- Joined
- Apr 3, 2002
- Messages
- 30,429
- Reaction score
- 28,771
As Russia advances, Blinken makes a surprise stop a dive bar in Kiev to rally support! Your tax money well spent
It really depends on which block they receive.6 aircraft will make little difference in the war.
Even an older block of F16 is going to be decades more advanced than the old soviet era stuff Ukraine is flying now. I hope it isn't too late.It really depends on which block they receive.
If the delays are for upgrades then the amount of f-16 needed for an effect wouldn't need to be large.
There's a lot more than 6 pledged and if you're worried about numbers it's still to be seen what the ramifications of this are:
Greece is retiring their entire f-16 fleet and it's around double what's been pledged.
Actually better had been to gave them F-15 not F-16. IF as you had posted, this air intake is so close to ground ....F-16s won't matter since there's no suitable runways to fly them from. All Soviet aircraft have some degree of rough field capability so they can takeoff & land on cratered runways, highways, and even dirt roads, which is about all that's left in the Ukraine (Russians trashed every runway that can host F-16s). The F-16 can't do that, they require a proper runway that's been fully swept for debris or else the engine's getting wrecked. The air intake is less than 3' off the ground and will suck every piece of loose debris off the road or runway into the engine, even if the engine survives the first time it's not going to live for long so you're only going to get a handful of flights out of the planes before the engine grenades.
The Soviets were not stupid. Their planes may not be as high tech as their US equivalents but they were built to be rugged and capable of operating in 3rd world conditions for extended periods of time since that was part of Soviet doctrine & design philosophy. This is why their planes have landing gear with rough field capability along with intake baffles to keep debris from being sucked into the engines. They also don't need hangers so you can hide them in forests or leave them in fields with camo nets over them, and you can do this for years as the Ukrainians have demonstrated. NATO planes can't do that, they're not built for the kind of war that's going on in the Ukraine.
you've earned your root vegetables todayF-16s won't matter since there's no suitable runways to fly them from. All Soviet aircraft have some degree of rough field capability so they can takeoff & land on cratered runways, highways, and even dirt roads, which is about all that's left in the Ukraine (Russians trashed every runway that can host F-16s). The F-16 can't do that, they require a proper runway that's been fully swept for debris or else the engine's getting wrecked. The air intake is less than 3' off the ground and will suck every piece of loose debris off the road or runway into the engine, even if the engine survives the first time it's not going to live for long so you're only going to get a handful of flights out of the planes before the engine grenades.
The Soviets were not stupid. Their planes may not be as high tech as their US equivalents but they were built to be rugged and capable of operating in 3rd world conditions for extended periods of time since that was part of Soviet doctrine & design philosophy. This is why their planes have landing gear with rough field capability along with intake baffles to keep debris from being sucked into the engines. They also don't need hangers so you can hide them in forests or leave them in fields with camo nets over them, and you can do this for years as the Ukrainians have demonstrated. NATO planes can't do that, they're not built for the kind of war that's going on in the Ukraine.
F-16s won't matter since there's no suitable runways to fly them from. All Soviet aircraft have some degree of rough field capability so they can takeoff & land on cratered runways, highways, and even dirt roads, which is about all that's left in the Ukraine (Russians trashed every runway that can host F-16s). The F-16 can't do that, they require a proper runway that's been fully swept for debris or else the engine's getting wrecked. The air intake is less than 3' off the ground and will suck every piece of loose debris off the road or runway into the engine, even if the engine survives the first time it's not going to live for long so you're only going to get a handful of flights out of the planes before the engine grenades.
The Soviets were not stupid. Their planes may not be as high tech as their US equivalents but they were built to be rugged and capable of operating in 3rd world conditions for extended periods of time since that was part of Soviet doctrine & design philosophy. This is why their planes have landing gear with rough field capability along with intake baffles to keep debris from being sucked into the engines. They also don't need hangers so you can hide them in forests or leave them in fields with camo nets over them, and you can do this for years as the Ukrainians have demonstrated. NATO planes can't do that, they're not built for the kind of war that's going on in the Ukraine.
Given how blatantly pro-Russia the guy was, here's to hoping he never leaves the hospital.Someone just tried to kill the recently elected Slovakian PM. He was shot apparently and rushed to a hospital.
Actually better had been to gave them F-15 not F-16. IF as you had posted, this air intake is so close to ground ....
F-15 does have higher location of air intakes than F-16.
We are hoping not to see this guy in EU institutions anymore. He is considerably worse for Ukraine than Orban.Given how blatantly pro-Russia the guy was, here's to hoping he never leaves the hospital.