Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I am aware of that - but they are not in service as such e.g. like the MiG 29's in the Luftwaffe.A number of MiG-29s were purchased by the US from Moldova. At least one was operated by the USAF for test purposes. At least 3 are operated by private individuals.
I am aware of that - but they are not in service as such e.g. like the MiG 29's in the Luftwaffe.
Regards
Jagdflieger
Just wondering. What would happen if those 3 individuals were to donate their MiGs to Ukraine?A number of MiG-29s were purchased by the US from Moldova. At least one was operated by the USAF for test purposes. At least 3 are operated by private individuals.
I guess ACTUAL Russian occupation of the Donbas region isn't the "kumbaya moment" the separatists were expecting.Donbas Conscripts Given Guns From 1800s and Forced to Drink Water From Ponds Infested With Dead Frogs
Maximilian Clarke/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty ImagesSome conscripts to the Russian war effort from the Donbas region are turning on their commanders and refusing to fight on, after being handed antiquated rifles designed in the 19th century, and forced to drink from ponds littered with...www.yahoo.com
The Mosin-Nagant model 1891 is a bolt action 7.62 rifle, arsenal upgraded to "91/30" in 1930. It was the main WW2 battle rifle. It is a collector arm in this country.
Used to own one. Upgraded to an AK-47 instead. My shoulder is much happierAnd a very cheap one at that.
I just read the original article on RIA Novosti. If you want to understand the ideology of the Kremlin, it is there. Everything is explained openly and shamelessly.Russian State Media is hard at work making sure the Russian people fully accept Moscow's real desired endgame: Finishing the genocide started in 32 ~ 33 by Stalin with the Holodomor:
Tomahawk or similar weapons could be given under certain conditions, including the ban on targeting RF territory. The first batch of Javelins was kept far away from the front line in Donbas and its combat usage was not allowed until the end of 2021, as far as I know. Therefore potential "fallout" is not an obstacle.Hey Dimlee,
re my post#3558:
". . .
The distance from Kyiv to Moscow is only ~540 miles (870 km). A Mig-29 loaded with DTs and a couple of bombs, flying from Antonov Airport, could easily reach Moscow. Whether they could return safely (fuel wise) I do not know.
There is no way (I think) that the US is going to give Ukraine weapons that can accomplish something like that - not unless the theater situation changes in a very significant way. . ."
and your post#3568:
"Tochka-U ballistic missile can do this job without a need to return. But Moscow's defences are too strong and the city itself does not represent a valuable target in this war for Ukraine.
As for the other, more feasible targets, Ukrainian forces can attack across the border using the weapons available. And most probably they will attack, notwithstanding what Washington approves or not."
Moscow was just an example of what could be attacked. Imagine if it was . . . what would be the fallout? (no pun intended)
Yes, the Ukraine could attack Moscow (or some other city of their choice) with what it has now. Or they could use their longer range weapons and aircraft to attack purely military targets inside of Russia, perhaps inside of cities. And no, they do not need the permissionof the US or NATO or anybody else. But what would the fallout be?
Why not have the US send cruise missiles to the Ukrainians? The US could send a thousand BGM-109 TLAM Tomahawk cruise missiles (with single or submunition warheads) to Ukraine. The operators (though not the maintenance crews) could be trained in 3-4 days. They could decimate the assembly and supply areas in Russia out to a radius of ~690 miles (1100 km) from the launch point, or destroy aircraft and airfield faciities within the same range. What would the fallout be?
The Ukrainians could use the weapons already in their possession (many of which were sold to them by, or inherited from, the Russians) to attack targets inside of Russia - but the Russians will not be able to blame NATO or the US. IF the Ukrainians attack targets inside of Russia it will work to the advantage of the Russian propaganda machine, at least as far as generating resentment, fear, and anger, in the Russian people. If they were to attack non-military targets (even by mistake) the propaganda effects would be even worse.
I do not know if most of you have noticed, but the Ukrainians are still flatly denying responsibility for the attack on the oil depot in Belgorad, which is 22 miles (35 km) inside Russia. So either it was a false flag job by the Russians, or an attack by unhappy Russian troops, or an unauthorized mission by the Ukrainian forces, or an authorized mission being denied by the Ukrainians. Interesting.
e.g. 419th Fighter Wings, at Hill Air Force Base in Utah - That is an official USAF fighter-wing and integral part of the USAF fighter wingsYou need to do some homework. Search RedEagles and or Constant Peg.
e.g. 419th Fighter Wings, at Hill Air Force Base in Utah - That is an official USAF fighter-wing and integral part of the USAF fighter wings
e.g. JG 73 "Steinhoff" formerly equipped MiG 29's at Laage Germany, now TLG 73 - that is an official Luftwaffe fighter-wing and integral part of the Luftwaffe fighter wings
Those Su 19, Su 22, MiG 23, and others that are operated by the evaluation unit at WtD 61 Manching Germany are not an official fighter-wing.
Anything else is what ever it may be, e.g. 4477th Test and Evaluation Squadron, but not an official fighter wing
Regards
Jagdflieger
Hard to say - operationally these MiGs can only fly to and from certain places within the US. I think they would have to be disassembled and shipped. I think 2 of these aircraft are 2 seat versions,Just wondering. What would happen if those 3 individuals were to donate their MiGs to Ukraine?
I know it ain't happening but I was wondering about legal and international implications of such an event.
A what if.