Good evening… actually, almost: good morning, everybody! It’s really ‘no fun‘ to monitor developments in Ukraine of the last few days. Sure, the government and different authorities are trying to keep the spirits high; the PSU’s Su-24-units are really pounding the Russians on the occupied Crimea hard, and the Russians have lost an Su-35 over the Sevastopol area today (reportedly, the pilot ejected safely, and it was ‘own goal’).
Thanks for report. All hope on f 16 to shot down su 34 and 35 is nonsense for me , because they should be block 70+ to do something. I personally hope that they will counter VKS indirectly increasing a number of Kabs(Jdams) from Ukrainian side. It would not protect Ukrainian troops, but cause more Russian attrition. 12 strikes against 120 is worse than 25-40 against 120.
A few questions:
1. In your opinion, how many Patriot batteries do Ukraine need to reduce VKS front activity( only front not protect cities)?
2. Jas 39 Gripen is also an option. How would one escadrille influence the problem on at least one piece of front( like Bahmut) ?
3. Why don't Russian attacks Dnipro bridges? They would need a lot of missles, but Russia wanted much more on energetics, whereas bridges collapse would have bigger front effect?
Thanks Tom, I consider yesterday's question answered . . .
Now, the hard data, taking into account the number of 120 UMPK deployed in a single day, we are talking about a minimum of 30 daily bomber sorties (4 UMPK x SU-34), a number that triples the number of f-16s available, in The best case
Funny, I was having a conversation about this tonight with another friend who is a big airplane specialist (he works civil aviation and spent 30 years as a Blackhawk Mechanic in the NG). We were talking about how could Ukraine maximize the F-16s. The best idea we came up with was holding them until they had enough numbers to make a difference, and then holding them until the UA was ready for a major operation and let them go then to maximize the surprise and effect. I have to wonder though about how well can the RU actually engage at max range. That rarely happens in real life, but it can be done. The issue though is that even if not at max range they still have enough range to outrange the UA stuff (at least what they have now). It would be nice to get some Gripens with Meteors in the mix, and again, holding them until everything is in place. I expect ideas are already in the works for countering these weapons or for getting the most out of things.
I find it hard to believe that for the past 40 years, the USSR/Russia has had the ability to snipe US planes from long-rage, with the US airforce being unable to retaliate, and the Pentagon was somehow chill about it and didn't bother developing a countermeasure.
I'm far from the "US technology is the best" mindset, and the idea that 10 or so F-16 will turn the tide of the air war always sounded silly. But I just cannot imagine the Pentagon tolerating such air-to-air range inferiority against a major rival, for so long, it goes completely agains US doctrine. So there must be more to this story, maybe they're confident the AIM-120 has more range than it has demonstrated so far in practice?
Speaking of F-16s, the old dream scenario of mercenary ("Flying Tiger") squadrons flying in from Poland was always impractical, right? For all the same reasons currently limiting the utility of any aircraft under direct PSU control. Plus the difficulty of operational integration with pilots and crews who don't speak Ukrainian and don't exist within the standard hierarchy, working on airbases outside PSU management. Plus the limiting effect on mission set when adding hundreds of kilometers of travel to each sortie.
Not only the ZSU/GUR are not attacking Russian airbases with drones, they have greatly reduced the number of such attacks - the last was a hit on coal plant (even less strategic than a refinery). It seems that they still lack a production capacity to keep the pace of their attacks.
The West should supply much more Patriots and other air defense systems but …. Russia has started dropping 1500kg gliding bombs, introduced smaller bombs and if it continues with this pace, it might get even ahead of the West in terms of air systems innovation…
Thanks Tom, your knowledge often comes tinged with bitter realities but is much appreciated all the same. Is Ukraines’ best option to build on the success of the Patriot/AA ambushes? It seems that the current dribble of Western support is really hurting now that the Russians are maximising their air advantage
I wonder whether the F-16’s Western partners will give the required number of missiles and which ones, or whether they will give 10-20 and that’s it. Or it will be like with the Patriots, who lack missiles. In general, our partners help us as usual. There are not very high expectations for these F-16s, especially in terms of their numbers; this is just a ridiculous 6-12 units versus 100 Su-34. Although there is something to laugh about here. All hope lies in Russian air defense, which will shoot down its planes.
Golly gee willikers Tom....you're all doom and gloom and BOOM!!!!!
"Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?"
"Always with the negative waves Moriarty (TOM), always with the negative waves."
How about something positive...something "Crazy... I mean like, so many positive waves... maybe we can't lose, you're on!"
......other than we are all positive that MAGA is trying to throw Ukraine and the Democratic world underneath PUT'LER's Fascist TANK of DEATH and potatoes...... "IS POTATO!!!" OH BORSCHT!!!!
...that we are all positive is happening.
Be well my friend and know that WE appreciate the $#@#$%^&$$% out of you and the great work you do.
Looking forward to another good news article - when the news is good, of course.
Thanks for report. All hope on f 16 to shot down su 34 and 35 is nonsense for me , because they should be block 70+ to do something. I personally hope that they will counter VKS indirectly increasing a number of Kabs(Jdams) from Ukrainian side. It would not protect Ukrainian troops, but cause more Russian attrition. 12 strikes against 120 is worse than 25-40 against 120.
A few questions:
1. In your opinion, how many Patriot batteries do Ukraine need to reduce VKS front activity( only front not protect cities)?
2. Jas 39 Gripen is also an option. How would one escadrille influence the problem on at least one piece of front( like Bahmut) ?
3. Why don't Russian attacks Dnipro bridges? They would need a lot of missles, but Russia wanted much more on energetics, whereas bridges collapse would have bigger front effect?
Thanks Tom, I consider yesterday's question answered . . .
Now, the hard data, taking into account the number of 120 UMPK deployed in a single day, we are talking about a minimum of 30 daily bomber sorties (4 UMPK x SU-34), a number that triples the number of f-16s available, in The best case
Funny, I was having a conversation about this tonight with another friend who is a big airplane specialist (he works civil aviation and spent 30 years as a Blackhawk Mechanic in the NG). We were talking about how could Ukraine maximize the F-16s. The best idea we came up with was holding them until they had enough numbers to make a difference, and then holding them until the UA was ready for a major operation and let them go then to maximize the surprise and effect. I have to wonder though about how well can the RU actually engage at max range. That rarely happens in real life, but it can be done. The issue though is that even if not at max range they still have enough range to outrange the UA stuff (at least what they have now). It would be nice to get some Gripens with Meteors in the mix, and again, holding them until everything is in place. I expect ideas are already in the works for countering these weapons or for getting the most out of things.
I find it hard to believe that for the past 40 years, the USSR/Russia has had the ability to snipe US planes from long-rage, with the US airforce being unable to retaliate, and the Pentagon was somehow chill about it and didn't bother developing a countermeasure.
I'm far from the "US technology is the best" mindset, and the idea that 10 or so F-16 will turn the tide of the air war always sounded silly. But I just cannot imagine the Pentagon tolerating such air-to-air range inferiority against a major rival, for so long, it goes completely agains US doctrine. So there must be more to this story, maybe they're confident the AIM-120 has more range than it has demonstrated so far in practice?
Speaking of F-16s, the old dream scenario of mercenary ("Flying Tiger") squadrons flying in from Poland was always impractical, right? For all the same reasons currently limiting the utility of any aircraft under direct PSU control. Plus the difficulty of operational integration with pilots and crews who don't speak Ukrainian and don't exist within the standard hierarchy, working on airbases outside PSU management. Plus the limiting effect on mission set when adding hundreds of kilometers of travel to each sortie.
Thanks Tom!
I don’t see F-16 shooting down S-34. I think they will be used at land targets from a longer range with more precise weapons.
Tom, why the Russians are not shooting down the SU-24 attacking Crimea with their long range missile?
Not only the ZSU/GUR are not attacking Russian airbases with drones, they have greatly reduced the number of such attacks - the last was a hit on coal plant (even less strategic than a refinery). It seems that they still lack a production capacity to keep the pace of their attacks.
The West should supply much more Patriots and other air defense systems but …. Russia has started dropping 1500kg gliding bombs, introduced smaller bombs and if it continues with this pace, it might get even ahead of the West in terms of air systems innovation…
BTW, have I missed your comments on UMPB or are they coming in the future?
Спасибо
Thanks Tom "It’s really ‘no fun‘ to monitor developments in Ukraine of the last few days" this pretty much sums it up
It seems the value for money decision is destroy all their SU-35 on air bases by long range ATACAMS. But Mike Johnson is playing for another team.
Thanks Tom, your knowledge often comes tinged with bitter realities but is much appreciated all the same. Is Ukraines’ best option to build on the success of the Patriot/AA ambushes? It seems that the current dribble of Western support is really hurting now that the Russians are maximising their air advantage
I wonder whether the F-16’s Western partners will give the required number of missiles and which ones, or whether they will give 10-20 and that’s it. Or it will be like with the Patriots, who lack missiles. In general, our partners help us as usual. There are not very high expectations for these F-16s, especially in terms of their numbers; this is just a ridiculous 6-12 units versus 100 Su-34. Although there is something to laugh about here. All hope lies in Russian air defense, which will shoot down its planes.
The amount of effort invested into minimizing value of F-16 is remarkable
Golly gee willikers Tom....you're all doom and gloom and BOOM!!!!!
"Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?"
"Always with the negative waves Moriarty (TOM), always with the negative waves."
How about something positive...something "Crazy... I mean like, so many positive waves... maybe we can't lose, you're on!"
......other than we are all positive that MAGA is trying to throw Ukraine and the Democratic world underneath PUT'LER's Fascist TANK of DEATH and potatoes...... "IS POTATO!!!" OH BORSCHT!!!!
...that we are all positive is happening.
Be well my friend and know that WE appreciate the $#@#$%^&$$% out of you and the great work you do.
Namaste Tom. :o)