Ukrainian Air Force
Discussion
LotusOmega375D said:
Third one also. Very brave crews. I hope their voyage was a safe one. So does this show that the Russians do not have air supremacy, at least over Western Ukraine, if slow unescorted transport planes (possibly full of weapons) are still able to fly in?
There does seem to be some perplexed thoughts on this......There was a photo on twitter of another downed Russian Su25 Frogfoot, handily showing the Russian tail serial number still, and there is that graphic footage of that Russian helo getting taken out by that Stinger missile, so the Ukrainians are not making life easy for the VKS at low level with the MANPADS they have and are being given, and the Ukrainians still seem to have enough of the Russian S300 and other higher level SAM systems in operation, plus the ones they have captured from the Russians already being turned against their former owners.
There is an interesting piece here on the various theories why the VKS don't seem to be being used in the same way that NATO airpower was used in Iraq/Afgan/Balkans in the past.
https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications...
.
I would think that if the US were to replace Poland’s Mig 29 squadrons with US crewed F-16 or F-15 and shipped the Polish Mig Pilots over to the US for F-35A familiarisation that would be perfectly acceptable.
If the Polish government then sold those Mig 29s to Ukraine that would also be a normal thing to do.
No escalation involved.
If the Polish government then sold those Mig 29s to Ukraine that would also be a normal thing to do.
No escalation involved.
Stick Legs said:
I would think that if the US were to replace Poland’s Mig 29 squadrons with US crewed F-16 or F-15 and shipped the Polish Mig Pilots over to the US for F-35A familiarisation that would be perfectly acceptable.
If the Polish government then sold those Mig 29s to Ukraine that would also be a normal thing to do.
No escalation involved.
No, but Putin would see the replacement of Russian-made materiel with US-made materiel as NATO expansion.If the Polish government then sold those Mig 29s to Ukraine that would also be a normal thing to do.
No escalation involved.
I think he saw that Ukraine was heading towards NATO membership and wanted to grab it while he still could. A nice bit of national prestige, home for tea and medals. Except Ukraine didn't play ball.
Stick Legs said:
Simpo Two said:
No, but Putin would see the replacement of Russian-made materiel with US-made materiel as NATO expansion.
Well that bit is happening anyway.Essentially F-35A is going to be the NATO standard fighter.
And Finland is thinking of signing up too.
You can see here how NATO has expanded, hoovering up former Soviet countries (sort by date): https://www.nato.int/nato-welcome/index.html Putin must have watched his country being eaten away.
Edited by Simpo Two on Sunday 6th March 13:45
Simpo Two said:
The silly thing is that if Putin didn't want NATO on his border, then by capturing Ukraine he will have exactly that!
Worth googling the north european plain, in the context of Russia defending itself.What he's trying to do is push the initial contact point several hundred km west (giving defence-in-depth) AND in doing so narrowing any potential point of attack by a good few hundred km.
Of course, that is all just PR for public consumption...the reality is that as soon as Ukraine discovered oil and gas they became both an economic threat and opportunity to Russia...so something had to be done.
I wonder if someone who knows what they are talking about could answer a question for me (and maybe hypothesise too if they feel so inclined).
As I understand it, very very generally, military radars used (*) to have two modes of operation. Search mode and track mode (aka "locked on"). The radar warning receiver in the aircraft used to be able to distinguish between a radar that just swept past you versus one that was actively tracking you.
I would imagine that if you are a pilot and you hear your Radar Warner alert "someone has locked on to you", your bottom clenches a little and you possibly start chucking out chaff, dumping your weapons and bravely running away.
With all the NATO aircraft flying around the borders, could they be "locking on" to Russian aircraft, to give them a fright if nothing else? Or would that be considered too provocative?
It was basically an idle thought about one possible reason for the mysterious lack of significant Russian airforce presence. If they get locked on every time they cross the border, presumably they couldn't know whether it was "just" NATO aircraft messing with them from afar or Ukrainian air defence about to send a missile along.
Any thoughts from anyone who has a clue (unlike me)?
(*) I think they are a lot more clever these days precisely to avoid the enemy getting a warning, but presumably the enemy's RWR can still be triggered if you want to
As I understand it, very very generally, military radars used (*) to have two modes of operation. Search mode and track mode (aka "locked on"). The radar warning receiver in the aircraft used to be able to distinguish between a radar that just swept past you versus one that was actively tracking you.
I would imagine that if you are a pilot and you hear your Radar Warner alert "someone has locked on to you", your bottom clenches a little and you possibly start chucking out chaff, dumping your weapons and bravely running away.
With all the NATO aircraft flying around the borders, could they be "locking on" to Russian aircraft, to give them a fright if nothing else? Or would that be considered too provocative?
It was basically an idle thought about one possible reason for the mysterious lack of significant Russian airforce presence. If they get locked on every time they cross the border, presumably they couldn't know whether it was "just" NATO aircraft messing with them from afar or Ukrainian air defence about to send a missile along.
Any thoughts from anyone who has a clue (unlike me)?
(*) I think they are a lot more clever these days precisely to avoid the enemy getting a warning, but presumably the enemy's RWR can still be triggered if you want to
Flooble said:
As I understand it, very very generally, military radars used (*) to have two modes of operation. Search mode and track mode (aka "locked on"). The radar warning receiver in the aircraft used to be able to distinguish between a radar that just swept past you versus one that was actively tracking you.
There's a third mode where they just passively 'listen' to see if any aircraft are using radar themselves.Flooble said:
With all the NATO aircraft flying around the borders, could they be "locking on" to Russian aircraft, to give them a fright if nothing else? Or would that be considered too provocative?
The NATO aircraft capable of detecting Russian aircraft as they enter Ukraine are generally AWACS aircraft, and not combat aircraft. So they wouldn't "lock" onto the Russian aircraft.A combat aircraft has a radar that only has limited directionality. So they would need to be pointed into Ukrainian airspace before turning away and repeating their circuit. Remember, NATO aircraft in Ukrainian airspace would be an escalation.
And finally, a good threat detection system would differentiate between an aircraft radar and a missile's radar (which may or not may-not be active during launch, as it may use the launch aircraft to vector before enabling its own radar at closer ranges).
Finally, it's worth checking the distances between the Polish/Ukrainian border (or the Romanian/Moldovan) and where most of the combat is.
Most fighter radars wouldn't be reaching much more than 200-300km, not with any real power*.
...only the big ol' dish on the AWACS can properly reach 400+km. And apparently the F22's radar, which outdoes the old AWG-9 on the F14. But I've not heard of any F22's in-theatre right now.
Also look here to work out distance to the horizon from altitude - http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm
(You can then either double the distance for aircraft at the same altitude as you, or pick 2 altitudes and add them together)
* Radar works pretty much like torchlight - you need f-off big batteries and a bright bulb to reach any distance and bounce back towards you...
Most fighter radars wouldn't be reaching much more than 200-300km, not with any real power*.
...only the big ol' dish on the AWACS can properly reach 400+km. And apparently the F22's radar, which outdoes the old AWG-9 on the F14. But I've not heard of any F22's in-theatre right now.
Also look here to work out distance to the horizon from altitude - http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm
(You can then either double the distance for aircraft at the same altitude as you, or pick 2 altitudes and add them together)
* Radar works pretty much like torchlight - you need f-off big batteries and a bright bulb to reach any distance and bounce back towards you...
Stick Legs said:
Well that bit is happening anyway.
Essentially F-35A is going to be the NATO standard fighter.
Just a few problems still to be sorted with the F-35, AKA the $1.7 trillion Yugo with wings.Essentially F-35A is going to be the NATO standard fighter.
https://inf.news/en/military/1b8926a71c83de79ef191...
How does a Mig29 compare to the current Russian counterpart?
One hears how the number of flight hours for most Russian crews are far less per year than combat pilots in the west, but I haven't heard much about the state of Ukraine training and expertise. Is supply of Mig29s to Ukraine just going to result in massive losses and would they be better on staying on the ground and/orfocusing on ground attack where there isn't a Russian airforce presence and simultaneously investing in some SAM batteries that can protect the cities against the high and medium altitude bombing?
One hears how the number of flight hours for most Russian crews are far less per year than combat pilots in the west, but I haven't heard much about the state of Ukraine training and expertise. Is supply of Mig29s to Ukraine just going to result in massive losses and would they be better on staying on the ground and/orfocusing on ground attack where there isn't a Russian airforce presence and simultaneously investing in some SAM batteries that can protect the cities against the high and medium altitude bombing?
NMNeil said:
Stick Legs said:
Well that bit is happening anyway.
Essentially F-35A is going to be the NATO standard fighter.
Just a few problems still to be sorted with the F-35, AKA the $1.7 trillion Yugo with wings.Essentially F-35A is going to be the NATO standard fighter.
https://inf.news/en/military/1b8926a71c83de79ef191...
havoc said:
Finally, it's worth checking the distances between the Polish/Ukrainian border (or the Romanian/Moldovan) and where most of the combat is.
Most fighter radars wouldn't be reaching much more than 200-300km, not with any real power*.
...only the big ol' dish on the AWACS can properly reach 400+km. And apparently the F22's radar, which outdoes the old AWG-9 on the F14. But I've not heard of any F22's in-theatre right now.
Also look here to work out distance to the horizon from altitude - http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm
(You can then either double the distance for aircraft at the same altitude as you, or pick 2 altitudes and add them together)
* Radar works pretty much like torchlight - you need f-off big batteries and a bright bulb to reach any distance and bounce back towards you...
Thanks guys, always useful to hear from people who understand. Shame they can't tune the AWACS radar to give the Russian pilots some brown trouser moments.Most fighter radars wouldn't be reaching much more than 200-300km, not with any real power*.
...only the big ol' dish on the AWACS can properly reach 400+km. And apparently the F22's radar, which outdoes the old AWG-9 on the F14. But I've not heard of any F22's in-theatre right now.
Also look here to work out distance to the horizon from altitude - http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm
(You can then either double the distance for aircraft at the same altitude as you, or pick 2 altitudes and add them together)
* Radar works pretty much like torchlight - you need f-off big batteries and a bright bulb to reach any distance and bounce back towards you...
Flooble said:
Thanks guys, always useful to hear from people who understand. Shame they can't tune the AWACS radar to give the Russian pilots some brown trouser moments.
I think they are currently having bigger brown trouser moments courtesy of the Ukrainian ground based anti-air missile batteries.....IanH755 said:
The rust is the iron particles within an older version of the LO paint which the USN has deliberately left to degrade so that they can see how bad it gets (as part of the F35C's first big cruise) before the paint actually needs to be "re-sprayed". The later version of the LO paint is far better for durability as the paint on the F-35B variants of the RN/RAF/USMC show after their 9 month cruise around the world showed (CSG21).
So it's a different sort of rust to the corrosion they found back in 2018 then?https://www.military.com/defensetech/2018/04/12/pe...
Or the corrosion the Australian Air Force had?
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-07/williamtown...
You'd think they could get a full refund under the lemon laws.
NMNeil said:
So it's a different sort of rust to the corrosion they found back in 2018 then?
https://www.military.com/defensetech/2018/04/12/pe...
Or the corrosion the Australian Air Force had?
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-07/williamtown...
You'd think they could get a full refund under the lemon laws.
Do you have any experience of engineering? I'm guessing none.https://www.military.com/defensetech/2018/04/12/pe...
Or the corrosion the Australian Air Force had?
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-07/williamtown...
You'd think they could get a full refund under the lemon laws.
ShortBeardy said:
How does a Mig29 compare to the current Russian counterpart?
One hears how the number of flight hours for most Russian crews are far less per year than combat pilots in the west, but I haven't heard much about the state of Ukraine training and expertise. Is supply of Mig29s to Ukraine just going to result in massive losses and would they be better on staying on the ground and/orfocusing on ground attack where there isn't a Russian airforce presence and simultaneously investing in some SAM batteries that can protect the cities against the high and medium altitude bombing?
The current Russian fighter, the SU-57 is meant to replace the Mig-29, so you can only assume that it's faster, longer range and more weapons.One hears how the number of flight hours for most Russian crews are far less per year than combat pilots in the west, but I haven't heard much about the state of Ukraine training and expertise. Is supply of Mig29s to Ukraine just going to result in massive losses and would they be better on staying on the ground and/orfocusing on ground attack where there isn't a Russian airforce presence and simultaneously investing in some SAM batteries that can protect the cities against the high and medium altitude bombing?
And in the works is the new Checkmate fighter.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41576/now-we...
And the unmanned Hunter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kuS30vyoqg
One or both may make an appearance on the battlefield, who knows?
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff