Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Now that Ukraine has a fighter aircraft that is plug-n-play compatible with nearly the entire NATO weapons catalogue I can't wait to see what ordinance is deployed. Hopefully NATO does not see this as an opportunity to donate primarily older, nearly-expired guided bombs and missiles.
Just listened to the podcast "the echo of MH17". It's a commemorative podcast about the shooting down of Malesian Airways MH17 on July 17th 2014 by a Russian Buk missile and killing all, amongst which almost 200 innocent Dutch passengers. It reminds me that we have also been on the receiving side of Russian aggression. When I then hear some of our populist politicians questioning why we help the Ukraine with these f-16s while "we should not be involved in someone else's war", my blood starts to boil. We've been involved since Russia murdered 200 of our countrymen exactly 10 years ago. Ukraine, please use those F-16s and Leopard 2's well.
View attachment 791658
What's with the yellow canopy? Did someone go rogue on photoshop?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mk9Ep5satN4
Hopefully with lessons learnt from previous offensive....and lots of Western backing.
It is used to reduce the RCS.It may indicate an electrical anti ice film as used on many airliners but I suspect it is more likely to be related to the HUD system
The husband of a friend was on that flight. I remember going to the funeral, once they had enough of him to bury.Many Australians, and others, share your grief which should not make it any less.
Oh yes, send older, short-dated weapons slated for replacement or disposal. But if we want the few F-16s Ukraine has to have maximum impact and survivability they also need some of the latest kit, such as the longest range AIM-120 and AGM-154 JSOW. We don't want instances of the UAF's new AEW aircraft uplinking a target to the F-16s but it being outside the range of older AIM-120, but within range of the latest, yet not provided variants.They still work. They still kill people and break things, and I'm not sure the Russians are so up on tech that those older NATO weapons are useless. Better to fire them off than to recycle them under HAZMAT regs and so on.
I agree. Send the old stuff when it will suffice. IIRC, Ukraine hasn't received any AGM-154 JSOW yet. Hopefully they'll get some, if older stock for their F-16s.… the latest equipment also costs a lot more, and someone has to front that bill.
Oh yes, send older, short-dated weapons slated for replacement or disposal. But if we want the few F-16s Ukraine has to have maximum impact and survivability they also need some of the latest kit, such as the longest range AIM-120 and AGM-154 JSOW. We don't want instances of the UAF's new AEW aircraft uplinking a target to the F-16s but it being outside the range of older AIM-120, but within range of the latest, yet not provided variants.
Trained pilots.I agree. Send the old stuff when it will suffice. IIRC, Ukraine hasn't received any AGM-154 JSOW yet. Hopefully they'll get some, if older stock for their F-16s.
What other weaponry do we think is both ideal and likely to be made available for Ukraine's new fighters?
I never would've thought of that. I hope the Russians don't read this thread.I am wondering if we will see trains fitted with IR flare and chaff launchers on the new route to Crimea. And maybe armed and/or armored engines with AA weapon systems on flat cars?
"GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb - Wikipedia"
"GBU-53/B StormBreaker - Wikipedia"
"AGM-88 HARM - Wikipedia"