"Break the face" of the "Fighting Falcon" or "Viper" - easy or not?
There are talks about deliveries of F-16 fighters to Ukraine, optimists say that nothing will happen, because Biden said so, pessimists believe that they will give the planes. Not the US so the Netherlands. Not the Netherlands, but Poland. Or France. Or Germany.
Moreover, there are also options: Mirage 2000, Tornado, F-16. True, from this list, only the F-16 is more or less accessible in terms of ease of support, logistics infrastructure, the ability to train pilots to fly it, and multi-role capabilities. In terms of infrastructure and pilot training opportunities, it is really difficult to compete with the Fighting Falcon: in Europe alone, the F-16 is in service in eight countries, from Portugal to Poland, so there will be where to turn around.
But many people need to be trained: technicians, gunsmiths, engineers and, of course, pilots. And today, according to many American publications, many are thinking about how much and most importantly - how much is it really possible to train pilots not only to fly, but also to fight on the F-16?
Jack Hunter, Tyler Rogoway, Kyle Mizokami have all looked at this under the microscope. We also do not stand idly by, and therefore present our understanding of the issue.
As the war in Ukraine approaches the one-year mark, there are constant cries of support from various countries for Kyiv's requests to supply Western fighter jets to the Ukrainian Air Force. Ukrainian fighter pilots continue to work, finishing off and losing their already few MiG-29s and Su-27s. In bomber and assault aviation things are no better, because despite the equipping of the Su-24 and Su-25 with new models of Western weaponssuch as the AGM-88 high-velocity anti-radiation missile (HARM), Russia is constantly reducing the number of Ukrainian aircraft, albeit not in the way described in the reports of the Ministry of Defense. However, the numerical and technical advantage in the air is still with Russia.
Since March 2022, the Ukrainian leadership has repeatedly called on Western countries to replenish and expand their air force fighter fleet, which consists of aircraft from the Soviet era.
Today, Western weapons are flowing into Ukraine, but not a single one has yet been delivered from the NATO bloc. The Ukrainian side made it clear that the best option for the country's Air Force is to supply used F-16s to Kyiv.
Indeed, in the case of the F-16, there are many options for different training programs, and the technical capabilities are very close to the MiG-29, the aircraft familiar to Ukrainian pilots.
Colonel Yuriy Ignat, a spokesman for the Ukrainian Air Force Command, said two air squadrons of 12 aircraft, plus reserves, would be enough, at least initially, to help turn the tide against Russian aircraft. Somewhat self-confident, because the fighter regiment is not as much as it seems.
However, in January 2023, Ignat announced that not only the type of aircraft had already been determined (he did not say which one), but also the training programs for flight personnel. It has even been stated that Ukraine is already working on upgrading some airfields to accommodate Western-style fighter jets, pending receipt.
Despite President Biden's firm "no" to the transfer of the US F-16 to Ukraine last month, that "no" could easily turn into a "yes" in a very short amount of time. And even if the US government doesn't want to donate the F-16 itself, it can approve another supplier, such as the Netherlands or any of the other countries on the list above.
But many analysts in the United States unanimously say that the situation with the ban on the supply of aircraft can change at any time. And if the US government ends up authorizing the transfer of F-16s to Ukraine, what would that entail?
Absolutely nothing surprising. Generally the perfect solution. F-16 has a good history applications, well-established logistics in Europe and factories for the production of everything you need in the USA. And there is a fairly large number of used aircraft that can be given to Ukraine, after putting them in order.
Yuriy Ignat recently told Air Force Magazine that there are at least 30 pilots in Ukraine with sufficient English proficiency who are willing to go to the US for training if the F-16 deal is negotiated.
The issue of allocating time and money is no longer worth it, last year the Pentagon allocated $100 million for the retraining of Ukrainian pilots, and if there is money, there will definitely be time in training centers. But there must be plenty of time.
Even the Ukrainian pilots themselves say that it will take several weeks to master the first stage of takeoff and landing and flight from point A to point B, but to learn combat maneuvers, learn how to use missiles, they will need about six months.
And this is despite the fact that the F-16 is relatively easy and safe to operate, and therefore not too difficult to master. Within a few months, a pilot, initially unfamiliar with this aircraft, can safely retrain on the F-16. The systems are easy to operate, the aircraft is easy to fly and very intuitive to learn. An experienced pilot will have no difficulty with the F-16, and, regardless of what type of aircraft he flew before. This was the opinion of the Polish pilot, who at one time switched from the MiG-29 to the F-16.
“You fire up all of his systems, you move the throttle up, you fly. The flight control system will cancel out any big bugs, you really can't overstress the plane unless you really try to do it on purpose. You can't easily take it out of controlled flight - there are many cases where the aircraft itself takes care of you with such a level of safety that even an inexperienced pilot can fly safely - some of the safety systems include advanced ground proximity warning systems (EGPWS)."
The F-16 Complete Basic Course, also known as the "B-Course", is usually a nine-month process for young pilots who have just completed their training. It mainly consists of theoretical sessions, simulator exercises and training sorties. In addition to the courses, the Training Units (FTUs) also run refresher courses for pilots with experience on other aircraft - these are generally much shorter than a full "B-course".
In the case of completing the full B-Course, the first four weeks of theory classes teach pilots F-16 systems and emergency procedures. This is followed by about eight simulation sessions covering basic instrument flying and the practical experience of various emergencies before they transition to a two-seat F-16D for four instructor-assisted training flights ahead of the first solo mission.
The following sorties are intended to provide some experience prior to an instructor-led test flight during which pilots perform instrument flight and emergency procedures. After completing this program, the new pilot is considered qualified to fly the F-16 in all weather conditions during the day and may progress to night flying with night vision goggles (NVG).
Applicants go through learning basic air-to-air fighter maneuvers, dogfight maneuvering, and tactical interceptions before they move into the air-to-ground phase with low-altitude flying and ground attack tactics. There are about 60 sorties in the course, divided between the air-to-air and air-to-ground phases.
For seasoned Ukrainian fighter pilots, retraining on the F-16 can be like a typical FTU transition course known as TX. This has traditionally been applied to aircrew who are transitioning from one fighter type to another, or perhaps senior officers who need to fly multiple types. An individual retraining course could be the type of training program that a future Ukrainian F-16 pilot who has previously flown a MiG-29 or Su-27 will need.
An American flight instructor estimates that for a pilot with about 500 hours of flight time in an American fighter, but who has never flown an F-16 before (for example, if someone is switching from an F / A-18) without any breaks and days off, it will take 69 days to learn everything for the effective use of the F-16 in air combat and ground use.
“That's assuming they speak English well, because that's the language we teach. These 69 days include six flights to learn how to fly the plane and land it. About 15 air-to-air mission flights, but if they make progress, the number of flights can be reduced to 10. Further six to nine air-to-ground missions, which will include basic training in the use of laser-guided bombs (LGB) and guided munitions (JDAM). This gives a basic understanding at the wing level, and this is provided that they are already familiar with complex weapons such as the AIM-120 AMRAAM and the specifics of its application.
“They will also need to complete 210 hours of theory classes and 10-20 simulation competitions. You can't do it quickly - even doing two "flights" on the simulator a day means 10 days in a row. You cannot do such things quickly. So those 69 days would mean that the pilot could potentially operate the aircraft safely in a tactical training environment. Flying in combat is a different story."
“To go into battle against the Su-35, even the Su-27 in the air - now you are talking about a pilot with many years of experience. You can't do that with a brand new guy who's seen everything once! You can have all the capabilities of an airplane, but if the pilot doesn't know how to use it properly, then it's useless. So for the pilot who came with the MiG-29, the need to learn a whole new PVI (pilot-vehicle combat interface), where everything looks different, use a weapon that they have only ever read about to give them three months of training , and then throwing them into battle is a difficult task!”
“The difference between the MiG-29 and the F-16 Block 50 or Mid-Life Upgrade Viper (modifications of the F-16V - approx.) Is not a big step in performance, but it is a huge leap in technology, weapons and avionics. Even after 69 days of intense training, this is still just an entry-level pilot qualification, so to speak, an ordinary pilot in a wing. The question is who will lead the mission? You wouldn't just send out flyers as a lone hunter to try and shoot down anything with more than one vertical tail, would you? To be super effective, you need at least four aircraft, and in order to lead this, you need at least a year of intensive training - then you can crush the enemy.
“The answer was initially to be based on the creation of a new training program based on the specific needs of Ukraine and the scenario for the use of these aircraft, and then in order to effectively use this in combat (vehicles and pilots), six to 12 months of training would be required. And it would still be risky.”
The revelations of the seasoned air wolf of the US Air Force dot many i's, especially since this letter is also in the Ukrainian language. The instructor, who gave an interview to The National Interest, although he remained unnamed for obvious reasons, very clearly outlined all the problems that Ukrainian flight crews will face on their way to the F-16 pilot's seat.
In general, nothing terrible or supernatural, many countries operating the F-16 prefer to send their pilots to the United States for initial retraining. For example, pilots from Poland and Romania conduct F-16 training with the 162nd Air National Guard Wing at Morris Air National Guard Base in Tucson, Arizona. This could serve as an ideal place to train Ukrainian pilots.
Another F-16 pilot commented to the equally well-known The War Zone magazine that the US Air Force could easily squeeze 6 to 12 Ukrainian pilots into an existing retraining program for the latest F-16 modification and give them a targeted program that provides specific skills that will be needed by pilots in the theater of operations.
But here another small, but still problem arises. The study of Western weapons systems, which are fundamentally different from Russian ones, in much the same way as aircraft and weapons control systems differ. Different radars, different missiles, even displays in different places and in different languages - all this is one continuous series of difficulties that Ukrainian pilots will have to overcome.
And also work with radio-electronic equipment for detecting and countering Russian air defense systems, of which there are also quite a few in Ukraine. Accordingly, like Russian pilots, the problem is that it is worth flying at low and ultra-low altitudes so as not to fall immediately under the Buk.
And indeed, speaking about the extent to which the regiment on the F-16 will be able to correct the situation in the air for the Ukrainian army, it is worth considering the question, but how much will it be possible to use the air defense system network? And this is a serious topic, because the actions of aviation are seriously hampered today by the air defense system. And only those pilots for whom low level flight is not a problem can fly. Slip under the radar beams, work out and go back again at ultra-low altitude.
Can it be done effectively after a brief relearning program? Good question, but the answer to it can only be obtained in combat conditions.
In general, the Ukrainian theater of operations will become more and more closed for flights. On the one hand, Russian S-300/400s, Buks and Torahs, on the other hand, all the same old S-300s, Buks and Patriots. Given the high saturation of troops on both sides and MANPADS, it is obvious that it will be very difficult for aircraft to realize their capabilities.
That is why, by the way, Russian planes do not carry out the usual patrolling of territories, but strike with long-range missiles from a safe distance. Plus cruise missiles and drones-kamikaze.
It is difficult to imagine how the pilots of American aircraft will act in such conditions, but the fact that the F-16 is unlikely to provide such a noticeable advantage over the same MiG-29 is said by many.
Ukrainian officials say they need a fighter with good radar and long-range missiles like the AMRAAM to be able to keep Russian fighters and bombers at a distance, so their American counterparts will need to weigh in on taking such a significant step and wonder if whether aviation continues to play a significant role in this theatre. It is possible that the air will have less of an impact in the future in Ukraine, especially as the SAM threat grows and the fighting shifts to urban areas where aircraft are least effective.
Ukraine has already received NASAMS air defense systems armed with AMRAAM missiles. AIM-120 missiles have shown their effectiveness and now it is logical to get aircraft that, with the help of AIM-120, will be able to intercept Russian cruise missiles outside the range of Russian Su-35S and MiG-31BM with their long-range R-37M.
The big question is what Ukraine will actually get out of the wide range of F-16 capabilities. This is not so much about flight modifications, but about weapons systems. It is clear that AMRAAM and "smart" weapons would be a huge leap in capabilities for the Air Force, but that's if they are given.
There is a possibility of AMRAAM missiles falling into the hands of the enemy, and this somewhat excites the US military, which is expectedly against this alignment. It's one thing - the NASAMS air defense system, which is located far from the front line and, of course, can be destroyed, but it is unlikely to be captured. Another thing is a plane with the same missiles, which can be shot down as a result of air combat or air defense systems.
It was not for nothing that the US restricted some F-16 export customers to the radar-guided AIM-7 "Sparrow" missile, which AMRAAM eventually replaced. Despite the receipt of brand new F-16 Vipers by Iraq, Iraqi aircraft are not armed with AMRAAM. Egypt also does not have AMRAAM on its F-16V Vipers. It is quite possible that Ukraine will also be refused.
There are many other weapons the F-16 can use. This is perhaps its biggest advantage. And this is especially useful for Ukraine, since the same JDAM guided bombs are also of interest to the Ukrainian military. GPS-guided precision-guided glide bombs could enhance the capabilities of the Armed Forces, as they could be launched again from a safe distance.
But the main tasks for the F-16 in the Ukrainian Air Force are the interception of cruise missiles and the countermeasures of air defense systems. It is in this way that it is possible to partially (the regiment - in this case, nothing) protect some objects from missile strikes and more effectively use the AGM-88 (HARM) anti-radar missiles already received from NATO, which are already used from MiG-29 and Su -27 Air Force of Ukraine. However, on the F-16, with its avionics suite and modern sensor systems, the AGM-88 could have been used more effectively.
In general - a separate issue, the issue of configuration. For the F-16C is one thing with Mk 82 "blunt" bombs and thermal AIM-9 "Sidewinders" of not the latest model or F-16V with AMRAAM and JDAM?
In any case, it is clear that they will not calm down in Kyiv, since the planes of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are very, very needed. Attempts to compensate for losses with the help of Soviet MiG-29s and Su-27s from Bulgaria, Poland and Slovakia were unsuccessful, since the aircraft is not a tank, and its maintenance at the proper combat-ready level costs a lot of money. In addition, those models that could have been delivered to Ukraine from friends were still not subject to re-equipment and equipping with new NATO weapons systems due to old age.
The fact that they were able to adapt the AGM-88 HARM to the old Ukrainian Su and MiGs is already a technical feat. This will not work with AMRAAM, missiles with an active radar seeker will not be well combined with the radars that Ukrainian aircraft are equipped with. And even if theoretically this can be done, in practice it does not make any real sense.
Conclusion: it is clear that Kyiv is dreaming of a long-term program to get modern Western-made aircraft for free. And there is a very high probability that Ukraine will receive such aircraft sooner or later.
If Ukraine does get the go-ahead for the F-16 Vipers, then Ukrainian pilots will eventually be able to retrain quickly with a very condensed training program designed specifically for them.
However, this will not provide Ukraine with a fighter jet for its long-term future and will not give it a chance in the confrontation with the Russian Aerospace Forces. This requires not only aircraft and logistics, but also technical personnel, equipped workshops and airfields.
And it will turn out that Ukrainian pilots will simply be taught to fly an airplane, with a short course in the use of weapons such as unguided "air-to-ground" and something like "Sidewinder" for combat in the air, and then such pilots could be considered experienced in a couple of months. But this will not give Ukraine what they are asking for. This will take longer and will only be part of a larger flight and maintenance personnel transition that will take place over many months, if not years, rather than a few weeks.
So for the F-16 in Ukraine, of course, there is an entrance. However, what the output will be - that's just what you can not see.
Information