F-16 for Ukraine

70
F-16 for Ukraine

The Northern Military District in Ukraine entered a war of attrition phase more than a year ago, despite the Ukrainian Armed Forces' attempts to break the deadlock during the failed summer offensive. The Russian army has regained its advantage in artillery and gained technical advantages in unmanned strike systems. The situation is complicated for the Ukrainian Armed Forces by the effective use of Russian aviation и drones, which hit military infrastructure deep in the rear, as well as Ukrainian troops at the front. In the latter, mainly with the help of controlled glide bombs. In such a situation, the question arises: what can the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine do to improve the situation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine?

The next “Wunderwaffe”, designed to save the Ukrainian Armed Forces from impending defeat, should be the appearance of Western combat aircraft, primarily the F-16. Why is this so important? Can a few dozen aircraft change the situation for the Armed Forces of Ukraine at the front in the armed struggle with the Russian Army and with the “second largest in the world” (and in fact the third after the USA and China) Russian Aerospace Forces?



Ukraine has so far been promised AM/VM versions of the F-16, on which the first pilots and members of the ground staff are completing training. These are old F-16 versions A and B that have undergone MLU (Middle Life Upgrade). The Americans retired all F-16A/B aircraft after the end of the Cold War in the second half of the 1990s. However, many more recent F-16 C and D versions remained in the line. At the same time, in the early 1990s, the Europeans did not have many C/D versions, and they had no desire to spend money on acquiring them, assuming that a successor will appear around 2010. Meanwhile, the Europeans continued the international program to modernize the F-16 to the AM/VM version.

How many aircraft will be delivered?


The European defense industry, with the participation of Lockheed Martin, modernized its F-16 A/B under the MLU program in 1996-2004. In total, 385 aircraft belonging to Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Portugal were upgraded to the AM/BM standard. From this pool, Romania purchased up to 47 vehicles (32 from Norway, 15 from Portugal, plus two F-16Bs from the USA), another 18 from Chile, 23 from Jordan (90 in total) and 18 are to be sent from Denmark to Argentina. The remaining aircraft either remain in service with their original owners (25 in Portugal, 53 in Belgium, 26 in the Netherlands, 43 in Denmark, i.e. 147 in total), or go to private companies, where they are used for training, incl. in “aggressor” squadrons, or stored in warehouses.

Despite the loss of some vehicles in accidents and the use of the resources of the oldest aircraft, it is currently estimated that, theoretically, about 120 F-16AM/BM could be transferred to Ukraine. So far, approximately 65 units have been promised, which means the possibility of rearming 4-5 combat squadrons. Due to ongoing pilot training, which also uses aircraft donated to Ukraine, infrastructure and logistical constraints, it appears that these aircraft will be delivered to Ukrainian units in batches. Dutch and Norwegian F-16s will be the first to go into battle, followed in the long term by Danish and Belgian ones.

The extent of the upgrade to the AM/BM variant made these vehicles comparable in performance to the F-16C/D of earlier versions. The only difference is that the European airframes are older and very worn out and will therefore have to be retired earlier than the C/D version aircraft. However, European countries still planned to decommission them between 2020 and 2030, so these aircraft would have time to participate in the ongoing war.

Radar, do you have a choice?


The best Russian fighters: the Su-35 and several modifications of the Su-30 SM2 have the Irbis-E radar radar with a theoretical range of 200 km and 350 km when searching in a narrow beam in the upper hemisphere. In turn, the Su-30, a much more common version of the SM, is equipped with the N011M Bars radar, capable of detecting an F-16 type air target at a range of up to 140 km in an interference-free environment. All these ranges are provided for a target with a frontal EPR - 3 square meters. The F-16 with coatings that absorb electromagnetic radiation has a frontal ESR of 1,2 m2, so the declared ranges will be 10-15% less. For Russian aircraft, the frontal EPR in the case of the Su-30 is 4 m2.

Meanwhile, the F-16AM/BM received AN/APG-66(V2) fire control radars, capable of detecting air targets at a distance of 53-90 km in conditions of strong electromagnetic interference, as well as targets against the ground at ranges of up to 45-67 km . The maximum theoretical range of this radar exceeds 150 km. So it won't give them any advantage.

However, this is only the weakest radar that can be used on the F-16. Press Secretary of the Ukrainian Air Force Yuriy Ignat openly stated that

“his country will receive aircraft equipped with a better radar than the one found in the donated aircraft.”

The Ukrainians say they would like to have the AN/APG-83 SABR (Scalable Agile Beam Radar), which is the best radar currently available for any version of the F-16 with an automatic electronically scanned array antenna. The theoretical range of this radar is 370 km, so its capabilities far exceed those of the AN/APG-66(V)2 and exceed the N011M Bars radar, and are at the level of the Irbis-E radar.

Can SABR really be delivered? There is no certainty about this, given the fact that its production began recently, a limited number of them were produced and there are 16 customers in line for the new F-175 (including Turkey), not to mention the modernization according to package V (according to the Block 70 standard /72). However, there may be another solution on the table that may not be perfect, but is much better than the original radar and is also readily available.

This is the AN/APG-68 radar, which is currently used, in particular, on the Polish F-16C/D Block 52+ Jastrząb, which have been removed in recent years from the F-16s of various countries upgrading their F-16s with the V package. Off-the-shelf radar kits of this type can be readily available without any hassle, and are far superior to the AN/APG-66(V2) with a theoretical range of nearly 300 km and numerous features that enhance the vehicle's multi-tasking and pilot situational awareness.

Therefore, it seems that Ukrainian F-16s will, in the worst case, have the radar that the Polish F-16C/D Jastrzębie currently has, and in the best case, the same as the F-16 of the latest version of Block 70/72. However, even this worst option makes it possible for the Ukrainian F-16s to earlier detect the Russian Su-30 SM with the N011M Bars radar and be the first to launch missiles at it, and the radars of our Su-35s are approximately equal if possible.

In addition, there are intermediate solutions, for example, some F-16s can be equipped with SABR radars, which will transmit the received information to those F-16s with simpler radar radars via a data exchange channel. Theoretically, air situation data could be transmitted to Ukrainian pilots and from NATO airborne early warning and control aircraft - directly or through the Ukrainian network.

With the new radars, Ukroluftwaffe pilots have the opportunity to be the first to detect Russian aircraft and launch medium-range missiles of the AIM-120 AMRAAM type B and C with a range of 105 km at them. The latest version of the D is unlikely to be transferred due to the possibility of such a missile falling into enemy hands.

In addition to weapons, the aircraft should also be supplied with reconnaissance overhead containers, which will increase the Ukroluftwaffe’s ability to use air-to-surface missiles and allow the aircraft to be used as reconnaissance aircraft.

Ability to survive


Firstly, in size: the F-16 is subject to high technical requirements for operation, but it is still a machine capable of operating from small runways and sections of highways. Therefore, it can operate from small air bases. In addition, compared to the MiG-29, it has a significantly larger range of action. All this results in the lower capabilities of the Russian Aerospace Forces and Missile Forces to destroy F-16s at their bases.

The F-16 also has much more advanced electronic warfare self-defense systems than the older Soviet Su-24M, Su-25 and MiG-29S aircraft available to the Ukroluftwaffe, which in turn increases mission survivability.

weaponry


The F-16 is a small fighter aircraft, but if we talk about its combat load, it can reach 7700 kg. In terms of payload, they are comparable to the heavier Russian multi-purpose aircraft Su-30SM/SM2 and Su-35S. And much more than in the case of the Su-27 or MiG-29.

One of the main arguments of the Ukrovermacht command in favor of the fact that the supply of F-16 fighters by NATO countries can radically influence the course of the war is the types of weapons integrated with it. Taking into account that aircraft can be equipped with more advanced radar than existing ones, and also the fact that even Soviet aircraft in Ukrainian service have managed to partially integrate Western weapons such as HARM or SCALP/Storm Shadow cruise missiles – it seems that the transferred F-16s will be able to use all types of weapons available even for its newest version. And these machines, unlike Soviet aircraft, will be able to fully use their capabilities.

As for cruise missiles, they will probably be able to carry JASSM cruise missiles with a range of 300 km and JASSM-ER with a range of 1000 km (though the latter may not be delivered for political reasons). This weapon will allow Ukroluftwaffe to carry out terrorist attacks deep into Russian territory against peaceful cities, as is their custom - attacks similar to those already carried out using Storm Shadow/SCALP missiles.

However, what seems even more important is the ability to use JSOW glide bombs from the F-16, which have a range of up to 130 km, so they can be used from a much greater - and safer - distance than conventional free-fall bombs. JSOWs have been produced since the 1990s, are relatively inexpensive ($300 per unit), and are used in many countries. In other words, the F-000 is a dangerous, very dangerous enemy. At such a range, it can only be reached by long-range air defense systems of the S-16/300 type, moved closer to the LBS (up to 400 km). F-100 strikes can also be carried out with AGM-16 Maverick air-to-surface missiles. However, such actions will involve the risk of hitting the air defenses of Russian ground forces. This weapon has a range of just over 65 km. The advantage for the Ukrainian Armed Forces, however, is that Mavericks are popular weapons around the world and have been in production for a long time, meaning they can be supplied in large quantities.

Thanks to HARM missiles, and possibly AARGM (if countries supporting the Ukrainian regime decide to provide them), the fight against Russian air defense will also become much more effective, which will further increase the freedom of use of Ukroluftwaffe aircraft.

In addition to AMRAAM, American-made short-range missiles (AIM-9 Sidewinder), as well as their European substitutes, such as the German IRIS-T, with which Ukrainians are already familiar, since they received them together with ground-based air defense systems, can be used for air combat.

The F-16 can also carry two Harpoon anti-ship missiles on internal underwing pylons, which could become another threat to Black Sea ships. Fleet Russia. One of the types of weapons also includes SLAM-ER missiles with a range of more than 250 km, created on the basis of Harpoons and adapted for attacking ground targets. Lighter anti-ship missiles could be the old Norwegian Penguin missile (the F-16 can carry four of these missiles) or the Joint Strike Missile, if its integration is completed and the weapon has been delivered to Ukraine.

Summary


The MiG-29, Su-27, Su-24 and Su-25 aircraft, still used by the Ukroluftwaffe, have partially survived two years of war; there are several dozen of them left. Considering that F-16s can, like them, operate from dispersed airfields and are much more difficult to destroy in the air (less radar signature, better electronic warfare and self-defense, greater situational awareness), their losses should theoretically be no higher. This means the F-16 fleet should expand over the next few months, and the experience of its technicians and pilots will only increase. Thus, these aircraft will gradually have an increasing influence on the course of hostilities on the ground.

The F-16, as conceived by the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, should also help to increase the morale of the Armed Forces of the Armed Forces also due to its ability to inflict tangible and difficult-to-recover losses on Russia, for example, shoot down combat, transport, reconnaissance aircraft and early warning aircraft or hit ships of the Black Sea Fleet.

Over time, the Ukrainian Air Force may have one or even two F-16 wings (regiments). This force could also be augmented in the long term by additional types of aircraft - the Mirage 2000, JAS-39C/D Gripen and perhaps even the F/A-18C/D once offered by Australia.

Much will depend on the success of the first Ukrainian F-16s, which may help increase the supply of aircraft, but also on the actions of the Russian aerospace forces and air defense, which will undoubtedly destroy F-16s at their bases and in the air.

The effectiveness of the F-16 will also depend on the specific configuration in which they are provided (the aforementioned radar, anti-radar coverage and integration with new weapons systems), as well as on how many and what type of missiles and bombs will be provided to the Ukroluftwaffe. for these aircraft.

What can be done?


It is necessary, first of all, to saturate all the advanced air bases of the Russian Aerospace Forces, where the Su-35 and Su-57 fighters are based, with R-37M air-to-air missiles (RVV-BD). It has a launch range of up to 200 kilometers, some sources indicate a longer range. Also deploy an additional number of S-100/300 divisions along the LBS from 400 km in depth.
70 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    19 February 2024 04: 16
    There is a complete feeling that with the supply of F-16s we are already at war with NATO aviation.
    But what about the home airfields...the infrastructure for servicing these aircraft, targeting with the help of NATO AWACS?
    Where will all this be at the time of F-16 combat battles with our aircraft and attacks on our ground targets?
    The situation in this case could smoothly develop into a direct fight with NATO aircraft.
    1. +1
      19 February 2024 04: 58
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      But what about the home airfields...the infrastructure for servicing these aircraft, targeting with the help of NATO AWACS?

      Yes
      What to do? It is necessary, first of all, to saturate...

      ...political will and determination to destroy the infrastructure of home bases even on foreign territory, something like this:
      1. +1
        19 February 2024 10: 45
        However, even this worst option makes it possible for the Ukrainian F-16s to earlier detect the Russian Su-30 SM with the N011M Bars radar and be the first to launch missiles at it, and the radars of our Su-35s are approximately equal if possible.
        AWACS aircraft have an even greater detection range, but there is nothing to shoot at such a range. Aviation in this conflict operates and will operate under the control of the command post, using all available means of airspace control and, accordingly, having information about the enemy in the air, deploying a detachment of forces and assets to the required area to complete the assigned task with maximum control of the air situation. The maximum detection range of an aircraft radar would play a role when operating in isolation from airspace control zones, in this case, both they and we need the operating range of an aircraft radar to be able to use existing weapons. But here, as they say, it’s a different story.
    2. +22
      19 February 2024 05: 10
      No, we are not at war with NATO yet. If we are wondering what damage a hundred old F-16s will do to us, then it is better not to think about what the 7 combat aircraft that NATO has at its disposal are capable of. For now, it would be a good idea to destroy those few Su-24s because they are still causing problems.
      1. -6
        19 February 2024 06: 05
        Quote: Little Bear
        then it’s better not to think about what the 7 thousand combat aircraft that NATO has at its disposal are capable of.

        And if you think about this, then you need to forget about the nuclear weapons created by our ancestors, get down on your knees and start kissing Zelensky’s boots, maybe they will forgive you if we undertake to restore (give back, reimburse and supply for free, dividing Russia into small territories).
        FUCK YOU ALL OVER YOUR FUCKING FACE!!!
        Better to die on your feet than to live as a slave on your knees. Let the West, together with NATO, shake with fear because if they take these 7 planes into the air, there will be NO WHERE to land them!!!
        1. +1
          19 February 2024 07: 48
          Quote: ROSS 42
          FUCK YOU ALL OVER YOUR FUCKING FACE!!!
          Better to die on your feet than to live as a slave on your knees. Let the West, together with NATO, shake with fear because if they take these 7 planes into the air, there will be NO WHERE to land them!!!

          I couldn't think of a better comment! I agree 100%!!!!!!
        2. +3
          19 February 2024 10: 07
          Then let’s use nuclear weapons right away - that’s what you’re talking about, isn’t it? what is all this for? the whole world is in ruins? These are the thoughts your answer suggests... the second option is a bit of armchair pathos... the second is clear... the first - I don’t think that the majority of the country dreams of burning in a nuclear flame with a sweet smile... and the question you answered, meanwhile , was quite reasonable..
          1. 0
            19 February 2024 17: 38
            As I understand it, you are already mentally ready to “kiss NATO’s boot”?
            1. +4
              19 February 2024 18: 02
              Quote: Stepan S
              As I understand it, you are already mentally ready to “kiss NATO’s boot”?

              firstly, NATO is not coming to us yet, and secondly, nuclear weapons are the end of the world and they can and should be used when the need really comes, and not wave them at every occasion in the hope of “dying heroically”.. Nuclear weapons are a great responsibility, practically for the whole world, and while there is no real threat of destruction of the Russian Federation, I think waving it around is stupid, to put it mildly... and thirdly and most importantly, if you read my comment with even the slightest attention - what is it about and why did I even write it, then such a question would not be asked..
        3. +3
          19 February 2024 23: 29
          Excellent slogans, all that remains is to tear the vest on the chest. Who needs death and what will it give???? - if the state is clearly losing, technically we need to act more cunningly and not engage in a direct clash in which we will lose. As recent years have shown, it is possible to inflict damage on an enemy at low cost by pressing on pressure points.
    3. +5
      19 February 2024 06: 22
      Targeting using NATO AWACS

      Taking into account the AWACS range of 500 km - only in the Black Sea zone and in the west. outskirts.
      As soon as an AWACS aircraft (regardless of its owner) appears over the outskirts, it becomes a legitimate target. I don’t think that overseas people will take such risks.
      1. -9
        19 February 2024 08: 04
        It should become a legitimate target over the neutral waters of the Black Sea.
        1. +4
          19 February 2024 08: 26
          Well, if you really want to start WW3
          1. 0
            19 February 2024 11: 02
            Don't be alarmed, these are the same "red lines" just on their part. Everyone wants to live, but they are not yet ready for a world war.
            1. 0
              19 February 2024 19: 44
              “Don’t be alarmed, these are the same “red lines” just on their part” - this is how their “red lines” work. I remember the first questions were whether to supply small arms, and now “on the line” there are a hundred F16s and three-hundred-kilometer Atacamsa.

              "But they are not yet ready for a world war." - Actually, it’s been going on for a long time. And very cruel. And what you are talking about will be its logical conclusion.
      2. +2
        19 February 2024 10: 06
        As soon as an AWACS aircraft (regardless of its owner) appears over the outskirts, it becomes a legal target.

        It will not be possible to win according to the laws and rules developed by the enemy. The destruction of AWACS aircraft operating in the interests of the enemy should be determined only by the range of our systems. Let them be afraid to fly!
    4. -2
      19 February 2024 09: 04
      F16s will most likely fly from Poland or Romania. Yes, and Su 24 fly and strike. Several Hamers were forced to surrender Kherson, so not everything is clear when using the F16.
    5. 0
      19 February 2024 10: 15
      An excellent detailed article for the participants of “Military Review” - thanks Sergey!
    6. +1
      19 February 2024 11: 56
      Dear Lekha from Android! We have been at war with NATO aviation for more than 2 years now... Almost all target designation, reconnaissance, and battle management are carried out by specific NATO aircraft. These are heavy UAVs, AWACS aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft. This whole “warm campaign” copes very well with the tasks assigned to them (the cruiser “Moskva”, the missile cruiser “Ivanovets”, several large landing ships, a diesel submarine), and is about “opening up” the situation on the theater of operations, in real time. they - 24/7 - are a separate conversation... So the F-16s will add “firebrands” at the front and not only at the front, if they start to be used, also as an aviation platform for launching long-range missiles. The F-16 is a fairly reliable, maneuverable aircraft with good avionics, a set of weapons, electronic warfare equipment, electronic warfare equipment, and can fly at minimum altitudes while following the terrain. But! Quite difficult to manage. Combat pilot training course - from 4-5 years. For a flight with a “one-way ticket”, 1,5-2 years is enough... The aircraft is quite complicated to operate from front-line airfields, requiring significant preparation time for departure, serious expensive equipment and qualified engineering and technical personnel. He is very “demanding” about fuels and lubricants, the production of which is not available in Ukroreich. Requires ideal smoothness of the runway due to the specific design of the landing gear...
      1. +1
        20 February 2024 02: 04
        There is absolutely nothing stopping us from sending technical personnel along with the planes
    7. 0
      20 February 2024 22: 29
      The subtlety is that Ukrainian aviation already is based on NATO territory (the same Romania and Poland), so fundamentally nothing will change for them or for us. Unless the increased range of the F-16 will make it easier to strike deep into the Russian Federation, while we still will not be able to destroy vehicles at airfields (because airfields are not in Ukraine)
  2. -8
    19 February 2024 04: 57
    There are so many letters, but the author deliberately forgot that Russian diplomats and various high-ranking leaders have repeatedly stated that the leadership of the Defense Ministry will not understand what letters are in the F-16 model. And they will be considered carriers of nuclear weapons with all the ensuing consequences. Why is the author silent about this? Ayayay, it’s not good to write articles like that, deliberately hushing up the most important points. And since the author deliberately ignores the official statements of our leadership, thereby showing his attitude towards the Russian authorities, we give the article a bold minus.
    1. +8
      19 February 2024 05: 20
      Quote: Griffit
      Why is the author silent about this?

      The article is about nothing at all, that’s why it’s silent wink
    2. +5
      19 February 2024 06: 11
      Quote: Griffit
      Russian diplomats and various senior leaders have repeatedly stated that the leadership of the Defense Ministry will not understand what letters are in the F-16 model. And they will be considered carriers of nuclear weapons with all the ensuing consequences.

      Yes it is necessary!!!
      That’s why I watch “Hawks” falling into the sea like flies from dichlorvos.
      The consequences follow for Russia and result in casualties among personnel, loss of equipment, and the death of civilians on Russian territory...
      And someone definitely said that Russia can neutralize reconnaissance satellites, which are flooding both NATO and Zelensky’s Nazis with data.
      There is no war: here we are fighting, but here we were wrapping fish...
      1. +2
        19 February 2024 12: 10
        Dear ROSS 42! In order for the "Hawks" to fall into the sea and the AWACS to "stick" into the Romanian or Polish black soil, certain decisions are probably needed "from above", commands to the performers... That successful experience of fighting the "Hawks" over the Black Sea, with the help of "spraying" , their aviation kerosene probably did not take root in the Aerospace Forces due to the high cost of fuel or Gretta Thumberg’s protests at the UN....
      2. -1
        19 February 2024 14: 38
        Naive thoughts of a dandelion. Even the USSR was not as principled as you. During the Second World War, he actively traded with the USA and England, although it was these countries that financed Hitler to attack the USSR, this is a well-known fact. And the US traded with Germany even when they opened a second front. So where are the principles of the leaders of the USSR? And why did Stalin suddenly make Hitler’s allies the winners of WWII? Where are the principles? Indeed, today’s people have only one mess in their heads. And how is this different from today? It’s just that factories were built in Germany with money from US and English banks. But in Ukraine they don’t build it, it’s too close to the BS line. That's all. laughing And then all of a sudden everyone is so principled. In words. And in life, you wouldn’t mind bringing home a couple of bolts from the factory for free, although this is basic theft. Just hypocrisy. Not ashamed? Before you demand anything from anyone, first conform to these principles yourself.
    3. +9
      19 February 2024 09: 08
      Are you sure that the “MoD leadership” will remember their words that “they will not understand what letters are in the F-16 model. And they will consider them carriers of nuclear weapons with all the ensuing consequences”? Here someone named Medvedev, I don’t know exactly who it is, but the namesake of the deputy chairman of the Security Council, threatened with holivar for the attacks on the Crimean Bridge, the attacks were holy hell no. So not everything is so simple.
      1. -5
        19 February 2024 14: 54
        Who are you that they should tell you? This is not a war, but a SVO. Do you know the difference? Or is he just venting his anger here? Are you waiting for someone to do something? What did you personally do? Stocked up on popular things, but no shows? That's the problem.
      2. -5
        19 February 2024 14: 57
        Who are you that the Ministry of Defense should bring all the information to you? What did you personally do for this? Stocked up on popcorn but no shows? That's the problem. Do you know that Russia is not waging a war, but conducting a military defense? Do you even understand the difference? Really, what more do people need, popcorn and spectacle? Forever and ever, nothing under heaven has changed
        1. 0
          19 February 2024 23: 03
          Quote: Griffit
          Who are you that the Ministry of Defense should bring all the information to you? What did you personally do for this? Stocked up on popcorn but no shows? That's the problem. Do you know that Russia is not waging a war, but conducting a military defense? Do you even understand the difference? Really, what more do people need, popcorn and spectacle? Forever and ever, nothing under heaven has changed


          Hurray comrades Hurray! They told you that you keep remembering some kind of war?!! There is no war!!! There is SVO! Eat the truth.
          In the third year of the war... this is the bottom
    4. +3
      19 February 2024 11: 42
      Quote: Griffit
      Russian diplomats and various senior leaders have repeatedly stated that the leadership of the Defense Ministry will not understand what letters are in the F-16 model. And they will be considered carriers of nuclear weapons with all the ensuing consequences.

      Russian diplomats and high-ranking leaders say something every day, and it doesn't get easier hour by hour. Could this be of interest to anyone?
  3. +7
    19 February 2024 05: 24
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    There is a complete feeling that with the supply of F-16s we are already at war with NATO aviation.

    It’s like you were born yesterday. A sea of ​​countries fought and is fighting with goods purchased and supplied by Lend-Lease from other countries. Just recently, half the world fought with Soviet weapons, and the USSR itself fought in the Second World War with weapons from the USA and Great Britain. How is the above situation different? We need to analyze the data before the war, and not go forward with a saber on horseback!
    1. +3
      19 February 2024 06: 08
      Quote: fa2998
      A sea of ​​countries fought and is fighting with Lend-Lease purchased and supplied by other countries

      This “sea of ​​countries” that you are talking about either does not produce weapons themselves, or does not produce all types of weapons. And the countries that produce the entire line of weapons and use the entire cycle, from the Pullman in the design bureau to the finished product, can be counted on one hand. That's why most of the world doesn't fight with its own weapons.
    2. +1
      19 February 2024 06: 14
      Quote: fa2998
      We need to analyze the data before the war, and not go forward with a saber on horseback!

      And during the war, give clear definitions to our military who are considered enemies and who should have been destroyed long ago!!!
      Then you can ask... Otherwise, we have “taboo” everywhere... It’s impossible to immediately determine who it’s time to kill, and who else is sending gas through the pipe to Europe...
  4. -1
    19 February 2024 05: 38
    The business of Ryabov and Damantsev is thriving :)
    Author, "there are a lot of books." And, often, incoherently.
    It's a terrible read, even crazy at times.
    1. +5
      19 February 2024 06: 17
      Quote: Peaceful SEO
      It's a terrible read, even crazy at times.

      Vyacheslav Olegovich and Mikhail Mikhailovich at different times promulgated the idea that if you don’t like something, write your own.
      You can even publish it on the website. and we will read and reward...
  5. -2
    19 February 2024 06: 12
    A lot of words about hardware, but practically nothing about pilots and technicians. An empty enumeration of “what could be” without an analysis of “whether it will be.”
  6. -2
    19 February 2024 06: 28
    Quote: ROSS 42
    Vyacheslav Olegovich and Mikhail Mikhailovich at different times promulgated the idea that if you don’t like something, write your own

    Valuable thought...not all critics really like this.
    smile I have thoughts on military topics running around in my skull, and I don’t have enough patience and talent to present them competently in articles.
    In this regard, I envy Vyacheslav Olegovich and Michal Mikhalych.
    Oh you thoughts are my horses smile ...
  7. Des
    +12
    19 February 2024 06: 55
    Several Ukrainian Air Force Su-24s are causing us too many problems.
    With impunity.
    And we “don’t see” them, we don’t know their location. It is amazing. Imagine how many more tasks there will be with the use of F-16s by the Ukrainian side?
    Moreover, most likely, the pilots will not be local.
  8. -7
    19 February 2024 07: 38
    You can compare the F16 and SU30 as much as you like, but in reality everything will come down to the work of our air defense. And here it doesn’t matter what kind of radar they put on the Litak. It will be necessary to take care of the quality of ejection systems for pilots. As Ilya Muromets said, “Sprinkle it with chalk, I’ll wave my club now.”
    1. 0
      19 February 2024 12: 32
      You can compare the F16 and SU30 as much as you like, but in reality everything will come down to the work of our air defense. And here it doesn’t matter what kind of radar they put on the Litak.

      The use of the F-16 specifically to combat air defense simply suggests itself.
      Mig-29s could be launched by Kharmas against radars, but did not provide reconnaissance and data transmission to the missile.
      In the case of the F-16, the situation is different - the aircraft is completely integrated with the Harm. That is, the F-16 pilot, having detected the radar radiation, is able to launch a Harm on it in the minimum time.
  9. +4
    19 February 2024 08: 41
    today our problem is not with any highmars or f-16s - the problem is with “secondary sanctions”
    For more than a month this problem has been voiced from Turkey, then from China, and now from the Emirates...
    This is something you should seriously think about, and not about what sites/infrastructure are being prepared for the F-16
  10. +6
    19 February 2024 09: 03
    The North Military District in Ukraine entered the phase of war of attrition more than a year ago

    Just as dry cargo ships carried wheat, they still carry it. As the trains traveled, they continue to travel. The way the energy industry worked is how it works. The bridges still stand as they stood. Just as the highest political and command leadership 404 exists, so it exists. Who is being drained?
    1. 0
      19 February 2024 09: 58
      You forgot to add that the level of well-being of the people is growing and the economy is thriving)))
  11. -6
    19 February 2024 09: 56
    Nobody argues that F-16 is not bad at all. But there are two big BUTs. We are talking about new cars. I seriously doubt that they will give very new modifications. Nobody excludes the possibility of theft. Secondly, F-16 is good when used according to US (NATO) standards. Its basis is “avax”. Who will give it?
  12. 0
    19 February 2024 10: 56
    A consistent trend has already formed on the site - the author of the article must be completely ignorant of the topic being described. This is especially true for the topic of SVO, where the authors race spherical horses in a vacuum, trying not to go beyond the boundaries outlined by the directive “little, late, useless.”
  13. -1
    19 February 2024 11: 22
    In turn, the Su-30, a much more common version of the SM, is equipped with the N011M Bars radar, capable of detecting an F-16 type air target at a range of up to 140 km in an interference-free environment. All these ranges are provided for a target with a frontal EPR - 3 square meters. The F-16 with coatings that absorb electromagnetic radiation has a frontal ESR of 1,2 m2, so the declared ranges will be 10-15% shorter.

    Interesting. On EOP 3 sq.m. The Su-30 radar saw the target at 140 km. However, if the goal is an image intensifier of 1,2 sq.m. detection range also dropped by 10-15%. Author of the question. How, when the image intensifier is reduced by more than 2 times, does detection drop to only 15%? You reduce target size and detection with virtually no major changes. This is far from logical.
    1. -1
      19 February 2024 14: 59
      This is far from logical
      Well, how should the detection range change in this case, if we follow your logic?
    2. +2
      19 February 2024 21: 05
      Quote: stoqn477
      Interesting. On EOP 3 sq.m. The Su-30 radar saw the target at 140 km. However, if the goal is an image intensifier of 1,2 sq.m. detection range also dropped by 10-15%. Author of the question. How, when the image intensifier is reduced by more than 2 times, does detection drop to only 15%? You reduce target size and detection with virtually no major changes. This is far from logical.

      It’s so convenient for the author) The classic calculation of changes in detection range with a change in ESR looks like the 4th root of the ESR difference ⁴√(3:1.2) =1.26 That is, reduce the detection range by approximately 26%.
      1. 0
        22 February 2024 00: 57
        Quote: BORMAN82
        Quote: stoqn477
        Interesting. On EOP 3 sq.m. The Su-30 radar saw the target at 140 km. However, if the goal is an image intensifier of 1,2 sq.m. detection range also dropped by 10-15%. Author of the question. How, when the image intensifier is reduced by more than 2 times, does detection drop to only 15%? You reduce target size and detection with virtually no major changes. This is far from logical.

        It’s so convenient for the author) The classic calculation of changes in detection range with a change in ESR looks like the 4th root of the ESR difference ⁴√(3:1.2) =1.26 That is, reduce the detection range by approximately 26%.

        Detection range will increase by approximately 26%. This follows from your mathematical notation of the calculation. Detection range decrease by approximately 20.5%.
        It’s sad that they no longer even understand what a percentage is. But BORMAN82’s post was also given two pluses. This means that the phenomenon is very common.
  14. -3
    19 February 2024 11: 28
    Quote: ROSS 42
    Quote: Little Bear
    then it’s better not to think about what the 7 thousand combat aircraft that NATO has at its disposal are capable of.

    And if you think about this, then you need to forget about the nuclear weapons created by our ancestors, get down on your knees and start kissing Zelensky’s boots, maybe they will forgive you if we undertake to restore (give back, reimburse and supply for free, dividing Russia into small territories).
    FUCK YOU ALL OVER YOUR FUCKING FACE!!!
    Better to die on your feet than to live as a slave on your knees. Let the West, together with NATO, shake with fear because if they take these 7 planes into the air, there will be NO WHERE to land them!!!

    I wonder where yours will land? Letting the genie out of the bottle will do the same thing.
    Nobody is forcing you to kneel. Get out of Ukraine and live your life. You have enough resources to turn your life into paradise. But you do not want. And your resources are in the hands of your leaders, who make their lives a paradise compared to yours.
  15. -2
    19 February 2024 12: 54
    It’s unlikely that anything will change with the arrival of the F16. Just as they launched missiles/threw bombs without crossing the front line, they will do so, suffering losses from foreign and their own air defense.
    According to Oryx, both our side and the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost 2 aircraft in the 29nd year, which is relatively not a lot and less than in the first year.
    The main question is what the F16 will carry. The easiest way is to hang JDAM, the USA produced half a million of them and cost no more than $20 thousand, but even in the er modification with wings the range is 70 km, from a high altitude, which is quite dangerous, although they may be able to effectively bomb the front line, flying up to zero height.
    Deliveries of GBU-39 glide bombs weighing 130 kg and a range of 110 km are possible. They are not expensive, $40 thousand, but the USA produced only 25 thousand of them and now Boeing is producing them for the GLSDB rocket bomb, deliveries along two lines are unlikely.

    The main danger is the possibility of delivering long-range stealth missiles, which could, for example, temporarily stop oil refining or gunpowder production in the European part of the country.
    1. 0
      22 February 2024 00: 45
      Quote: Ivan Seversky
      According to Oryx, both our side and the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost 2 aircraft in the 29nd year, which is relatively not a lot and less than in the first year.

      Aircraft losses are not measured by quantity.
  16. -1
    19 February 2024 13: 03
    RLP "Irbis-E"
    'What kind of "beast" is this, author?
    And why is the army Russian? An officer or a soldier can be Russian (belonging to a nation), but the army is Russian!!!
    1. -4
      19 February 2024 13: 10
      The next “Wunderwaffe”, designed to save the Ukrainian Armed Forces from impending defeat, should be the appearance of Western combat aircraft, primarily the F-16. Why is this so important? Can a few dozen aircraft change the situation for the Ukrainian Armed Forces at the front in the armed struggle against Russian army and with the “second largest in the world” (and actually third after the USA and China) Russian Aerospace Forces?
      [B] [/ b]
    2. 0
      19 February 2024 14: 31
      Ilmir. Good afternoon. Ilmir, I AM A RUSSIAN SOLDIER. What do you think I should call the army in which I serve? Only the RUSSIAN ARMY, and nothing else.
      1. +4
        19 February 2024 14: 46
        Chechens, Ingush, Dags, Tatars, Bashkirs, Udmurts, Chuvashs, Nenets, and many, many...
        We are not Russians, but Russians! And yes, we love our fatherland, our Motherland and are ready to give not only our lives, but also our health...
        p.s. My brother, at 49 years old, serves in the assault brigade...
        1. 0
          19 February 2024 15: 04
          Ilmir, I’m not arguing with you, I’m also an Armenian by nationality, and what does that change? Good health to my brother and return home with Victory, healthy and unharmed (no injuries)!
          1. 0
            19 February 2024 15: 10
            Yours faithfully!!


            Comment too short and stupid!
  17. -2
    19 February 2024 15: 29
    Somehow, during the times of the USSR, I heard about testing a microwave product, the result shocked everyone, it burned electronic components around at a good distance, I wonder why this is not used now
  18. -2
    19 February 2024 15: 36
    Ignat writes that he needs a layered air defense system, and not the scraps that his allies give him! Where can he get such an air defense system?
    Well, F-16s without long-range missiles like Jassm or StormShadow are essentially useless! It makes no sense to send them as attack aircraft to the LBS, because now it is much safer to use adjustable aerial bombs from drones, rather than attack aircraft! But I remember the allies didn’t even give Ukraine the MQ-9Reaper! Not to mention the long-range version of Bayraktar!
  19. -1
    19 February 2024 16: 46
    Quote: TermNachTER
    Its basis is “avax”. Who will give it?

    They won’t give it. But they will provide data. And not only from AWACS, there are their UAVs and satellites flying around in Romania and over the Black Sea. That’s target designation in full! bully bully hi
  20. -1
    19 February 2024 17: 22
    The liberation of the Nikolaev and Odessa regions will make it possible to shoot right through Ukraine with anti-aircraft missiles. And the Belarusians won’t let you fly from the north.
  21. 0
    19 February 2024 17: 34
    Will there be a second part? Or will the topic remain neutered? Since they started writing about the F-16 anti-aircraft missile system as a fighter, then move on. Don’t just write about the Su-35, 30cm radar missile system and tales about replacing the F-16 radar. What they write from the villages about the means of destruction of the "V-V" missile launcher and how they will be collectively farmed in the F-16. Or a person far from FA, and a theorist who does not know that the Su-35s is itself as blind as the MiG-21bis,...23mld? How will we open the air defense at ranges of several hundred km, and certainly at the federal zone? Does the writer know how to work in the Federal Law, or “from the bottom up”? It has already been explained that Ukraine will be able to receive three-coordinate radar images only from the ground, and not because it does not have AWACS, but also because the territory is not as rocky and desert-mountainous as Israel, Iraq, Syria,... Hanging around along the border of Romania and Bulgaria, AWACS are still not visible beyond the longitude of Kiev, and the Soviet grandfather A-50 is unsuitable closer than 150 km. to LF does not see that he is on the circle of air. Starokonstantinov. And in the third part we’ll fantasize about the satellite reconnaissance component.
  22. 0
    19 February 2024 17: 55
    When you start reading, the first thing you do is check that this is not a buffoon's article)
  23. 0
    19 February 2024 20: 25
    25 in Portugal, 53 in Belgium, 26 in the Netherlands, 43 in Denmark, i.e. 147 in total

    There's something wrong here. Speaking about 147 aircraft, the author does not count the aircraft of Norway at all (35), although she mentions that she will go into battle first. Figures for countries other than Belgium require clarification.
    The Military Balance 2023 talks about the Netherlands - 61, Norway - 35, Portugal - 30, Belgium - 53, Denmark - 44. Total - 223. And this is much more than 147.
  24. +1
    19 February 2024 20: 37
    = It is necessary, first of all, to satiate = Insatiable Sergei Ketonov, where did you pick up such words?
  25. 0
    19 February 2024 22: 04
    The most realistic use of the F-16 is in combination with glide bombs and Storm Shadow/SCAL from field airfields and a constant change of location after the next use. Air battles against the Su-30 and Su-35 are unlikely due to objective and subjective reasons, except when the enemy, represented by the F-16, is not detected in a timely manner.
    1. 0
      20 February 2024 00: 55
      From field airfields? You are even far from the airfield company from OBATO.
  26. The comment was deleted.
  27. 0
    24 February 2024 10: 31
    In my opinion, 120 F-16s for Ukraine, which does not have the infrastructure to service them at its rather broken-down airfields, is a utopia. And here it is implied that these planes will be serviced at airfields in Eastern Europe and Germany, from there, in a purely nominal jump, they will take off from Ukrainian airfields and strike Russian troops and cities. That is, the NATO members, completely overwhelmed by impunity with unhindered supplies of weapons, are counting on Russia to grab it in silence and nothing will happen to them again. But I think they will first be warned, and then they will launch 1-2 strikes on NATO airfields first, because there is a limit to everything. Russia cannot know what kind of F-16 these are, nor who is in the cockpit, nor what is suspended under the wings. That is, such actions can be considered as an attack by NATO on Russia, and attacks on NATO airfields will have legal protection under international law. It's time to punch them right in the face once.