The AIM-120 (regardless of of B or C5/C7/C8) together with a tactical link (usually Link16) is a marvellous asset.
Such an aircraft can approach a target at very low altitude, hiding in valleys, ground clutter or similar. It can then launch its AMRAAM without turning on its radar at all, firing against target coordinates which it has received over the Link16. (Also called third party targeting)
In the best of conditions the firing aircraft may not even be detected at all, if it can quickly get down ”on the deck” again and escape.
The missile will later turn on its seeker and disclose its presence, but then it’s hopefully too late for the target.
It calls for careful coordination and timing, but an ambush could be arranged where several quiet aircraft can attack a target simultanously from several directions.
Firing from very low altitude decreases the range of the missile considerably, however, due to the high density of the air, and because the missile will have to climb up to the target if this is at higher altitude.
The targeting, i.e. detecting, following, calculating the target position and vector, and sending this information on the Link16 can be done by other figthers, AWACS or even ground radars.
Such scenarios can be planned and practised beforehand, in simulation centers abroad, USA or NATO contries that have them.
Possibilites are endless, obviously Ukraine is good at this kind of intelligent fighting.
Yes, but I don’t think it’s necessary for the firing aircraft to turn on its radar after firing its AMRAAM(s). It can remain radio/radar silent and turn away immediately.
By popping up briefly and fire the missile slightly upwards it will help the missile with regards to range, just as it would if teleasing
>> So, if the PSU really has the IBCS BN Gateway, and then gets the Link 16, its F-16s could receive the same ‘picture’ like the Ukrainian air defence network and that ‘in real time’.
In turn, this means that the Ukrainian F-16s could also operate without revealing their presence through radio transmissions or through powering up their own radars.
Why is this important?
Because the Russians have a very comprehensive system of electronic support measures (ESM) deployed in and around Ukraine...
You mention; ”an F-16 on a counter-air mission will have to stay up there for a while longer: it will have to activate its radar, acquire the target and fire the missile, before returning back to the low altitude.”
The F-16 would still need to use it's radar in track while scan mode for the first leg if it wanted to get any considerable range out of the AIM-120. Firing the AIM-120 "mad dog" off the rail at the generally area of the target would further greatly reduce the range since there would be no in-flight course correction of the missile, until it's own seeker went active (as long as the aircraft also didn't change course a bit, and is now out of the gimbal limits of the missiles internal radar). You would have to reasonably get within just a few kilometers of the aircraft you were firing at for this to be effective, maybe 10-15km max, with a giraffe attack firing from low alt at a high target at 35,000 feet.
2 problems with the link 16. Say you are fying at treetop level to sneak up to do a giraffe attack with a aim-120. Your assests feeding you that info are also effected by terrain blocking your aircraft from their transmission, unless all of these assest and jets are using SATCOM (that isn't being jammed) , then your own aircraft is likely going to have a broken up picture going in, making this kinda attack, while not impossible, extremely high risk. With low chance of success.
The other thing is that in the sophisticated EW environment it's quite likely that link 16 transmission would at least be detected by Russian forces, and even if disrupting or interpreting these encrypted communications would be difficult, it would make detecting the aircraft trying to penetrate 50km into the Russian lines (glide bomb jets are usually launching at around 60km behind Russian lines) , easier.
Just to make it clear for me: Is there any known reason why they would paint the original US BuOrd number on the planes which originally hadn't them in their Danish service?
Because both ground-crews and pilots need aircraft insignia for orientation purposes - especially so when 'under the stress of combat'. Nobody wants to, in a rush to scramble, jump into the wrong cockpit.
So, now: when the aircraft were delivered, they have received their full FY-designations, to make sure the 'ground crews on the other side (of the border)', know, 1000% sure, which is which.
What is the PSU going to do with these numbers from now on.... that's a different story.
Forgive me for my ignorance but...was this a good idea to reveal the jets now? I don't know if I missed a few points in the articles regarding Ukraine and the F-16 Saga, but I don't know if this plan was a good one or not from any point. I'm not expecting a clear cut answer either as the 'ideal situation' is seldom ever achieved, but I was under the impression that if Ukraine wanted to have this make a greater impact on the field, they'd need greater numbers of this rather than piecemeal/trickling method their getting now. They might find good success with this, but Russia will eventually figure something out and plan around that and it'll be back to the drawing board. I don't know anymore, I just don't know how to take this news
The problem is that no one can wave a magic wand and have combat-ready pilots, aircraft, maintenance crews, runways, airfields, GBAD, and logistics in place in an instant. It takes a long time. That six F-16s are in-country right now is a minor miracle. Any expectations of this happening faster is the fault of those who merely wished it was so, not of those trying to get the job done.
F-16s simply have their footprint and hiding them is anything else than easy.
Plus, it's 'good for PR purposes' (especially in combination with the 20th anniversary of the PSU): is important in Ukraine - also for 'morale boosting purposes'.
Thanks for the update. The part thats most important is this Jet is better than anything they have in their inventory when all things are considered. And its just the start
- All Aim-120 (at least on ground) have blue rings. Isn't that mean this is training rockets?
- We already see in Ukraine aim9x (both launch from nasams and fragments) and some kind of aim120-c (launch). Unfortunately not remember c3 or c5 and can't find news(
Therefore, I have a feeling that (fortunately) we were not shown what maximum modification of aim120 rocket is available to PSU
More info on the 3 or 4 dog fights please!
Sorry mate, that's so hard to get, that kind of info is reserved for this:
https://www.helion.co.uk/military-history-books/war-in-ukraine-volume-6-the-air-war-february-march-2022.php
....and this book:
https://www.helion.co.uk/military-history-books/war-in-ukraine-volume-7-air-war-2023.php
Does it take long for the digital edition be launched?
6-9 months.
ouch...
The AIM-120 (regardless of of B or C5/C7/C8) together with a tactical link (usually Link16) is a marvellous asset.
Such an aircraft can approach a target at very low altitude, hiding in valleys, ground clutter or similar. It can then launch its AMRAAM without turning on its radar at all, firing against target coordinates which it has received over the Link16. (Also called third party targeting)
In the best of conditions the firing aircraft may not even be detected at all, if it can quickly get down ”on the deck” again and escape.
The missile will later turn on its seeker and disclose its presence, but then it’s hopefully too late for the target.
It calls for careful coordination and timing, but an ambush could be arranged where several quiet aircraft can attack a target simultanously from several directions.
Firing from very low altitude decreases the range of the missile considerably, however, due to the high density of the air, and because the missile will have to climb up to the target if this is at higher altitude.
The targeting, i.e. detecting, following, calculating the target position and vector, and sending this information on the Link16 can be done by other figthers, AWACS or even ground radars.
Such scenarios can be planned and practised beforehand, in simulation centers abroad, USA or NATO contries that have them.
Possibilites are endless, obviously Ukraine is good at this kind of intelligent fighting.
Yup, have described the 'principles' of that method of operation here: https://substack.com/home/post/p-147193301
Yes, but I don’t think it’s necessary for the firing aircraft to turn on its radar after firing its AMRAAM(s). It can remain radio/radar silent and turn away immediately.
By popping up briefly and fire the missile slightly upwards it will help the missile with regards to range, just as it would if teleasing
… releasing JDAMs or PAVEWAYs.
....from the same feature...
>> So, if the PSU really has the IBCS BN Gateway, and then gets the Link 16, its F-16s could receive the same ‘picture’ like the Ukrainian air defence network and that ‘in real time’.
In turn, this means that the Ukrainian F-16s could also operate without revealing their presence through radio transmissions or through powering up their own radars.
Why is this important?
Because the Russians have a very comprehensive system of electronic support measures (ESM) deployed in and around Ukraine...
You mention; ”an F-16 on a counter-air mission will have to stay up there for a while longer: it will have to activate its radar, acquire the target and fire the missile, before returning back to the low altitude.”
I don’t think it will have to activate its radar.
The F-16 would still need to use it's radar in track while scan mode for the first leg if it wanted to get any considerable range out of the AIM-120. Firing the AIM-120 "mad dog" off the rail at the generally area of the target would further greatly reduce the range since there would be no in-flight course correction of the missile, until it's own seeker went active (as long as the aircraft also didn't change course a bit, and is now out of the gimbal limits of the missiles internal radar). You would have to reasonably get within just a few kilometers of the aircraft you were firing at for this to be effective, maybe 10-15km max, with a giraffe attack firing from low alt at a high target at 35,000 feet.
2 problems with the link 16. Say you are fying at treetop level to sneak up to do a giraffe attack with a aim-120. Your assests feeding you that info are also effected by terrain blocking your aircraft from their transmission, unless all of these assest and jets are using SATCOM (that isn't being jammed) , then your own aircraft is likely going to have a broken up picture going in, making this kinda attack, while not impossible, extremely high risk. With low chance of success.
The other thing is that in the sophisticated EW environment it's quite likely that link 16 transmission would at least be detected by Russian forces, and even if disrupting or interpreting these encrypted communications would be difficult, it would make detecting the aircraft trying to penetrate 50km into the Russian lines (glide bomb jets are usually launching at around 60km behind Russian lines) , easier.
Maybe that explains why it took that long to appear
Just to make it clear for me: Is there any known reason why they would paint the original US BuOrd number on the planes which originally hadn't them in their Danish service?
Because both ground-crews and pilots need aircraft insignia for orientation purposes - especially so when 'under the stress of combat'. Nobody wants to, in a rush to scramble, jump into the wrong cockpit.
So, now: when the aircraft were delivered, they have received their full FY-designations, to make sure the 'ground crews on the other side (of the border)', know, 1000% sure, which is which.
What is the PSU going to do with these numbers from now on.... that's a different story.
FY-numbers like anamnesis vitae(life history), they included 'diseases, surgeries, traumas'.
Forgive me for my ignorance but...was this a good idea to reveal the jets now? I don't know if I missed a few points in the articles regarding Ukraine and the F-16 Saga, but I don't know if this plan was a good one or not from any point. I'm not expecting a clear cut answer either as the 'ideal situation' is seldom ever achieved, but I was under the impression that if Ukraine wanted to have this make a greater impact on the field, they'd need greater numbers of this rather than piecemeal/trickling method their getting now. They might find good success with this, but Russia will eventually figure something out and plan around that and it'll be back to the drawing board. I don't know anymore, I just don't know how to take this news
Here's a well-written explanation of the issues you raise:
https://www.twz.com/ukrainian-f-16-combat-proficiency-at-scale-not-likely-before-2027-air-force-general-says
The problem is that no one can wave a magic wand and have combat-ready pilots, aircraft, maintenance crews, runways, airfields, GBAD, and logistics in place in an instant. It takes a long time. That six F-16s are in-country right now is a minor miracle. Any expectations of this happening faster is the fault of those who merely wished it was so, not of those trying to get the job done.
There were not many options left.
F-16s simply have their footprint and hiding them is anything else than easy.
Plus, it's 'good for PR purposes' (especially in combination with the 20th anniversary of the PSU): is important in Ukraine - also for 'morale boosting purposes'.
[takes notes for F-16 submission at an IPMS event]
Looks like both F-16s on the ground at Zelensky 's speech are ADF versions, here a clear picture of the second:
https://x.com/Tendar/status/1820402719577768336/photo/2
Thanks - and yup: both F-16ADFs and thus both training aids, mock-ups, for display purposes only...
Hello,
The pylon does not looky like a PIDS+. It looks like an ECIPS+.
They usually come in pairs so PIDS+ would be carried under the other wing.
PIDS+ contains 3 buckets of chaff/flare plus MAWS sensors.
ECIPS+ contains an AN/ALQ-162(V)6 jammer along with the 3 MAWS sensors.
Thx for explaining that.
Thanks tom for this update
Thanks for the update. The part thats most important is this Jet is better than anything they have in their inventory when all things are considered. And its just the start
Two points in addition:
- All Aim-120 (at least on ground) have blue rings. Isn't that mean this is training rockets?
- We already see in Ukraine aim9x (both launch from nasams and fragments) and some kind of aim120-c (launch). Unfortunately not remember c3 or c5 and can't find news(
Therefore, I have a feeling that (fortunately) we were not shown what maximum modification of aim120 rocket is available to PSU
It's hard to judge the impact, given all the complicating paths of the next year.
I'm wondering at the impact of the Corvette ship from Turkey. Turkey's position seems to
have changed dramatically from earlier in the war.
At the beginning of the full invasion I read that Ukraine sunk its ships so they wouldn't
easy targets. I found it too depressing to think about further. What has changed that such
ships can now proceed?
And do you have thoughts on Turkey's transformed position?
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/ukraine-adds-turkish-corvette-navy-war-russia-112507700
Hey Mister....... (small child with hand raised) Does that birdy REALLY have that many claws???
Tom, wow. Reading your analysis of the F-16s based on that photo is like how Sherlock Holmes worked out Henry Baker's life details just from his hat.
That picture with the back part of 120 seems to show a captive round. The winder is a live missile.