"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (6 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I know this has been reported up-thread a little but I had to comment on the Russian response:



Russia's ambassador to the US said the news was "another blatant provocation".

And the Kremlin spokesman said Germany's reported decision would "bring nothing good" and leave "a lasting mark" on relations with Russia.



It's remarkable to me that the Kremlin still seems to think that the West really cares about future relations with Putin's Russia. Putin has burned so many political bridges that it's impossible for any normalization of relations with the West until he's replaced. Yet, somehow, in Kremlin-land, Germany is supposed to be worried by these threats related to the provision of Leo 2s to Ukraine? Like Russia's steps to hold the West hostage to oil and gas supplies didn't have a "lasting mark" on German-Russian relations.

As to the "provocation" peace, surely Russia is the only country in the world where even providing defensive weapons, like SAMs, to their adversary is deemed "provocative"? Yes, I know tanks are a bit different...but, really, if they hadn't invaded then we wouldn't be in this situation (oh, and many tens of thousands of people would not have been killed).

Please can the Russian people get rid of these clowns? PLEASE?????
 
It's too bad the F-16 doesn't have the MiG-29's intake bypass and big tires for rough strip ops. Clearly the Americans never intended to operate the aircraft from anything but smooth and long runways. In this respect, the SAAB Gripen seems a better fit, though not nearly available in immediate quantities.
 
I know this has been reported up-thread a little but I had to comment on the Russian response:



Russia's ambassador to the US said the news was "another blatant provocation".

And the Kremlin spokesman said Germany's reported decision would "bring nothing good" and leave "a lasting mark" on relations with Russia.



It's remarkable to me that the Kremlin still seems to think that the West really cares about future relations with Putin's Russia. Putin has burned so many political bridges that it's impossible for any normalization of relations with the West until he's replaced. Yet, somehow, in Kremlin-land, Germany is supposed to be worried by these threats related to the provision of Leo 2s to Ukraine? Like Russia's steps to hold the West hostage to oil and gas supplies didn't have a "lasting mark" on German-Russian relations.

As to the "provocation" peace, surely Russia is the only country in the world where even providing defensive weapons, like SAMs, to their adversary is deemed "provocative"? Yes, I know tanks are a bit different...but, really, if they hadn't invaded then we wouldn't be in this situation (oh, and many tens of thousands of people would not have been killed).

Please can the Russian people get rid of these clowns? PLEASE?????


Thats because Germany never really divested from RuZZIa.
Many German companies simply transferred their holdings over to local entities, and set up shell companies across the ME to supply parts and equipment.
There are shell companies operating out of accommodation addresses handling $Millions of orders monthly from German parents to their RuZZian proxies.
Well over 50% of Germans and German companies still talk of the resumption of 'normal' trade with RuZZia.
 
It's too bad the F-16 doesn't have the MiG-29's intake bypass and big tires for rough strip ops. Clearly the Americans never intended to operate the aircraft from anything but smooth and long runways. In this respect, the SAAB Gripen seems a better fit, though not nearly available in immediate quantities.


F-16's operate just fine from the same roadways as UAF MiG 29's currently do.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qfkGQ97qlA
 
It's too bad the F-16 doesn't have the MiG-29's intake bypass and big tires for rough strip ops. Clearly the Americans never intended to operate the aircraft from anything but smooth and long runways.
Of course not. To do so would commit USAF to operating from the bush on occasion, far from their precious creature comforts, almost like Marines.
 
Looks like a smooth and long runway to me, not your average road. A little narrow, maybe, but uncommonly straight and smooth. Well swept, to boot.

When the F-16 was designed it was designed to operate from Germany's many autobahns and well developed roads. Remember it was designed during the Cold War and it would have been operating from countries like Germany, Italy, France, Norway, and England. All places with well developed road networks.
 
There are a lot of feasibility issues too.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zklo4Z1SqkE

Her arguments against are interesting:
"Hydrogen tanks are heavy" - not nearly as heavy as batteries.
"Hydrogen gas needs to be pressurized" - CNG or LPG powered vehicles have no problems with it.

The list goes on and would make for a good thread in it's own right, but in short, her argument doesn't hold water (pun intended) :lol:
 
08243FB2-D90D-491F-9088-63E3297CC73F.jpeg
 

"... two 12-aircraft squadrons of F-16s, plus reserves, would be sufficient to help turn the tables against Russian airpower."

24, lets say 30 for the reserves doesn't look like a lot of planes. But if the Ukrainians are happy with that number its certainly doable. I guess there are so many F-16 around in storage or about to be retired that they could probably get much more than that. Maybe its just a question of how many available pilots they have.

Time to recreate the AVG aka Flying Tigers? :pilotsalute:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back