International Russia/Ukraine Megathread V15

As Russia advances, Blinken makes a surprise stop a dive bar in Kiev to rally support! Your tax money well spent



 

Oh no Blinken played a guitar at a bar in Kyiv arrest him!!! While Republicans are doing a campaign rally for Trump at the courthouse. Ukraine fighting against a Russian invasion Republicans are putting out the welcome mat.
 
6 aircraft will make little difference in the war.
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.
 
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.
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.
 
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.
 
Someone just tried to kill the recently elected Slovakian PM. He was shot apparently and rushed to a hospital.
 
  • Eek
Reactions: Cid
Ukraine should reduce corruption and to deal with kleptocrats.
Now they looks that are starting to do something.
For example appeared that some colonel is hardcore kleptocrat. His wife used jeep purchased for military unit, colonel had collected accumulators and power banks , looks that with intent to sell them.
 
France will supply Ukr missiles for SAMP-T and batch with cruise missiles.
Looks good that France managed to increase Anti aircraft missiles production capacity.

Also micron ordered to deliver ukr 3000 shells, looks that these already are in Ukraine. These shells are 155 mm and if fired from long barrel howitzer does have range more than 40 km. GPS spoofing / jamming doesn't work against them cos GPS isn't used for these.
 
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.
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.
 
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 today

you should cite your sources tho
 
Article is biased regards funding for Ukraine. Especially financial aspect. Europe had provided Ukraine considerably more funds than U.S.
De facto all foreign currency reserves Ukraine does have now are literally Europeans money and loans from different institutions.
More than this : EU had negotiated with IMF, EBRD, IBRD and World Bank to continue provide Ukr further loans and managed to negotiate that they will not demand immediate loans re payment....according to contracts.
Japan had signed batch with warrant letters and this had allowed Ukr to get multiple loans from World Bank...
 
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.

Seems pretty silly to suggest that the parties involved aren't aware of F-16s capabilities and operating requirements, don't you think?

Especially when you consider the United States is the largest owner and operator of F-16s and has run them all over the world in "3rd world conditions" for decades at this point.

We just you know, sweep the runways off before flying them. It's not that complicated.
 
If about F-16  maybe reason is that they wants to get weapons used by F-16.

They already managed to launch western cruise missiles by using changed pylons for soviet airplanes they does have.
so maybe will do something like this again.
 
Btw France had supplied Ukr some batch with gliding bombs. Ukr are using modified pylons for Mig 29 for these bombs.
So also Su 25 , Su 24 definitely might be used to drop these bombs.
 
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.

F-15 will still suck a ton of crap into the engines, not as bad as the F-16, but still bad enough to ground it before too long. There's more than just air intake placement when it comes to keeping debris out of the engines.

The MiG 29 has a 2nd set of air intakes on TOP of the wing roots just behind the pilot, you can see the slotted rectangular openings in this picture. During takeoffs & landings the main air intake on the bottom is closed off and all the air goes in through the top, this keeps things from getting sucked off the ground & into the engine.
Russian_Air_Force_Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-29S_Naumenko-1.jpg


Sukhoi Flanker series (Su-27, 30, 33, 34, 35) doesn't have the 2nd set of top mounted intakes, but they all have a blower device on the front wheel which blows away all the debris on the ground so that it doesn't get sucked into the engines. That funny looking wheel cover on the nose wheel is actually a blower that clears the ground of debris, Su-57 and Tu-160 also have the blower device since they don't have top mounted intakes like the MiG-29 and Tu-22M.
Su-27-NMUSAF-3-scaled.jpeg
 
Given how blatantly pro-Russia the guy was, here's to hoping he never leaves the hospital.
We are hoping not to see this guy in EU institutions anymore. He is considerably worse for Ukraine than Orban.
Yes, Orban refused to provide military supplies, opposed against financial assistance for Ukr and insisted that Ukr should negotiate with Putin ASAP.
While he didn't did stuff like Fico. Fico multiple times had advised EP/EC to cease assistance for Ukr and even multiple times had advised countries leaders to cease military supplies for Ukraine.
He hates Ukraine not lesser than Putin.
 
Obviously that Sovakian parliament will have new PM elections if Fico will not bear stuff he should ....tonight.
 
Back
Top