Fighter Jets at Long Last Given to Ukraine

New news:

- Turkey will allow U.S. Navy vessels to just the Bosphorus to access the Black Sea because of this incident

- Russian Army Days Away From Running Out of Resources, Military Experts Say

Military experts and former commanders have said that Russia's army is days away from running out of resources, with what was intended to be a swift seizure of key Ukrainian cities turning into a drawn-out war.

www.newsweek.com

Large scale suicide charges with a 95% fatality rate aren't winning they're losing slowly.

#2 | POSTED BY TOR AT 2023-03-16 01:44 PM | FLAG:

Russian Military history shows that first year casualties are irrelevant. They win the grind. Ukraine has capabilities gaps. Their troops aren't coming out of NATO training into the field fast enough to hold the line. Their counter offensives in Bahkmut were defeated by Wagner who continues to press forward. Their offensive in Kremmina was defeated by Russian conscripts.

AU over here linking a 2022 article. Russia has not run out of artillery. Notice you don't see headlines about HIMARS destroying depots anymore? Russians are not stupid. They adapt.

and Poland is sending Mig-29s. Ukraine already has Mig-29s. They are no match whatsoever for a Sukhoi 27 & up, the Mig-31, etc. Russians are shooting at them from 220km away with air to air missiles.

"Russians are not stupid. They adapt."

Yeah, that worked so well in Afghanistan.

"Russian Military history shows that first year casualties are irrelevant."

According to what historians? This the 19th century Russia can no longer do as it wishes to its own people even if they're not aware of it they've all had a taste of freedom and the Big World outside of russia.

and Poland is sending Mig-29s. Ukraine already has Mig-29s. They are no match whatsoever for a Sukhoi 27 & up, the Mig-31, etc. Russians are shooting at them from 220km away with air to air missiles.

#5 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG

This isn't Top Gun. They aren't dog fighting.

This will depend entirely upon the technology.

If you were right, why the hell don't the Russians have air superiority locked up already?

Just give them another year. Or two. Or four.

This isn't Top Gun. They aren't dog fighting.

If you were right, why the hell don't the Russians have air superiority locked up already?

#8 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT AT 2023-03-16 02:45 PM | FLAG:

No ---- sherlock. It's called BVR combat. Please just look into how it works and you can figure out how you can shoot from behind Russian lines into Ukrainian airspace and engage their long obsolete Mig jets. It's been happening the entire time.

According to what historians?

#7 | POSTED BY TOR AT 2023-03-16 02:41 PM | FLAG:

All of them. Nobody would bet Russia would come out a winner in 1941, and nobody would bet on Germany in 1943. It's most of Russian military history. The first year is massively inept leadership that gets fired and/or executed, massive losses, etc. Then they dig deep and turn it around.

If you think what happened to Russia at the end of World War II constitutes winning you need to raise your standards. They may not have lost but that was not winning in fact if it hadn't been for America they probably would have lost the fight with Germany in the first year or two.

"If you think what happened to Russia at the end of World War II constitutes winning you need to raise your standards."

They gained control of half of Europe.
I'd call that a win.

"if it hadn't been for America they probably would have lost the fight with Germany in the first year or two."

You have it 100% backwards.
The Soviet did the heavy lifting.
Americans were the clean up crew.

Russians don't like to talk about how they benefited for the Lend lease act.

Or how after the Russian Revolution they likely would have all starved if not for American charity efforts led by Herbert Hoover of all people.

__________
#14 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-03-16 05:27 PM
You have it 100% backwards.
The Soviet did the heavy lifting.
Americans were the clean up crew.

Only according to Soviet "history" of "Great Patriotic War" (what Russians now call WW2) and only if you count dead bodies. Without Lend-Lease they would lose quickly - see en.wikipedia.org - Lend-Lease :
... Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev and Soviet Marshal Georgy Zhukov both stated that Lend-Lease enabled the Soviet Union to defeat Germany on the Eastern Front.

BTW, Khrushchev and Zhukov (an outstanding Russian General) had very interesting history - watch the 2017 movie "The Death of Stalin"
___

Poland is sending 4 MiG-29s now, and up to 20 altogether from the dozens they have - great PR move and hopes of making space for F-16s or even F-35s they've been asking for. MiG-29s are pretty useless, there is a reason neither UA nor RU have air superiority. The only benefit of 29s for UA is that they have pilots who already know and can fly them.

UA keep asking for F-16s, but I am not quire sure how much that would help unless it's a massive number. If anything, I think CAS planes A-10/A-10Cs would be better if used sparingly where it counts and in areas with few AA systems. We are retiring them anyway. Though some find them a tough learning curve.
__________

I too have now heard that Poland is sending somewhere between 10 and 20 fighter jets.

They're going to make a short work of Russian Artillery

It's 13 jets. Doesn't matter, they're ancient Mig-29s. ---- CAS platforms.

Russia has lend lease from China now, which was just caught -------- rifles, body armor, drones, etc via Turkey. Xi can't afford for Russia to lose.

Turkey isn't arming russia.

Turkey is a shipping route, along with the UAE, and direct over the border rail from China itself.

and Turkey is a China weapons buyer which in turn subsidizes the lend lease to Russia despite being a NATO member with NATO keeping Ukraine alive via its own lend-lease and NATO quality troop training which is why Ukraine's throughput of troops to the front is so low compared to Russia's.

also... ""Turkish companies last year exported tens of millions of dollars worth of machinery, electronics, spare parts and other items that Russia needs for its military, according to a survey of trade data, showing how Moscow can fuel its war effort despite international sanctions."

Proxy world wars are complicated.

This isn't Top Gun. They aren't dog fighting.
If you were right, why the hell don't the Russians have air superiority locked up already?
#8 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT AT 2023-03-16 02:45 PM | FLAG:
No ---- sherlock. It's called BVR combat. Please just look into how it works and you can figure out how you can shoot from behind Russian lines into Ukrainian airspace and engage their long obsolete Mig jets. It's been happening the entire time.
#10 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG

Ugh. That's not dependent on the jet. That's dependent on what the jet is armed with.

I also find it's suspicious that somebody's forgetting when you're Ukraine has plenty of surface to air missiles.

"Russian Military history shows that first year casualties are irrelevant."

In WW II Russia was being attacked from outside. It is reasonable that the people rallied to defend the motherland.

Now it is Ukrainians that are being attacked by outsiders and the Russians are now the aggressors and many Russians are being forced to fight for a cause they may not even understand or agree with.

A completely different scenario. I suspect it will have a completely different outcome for Russia.

Ugh. That's not dependent on the jet. That's dependent on what the jet is armed with.

#23 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT AT 2023-03-17 01:16 PM | FLAG:

Combat jets are integrated weapon systems. Everything matters.

The best Ukr Mig-29 missile can go 50 miles, but at a very low pK which means probability of kill. The best Su-27/35/57 missiles have double that range at a much higher pK. They sit at the edge of sam range and if you throw an S-300 at the Sukhoi it can just point away and run out of range. They can throw radar homing missiles back. The few Su-57 that do actually fly can get very close to the forward edge of the battle area and shoot the missiles far beyond the Migs range and the Mig won't even know it's been shot at until the missle goes "pitbull" which turns on the missiles onboard active radar and the escape odds are under 5%. When everything is considered it is not a remotely fair fight, it's gen 4 vs gen 4.5 & gen 5.

Mig-29 radar is trash compared to the late model Sukhoi they face. It's not a remotely fair fight in this combat environment for a massive number of reasons. Switching to F-16 would be a massive upgrade, more Mig-29 is not.

That doesn't mean Russian can establish Air Dominance. They don't have that level of technology.

I suspect it will have a completely different outcome for Russia.

#25 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY AT 2023-03-17 01:50 PM | FLAG:

Maybe. Right now things are going in their favor as they grind forward and have blunted the Ukr counterattacks through the winter and into this spring. Places that looked favorable to Ukr breakthroughs were mired down in mud and a never ending sea of conscripts that while low quality can still point and click a Kornet into your BMP as recently happened to one of the American volunteers.

How many Russian Jets is Russia currently afraid to send into ukraine?

#26

Some Polish MiG-29s are already equipped to fire AIM-120s. They've been NATO jets for quite a while now, Poland started doing pretty significant avionics upgrades a decade ago.

From what I understand they're finishing the modernization process on the rest of the MiGs they're sending to Ukraine, that's why they're only sending the first 4 now.

I can summarize this by saying that adapting Soviet fighters to carry AMRAAM missiles is unpromising and leads to nowhere. If we send AIM-120 it's early inventory models first which simply are not competitive with the cutting edge MRMs the Russian Sukhois have, and trying to guide a semi-active AIM-120 with Warsaw Pact era radars isn't worth the logistics to make it happen.

To be remotely competitive in the air superiority realm it's time to cut the nonsense out and train them on the F-15.

How many Russian Jets is Russia currently afraid to send into ukraine?

#28 | POSTED BY TOR AT 2023-03-17 02:48 PM | FLAG:

All of them. If you want to attack Ukraine it's at treetop height, a pass over the contact lines, and full burn back home. If you are at altitude it's to launch standoff missiles or ran combat air patrols to protect the missile platforms and their logistics train. The only thing that can really crack Ukranian air defenses now would be an all out assault from the USAF using F-22, F-35, B-2, Predator-C drones, and whatever else they already have and don't talk about.

Ukraine is about to have fighter jets well within its borders and unless Russia plans on losing it's mechanized forces it's going to have to start risking sending fighter jets in.

"Please just look into how it works and you can figure out how you can shoot from behind Russian lines into Ukrainian airspace and engage their long obsolete Mig jets."

I know what it is and how it works. Probably more than anyone here.

The Russians have an huge advantage, they're just not using it. We don't think they know how to use it. UKRAF doesn't really have a BVR capability that they could effectively employ against Russian air dominance fighters.

"Switching to F-16 would be a massive upgrade, more Mig-29 is not."

MiG-29s are a gesture. That said, an F-16 without the right configuration is not going to provide much more capability than the MiG-29.

Russia won't have a general left in a couple months.

Only according to Soviet "history"

According to Churchill, "It was the Red Army that tore the guts out of the Nazi war machine."
The Soviets destroyed 200+ German divisions. Utterly destroyed. Paulus' 6th Army began with 300,000 troops, 9,000 made it back.
And they did all of that after their entire industrial capacity was obliterated and rebuilt East of the Urals.
The other 25 allied countries combined never fought more than 10 divisions.

It's perfectly fine that you are stupid. Decades of propaganda and lazy Hollywood movies made you stupid. It's not entirely your fault. It's understandable. What I dont understand is how you can be stupid and this confident about a subject you clearly dont know anything about and arent interested in.

"The Soviets destroyed 200+ German divisions. Utterly destroyed. "

Poor German strategy also played an important role in the defeat of Germany.

The Red army lured the Nazis deep into its territory far from their own supply lines and they halted their advance and let the Siberian winter finish them off. The soviets even scorched their own fields and farms as they retreated leaving nothing for the Nazis to scavenge.

So far Putin does not seem to have learned the lessons of its own history and is bogged down in what now appears to be a war of attrition.

Also just as a side note Germany also did not have allies all around it fully armed and supplying it with superior weapons and technology and humanitarian aid to its people and was not supported by the worlds greatest super power.

So, like the old man and white horse once said, we'll see!

__________
#36 | Posted by BluSky at 2023-03-18 09:21 AM
According to Churchill, "It was the Red Army that tore the guts out of the Nazi war machine."

Right, and acknowledged by most... But while you are "counting the bodies" you are again deliberately ignoring the fact that both Khrushchev and Georgy Zhukov (aka "Marshal of Victory") and many others at the top of Soviet hierarchy have admitted that none of that would be possible without Lend-Lease program provided by the USA to many allies. In real life, documented - not propaganda, not lazy Hollywood movies.

Re your ad hominem It's perfectly fine that you are stupid. Decades of propaganda and lazy Hollywood movies made you stupid. - stop reading and watching propaganda, Hollywood or any other, and read a few history books and docs like this:

Marshal of Victory: The Autobiography of General Georgy Zhukov ; Language. English ; Publisher. Pen and Sword Military - definitely not Hollywood

www.rferl.org - 'We Would Have Lost': Did U.S. Lend-Lease Aid Tip The Balance In Soviet Fight Against Nazi Germany?

... Most famously, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin raised a toast to the Lend-Lease program at the November 1943 Tehran conference with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt.
"I want to tell you what, from the Russian point of view, the president and the United States have done for victory in this war," Stalin said. "The most important things in this war are the machines.... The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war."

Nikita Khrushchev offered the same opinion.

"If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war," he wrote in his memoirs. "One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. No one talks about this officially, and Stalin never, I think, left any written traces of his opinion, but I can say that he expressed this view several times in conversations with me."

By the way, from the ""estimated 25 million Soviet citizens perished in the titanic conflict with Nazi Germany between June 1941 and May 1945 - 8 million (almost a third) was from Ukraine, much smaller Soviet Republic than Russian Republic, not counting inclusion of many smaller minorities from southern and Asian / eastern republics.

Now read your last paragraph out loud while looking the mirror - will do you good next time before you slander someone you know nothing about, even if you are "... this confident about a subject..."
__________