In the Ukrainian Rada: Russian pilots used an advantage over the F-16 in the form of the R-37M missile in combat, knowing that the Ukrainian Armed Forces' ground-based air defense was not working there

Zelensky awarded the title Hero of Ukraine to the Ukrainian F-16 fighter pilot Pavel Ivanov, who was killed the day before. At the same time, the investigation into the incident is ongoing. Let us recall that the Russian Defense Ministry reported today that the plane was shot down by our Defense.

In the Ukrainian Rada, trying to understand what happened, they say that the F-16 was shot down “either rocket S-400 air defense missile system, or R-37 air-to-air missile. In the second case, it is aviation long-range missile. The range of the R-37M version, as stated in open sources, is 300 km. Modifications of the said R-37M missile are used by various Russian fighters, including the Su-30SM2, Su-35S and Su-57. And it is this missile that the Ukrainian side designates as the “most likely” to destroy the American-designed fighter.

Considering that the F-16 fighter of the Ukrainian Armed Forces was shot down in the skies over Sumy Oblast, the R-37M missile could have been launched from a Russian fighter over any Russian region bordering this region – Kursk, Bryansk or Belgorod Oblasts.

From the publication of one of the main Ukrainian MPs-"newsmakers" of recent times, Maryana Bezuglya:

Sources rule out the version of friendly fire, since Ukrainian air defense systems were not operating in the area where Ivanov was carrying out his mission.

Accordingly, in Ukraine, in connection with the loss of the F-16 and the data that was voiced, a new "betrayal" is being promoted. It consists of the following: if Ukrainian air defense was not operating in the F-16 fighter's flight zone, then the "one-off American aircraft" was operating without ground cover. And it turns out that Russian aircraft received an advantage: without being exposed to the risk of being shot down from the ground, they could use those same long-range R-37M missiles to carry out an attack.

Comments

[January]

This is a real disaster... So it turns out they shot me down unfairly?
It's not right. We're replaying. Raise a new f16 and drive it into the same area....
And anyway, what did they use to knock down the lamp? At least with a hazelnut or a jar of cucumbers. They knocked it down - well done. No need to wander where you weren't invited...
Well, and referring to Madness seems to me to be disrespecting myself.... She is a major specialist in any field. From air defense to economics and education...

[ZovSailor]

Orange Bigg
Today, 21: 27
The R-37M has a kill radius of about 400 km. Actually, in Russian it would be correct to write "upon the defeat/destruction of a fighter", and not "downing". Who even introduced the incomprehensible word "downing" into circulation? Did someone skip Russian language classes? Seriously, I had never heard of such a word before the official reports. Who made it up?

There is an opinion that the Russian Defense Ministry correctly indicated on April 12 about the strike and loss of the Fu-16 on the Russian Air Defense Day without specifying the striking element, since the SVO-KTO continues and all enemies do not need to know the details for the future use of the algorithm in similar episodes.

[syabroleonid]

They wouldn't write anything at all. You never know why the Litak crashed. They're just helping the enemy find out the details. Or maybe it's disinformation? Or maybe it's true and we shot it down? Or maybe we didn't shoot it down at all (there's no such term), but destroyed it? Or maybe they're lying? Or maybe it's true that the air defense forces? And do you seriously believe that the Ukrainian Armed Forces leadership uses information from the Ministry of Defense reports? Then they're hopeless and that's the end for them. But since we've ceded at least 2022 square kilometers of territory since 15, that's not true. And dozens of NATO countries share intelligence information with them.

[Bad_gr]

Sources rule out the friendly fire version, since Ukrainian air defense systems were not operating in the area where Ivanov was carrying out his mission.

Quote: ian

This is a real disaster... So it turns out they shot me down unfairly?

As far as I understand, the Ukrainians were upset that it wasn't them who shot down the F-16. There wasn't even a chance, since their air defense wasn't working in that area. Betrayal.

[fruc]

In the Ukrainian Rada, trying to understand what happened

Apparently the Rada has nothing better to do than delve into the issues of air battles. One Bandera freak is gone (and a plane too), he went to Hell.

[navigator777]

And what kind of cover could there be on the ground, any cover, having turned on the radar, immediately becomes the target of Iskandea, only the Patriot can shoot at a good range, but they are saved after large losses. And in general it is not clear what they were counting on, considering that the same MiG-29 is constantly shot down, did they think that the F16 is invulnerable?

[KCA]

It seems to me that the Patriot can shoot, but who will let him? You can tease him and send a couple of Kh-31PM, minus the Patriot, the Americans will bring a big strap-on and talk to Zelensky without Vaseline

[Alf]

Why did you take your wife with you? When Putin came to the factories, his wife was sitting at home.

[2 Level Advisor]

Quote: Alf

When Putin came to the factories, his wife stayed at home.

so it seems like he hasn't been married for a long time... officially...

[Alf]

Quote: 2 level advisor

Quote: Alf

When Putin came to the factories, his wife stayed at home.

so it seems like he hasn't been married for a long time... officially...

And when I was married I didn’t take it either.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

but in general it's an interesting situation, if ours shot it down, then as I understand it this is the first F-16 shot down by a Russian aircraft, and in principle the first F-16 shot down in an air battle
but I think that even if so, our people will hold back the information in light of the "progress" in the negotiations with the mattresses

[sas711]

Why first? F-16s were shot down more than once during almost half a century of operation. Another thing is that these losses were often attributed to technical failures and accidents.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

Quote: sas711

The F-16 has been shot down more than once in its nearly half-century of service.

never in an air battle, read carefully

[nik-mazur]

Russian aircraft received an advantage: without the risk of being shot down from the ground, they could use those same long-range R-37M missiles

The R-37 has a range of up to 300 km. The Patriot has a target detection range of 180 km for a bomber. The range of destruction is naturally less.
In this scenario, the Patriot would have to move 120 km ahead of the F-16 to at least detect the attacking fighter.

[sas711]

The Patriot can easily receive target designation from an AWACS aircraft.

[nik-mazur]

Quote: sas711

receive target designation from an AWACS aircraft

What do you mean by target designation? Are you confusing it with guidance? Because it is far from the same thing.

[sas711]

Patriot can receive target designation from the AWACS aircraft - that's what I heard. How exactly it is transmitted - from the aircraft to the complex, or directly to the missile - I don't know. But it is logical to assume that at a long range the Patriot radar does not see the target if it is low-altitude - actually, like all other air defense systems - no one has cancelled the curvature of the Earth.

[nik-mazur]

Quote: sas711

Patriot can receive target designation from the AWACS aircraft... How exactly it is transmitted - from the aircraft to the complex, or directly to the missile - I do not know

Rest assured – target designation is transmitted to the SAM system in the form of information, not commands. Missile control, i.e. direct guidance, is only possible from the SAM that fired the missile. The same situation applies to air-to-air missiles – whoever shoots, controls.
Maybe someday they will figure out how to implement external control, but for now this is how this world is structured.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: sas711

The Patriot can easily receive target designation from an AWACS aircraft.

It can. But the maximum range of the PAC-3 (and only SAMs with ARL homing heads need to work with external target designation and target data) is about 120 km. So, to cover an aircraft over Sumy, the Ukrainian SAM system needs to be installed in Kursk.

[helilelik]

For a rocket to fly 300 km, it needs to be launched almost from space and, preferably, at supersonic speed.

[nik-mazur]

Quote: helilelik

For a rocket to fly 300 km, it needs to be launched almost from space

This means that our planes can fly almost in space.
Supersonic speed is obvious – the maximum speed of the Su-35 is 2 km/h or 500 Mach.

[Mazunga]

Do we still have the MIG-27 in service? Does anyone know?

[nik-mazur]

Quote from Mazunga

We still have the MIG-27 in service

They say they were written off in the mid-nineties.

[Mazunga]

yes, good planes have been written off(

[Glagol1]

A strange comment in the article. The Ukropvo didn't work in the F-16 flight zone. So what? If it's an R-37, then the launch range is such that our air defense fighter doesn't care in the F-16 flight zone. Because the maximum the dancers shoot at is 100 km with a bit. They don't have any really long systems.

[voyaka uh]

All fighters shoot from 80-100 km maximum.
For longer range explosive missiles
External guidance and target designation is required.
Otherwise, it's blind shooting.

[drags33]

All the Ukrainian pilots should be awarded immediately, even before their first flight... let them at least walk around as heroes for a few weeks/months... They all end up the same anyway...

[voyaka uh]

Actually, there was just another article on VO.
About how the F-16 dodged and performed anti-missile maneuvers against S-400 missiles.
And it was said that it was shot down by the third missile. This is a logical version.
There was no talk about launching a missile from a fighter jet.

[nik-mazur]

Quote: voyaka uh

Longer range explosive missiles require external guidance and target designation

I'm embarrassed to ask, where does external guidance and target designation come from?

Quote: voyaka uh

how the F-16 dodged and performed anti-missile maneuvers against S-400 missiles.
And it was said that he was shot down by the third missile.

There was no such article. There was an unconfirmed version about three missiles - allegedly two from the SAM system and one air-to-air. Even if this is true, then which missile destroyed the F-16 - the first, the second, or perhaps both at once - no one knows. The anti-missile maneuvers that allowed the first two missiles to be evaded are already the commentators' fantasies.
Our Ministry of Defense, as usual, laconically reported that the F-16 was shot down by air defense systems.

[voyaka uh]

"I'm embarrassed to ask, where does the external guidance and target designation come from?"///
----
What is there to be embarrassed about? It's a perfectly reasonable question.
Guidance from an AWACS aircraft, ground-based radar, or another aircraft flying closer to the target.
The fighter itself, having launched a long-range missile, is not capable of guiding it with its radar at a distance of more than 100 km, and the missile’s homing head is not capable of catching the target at the remaining 200 km.
That is, without additional external target designation, the missile will fly into nowhere, blindly.

[nik-mazur]

Quote: voyaka uh

Guidance from an AWACS aircraft, ground-based radar, or another aircraft flying closer to the target

And why use a long-range missile if there is a SAM or another aircraft closer to the target? It is completely unclear why an AWACS aircraft would be closer to the target than a fighter.
Again, are you sure you're not confusing target designation with guidance?

[voyaka uh]

"Why would an AWACS aircraft need to be closer to the target than a fighter is somehow completely incomprehensible"///
----
Let me explain.
An AWACS aircraft has a radar that is many times more powerful than a fighter jet. And it doesn't need to be any closer to the target.
On the contrary, it flies at a safe distance from air defense under the cover of fighters.

[nik-mazur]

Quote: voyaka uh

Let me explain. The aircraft has AWACS

That is, there are no objections regarding the air defense missile system and other aircraft?
So, the AWACS aircraft directly guides the missile to the target?

[Yarik]

The R-37 has a range of up to 300 km. Therefore, at such a maximum distance, it will lose more than half of its momentum and it will not be difficult for a fighter with an experienced pilot to dodge it. Therefore, I think it was an S400 missile.

[Hexenmeister]

The range of the R-37 is up to 300 km.

But the developers don’t think so:

The efforts were not in vain: on November 21, 2012, successful “hot” work was carried out on the “Tribute” goal. The work showed the possibility of implementing long-range launches (more than 300 km).

And this information is essentially fifteen years old.

[nik-mazur]

Quote: Yarik

The range of the R-37 is up to 300 km. Therefore, at such a maximum distance

Even if so, how do we know that the missile was used at the maximum range? For example, 150 km, that is, less than half of the maximum range, is a completely safe distance to hit an F-16, which is carrying a bomb load, and therefore limited in maneuverability and unable to respond.
In general, in the absence of information, fortune telling on coffee grounds will be just as plausible.

[Hexenmeister]

fortune telling on coffee grounds will be just as plausible.

I agree that only an expansion of the launch range values ​​will make the fate of any enemy aircraft in this zone even more unpredictable in the absence of normal air defense on the ground.

[nik-mazur]

Quote: Hexenmeister

in the absence of normal air defense on the ground

In fact, when the range of our air missiles is at least twice the range of the most powerful Western air defense system, ground-based air defense will not be of much help to Ukrainian aircraft.

[Word]

What's all the fuss about? F-16 is an ancient plane, born in 75-78. Maxim died, so what?

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

AK 74 is also ancient, but it kills quite well

[PPD]

How to say.
There is so much difference between the version from 70 and the current one that perhaps the only difference is the appearance.
So there are probably no original options left at all.

[Nord11]

It seems to me that the remaining "Ghosts of Kyiv" were visited by philosophical sadness in the wake of this message.

[Gregory Charnota]

Well, the Svidomite folk tales begin )))
a jar of cucumbers is crying on the sidelines