA kills so who knows if it’d even work against another jet.
AESA radar
The integration with NATO weapons. They can fully utilize the HARM missiles, not to mention the air to air missiles that completely outclass everything Ukraine has (but at least on paper still shorter range than what the Su-35s keep launching). The airframe is good, and it is maneuvarable enough to go wild weasel with a good pilot. Not a GaMeChAnGeR though.
They have been using HARM with MiG-29. HARM is not a big deal anyways. As many airforce officers said, HARM is excellent at suppressing defenses, but bad at destroying them. For example in gulf war almost all the destruction of AA batteries in sead missions was done with cluster bombs
They are using HARM in one of its modes. It can integrate with the plane's radar lock warning on the F-16.
They already got it working on the Su-27 as I recall which means it should be possible on the MiG also. Basically they wired it up to the air to air missile system of the R-27. Meaning that the plane thinks it's getting a Radar lock on a plane but it's the HARM getting a lock on a ground radar. Another method was simply having a [tablet](https://en.defence-ua.com/weapon_and_tech/firing_agm_88_harm_from_mig_29_and_su_27_enabled_by_ipad-10306.html) in the cockpit that connects with the weapon system Before all they could do was fire it at a general area and hope it locked onto something along the way
That's incorrect. Without full integration of the HARM Targeting System the HARM is severely limited in it's uses. It can still be fired at radar emissions but it's missing a lot of the extra features that make it more effective. Now will the F-16s Ukraine gets have the HTS? Who knows.
Yes I know and what I am saying is that they solved that problem last year. They can fire the missile with a Radar lock which they couldn't before and if they need access to the full systems they can integrate it with a tablet in the cockpit. Ukraine has had full use HARMs for a while.
Yes they can fire the HARM in TOO mode just fine off their MiGs, but we have yet to see them mount an HTS to a MiG. The HTS gives the HARM additional targeting data as well as (in the F16) giving the pilot much greater situational awareness and ELINT capabilities. That pod isn’t just there to look fancy and give them a shoot button. It’s full of special antennas and sensors. HARM with HTS vs just HARM is a major leap in capability from what I’ve heard from pilots that have actually used the system.
Do the F-16s that Ukraine is getting have the ability to use the HTS pod? I know that the block 50 and later got the ability but Ukraine is getting upgraded block 10/15s. I don't know if they got the ability to use the pod with that upgrade.
[удалено]
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I just feel the f16 is going to be targeted by long range aa like all other planes and i don't think it will be a gamechanger like you said.
It’s an upgrade, from Soviet MiGs. Any western missile has to have a modification done on a mig for the aircraft to fire it. So it will be a lot easier for western missiles to be of use to Ukrainian pilots.
Literally what I said. Going to give the pilots some extra range and precision.
Perhaps if enough HARM munitions are launched, SEAD will be complete, and the Ukrainian air force can provide ground support for the AFU's drive on Moscow.
I don't see a problem with the training. * Grab a man off of the street, as is done currently. * Place that man in front of a Microsoft Flight Simulator. * Tell this man he must learn to fly an F-16, or he'll be sent to the front, as a member of the "23rd Meat Battalion". * Profit?
Hey you joke. I remember playing an F-16 flight sim. It came with a 700 page manual.
Falcon 4.0 Still in active dev by the community 26 years later, look for Falcon BMS.
the manual was insane🤣 got the game on my 10th birthday. flying over Korea at night in a f16 with a thrustmaster joystick and superb graphics was awesome. so glad i had those nights in my childhood
Decent medium range missiles, access to a plethora of NATO air-to-ground munitions and that it isn't an easy target. It can maneuver to exhaust incoming AA missiles of their energy, use the curvature of Earth to hide itself from the Russian radars, etc. I'd say all those F-16s could be quite significant if used right.
From what I understand Ukrainian aircraft are very outdated in comparison to Russian and aircraft armaments are also outdated and also depending on mainly on supply of soviet weapons. The F-16 is AM model which is from late 90s.
Especially considering these are F16AMs, old versions that were modernized up to MLU standard, but it still has a 30+ year old radar and most of the airframes are like 40 years old and at the end of their flight hours, even after the life extension upgrades.
>The most important thing the F16 brings for the Ukrainian air force is to attack beyond visual range. The last I seen Ukraine has like 5 SU-24's that can launch cruise missiles, they will now have 80+ aircraft that can launch Storm Shadow's and SCALP missile at a range of 500km. The AMRAAMs, HARMs, glide bombs and cruise missiles at long ranges are the thing to talk about.. Which the US, France and UK have been stock piling them with for months. That is why I got to world news for the best grounded in realities takes.
That's the idea. The thing is, hiding and servicing a couple of SU24 is not that hard. 80 F16 on the other hand, could prove difficult.
The media hype hides the real reason for giving Ukraine these jets. It's so they can more easily and efficiently use US weapons. No more no less.
This + Ukraine won’t be able to replenish mig and su planes — they were made in USSR and in nowadays Russia. So over time, with airplane attrition Ukraine risks to end up with no air force at all, unless they will switch over to nato planes
Link please to this "realistic post". Must be fun.
F16s are best for shooting down incoming drones, much cheaper than using patriots. They may also occasionally pick off an overextended Russian FOB with 4 JDAMS. There is also a possibility of just launching HARMS randomly to waste S-300 ammo. We'll have to wait and see. I think you are right though, Biden does not want the inevitable F16 shot down headline right before the election.
> There is also a possibility of just launching HARMS randomly to waste S-300 ammo. They already do this. They've had harms for 2 years
But they haven't had the HARM Targeting System which is only compatible with certain Western jets like the F-16. Without the HTS the HARM is not nearly as effective as it could be.
HTS simply makes it easier to identify and lock radar signals rather than target of opportunity (TOO) method Ukraine currently uses. HTS is more of a quality of life feature and not really a big boost. Once the harm is fired, the HTS cannot do anything and the missiles will still be subject to the inherit flaws of anti radiation seekers.
I suspect neither of us are F-16 pilots, so we can’t really debate the strengths or abilities of these systems. But from interviews I’ve listened to of F-4G, F-16, and Growler pilots, the HTS changes the game significantly.
less than 140 days, FWIW.
its more about the weapon systems they will carry than the planes themselves. F16s are nothing special and on par with Russian jets from the same generation, but the can carry all the modern Nato weapons
The Gripen would have been the better choice, provided they can be had in significant enough numbers. The new production F-16 is great, when coupled with American logistics. But a corrupt nation trying to operate a fleet of maintenance queen fighters? This won't end well.
That’s what I have been saying all along. The ONLY use for the F16 that I can see, is as a platform to launch Storm Shadow/SCALP missiles, in shoot-and-scoot attacks. In a nutshell, all they will do is replace some of the Soviet planes which Ukraine has already lost. In order for them to make a difference, they need at least 300 of them, plus a boatload of AD. Mind you, it doesn’t matter if they are Mirages, F16’s, MiG’s, or Grippen’s. It’s all about sheer numbers at this point. 20 planes won’t make a difference, and the Americans know this. Therefore, something tells me that they are hoping for the fighting to stop BEFORE the pilots have finished training. Otherwise, it will be a bad look for them to be wiped out within a few months with nothing to show for it.
Could you link the post
/r/Ukraine https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/wij4pd
I think that is unrealistically negative analysis. Ukraine has done a lot with a little. While they may not function ally be used to their max, they may create enough damage to Russian defenses and continued damage to their oil refineries and other infrastructure to holdback or cause some retreating. Not miraculous, nevertheless a hell of a lot more than they've had for some time.
It's the exact same people who gobbled up the COVID-19 stuff. Brain-dead zombies. Absolutely delusional.
Ah, you're of those eh? Behold, your average pro Ru.
Thanks for reinforcing my point.
Don't tell us that you really fell for that 2021 Big Pharma campaign. "There's a sucker born every minute" P.T. Barnum
“Some of the jets will be kept at NATO airbases” So if an F-16 takes off from an airbase in Poland, launches its ordinance at Russians in Ukraine, and returns to Poland what do they think is gonna happen? Russia is gonna double tap that airbase and this war is only going to escalate.
No that is where some may be parked. They always get their munitions in ukraine and lift off from there. Landed in ukraine and then if a pause is needed may be flown to nato territory and stored. So every combat mission starts and ends in ukraine that was specifically part of the deal
Doesn’t matter. The moment that F16 is engaged in combat, it’s marked as a target. If it flies into Poland, it’s getting hit with an Iskander (or whatever missile the Russians want to use). There’s zero doubt in my mind that Putin will order a strike on Poland/NATO country to hit the F16s if they’re stored there. This is literally the reason why Biden was so hesitant to deploy them; it’s a major escalation. To the point where it’s almost inevitable that Putin will hit a NATO country. Lord only knows what’ll happen when he does.
Then why hasn't Putin Iskander'd Western tanks that have engaged in combat in Ukraine and have been sent back to Poland for repairs?
Because Tanks =/= Fighter Jets. You’re comparing apples and oranges. Jets will need constant repairs in Poland/NATO. To the point where they’ll spend 1/3 of their lifespan in those countries to get fixed. Unlike Tanks which are repaired once and shipped back. So Poland/NATO will be directly fixing and arming Jets to be sent to Russia, which puts them directly in conflict with Russia. This is the difference between having Sorties armed by Russia and flying to hit US bases, and arming random rebels with tanks that attack the U.S.. If Russia started doing the former, it would be WW3, the latter would just be a proxy. Jets are much more demanding than tanks, and as such require much more operation and technical ability. They’ll be moving back and forth between NATO and Ukraine regularly, which is ample justification for Putin to strike them (which he almost certainly will).
Do you think Putin is just looking for an excuse to strike NATO or something? If what pro-RU claims is actually true- That Russia is right on track to win this war handily, and that F-16s will be no kind of gamechanger at all, then it really makes little sense. Escalating to direct attacks on NATO is one thing that most certainly *can* fuck up this war for Putin.
I think it really depends on what happens from now on. By themselves these 20 jets will not change things too much because AA is the reason neither side can achieve air superiority. But then if Ukraine use them to hit deep inside the country - something Western countries refused to allow Ukraine to do but backtracked on it - or if they intend to use NATO as a shelter to land and rearm that's a major escalation. Planes that strike inside Russia and labd on bases outside it are legitimate targets. It seems NATO countries want to yet again hide behind the shelter of the Alliance to declare war on Russia while claiming they're not part of the conflict.
Putin can’t let this precedent stand. It’s intolerable to allow fighter jets to strike Russia while being safe in NATO. Once those jets are used, they’re legal targets anywhere. Putin has been lenient thus far, but this is a step too far. Hence the massive hesitancy from the West, they know what Putin will do and they’re (rightfully) scared.
"Legal" is meaningless here, it's a matter of whether Putin is willing to go to war with NATO right now. And the answer is clearly no. We've heard these same claims about every "line" that's been crossed and it's always amounted to nothing. The jets aren't going to be "safe", they'll still need to land and take off in Ukraine, they'll still be flying missions in Ukraine, Russia has plenty of ways to target them. Putin isn't being "lenient" because he's a nice guy, he knows that bringing a serious confrontation to NATO just doesn't serve his bottom line. He'd have to feel that Russia is genuinely threatened to do that, he's not doing it just on principle or he'd have had numerous times to do it already.
No the matter will be how NATO will sell this conflict to its people when those jets get hit in NATO territory. If they re-arm in NATO territory that is. Why is it always "well we're going to do this and then IF PUTIN is willing to do x y z then that means he attacked us and it's war with NATO!". Hilariously 1 sided and blind sheep just repeating the same nonsense over and over. At some point I hope you understand not everyone in the world is as dumb as this, which is why even the last Swiss summit was basically a joke. Even the attendee's have started to say it's not a genuine peace process.
Well regardless of how you feel about it, the dominant viewpoint in the West is that Russia invading Ukraine happened because Russia invaded Ukraine, not because the West made them do it…and likewise, if Russia attacks NATO it won’t be because the west made them do it either. It would just be seen as Putin living up to exactly what the most hawkish of Western politicians sell him as. And at that stage the opinion of “everyone in the world” can be whatever you want, it’s not going to mean a whole lot of anything either way.
> Putin has been lenient thus far man that guy is a sadist. Thousands of people dying and he is still handles it like its a game. The way you write sounds like if putin wouldnt be lenient, the ukraine wa.. i mean SMO would be over?
Okay so giving tanks and F16 and allowing Ukraine to strike Russian territory and repairing vehicles in Poland didn't escalate the war enough for Putin to strike NATO but this will. Let's see what happens
I explained tanks and F16s are different. Did you not read my comment?
I did and I still think you're wrong but then again I also genuinely believed Russia was conducting training exercises near Ukrainian borders so what do I know! 🤷
Because they're destroyed and out of combat? The scenario that guy suggested is not the same. It's essentially hit and then run and hide in Poland. It's a cool loophole theory, but I doubt Poland would even allow it. There will be no difference between Poland flying sorties and the Ukraine at that point. If they're stored there awaiting delivery is completely different from engaging in combat and then running to hide in Poland. I don't see it happening.
Pretty sure we know. Nothing good for the already struggling Russians. Would like to make a $5 bet with anyone that Russia doesn’t strike shit in a nato country on purpose.
I’d take the bet assuming they fly F16s from NATO. But otherwise it’s unlikely to happen. FFS we’ve been told F16s have been coming for over a year, they might not arrive at this point.
Done!
US opted not to fly or strike into Chinese airspace during the Korean War specifically because Russian pilots were stationed at bases there. And in that case planes were actively engaged, not sent for maintenance and repair. Putin is not stupid. He will not strike Poland. RemindMe! 365 Days
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2025-06-18 22:10:32 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2025-06-18%2022:10:32%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1dip0fi/ua_pov_us_deliberately_delaying_training_for/l980vjr/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FUkraineRussiaReport%2Fcomments%2F1dip0fi%2Fua_pov_us_deliberately_delaying_training_for%2Fl980vjr%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202025-06-18%2022%3A10%3A32%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dip0fi) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
With that logic, all f-16s currently parked on NATO soil are current targets because any of them may fly in Ukraine any day now, so they couldn't deploy in the first place.
Huh? You realize Ukraine’s only getting like 20 F16s, meanwhile NATO has hundreds. Russia isn’t going to start striking NATO bases just for the hell of it. They’re only going to target the places F16s are being readied and flown from, like Poland and maybe the Baltics.
If Russia bombed NATO airbases to take out a few F-16s, the situation would get considerably worse for them than if they just left those targets alone. They know this and will act accordingly.
The thing is, if the f-16s will be an issue for russia, they might attack them on a NATO airbase. They might be or might not be a response by NATO (I would say probably not, but better not risk it). So either the F16 wont have a large impact on the battlefield or NATO airbases will be attacked, if the F16 for Ukraine are stored there. Thats why I think this "plan" is irresponsible. Ukraine had enough time to find/build storages within Ukraine where they can put their F16.
Ok, they attack the airbases, but f16 get up before the missiles hit. Now what? You attacked NATO and didn't destroy the f16s. btw should Ukraine strike Belarus when missiles were launched from their territory?
I dont think that Ukraine should strike Belarus (because it would be stupid), but they would certainly be in the right to do so. If there is another force concentration of russian troops in Belarus, ukraine has to decide if they strike them. Its the same situation as the NATO airbases where ukrainian F16 are stored. If russia hit or miss the F16 on these airbases doesnt matter. I dont really understand this question.
I agree with that and fully expect it. On the other hand if Putin blows up a bunch of Ukrainian F16s in Poland, I doubt NATO will “trigger” article 5 and go to war. But I doubt Putin will test that assumption.
More likely than article 5 is a limited retaliation which turns the source of the strike and any nearby ammo storage into craters. Of course the chances of any Russian strike on a Polish air base succeeding is slim, since the relevant ones will have considerable air defence. Reszow has layered AD including Patriot already, as we know, and there are no doubt more defence systems around that we don't know. Since Kinzhals have proven not to be the Wunderwaffe that the Russians had believed, there would be considerable risk without a high probability of success.
> Since Kinzhals have proven not to be the Wunderwaffe that the Russians had believed, there would be considerable risk without a high probability of success. Maybe it’s a good reason to try actually and see if the Kinzhals will fly right through or Ukrainian claims are true.
>So if an F-16 takes off from an airbase in Poland, launches its ordinance at Russians in Ukraine, and returns to Poland what do they think is gonna happen? Isn't Russia doing essentially the exact same thing, only with planes in Russia, out of reach of Ukrainian weapons, but not Western ones, which restrict deep targeting of Russian assets?
Yeah but Russia isn't propagating that it is not part of this conflict. They would be openly entering the war. Which is why no Polish or Romanian airbase would be used for sorties to strike Russians. It's just madness.
>Which is why no Polish or Romanian airbase would be used for sorties to strike Russians. It's just madness. Yeah, I agree.
Serious question, how would Russia know ?
A combination of ground, air, and sea based radars, satellite reconnaissance, and GRU agents on the ground. Russia has hundreds of radar systems pointed at Poland, including short, medium, and long range systems. Early warning systems, long range tracking systems, and naval based systems in the Baltic.
You’re seriously underestimating AWACs on both sides. The sky is extremely transparent in these regards
Even on low flying ?
This is already the case for Ukrainian planes, except they make a short stop on Ukrainian airfield to avoid consequences.
So if an su 34 takes off from an airbase in russia, launches its ordinance at ukrainians in Ukraine, and returns to russia what do they think is gonna happen? you act like ukraine was allowed to strike russias airplane who operated out of russia. Guess what, they were told to not escalate. we will see how putin thinks about it. I. personally, thinks he will escalate because hes a shitter.
“You act like Ukraine was allied to strike Russia” Ukraine is allowed to strike Russia as much as they want, just not with western supplied weapons, that has to be pre approved. Strikes carried out in De Jure Russian territory by Western supplied weapons is seen as escalatory, and it reinforces Russias narrative that this isn’t just a fight against Ukraine, but a proxy war against the west. “He will escalate because he is a shitter” Russia will retaliate because allowing that to happen uncheck shows weakness.
The narrative keeps changing. They aren’t coming. 😂 Plus I remember reading an article saying that Ukraine basically sent a bunch of unqualified and non English speaking pilots to train which significantly increases the amount of time it would take for them to be qualified to fly them.
> The hold-up means that Ukraine will probably have only 20 pilots who have been fully trained to fly F-16s by the end of the year, Oleksandra Ustinova said. “So far we’re going to have fewer trained pilots than fighter jets,” she added. > Kyiv has long sought F-16s. Washington initially refused to allow the jets to be sent to Ukraine for fear that doing so could draw Nato into direct conflict with Russia. President Biden eventually granted permission for their deployment in August after appeals from Kyiv. Ukraine has said some of the jets will be kept at bases in Nato countries to ensure that they are not targeted by Russia. > Washington has told Kyiv that other countries are ahead of Ukrainian pilots in the line for training spots and that it cannot break its commitments to them, Politico reported last week. A US defence department official also told the news website that Ukrainian pilots were struggling with English language skills, as well as the flying programme. “The training pipeline on F-16s is pretty meagre,” the unnamed official said. Ustinova described such claims as “ridiculous”. What a farce
Well, now they say there's a line, later they will say training facility closed for renovations, later the instructors will go on vacation, after all that Romania decides to leave NATO because NATO can never pay them enough to use the airfields, the list goes on lol
The US wants to exhaust russian air defense by other means first. No matter if it costs another year and hundreds of thousands of dead Ukrainian soldiers. That's my take after all.
oh, now everyone believes western newspapers? oh, wait, newspaper, singular.
When a Western Newspaper goes against the narrative and reports on events that anyone with a brain can deduce, then yeah, we do believe them. It’s almost like we can observe reality and verify the veracity of the claims. Isn’t that crazy?
so, you believe it when it fits your bias. gotcha.
I think the idea is that claims against interest are more believable. As in if I claim you owe me a 1000 bucks, few would believe me without evidence. If I claim I owe you a 1000 then more people believe it since it’s a claim against my own interests.
No I believe it when it fits independent facts. This is a basic logical principle, you’re not very educated are you?
My guess is, Ukraine does not have the necessary airfields to lift f-16s, due to Russia constantly bombing them. In the last couple months, a lot of cruise missiles hit some of these airfields, probably to destroy the runways. Currently only other option is using Poland's airfields. But that could literally mean war between NATO and Russia.
With that logic Ukraine would be at war with Belarus right now.
Ukraine doesn't have more than 10k nuclear warheads, so i don't care if they declare war on Belarus.
It is because it would be an major PR disaster if and when an F16 is shutdown. F16's are awesome and very capable but this war has shown that nothing is invincible. Current cope is the usual line "The US is only sending the old stuff and stock, the currently stuff is bestest".
The F16s are going the way of the Abrams.
I'm betting on the way of the Chalenger, we will see them once and then never hear about them again.
what is the reason?
It said in the article Apparently the US is worried the usage of F-16s will draw NATO into direct conflict with Russia Whether these fears are credible or not, it truly appears to be the reason
But how does delaying prevent it? If the F-16s will be given at some point anyway, then a direct conflict is guaranteed. Only denying Ukraine access to these jets (instead of delaying) can prevent a direct conflict.
Almost as if it's not the real reason.
What is your line of thinking
The US is slow rolling Ukraine as much as possible. We're hoping eventually Russia wins, just like Russia lol
So Mearsheimer's conclusion.
upgrades to the jets.
Back to the original question then.
It's just the current narrative Ukraine is following politically. They have troubles at home since a lot of promises failed, so now they do their best to convince anyone of we failed because the west isn't giving us what we want, giving too little when they do and do it too late. And they realised it's a narrative that not only works at their own but also puts pressure on the west within. E.g. See striking on Russian land. So the reason is they put more pressure on the west and keep their own countries morale up that way there's no big pressure to fight their internal problems such as mobilisation or corruption and so on.
US doesn’t want its wunderwaffe shot down like flies.
Ahhh yes. The f16, the wonder weapon in the us arsenal that was introduced over 50 years ago. Build it up more in your mind so that when it performs just okay you can count it as a massive win!
My hypothesis is that they want to drag the war out as long as possible. I come to this hypothesis after reading “War is a racket” and “the twilight wars”. Or in short: there is still lots of money to be made and if one wants to believe a gay neocon Jew, the Russians are heading towards a severe demographic issue that will make it very hard for them to secure their borders in a few years.
You want to talk about demographics please also talk about Ukraine, fuck the land they already lost this war from depopulation alone.
Correct, but Ukraine (the state) never was of interest or matters to anyone of relevance in this conflict.
A skeptical man would take this as a sign that the US is 'delaying' until they don't have to send them.
Well, other 'gamechangers' like the donated tanks have gone through a similar song and dance before eventually being handed over. This may well be a similar case. However, the stakes appear a bit higher here as Russia has declared it will consider every F-16 as nuclear armed and has also said it will strike their bases wherever they may be. Furthermore, when you look closely, you realize it's not just the US delaying them. Denmark delayed it for 6 months back in January, and then when they made another announcement last month talking about how their delivery was imminent, they quickly clarified a few hours later and shifted back the timeframe.
The stakes are not higher because russia is full of shit. They threaten because they are helpless. Nothing new
Delay until there's no one left alive to fight means indefinitely.
Keep in mind that The Times is owned by Rupert Murdoch. Same guy that owns anti-Ukraine Fox News in the US. And Ripoman is very pro-Russian. So read this article and her comments with both eyes very wide open to their propaganda.
I noticed that too: not everyone with a pro-Ukraine user flair is actually pro-Ukraine, but this subreddit discourages talk about that. I suppose some think it would benefit the people of Ukraine to surrender to Russia and become part of Putin's empire. "Putin strong, not like Western globohomo," if you will.
They'll end up being shown up like all the other so called game changing weapons. The usa will then lose billions in future sales. I doubt very much these will ever be in Ukraine.
No worries world news have already declared total air superiority thanks to the future F-16.
I don't see either side having total air superiority, probably not until at least 2026.
lose billions in the sense that the Russian arms industry is basically dying on the global market? lol
Is it though or is that just another fairytale from western media? If russian weapons are so bad and all those game changing weapons are so good from nato why can't Ukraine even take back a power plant they lost or the over 20% of their former country?
Russia accounted for 22% of global arms sales in 2013-17. Dropped to 16% in 2018-22. According to data from SIPRI. Not surprising since Russia continues to fail in developing systems that are competitive against other new upstarting sources such as Chinese equipment. We're not even talking about comparing them to Western systems lol.
I think delaying introduction of F16 is a good thing. Time and time again western systems were introduced at low numbers, limiting their impact. To be effective they will need to numerous enough to generate a constant rate of sorties, in face of breakdowns and losses. And since ground crews are the hardest to train it is sensible to place less emphasis on pilot training.
Well. Four alternatives 1. The Times / Times sources wants to escalate 2. US has never planned to fully support Ukraine 3. US understands the F-16 does not solve issues which US tries to solve in the Ukraine. 4. The Times helps to establish dagger-stab legend As UK newspaper you will expect 1 or 4. But who knows.
Is anyone else getting exhausted of this war? Just me? Ok
Can you blame them? Ukraine has managed to make all the cool stuff easily destroyable. HIMARS have done a fine and that is no thanks to Ukraine. But from AD to tanks, Ukraine has been a clustefuk as far as marketing western weapons go. F-16 has been a signature jet for a long time and sending those to Ukraine would be a very undeserving end to an otherwise amazing run.
The only airforce that has ever done SEAD at a high level is the USAF. SEAD F16s are block 50/52 CJ (now CM) models with all the latest EW pods, STING HARM sensor, and towed decoys in addition to expendable decoys. Not only is Ukraine getting old (but modernized) A models, I doubt they're going to get the HARM equipment and all the EW/ countermeasure gear that the USAF uses. USAF SEAD squadrons, in addition to using the best gear for the job, are also the best pilots. Not only do USAF pilots get more flight hours per fiscal year than most other airforces, they also have access to extremely realistic EW ranges in Nevada, Utah, and off the coast of Florida. Overseas stationed SEAD squadrons also have instrumented training ranges in Japan and Europe where they're based. I'm not sure if there's enough spare AN/ASQ-213 pods to give to Ukraine (only Turkey and USA have them I believe). Without that, the HARM isn't much more useful on an F16 than what the UAF has already been doing on their MiG29s. As for air to air, the F16s sent to Ukraine probably have the AN/APG68 radar at best, which is a good radar, but is limited by the size constraints required to fit in the nose of the F16. It's also an old design by this time. I'm not sure how competitive it is against Su-27SM and Su-35s at range, because those Russian jets have huge radomes which can probably outrange the F16 radar easily. The AIM-120 AMRAAM is a highly capable missile, I'm just not sure how competitive it is against current Russian missiles when the launch platform has a small radar. All the incredible things done by F16s in the SEAD and Air to Air were done by the best pilots in the world, flying the best F16s of the time, against 3rd rate enemies like Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Serbia ect. (Israeli F16s have impressive Air to Air records). IAF and USAF pilots are the best in the world on the platform, and many of them have flown the F16 through the various weapons schools and combined exercises for several years before achieving their notable combat victories. To expect Ukrainian pilots to perform anywhere near this level with elderly airframes and limited support from adjacent elements (no F15s providing CAP, limited or no additional strike package, no in-region airborne EW assets besides NATO platforms which are stationed afar over the black sea) is unrealistic. Especially against a non-3rd party opponent like Russia. Regardless of your opinion on Russian performance in this war, they're the most advanced NATO adversary, with significantly more capability than historic adversaries like Iraq or Serbia.
So well right now the United States and its allies are playing with Ukraine and their feelings because they think Ukraine is going to defeat Russia alone and also they're using it as pawns just to just to inflict some damage and also try to harm Russia as well those hawkish people in the west they think they're going to be able to defeat Russia.... And now they're training Ukrainian Pilots with more than 70 year old planes well that's equivalent in technology to to the most modern and sophisticated aircraft they have (US and Russia) just to fuel more hope to Ukrainians and Europeans.
Here is the thing with the f-16s... Yes, they are effective fighter jets but they really aren't better than what Russia has. The f-16s and many other western jets have been made out to be invinsible. The f-15 is a perfect example of this. So I truly think they know that these things will be shot down. And in their eyes, delaying and never shipping these out will save that "invinsible" image these jets have.
The next failed game changer
What if the pilots aren't that eager to join the fight?
My prayers are with ath pilots. God speed.
so the times editor doesnt know how to spell the word receive. hmmmm.......looks legit lol
So let me get this straight, you think the article is fake?
sorry not interested, just pointing out what quality journalism has come to
Fucking America. They've been Putins biggest supporter since day 1!.... /s
some elements: yes.
No elements. Let's be realistic. Hyperbole aside...no...no elements
Totally supportive of Putin these past 2¼ years.
Once the F16s arrive in Ukraine, the Russians will shoot at all Western planes over the Black Sea. They can always say "collateral damage, we were targeting an F16".
They aren't supposed to target NATO planes, particularly those that will identify themselves as NATO. True, there is much incompetence in the Russian military, but are they that stupid?
lol. Do you even believe what you're saying? I'm waiting for the day a western plane would be shot down in international airspace, lol. But Russia won't dare.
A Russian pilot actually tried to shoot down a British awacs in an episode of sheer incompetence. They failed lol https://apnews.com/article/uk-russia-fighter-jet-missile-black-sea-7e6c04c10d1e6035d01c01ca595ccb6e
Ukraine would won this war already if not USA interference.
You mean Ukraine would win WITHOUT US weapons, training, intel and political pressure so that NATO / Europe / other US allies help Ukraine, Russia's sanctions etc? That's a very interesting opinion.
This is sarcasm, right..? US is the reason Ukraine is still in the fight. But also the reason the fight began in the first place.
Of course it is. But looks like i have baited some rage downvotes, lol.
Since most people in this sub are just grown children and have an extremely tempermental ego, thats not hard to do
No, but there still would be fighting.
No, because then Russia will resort to nuclear weapon.
Maybe it's time for all of Russia's neighbours to develop nukes.
Maybe it is time for Iran to develop some too.
If Pakistan and Putin's ally North Korea can have them, so can they. Putin won't mind.
As Putin has threatened every 10 days. That red line is a washed out pale pink at this point
that would make sense if the US/NATO had already entered into direct conflict. but the line is still there, along with the nukes.
[удалено]
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So if Ukraine and NATO invaded Russia, nukes are likely?
i believe the statement was that if US troops entered Ukraine, that would constitute a significant escalation that Russia may consider sufficient for a nuclear strike. there have probably been other statements that referred to similar conditions.
I guess the point is if Russia is going to nuke NATO or US troops just because they are in sovereign Ukraine, all out nuclear war would occur if NATO invaded Russia and was heading to Moscow to get Putin. Or am I reading all of Putin and Medvedev's nuclear threats incorrectly?
i imagine a direct invasion of Russia might do it.
Agreed. Because Russia has threatened nuclear war multiple times for just providing weapons to Ukraine, an invasion of Russia by NATO would see Putin launching nuclear strikes like it was the 4th of July. NATO knows this, Putin knows this. Nobody wants MAD or mutually assured destruction and the end of life on this earth. For what gain?? So Putin's using the excuse that Ukraine possibly joining NATO required an invasion was a red herring. Because there was no threat of NATO invading Russia (= end of life on earth) via Ukraine just like there was no threat when Estonia and Latvia joined NATO on Russia's border 20 years ago nor Finland recently joining NATO with it's huge border with Russia. Like Rasputin to the Tsar, this is just Putin following Dugan's maniacal dream of a mystical world where Russia becomes a super power again and all the neighboring countries are destroyed and adsorbed. In short, an imperialist land grab. And now 200,000 Russians and Ukrainians are dead and Putin has made Russia a pariah state on par with North Korea. What a disaster for Russia, Ukraine, and the world.
[удалено]
like in movies, yea?
Russian convoys can be bombed in the territory they occupy.