Thumpalumpacus
Major
100 F-16s and 100 A-10s. This is doable!
"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again."
- Thread starter XBe02Drvr
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
That's what I mean. At least send a couple to Ukraine's aviation mechanics schools. Get them started.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
They provided 500,000 (Swiss Francs) in humanitarian aid - not bad for a nation of about 40,000 people!
Thumpalumpacus
Major
They haven't given one single nuke, dammit. C'mon now!
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Before you start pointing at AMARC, some things to consider -
Many aircraft placed there (like these F-16s) are high time airframes. In some cases it's more economical to place them in storage rather than keep them operational, or in the end part them out and eventually scrap what's left. If the airframes are high time, it may not be economical (and in some cases dangerous) to try to pull them out of storage and then think you're going to give them "renewed life." Many of these aircraft are slated to be target drones, about the best thing that can be done to them. I worked on the QF-4 program many years ago and used to wonder why seemingly good combat aircraft were being droned until I got to look inside of them and learned what it would take to give them a useful few more years of life.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I may have been misunderstood. I'm saying send a few complete planes and knock them down for shipment to Ukraine. They can't be flown. No pilots, no ground crews nor related equipment. They will have a couple of F-16s for the mechanics to start poking around with. No fuel, no runways, bowsers required. I forgot about bowsers. Maybe a couple of those? I can't see national security being compromised by not splattering 2 more jets over the dessert.
Dunno what the US term for such things are, but the Brits call them Instructional Airframes. The whole British aviation museum scene is made up of ex-RAF/RN instructional airframes!
This Jaaaag was at the technical training school at RAF Cosford for years but is now on display at the RAF Museum.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Nothing wrong with that until they have viable airframes to actually deploy
Thumpalumpacus
Major
We took every opportunity to familiarize ourselves with any new airplane that came onto the apron. We'd grab the T.O. (105-E-9 iirc) on the plane, and one of our NCOs who'd served on a base hosting those a/c would give us a walk-through.
The only funny one was the F-117, because we had no sergeants in 1991 who'd worked a -117 flightline. The obscure small cargo/VIP transport planes too, we didn't have anyone who knew them. But for the main combat airframes, we had a firefighter who could school us on the roster. C-5, KC-10 as well, we had a wealth of knowledge in the station.
The only funny one was the F-117, because we had no sergeants in 1991 who'd worked a -117 flightline. The obscure small cargo/VIP transport planes too, we didn't have anyone who knew them. But for the main combat airframes, we had a firefighter who could school us on the roster. C-5, KC-10 as well, we had a wealth of knowledge in the station.
Thumpalumpacus
Major
Finding the maintenance access panels would have been a bugger...
I'll have to take your word for it, we weren't allowed any closer than 90 foot unless there was an emergency, and there never was. This was 1991 iirc, when one came to our airshow at Carswell. We were not allowed to do familiarization.
That's a shame, would have been an intriguing aeroplane to work on, I reckon. I've gotten close enough to touch one at an airshow only and the armed guards surrounding it looked a little too menacing to tempt it, although they graciously moved out of the way when we went to take photos!
Thumpalumpacus
Major
The big thing I remember with that plane is that -- although SCBA was already mandatory on a CFR incident -- we were reminded again to not fight a -117 fire without bottled air. Something about the resins or paints used in its coating.
at6
1st Sergeant
There are only a couple of those left and they are in museums.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Only four B-36s remain.
Which is four more than the B-19 - I sure wish they had kept that as a museum piece, but it ended up being scrapped
Which is four more than the B-19 - I sure wish they had kept that as a museum piece, but it ended up being scrapped
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I was kind of joking about the B-36s.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I meant to mention earlier - the F-16s seen at AMARC are very different from the F-16s being used operationally today, almost like 2 different aircraft.
Jabberwocky
Staff Sergeant
Combat seems to be returning to the near static/incremental phase seen before the start of September, albeit with Ukraine now having strategic initative in several geographies.
For all the speculation about offensives in the lead up to Winter, I think that we're going to see this settling in phase for at least a few more weeks, possibly until the end of October. (I'd love to be proved wrong here though).
Ukraine needs to set up proper supply lines into the battles around Lyman, Sivers'k and Kupiansk. In addition, it will want to establish some fall back positions should Russia be able to turn a Ukrainian attack and conduct a counter offensive.
A part of the problem is that Russia's forward artillery positions are able to interdict Ukrainian supply columns moving southeast and east from positions established to support the initial Kharkiv offensive. (Russia also reportedly has the same problem, with units reinforcing positions around Kremenna, Lysychansk and Svatove subject to Ukranian long range artillery).
For Russia, it needs to stem Ukraine's incremental gains west of the Oskil (or risk the main supply line into northeast Ukraine being severed), assembling sufficient forces to look to push back some of the westward advances that threaten control of battlefields further to the south.
It will also look to defeat Ukraine's advances towards Kherson and the northern bank of the Dnipro. There were (Russian) reports of a strong counter-attack on the Ukrainian bridgehead across the Inhulets which may have pushed them back across (who knows though, mil bloggers on both sides get a little enthusiastic when reporting advances). Recent OPSINT reports show heavy losses of Russian artillery systems in this area [circa 16 mobile systems and 5 fixed guns] in the past 48 hours so its not all one way traffic. Ukraine, for its part, seems to be content widening the bridgehead east and west, rather than deepening the penetration.
I don't think that either side is going to be suckered into major shifts in emphasis any time soon.
For all the speculation about offensives in the lead up to Winter, I think that we're going to see this settling in phase for at least a few more weeks, possibly until the end of October. (I'd love to be proved wrong here though).
Ukraine needs to set up proper supply lines into the battles around Lyman, Sivers'k and Kupiansk. In addition, it will want to establish some fall back positions should Russia be able to turn a Ukrainian attack and conduct a counter offensive.
A part of the problem is that Russia's forward artillery positions are able to interdict Ukrainian supply columns moving southeast and east from positions established to support the initial Kharkiv offensive. (Russia also reportedly has the same problem, with units reinforcing positions around Kremenna, Lysychansk and Svatove subject to Ukranian long range artillery).
For Russia, it needs to stem Ukraine's incremental gains west of the Oskil (or risk the main supply line into northeast Ukraine being severed), assembling sufficient forces to look to push back some of the westward advances that threaten control of battlefields further to the south.
It will also look to defeat Ukraine's advances towards Kherson and the northern bank of the Dnipro. There were (Russian) reports of a strong counter-attack on the Ukrainian bridgehead across the Inhulets which may have pushed them back across (who knows though, mil bloggers on both sides get a little enthusiastic when reporting advances). Recent OPSINT reports show heavy losses of Russian artillery systems in this area [circa 16 mobile systems and 5 fixed guns] in the past 48 hours so its not all one way traffic. Ukraine, for its part, seems to be content widening the bridgehead east and west, rather than deepening the penetration.
I don't think that either side is going to be suckered into major shifts in emphasis any time soon.
buffnut453
Captain
Well, it rather depends on whether Ukrainian forces can consolidate their crossing of the Oskil River. According to reporting yesterday, they had taken the eastern bank. If they can hold onto that bridgehead, then they may elect to continue the offensive. Here's some more reporting on the Oskil River crossing and the general situation:
Ukraine troops focus on Donbas ‘de-occupation’ from Russia
Ukraine troops advance along the key Oskil River threatening Russian forces in the Donbas – Moscow’s prized territory.
It's a delicate balance between overstretching supply lines and keeping the enemy on the run. Pausing to build up your logistics and defences affords the enemy the opportunity to do likewise. It can also be difficult to hold forces back if the enemy retreats rapidly. Zelensky has said this isn't a lull, just a pause prior to the next phase of the counter-offensive:
Zelenskyy promises no let up in counteroffensive against Russia
Pledge comes as US calls for vigilance and the UK warns of more Russian attacks on Ukrainian civilian infrastructure.
Last edited:
buffnut453
Captain
Again, I have no words:
Sri Lankans freed from Russian brutality in Ukraine
Seven Sri Lankans say Russian soldiers in Ukraine subjected them to beatings and other abuse.
www.bbc.com
