art wrote:

T4thH wrote:

EDIT: I AM STUPID as everyone else. YES, UKRAINE HAS F-16. THEY HAVE OFFICIAL ANNOUNCED IT AND NO ONE HAS RECOGNIZED IT!

Headline: by Ukrainian Defence ministry on Twitter: Ukrainian Fighting Falcons Strike Back.
https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1556289056639619072

They have F-16 and are using them as Wild Weasel.

Where did they come from? Are the pilots Ukrainian?

US/Ukrainian pilots

T4thH wrote:

GDB wrote:

T4thH wrote:

Seems some AGM88 HARM rests have been found on the Russian site of the frontline....
Images have popped up in Telegram or so, but no further information regarding where e.g seems to be given: So unconfirmed. We do not know if these are new or old from another conflict like Jugoslavia e.g.

Has someone ofiicially delivered some AGM 88 HARM to Ukraine in this war? I am not aware. And in this case, which platform has been used? Is one of the MIGs and/or SUs delivered from one of the NATO countries to Ukraine upgrated to use the HARM?
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/wiifv2/ukraine_began_to_use_american_agm88_harm/

To answer your second question, no. You don't just strap a HARM on to a Mig-29.
It's never been integrated so a long process, with a dubious platform.

Meanwhile, Perun has gone ballistic;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F7mt4rNVY0

OK, now also the news and other media have recognized it:
https://mil.in.ua/en/news/us-made-agm-88-missiles-started-striking-russian-air-defense-positions-in-ukraine/

So if till now noone (no other NATO countries whp hve delivered Mig.29 or Su to Ukraine from there own armies) had integrated the HARM system in their birds and if these pictures are new and not fake, so really taken now recently behind Russian lines at a Russian position (likely air defence)...

Then a Ukrainian F-16 is flying around in Ukraine? Another possibility (ok, another western jet)?
Russia has recently (last days including yesterday) lost 2 Pantsir, one S400 radar system and a whole S300 defence group (3x TELAR and one command vehicle) in the South of Ukraine. The second Pantsir was lost together with these S300 unit (on the same day).

Today or yesterday, there was the "Day of the Ukrainian Air Force) and there was the officia image,which was interesting and did not fit....
And with this image of the HARM rests...it fits. I have to search.

EDIT: I AM STUPID as everyone else. YES, UKRAINE HAS F-16. THEY HAVE OFFICIAL ANNOUNCED IT AND NO ONE HAS RECOGNIZED IT!

Headline: by Ukrainian Defence ministry on Twitter: Ukrainian Fighting Falcons Strike Back.
https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1556289056639619072

They have F-16 and are using them as Wild Weasel.

If russia can have a Nimitz carrier, the least that Ukraine can have is a few F16s! Haha

SRQLOT wrote:

T4thH wrote:

GDB wrote:

To answer your second question, no. You don't just strap a HARM on to a Mig-29.
It's never been integrated so a long process, with a dubious platform.

Meanwhile, Perun has gone ballistic;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F7mt4rNVY0

OK, now also the news and other media have recognized it:
https://mil.in.ua/en/news/us-made-agm-88-missiles-started-striking-russian-air-defense-positions-in-ukraine/

So if till now noone (no other NATO countries whp hve delivered Mig.29 or Su to Ukraine from there own armies) had integrated the HARM system in their birds and if these pictures are new and not fake, so really taken now recently behind Russian lines at a Russian position (likely air defence)...

Then a Ukrainian F-16 is flying around in Ukraine? Another possibility (ok, another western jet)?
Russia has recently (last days including yesterday) lost 2 Pantsir, one S400 radar system and a whole S300 defence group (3x TELAR and one command vehicle) in the South of Ukraine. The second Pantsir was lost together with these S300 unit (on the same day).

Today or yesterday, there was the "Day of the Ukrainian Air Force) and there was the officia image,which was interesting and did not fit....
And with this image of the HARM rests...it fits. I have to search.

EDIT: I AM STUPID as everyone else. YES, UKRAINE HAS F-16. THEY HAVE OFFICIAL ANNOUNCED IT AND NO ONE HAS RECOGNIZED IT!

Headline: by Ukrainian Defence ministry on Twitter: Ukrainian Fighting Falcons Strike Back.
https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1556289056639619072

They have F-16 and are using them as Wild Weasel.

If russia can have a Nimitz carrier, the least that Ukraine can have is a few F16s! Haha

Very true.
It's not impossible but going all caps does not change this, the F-16's that were mooted originally to go to Ukraine, which was abandoned, would need conversion to effectively use HARM. You don't just strap it on an early model F-16 either, in USAF service it's designated the F-16CJ.
The Greeks certainly have it on their late model F-16's too, their D variant primarily.

It might be that the nature of the war has made the US, in secret, change the policy regarding F-16's but not to contest air superiority directly, nor to be used for close air support or interdiction where early model F-16's, without the usual NATO style support package, would be vulnerable to air defence.
So instead they pulled some from storage and/or converted some, USAF F-16C's and supplied to them to Ukraine, after the required extensive training, just to fly the F-16.
And no one, anywhere, noticed?

Again, not impossible but this would be potentially give Ukraine something that the US has not been so far willing to do, to strike targets within Russia itself.
This is why one system they really want but so far have been refused, ATACAMs, yet they get Combat Aircraft that could if Ukraine configured them to, hit targets in Russia. Not that far inside but that is not the point.

Ground launch? Well a version of HARM for that is under development, however that version lacks those fins.
A quick and dirty conversion, like the UK did with Brimstone?
Different system entirely, battlefield, an addition to an already multi platform missile, besides for the SEAD mission it's hard to see how it would work, the version being developed is part of a wider system, unless a drone maybe illuminated the radars, but the HARM platform would have to be pretty close?

While I am not ruling it out, that twitter feed had the more informed sources more skeptical, not ruling it out but many questions?
From one source so far too.

That last video I linked does mention systems the Ukrainians could used against SAM sites, especially if they hang around in the same place for too long.

GDB wrote:

SRQLOT wrote:

T4thH wrote:

OK, now also the news and other media have recognized it:
https://mil.in.ua/en/news/us-made-agm-88-missiles-started-striking-russian-air-defense-positions-in-ukraine/

So if till now noone (no other NATO countries whp hve delivered Mig.29 or Su to Ukraine from there own armies) had integrated the HARM system in their birds and if these pictures are new and not fake, so really taken now recently behind Russian lines at a Russian position (likely air defence)...

Then a Ukrainian F-16 is flying around in Ukraine? Another possibility (ok, another western jet)?
Russia has recently (last days including yesterday) lost 2 Pantsir, one S400 radar system and a whole S300 defence group (3x TELAR and one command vehicle) in the South of Ukraine. The second Pantsir was lost together with these S300 unit (on the same day).

Today or yesterday, there was the "Day of the Ukrainian Air Force) and there was the officia image,which was interesting and did not fit....
And with this image of the HARM rests...it fits. I have to search.

EDIT: I AM STUPID as everyone else. YES, UKRAINE HAS F-16. THEY HAVE OFFICIAL ANNOUNCED IT AND NO ONE HAS RECOGNIZED IT!

Headline: by Ukrainian Defence ministry on Twitter: Ukrainian Fighting Falcons Strike Back.
https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1556289056639619072

They have F-16 and are using them as Wild Weasel.

If russia can have a Nimitz carrier, the least that Ukraine can have is a few F16s! Haha

Very true.
It's not impossible but going all caps does not change this, the F-16's that were mooted originally to go to Ukraine, which was abandoned, would need conversion to effectively use HARM. You don't just strap it on an early model F-16 either, in USAF service it's designated the F-16CJ.
The Greeks certainly have it on their late model F-16's too, their D variant primarily.

It might be that the nature of the war has made the US, in secret, change the policy regarding F-16's but not to contest air superiority directly, nor to be used for close air support or interdiction where early model F-16's, without the usual NATO style support package, would be vulnerable to air defence.
So instead they pulled some from storage and/or converted some, USAF F-16C's and supplied to them to Ukraine, after the required extensive training, just to fly the F-16.
And no one, anywhere, noticed?

Again, not impossible but this would be potentially give Ukraine something that the US has not been so far willing to do, to strike targets within Russia itself.
This is why one system they really want but so far have been refused, ATACAMs, yet they get Combat Aircraft that could if Ukraine configured them to, hit targets in Russia. Not that far inside but that is not the point.

Ground launch? Well a version of HARM for that is under development, however that version lacks those fins.
A quick and dirty conversion, like the UK did with Brimstone?
Different system entirely, battlefield, an addition to an already multi platform missile, besides for the SEAD mission it's hard to see how it would work, the version being developed is part of a wider system, unless a drone maybe illuminated the radars, but the HARM platform would have to be pretty close?

While I am not ruling it out, that twitter feed had the more informed sources more skeptical, not ruling it out but many questions?
From one source so far too.

That last video I linked does mention systems the Ukrainians could used against SAM sites, especially if they hang around in the same place for too long.

First: The Twitter source: "Defence of Ukraine" is the official Twitter page of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine. When they post today an image with two F-16 in Ukrainian colors and the text: "Ukrainian Fighting Falcon Strike back", than it has some importance, as it is not a random Twitter source, it is an official statement even with an Imgage (someone has to produce first). So they are just writing: "F16 "Fighting Falcon" are now on duty of the Ukrainian Air Force and are already flying sorties".

OK, as clarified, we have parts of a AGM 88 HARM, so either a Panavia Tornado ECM of the Bundeswehr, a F18 of US Navy, F15 or a F16 is flying around in Ukrainian colors (F16 most likely of the C/D family part) as the AGM 88 HARM is only integrated in these jet families till now (OK, we have additional the Eurofighter and the F35, pretty sure these are not there (as also the F15, Panavia Tornado ECM and F18). F-16 would fit to the official statement by the Ukrainian Ministry of defence. So, when these images in Russian media are not faked/are from a Russian position in Ukraine as stated, than there must be something, which is able to carry a HARM.

According official statement, the Ukrainian forces have destroyed two Pantzir's, one S400 radar system and one S300 unit in the Klerson Oblast in last days. This is a new development, so something has changed here.

So conclusion: if these images of AGM 88 HARM parts are not faked, than there is a western jet flying around on Ukrainian site, playing with HARM and hunting the Russian AA radar systems.

What does Ukraine really need?
Both sites are pretty well able to protect there own site of the frontline with high amounts of AA systems, So they are pretty well able to protect their own controlled ground against enemy jets. Do they need air superiority fighters? Not now. as they also not need bombers now. So not them.

So, what does Ukraine now really need? Systems to hunt and destroy the light AA sytems like the Pantzir or Thor, and systems to hunt and destroy the jammer systems, so the own drones can more effectivelx been used.
Systems to hunt and destroy the active anti artillery radar systems of the Russian forces.

T4thH wrote:

First: The Twitter source: "Defence of Ukraine" is the official Twitter page of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine. When they post today an image with two F-16 in Ukrainian colors and the text: "Ukrainian Fighting Falcon Strike back", than it has some importance

True, it is an official site. But no where does it say Ukraine have F-16s.

SRQLOT wrote:

If russia can have a Nimitz carrier, the least that Ukraine can have is a few F16s! Haha

I'd go with this.

Another way to look at the Twitter page is the Ukrainian are confident they will get F-16. Just like how airliners will have illustrations of the jet they just bought in their livery even though they won't get the new jets for months.

Wild Weasels variant is logical for first delivery because it is more defensive in nature and only a small step in escalation.

bt

O.K.

Here is a good write up on the Ukrainian HARM.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/d ... n-missiles

At the end they noted that radiation missiles were part of the July aid package. So yes, good possibility that the image is legit.

The very end of the article, they mentioned that the HARM could possibly be launched from HIMARS.

Sounds more reasonable than Ukrainian F-16s.

Oh and cliff hanger?

Similar studies were done for using HIMARS as an air defense platform over a decade ago, including launching the AIM-120 AMRAAM.

bt

Just to prove all this inspection protocol for ships coming and going from Odessa, is just a face saving technicality for Russia.

None of the ships coming and going to Ukraine's Danube ports are inspected.

Need to smuggle stuff by sea to Ukraine? Ship them to Izmail or Rene.

bt

bikerthai wrote:

O.K.

Here is a good write up on the Ukrainian HARM.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/d ... n-missiles

At the end they noted that radiation missiles were part of the July aid package. So yes, good possibility that the image is legit.

The very end of the article, they mentioned that the HARM could possibly be launched from HIMARS.

Sounds more reasonable than Ukrainian F-16s.

Oh and cliff hanger?

Similar studies were done for using HIMARS as an air defense platform over a decade ago, including launching the AIM-120 AMRAAM.

bt

Makes a lot more sense, certainly more than frankly rather absurd notions that a USAF F-16CJ, or EAG-18G, or German and/or Italian Tornado ECR for some reason explicitly did the one thing they will be ordered not to do.
If a HIMARS as designed can swap out a cluster of 227mm rockets for an ATACAMs they could with rapidly developed modifications also be swapped for an also quickly modified AGM-88.
Though the timelines are tight from approving HIMARS, training the Ukrainians, getting them over there, seeing how they perform in Ukrainian service, then perhaps starting the HIMARS mod which then presumably arrived with the recent HIMARS.
Albeit with a much reduced range.
All possible but does it pass the sniff test?

Compared to disinformation, certainly Russia keeps banging on about being ‘attacked by NATO’ or increasingly saying that they are effectively already at war with us.
Those two guys in 2018 might have just come to Salisbury to see the Cathedral, MH-17 was according to Russia and their useful idiots in the West, brought down by, variously, Ukrainians flying SU-25’s, (wrong type of missile, no short range IR guided AAM did that as the investigation proved), or Ukraine AD, problem is the launcher and operators were traced.

More verification needed, in summary.

GDB wrote:

Though the timelines are tight from approving HIMARS, training the Ukrainians, getting them over there, seeing how they perform in Ukrainian service, then perhaps starting the HIMARS mod which then presumably arrived with the recent HIMARS.

The timeline is not tight if the software was already developed.

It may be that the US army already did the development and found it not adequate for their use. So they shelved the idea. So when Ukraine came along, all they had to do is pull their prototype from the shelf and send it to Ukraine to try out. We are not talking about all 16 launchers, maybe just one or two.


bt

T4thH wrote:

GDB wrote:

T4thH wrote:

Seems some AGM88 HARM rests have been found on the Russian site of the frontline....
Images have popped up in Telegram or so, but no further information regarding where e.g seems to be given: So unconfirmed. We do not know if these are new or old from another conflict like Jugoslavia e.g.

Has someone ofiicially delivered some AGM 88 HARM to Ukraine in this war? I am not aware. And in this case, which platform has been used? Is one of the MIGs and/or SUs delivered from one of the NATO countries to Ukraine upgrated to use the HARM?
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/wiifv2/ukraine_began_to_use_american_agm88_harm/

To answer your second question, no. You don't just strap a HARM on to a Mig-29.
It's never been integrated so a long process, with a dubious platform.

Meanwhile, Perun has gone ballistic;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F7mt4rNVY0

OK, now also the news and other media have recognized it:
https://mil.in.ua/en/news/us-made-agm-88-missiles-started-striking-russian-air-defense-positions-in-ukraine/

So if till now noone (no other NATO countries whp hve delivered Mig.29 or Su to Ukraine from there own armies) had integrated the HARM system in their birds and if these pictures are new and not fake, so really taken now recently behind Russian lines at a Russian position (likely air defence)...

Then a Ukrainian F-16 is flying around in Ukraine? Another possibility (ok, another western jet)?
Russia has recently (last days including yesterday) lost 2 Pantsir, one S400 radar system and a whole S300 defence group (3x TELAR and one command vehicle) in the South of Ukraine. The second Pantsir was lost together with these S300 unit (on the same day).

Today or yesterday, there was the "Day of the Ukrainian Air Force) and there was the officia image,which was interesting and did not fit....
And with this image of the HARM rests...it fits. I have to search.

EDIT: I AM STUPID as everyone else. YES, UKRAINE HAS F-16. THEY HAVE OFFICIAL ANNOUNCED IT AND NO ONE HAS RECOGNIZED IT!

Headline: by Ukrainian Defence ministry on Twitter: Ukrainian Fighting Falcons Strike Back.
https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1556289056639619072

They have F-16 and are using them as Wild Weasel.

Is a Reaper UCAV able to deliver the AGM-88 HARM?

From The Drive - War Zone.

They got a link to a 2018 concept of containerized HARM launcher.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... le-concept

If shipping and deployment in one standard container, then really impossible to detect among all those container trucks moving around.

bt

bikerthai wrote:

From The Drive - War Zone.

They got a link to a 2018 concept of containerized HARM launcher.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... le-concept

If shipping and deployment in one standard container, then really impossible to detect among all those container trucks moving around.

bt

A different booster and smaller wings to the ones found, if indeed they are what is claimed.
Are their serial numbers visible, if so traceable.
If it is Russian propaganda using say sections recovered from 1999 by their Serb buddies for example.

Meanwhile, the export control effort on the Russia ability to wage war:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKwliOyAPRs

GDB wrote:

If it is Russian propaganda using say sections recovered from 1999 by their Serb buddies for example.

Why would Russia do that?

By announcing Ukraine has HARM missiles it’s entirely likely that Russian air defence troops might decide to walk away, turn on the radar only intermittently or loose sleep therefor loosing focus.

This announcement will impact Russian effectiveness, without any upside.

The only upside for Russia might be that they can claim NATO is helping Ukraine. But let’s be honest here, everyone already knows that.

petertenthije wrote:

GDB wrote:

If it is Russian propaganda using say sections recovered from 1999 by their Serb buddies for example.

Why would Russia do that?

By announcing Ukraine has HARM missiles it’s entirely likely that Russian air defence troops might decide to walk away, turn on the radar only intermittently or loose sleep therefor loosing focus.

This announcement will impact Russian effectiveness, without any upside.

The only upside for Russia might be that they can claim NATO is helping Ukraine. But let’s be honest here, everyone already knows that.

Official Russian sources are increasingly claiming they are in Ukraine to defend against NATO, some extending that to claiming that NATO are directly involved militarily, not just with material and intelligence assistance.

Does not make sense given the restrictions on what sort of equipment Ukraine is getting, they want many more HIMARS/MLRS, as well as very substantial numbers of modern tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, as well as better known examples such as ATACAMs for their HIMARS.
None of the above are likely, not M1’s/Leopards and Bradley’s or the numbers of HIMARS though the latter is more about depleting the US inventory.

But the average Russian doesn’t know this, it might also be about politically preparing the ground for the long avoided mobilization in Russia.

GDB wrote:

Ukraine is getting, they want many more HIMARS/MLRS, as well as very substantial numbers of modern tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, as well as better known examples such as ATACAMs for their HIMARS.
None of the above are likely, not M1’s/Leopards and Bradley’s or the numbers of HIMARS though the latter is more about depleting the US inventory.

To me the number of the HIMARs are more about being able to feed them logistically.

ATACAM are more of a political chip to be used if things escalate later (like full Russian mobilization for war- as a result of any referendum).

Modern tanks and Jets are inevitable. It is a matter of training and timing. Feeding these weapon systems are more logistic intensive than HIMARs.

bt

bikerthai wrote:

GDB wrote:

Ukraine is getting, they want many more HIMARS/MLRS, as well as very substantial numbers of modern tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, as well as better known examples such as ATACAMs for their HIMARS.
None of the above are likely, not M1’s/Leopards and Bradley’s or the numbers of HIMARS though the latter is more about depleting the US inventory.

To me the number of the HIMARs are more about being able to feed them logistically.

ATACAM are more of a political chip to be used if things escalate later (like full Russian mobilization for war- as a result of any referendum).

Modern tanks and Jets are inevitable. It is a matter of training and timing. Feeding these weapon systems are more logistic intensive than HIMARs.

bt

There is a reported reluctance to supply for example M1’s, due to what happened to the ones sold to Iraq, they fell into the wrong hands and efforts had to be taken to from the air, destroy them.
While Ukraine might be very different, something like that quite recently creates a reluctance within both the political and military systems in Washington.
Plus the logistical support for such a different type for Ukraine, operating a modern MBT in a battlefield like Ukraine, with peer opposition, is not like a shoot and scoot artillery piece, or man portable anti tank and anti air systems.
Much of the same applies to Bradley’s too.

Better used to further bolster the inventories of NATO members that were former Warsaw Pact, so they can continue to empty out their inventory from that period and crucially, the ammunition for these tanks, IFV’s and guns.
This could be something to ramp up fast, starting with stored equipment, not just from the US inventory but it is the main source, the quicker to replace the WarPac equipment. Which Ukraine is both familiar with, battle hardened on and logistically set up for.

I do think, with caveats on use, which if ignored would stop any more being supplied, small numbers of ATACAMS should be provided, on his last Video Perun made a compelling point about the limitations of the HIMARS and MLRS rockets against hardened targets like bridges. Plus some ammo dumps moved outside of HIMARS range, though still not too far away to be able to resupply.
It would also save a lot of the standard 227mm rockets for more suitable targets.
Plus it would send a message to Moscow.

GDB wrote:

Official Russian sources are increasingly claiming they are in Ukraine to defend against NATO, some extending that to claiming that NATO are directly involved militarily, not just with material and intelligence assistance.

If this were true, the war would've been over long ago. A half dozen NATO armoured brigades with a full complement of air assets and the Russians wouldn't know what hit them. Of course, this assumes that the Russians didn't "push the button".

GDB wrote:

There is a reported reluctance to supply for example M1’s, due to what happened to the ones sold to Iraq, they fell into the wrong hands and efforts had to be taken to from the air, destroy them.

To me this is a red herring. I'd you look at where all the M-1s are going, to Poland to back fill for their shipment of T-72 to Ukraine, it says, meet NATO obligation first. Once Poland and any other NATO countries that provided T-72 tanks to Ukraine are satisfied, then excess M-1s can go to Ukraine.

Same can probably said about F-16s. You'll see F-16s or F-35s fill the ranks of NATO Airforces that donated MIGs to Ukraine first, and then Ukraine will get the pick of what's left over.

The latest $1 bil aid package just announced revealed something. No detail yet but it looks like more amo and not new systems or launch platforms.

So for now I guess the planners believe Ukraine have enough HIMARs and SP guns and they will concentrate on getting amo to the front.

Did someone say "counter offensive"? Does this latest donation give us a hint? How much lag time between the announcement and the harware actually reaching the front?

Can we predict when the planner expect the bulk of the fighting will occur by the "just in time" munitions delivery?

bt

johns624 wrote:

GDB wrote:

Official Russian sources are increasingly claiming they are in Ukraine to defend against NATO, some extending that to claiming that NATO are directly involved militarily, not just with material and intelligence assistance.

If this were true, the war would've been over long ago. A half dozen NATO armoured brigades with a full complement of air assets and the Russians wouldn't know what hit them. Of course, this assumes that the Russians didn't "push the button".

This is true, in the real universe not the alternate one of the Russian regime.
Though deep down, I suspect they know it’s true, certainly in the past 6 months.
Though that might not include Putin himself.

GDB wrote:

johns624 wrote:

GDB wrote:

Official Russian sources are increasingly claiming they are in Ukraine to defend against NATO, some extending that to claiming that NATO are directly involved militarily, not just with material and intelligence assistance.

If this were true, the war would've been over long ago. A half dozen NATO armoured brigades with a full complement of air assets and the Russians wouldn't know what hit them. Of course, this assumes that the Russians didn't "push the button".

This is true, in the real universe not the alternate one of the Russian regime.
Though deep down, I suspect they know it’s true, certainly in the past 6 months.
Though that might not include Putin himself.

If Putin didn't know it before, he has to have become aware off it by now. The Russians built their military around nuclear weapons, their national defense doctrine was probably created without a non-nuclear option. Putin has painted himself into a corner, he thought he was kicking a stray dog, but Ukraine has turned into a lion. His nukes do him no good in this kind of a war and expanding this war into all out war against the "west" isn't a desirable option.

Wouldn't we love to be a fly on the wall when his military staff discuss things when he's not around. Maybe someday it'll all come out.

bikerthai wrote:

GDB wrote:

There is a reported reluctance to supply for example M1’s, due to what happened to the ones sold to Iraq, they fell into the wrong hands and efforts had to be taken to from the air, destroy them.

To me this is a red herring. I'd you look at where all the M-1s are going, to Poland to back fill for their shipment of T-72 to Ukraine, it says, meet NATO obligation first. Once Poland and any other NATO countries that provided T-72 tanks to Ukraine are satisfied, then excess M-1s can go to Ukraine.

Same can probably said about F-16s. You'll see F-16s or F-35s fill the ranks of NATO Airforces that donated MIGs to Ukraine first, and then Ukraine will get the pick of what's left over.

The latest $1 bil aid package just announced revealed something. No detail yet but it looks like more amo and not new systems or launch platforms.

So for now I guess the planners believe Ukraine have enough HIMARs and SP guns and they will concentrate on getting amo to the front.

Did someone say "counter offensive"? Does this latest donation give us a hint? How much lag time between the announcement and the harware actually reaching the front?

Can we predict when the planner expect the bulk of the fighting will occur by the "just in time" munitions delivery?


That’s what I meant, though the Ukrainians would probably like a bunch of M1’s or Leopard 2’s and western IFV’s, medium term best they get as much equipment replaced from former WarPac nations by NATO kit, though there will come a point where logistics for these runs out due to the intensity of combat use.
Or if Russia is forced to make the choice to either mobilize or disengage, hopefully that comes first for and everyone’s sake, they choose the latter, including if they were rational, Russia itself.

GDB wrote:

though there will come a point where logistics for these runs out due to the intensity of combat use.

We will see how the Ukrainian armour fare with the on coming counter offensive. If there are no tank crew in training now for M-1s like there is rumors that pilots are approved for F-16 training, then Ukraine probably will probably not expect any M-1s until 2023. The winter pause seems like a good time for a whole sale upgrade to western armor and some aircrafts.

bt

Vintage wrote:

GDB wrote:

johns624 wrote:

If this were true, the war would've been over long ago. A half dozen NATO armoured brigades with a full complement of air assets and the Russians wouldn't know what hit them. Of course, this assumes that the Russians didn't "push the button".

This is true, in the real universe not the alternate one of the Russian regime.
Though deep down, I suspect they know it’s true, certainly in the past 6 months.
Though that might not include Putin himself.

If Putin didn't know it before, he has to have become aware off it by now. The Russians built their military around nuclear weapons, their national defense doctrine was probably created without a non-nuclear option. Putin has painted himself into a corner, he thought he was kicking a stray dog, but Ukraine has turned into a lion. His nukes do him no good in this kind of a war and expanding this war into all out war against the "west" isn't a desirable option.

Wouldn't we love to be a fly on the wall when his military staff discuss things when he's not around. Maybe someday it'll all come out.

Many think he has successfully used nuclear saber rattling to deter direct Western intervention, meaning he is not relying on proper political intelligence, rather his own paranoia, or just to limit the scope of what Ukraine has been given.
Certainly the opposition to sending equipment such as ATACAMS due to fears of it hitting Russian territory is based on that, not because the US is being somehow feeble, this is based on political and military advice on the possible escalation consequences, plus Vlad’s a bit off his rocker too.

As I mentioned further up, there are ways around that particular system in my view, this however has also been probably the major factor in the ‘give them F-16’s’ saga early on, as well the the real practical problems with it.

It was reported from the start that the US administration viewed this as potentially as dangerous as the Cuban Missile Crisis, if the ladder of escalation ramps up.
When you are in charge of the second largest nuclear arsenal in the world, with the holder of the largest acting like this, plus they’ve been doing for some years now, masturbatory material on Russian TV about their hypersonic and other strategic systems real and in development/imagined, hitting explicitly US targets, you have to take account of this.
Really, as POTUS, that’s your greatest responsibility. Being the adult in the room.

I've always wondered about Russia continually bragging about their new super weapons. If they are that good, you don't talk about them. I'm sure the US has "something" that replaced the SR71. Damned if anyone without a "need to know" knows what it is. It's almost like the Russians were publicizing it to convince themselves how good it is. Not that it's rubbish, but with their problems building simpler equipment, I have my doubts.

johns624 wrote:

I've always wondered about Russia continually bragging about their new super weapons.

Before the war, the bragging would help sell there "non-super weapons".

Now that we all see their capabilities, not sure if it's worth the bragging any more.

bt

johns624 wrote:

I've always wondered about Russia continually bragging about their new super weapons. If they are that good, you don't talk about them. I'm sure the US has "something" that replaced the SR71. Damned if anyone without a "need to know" knows what it is. It's almost like the Russians were publicizing it to convince themselves how good it is. Not that it's rubbish, but with their problems building simpler equipment, I have my doubts.

The Oxford Dictionary has a word for what you have described......

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries. ... rcissistic

bikerthai wrote:

johns624 wrote:

I've always wondered about Russia continually bragging about their new super weapons.

Before the war, the bragging would help sell there "non-super weapons".

Now that we all see their capabilities, not sure if it's worth the bragging any more.

bt

I wasn't speaking so much of their tanks, fighter aircraft, etc., as their hypersonic missiles and high speed nuclear armed "torpedoes". Stuff that wasn't for sale.

889091 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

I've always wondered about Russia continually bragging about their new super weapons. If they are that good, you don't talk about them. I'm sure the US has "something" that replaced the SR71. Damned if anyone without a "need to know" knows what it is. It's almost like the Russians were publicizing it to convince themselves how good it is. Not that it's rubbish, but with their problems building simpler equipment, I have my doubts.

The Oxford Dictionary has a word for what you have described......

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries. ... rcissistic

I was thinking of "blowhard". How many times have you seen an MMA fight or boxing match where the guy talking all the crap before the start gets laid out by the quiet fighter as soon as the fight starts?

johns624 wrote:

I wasn't speaking so much of their tanks, fighter aircraft, etc., as their hypersonic missiles and high speed nuclear armed "torpedoes". Stuff that wasn't for sale.

Understood that. But flashing their hypersonics say, we can make advance weapons also which help sells their other ware. Like their S-400 or balistic missiles.

bt

bikerthai wrote:

Like their S-400

That part actually still puzzles me. I mean, even plenty of western experts claimed those SAMs (S300, S400) are the bestestest, and there is no match on the western side. Turns out the only things the're actually good at is shooting down civilian airliners or making a u-turn improving themselves. They fail to even intercept rather basic ballistic missiles and the ukrainian airforce is still very much alive and kicking till this day. Talk about massively overrated stuff.

Zeppi wrote:

They fail to even intercept rather basic ballistic missiles and the ukrainian airforce is still very much alive and kicking till this day. Talk about massively overrated stuff.

May be not overated. The Ukrainians are shooting down many Russian missiles with their own Soviet SAMs. But I guess they are not revealing their own failure rate. And these are Soviet SAMs and not Russian SAMs if it makes any difference.

bt

Well, who said Russia is adept at the media war? That Amnesty International report has now been over taken by Russian militarizing the nuclear power plant.

On the other hand.

Confirmed that the HARMs were provided to the Ukrainian by the US.

Ukrainian military news platforms said either Romanian or Slovakian MiG-29 jets, both upgraded to NATO standards and now thought to be in the Ukrainian air force’s possession, were the missiles’ most likely launch platforms.

https://www.kyivpost.com/russias-war/pe ... y-hit.html

bt

bikerthai wrote:

Well, who said Russia is adept at the media war? That Amnesty International report has now been over taken by Russian militarizing the nuclear power plant.

On the other hand.

Confirmed that the HARMs were provided to the Ukrainian by the US.

Ukrainian military news platforms said either Romanian or Slovakian MiG-29 jets, both upgraded to NATO standards and now thought to be in the Ukrainian air force’s possession, were the missiles’ most likely launch platforms.

https://www.kyivpost.com/russias-war/pe ... y-hit.html

bt

So that's how they did it, the spare parts delivery for existing Ukrainian Mig-29's also included integration kits for HARM, presumably tested on Mig-29's in the US, which would also require new and expanded electronic support measures, itself requiring trials on this fitment. Busy at Groom Lake? If that is where it is done?
A case when not announcing something worked, had the Russians thought HARM was coming their AD would have adapted accordingly in advance.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/08/poli ... index.html

https://defbrief.com/2022/08/08/us-conf ... o-ukraine/

Away from that, even a very small NATO member can make a difference, punching above their weight in aid here;
https://defbrief.com/2022/08/05/in-addi ... ne-report/

Which bring me to this thought

If the NATO Migs that Ukraine have can launch HARMs, can they also launch Harpoon?

Which may explain why the Russian fleet abandoned Crimea. A combination of HARMs and Harpoons would put any Russian ship in the area at risk.

The end result? Odessa port is opened.

Truly those NATO Migs may be another system that is turning the tide. I guess the Soviet do make some good stuff.



bt

Zeppi wrote:

bikerthai wrote:

Like their S-400

That part actually still puzzles me. I mean, even plenty of western experts claimed those SAMs (S300, S400) are the bestestest, and there is no match on the western side. Turns out the only things the're actually good at is shooting down civilian airliners or making a u-turn improving themselves. They fail to even intercept rather basic ballistic missiles and the ukrainian airforce is still very much alive and kicking till this day. Talk about massively overrated stuff.

The S-300 / S-400 has never shot down an airliner and I don't know anything about a U turn. HIMAR is a very difficult target, it is small and travels very fast, I have read around mach 3. And the S-400 system must be set back beyond HIMAR range or it would be targeted.

So lets say that the S-400 is 65 miles behind the line and the HIMAR is 10 miles on its side of the line: they are 75 miles apart. The terrain in most of Donbas is fairly flat so let's guess that the S-400 is on a knoll with 50' of elevation. So the S-400 could not see the launch, but would first detect the HIMAR rocket at an altitude of a half a mile and a speed of 2000 mph, or just over a half a mile per second. If the HIMARS target is 40 miles behind the line, the S-400 site has <100 seconds to detect, verify, track, launch and get its defensive missile to the target which is unlikely to be in a direct line with the S-400 site. If the target is offset by 20 miles, the SAM site has <60 seconds to get all that done etc.

S-400s are good, but not that good. They would be better at hitting an IRBM missile which can be detected 250 miles away at an altitude of 400,000 feet. Or an aircraft a hundred miles away at 700 mph.

https://calculators.io/curvature/

bikerthai wrote:

Zeppi wrote:

They fail to even intercept rather basic ballistic missiles and the ukrainian airforce is still very much alive and kicking till this day. Talk about massively overrated stuff.

May be not overated. The Ukrainians are shooting down many Russian missiles with their own Soviet SAMs. But I guess they are not revealing their own failure rate. And these are Soviet SAMs and not Russian SAMs if it makes any difference.

bt

I'm flabbergasted that 3 decades later, the "advanced" equipment is still Soviet equipment. Once the chip sanctions really hit, Russia will truly be short of weapons. So much for the "reform" of the Russian military.

Who else finds it amazing that Russia turned out to be a paper tiger and not the #2 army in the world?

Lightsaber

Diamerer comparison from Wiki.

S400 missile = 515 mm
M30 (HIMARS) = 240 mm
Scud = 880 mm
Patriot = 300 mm
S300 = 450-500 mm
Buk = 360 mm

The Patriot to Scud diameter ratio comparison is better. Even then effectiveness rate is . . .?

And don't forget the HIMAR rockets comes at you in salvos.

bt

GDB wrote:

bikerthai wrote:

Well, who said Russia is adept at the media war? That Amnesty International report has now been over taken by Russian militarizing the nuclear power plant.

On the other hand.

Confirmed that the HARMs were provided to the Ukrainian by the US.

Ukrainian military news platforms said either Romanian or Slovakian MiG-29 jets, both upgraded to NATO standards and now thought to be in the Ukrainian air force’s possession, were the missiles’ most likely launch platforms.

https://www.kyivpost.com/russias-war/pe ... y-hit.html

bt

So that's how they did it, the spare parts delivery for existing Ukrainian Mig-29's also included integration kits for HARM, presumably tested on Mig-29's in the US, which would also require new and expanded electronic support measures, itself requiring trials on this fitment. Busy at Groom Lake? If that is where it is done?
A case when not announcing something worked, had the Russians thought HARM was coming their AD would have adapted accordingly in advance.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/08/poli ... index.html

https://defbrief.com/2022/08/08/us-conf ... o-ukraine/

Away from that, even a very small NATO member can make a difference, punching above their weight in aid here;
https://defbrief.com/2022/08/05/in-addi ... ne-report/

Unless the Slovakian or Romanian MIGs could already use HARMs.
Or if they knew how to do it from that (or other NATO MIGs like Poland, US etc) and just needed the hardware bits to integrate the HARM onto the MIG.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-29#Variants

ReverseFlow wrote:

Unless the Slovakian or Romanian MIGs could already use HARMs.

It has been speculated that the Slovakian or Romanian MIgs have NATO standard provisions.

At a minimum, they would have NATO standard hardpoints. Thus they can handle a variety of NATO weapons. AA missiles and bombs.

Something like a HARM or Harpoon may require software changes or at most swapping out the Stores Management Computer and maybe the cockpit weapons display. This can be done relatively easy for a small fleet if it hasn't been done already.

If anything I suspect the US DOD or NATO would have upgrade the necessary systems on those MIGs before handing them over.

bt

"This morning there was a good news, there was a very powerful detonation in Henichesk region," Serhii Khlan, adviser to the head of Kherson Civil Military Administration, said on Ukrainian television Tuesday.

This and the attack at the Crimea airport makes two of the deepest attack for the Ukrainians.

Are they using up their long range rockets? Hard to believe ir could have been sabotage.

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ru ... index.html

bt

ReverseFlow wrote:

GDB wrote:

bikerthai wrote:

Well, who said Russia is adept at the media war? That Amnesty International report has now been over taken by Russian militarizing the nuclear power plant.

On the other hand.

Confirmed that the HARMs were provided to the Ukrainian by the US.



https://www.kyivpost.com/russias-war/pe ... y-hit.html

bt

So that's how they did it, the spare parts delivery for existing Ukrainian Mig-29's also included integration kits for HARM, presumably tested on Mig-29's in the US, which would also require new and expanded electronic support measures, itself requiring trials on this fitment. Busy at Groom Lake? If that is where it is done?
A case when not announcing something worked, had the Russians thought HARM was coming their AD would have adapted accordingly in advance.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/08/poli ... index.html

https://defbrief.com/2022/08/08/us-conf ... o-ukraine/

Away from that, even a very small NATO member can make a difference, punching above their weight in aid here;
https://defbrief.com/2022/08/05/in-addi ... ne-report/

Unless the Slovakian or Romanian MIGs could already use HARMs.
Or if they knew how to do it from that (or other NATO MIGs like Poland, US etc) and just needed the hardware bits to integrate the HARM onto the MIG.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-29#Variants

I really think this is the first integration of HARM on to a Mig-29, 'NATO' standards up to now have meant comms, IFF, maybe ESM, rather than weapons.
As I mentioned upthread, you don't even just stick a HARM on to a standard F-16.

Now, SU-25's, we've seen them, like the Russians, using unguided rockets in a way to avoid SAM/AAA fire but meaning they are highly inaccurate.
So how about giving the Ukrainian ones a modern, already integrated on to several, albeit Western types, proven in operation and best of all, an adapted version already in Ukrainian service;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brimstone_(missile)

https://mobile.twitter.com/vcdgf555/sta ... 2099449857

https://mobile.twitter.com/ThomasVLinge ... 7503974404

Some footage of the Crimea attack here.

It seems like a lot of overly optimistic assumptions are being made here. Just because something is in the news as a discussion point doesn't mean it is happening or is effective in any meaningful manner so far.

1) A few months ago it was discussed how Bulgaria had donated Su-25s. I guarantee you this didn't happen. All Bulgarian Su-25s are still at Bezmer with no sign of any work being done on them for donating to Ukraine. Another optimistic headline which ended up being nothing.
2) Same news was blown out of proportion in the beginning months of the war about how Poland, Bulgaria and Slovakia were going to donate their MiG fleets. Again nothing happened, except that Slovakia has now finally potentially agreed to do so.
3) Just because Slovakia recently said they might send MiG-29s doesn't mean they already have. And this might take quite some time. The planes have to be disassembled and all confidential NATO avionics removed (like for example, IFF equipment). Also plans have to be made for who will take over the air defense of Slovakia and execute those plans. I don't think they will give any MiGs until some guarantees are agreed upon. Finally, the aircraft need to be shipped to Poland, then Ukraine, then assembled again and test flown before being integrated in the Ukrainian air force. Follow all that with the inevitable paper trail that would also be required. Ukrainians would have to read through all the documentation and logbooks of these aircraft to establish the correct servicing intervals. In other words, Slovakian MiG-29s are not in Ukraine yet.
4) Romanian MiG-29s? Carrying Western weapons? That is a complete pipe dream. These aircraft were retired by Romania 20 years ago and have been sitting derelict outside receiving little to no maintenance or attention. I'd be surprised if they even start up without requiring significant maintenance beforehand. They have never received any NATO integration upgrades. By the way, Hungary has some MiG-29s sitting around as well in perhaps a little better condition. Even the Slovakian MiG-29s which did receive some upgrades over the years cannot carry Western weapons.
5) Macedonian Su-25s that were potentially donated is yet another overly optimistic news piece. 4 aircraft which have also sat in the sun for 20 years and received almost no maintenance or conservation efforts. Furthermore one of them is a Su-25UBK which lacks the full combat capability of the single seaters. These aircraft would need a complete overhaul before being used again.

The bottom line is these "donations" in the news have done little more than boost morale. Their actual combat effectiveness has been close to zero so far. One should really take such news with a grain of salt. Really the only confirmed donated air assets that are actually in use are some Czech Mi-24 and Mi-8 which not only have arrived in Ukraine but are also flying there. Funnily enough we haven't seen almost anything in the news about them. Everyone focuses on the jets.

bikerthai wrote:

It has been speculated that the Slovakian or Romanian MIgs have NATO standard provisions.

It has been quite a soap to get the Slovak migs to Ukraine. With Slovakia announcing it, only to then decide not to after pressure from the larger NATO members.

I wonder if that pressure was done to give time to integrate NATO missiles and equipment.

If so, then Ukraine’s Migs are probably more advanced then Russia’s, which is a nice irony.

petertenthije wrote:

I wonder if that pressure was done to give time to integrate NATO missiles and equipment.

If so, then Ukraine’s Migs are probably more advanced then Russia’s, which is a nice irony.

The story still need to be flushed out.

But we have a direct quote from a US official.

“In recent military aid packages, we have included a number of anti-radar missiles that can be fired from Ukrainian aircraft and can affect Russian radars and other things,” Colin Kahl said during a press briefing on Monday.

From the Kyiv article above.

So whether it's donated MiGs or Ukrainian MiGs upgraded to handle the HARMs, really is secondary.

Lead me to wonder what else do they have up their sleeve.

bt

sovietjet wrote:

Just because something is in the news as a discussion point doesn't mean it is happening or is effective in any meaningful manner so far.

Your note about the donates aircraft makes sense.

Maybe that is why they emphasized donated aircraft parts. Which as a whole seems to be effective and meaningful for keeping the Ukrainian Airforce in the air and launching missiles at radar sites.

Now that they can launch HARMs, any speculation on potential deep strike by the Ukrainian MIGs as opposed to long range rockets?

bt

sovietjet wrote:

It seems like a lot of overly optimistic assumptions are being made here. Just because something is in the news as a discussion point doesn't mean it is happening or is effective in any meaningful manner so far.

1) A few months ago it was discussed how Bulgaria had donated Su-25s. I guarantee you this didn't happen. All Bulgarian Su-25s are still at Bezmer with no sign of any work being done on them for donating to Ukraine. Another optimistic headline which ended up being nothing.
2) Same news was blown out of proportion in the beginning months of the war about how Poland, Bulgaria and Slovakia were going to donate their MiG fleets. Again nothing happened, except that Slovakia has now finally potentially agreed to do so.
3) Just because Slovakia recently said they might send MiG-29s doesn't mean they already have. And this might take quite some time. The planes have to be disassembled and all confidential NATO avionics removed (like for example, IFF equipment). Also plans have to be made for who will take over the air defense of Slovakia and execute those plans. I don't think they will give any MiGs until some guarantees are agreed upon. Finally, the aircraft need to be shipped to Poland, then Ukraine, then assembled again and test flown before being integrated in the Ukrainian air force. Follow all that with the inevitable paper trail that would also be required. Ukrainians would have to read through all the documentation and logbooks of these aircraft to establish the correct servicing intervals. In other words, Slovakian MiG-29s are not in Ukraine yet.
4) Romanian MiG-29s? Carrying Western weapons? That is a complete pipe dream. These aircraft were retired by Romania 20 years ago and have been sitting derelict outside receiving little to no maintenance or attention. I'd be surprised if they even start up without requiring significant maintenance beforehand. They have never received any NATO integration upgrades. By the way, Hungary has some MiG-29s sitting around as well in perhaps a little better condition. Even the Slovakian MiG-29s which did receive some upgrades over the years cannot carry Western weapons.
5) Macedonian Su-25s that were potentially donated is yet another overly optimistic news piece. 4 aircraft which have also sat in the sun for 20 years and received almost no maintenance or conservation efforts. Furthermore one of them is a Su-25UBK which lacks the full combat capability of the single seaters. These aircraft would need a complete overhaul before being used again.

The bottom line is these "donations" in the news have done little more than boost morale. Their actual combat effectiveness has been close to zero so far. One should really take such news with a grain of salt. Really the only confirmed donated air assets that are actually in use are some Czech Mi-24 and Mi-8 which not only have arrived in Ukraine but are also flying there. Funnily enough we haven't seen almost anything in the news about them. Everyone focuses on the jets.

The US has also supplied Mi-8/17 models, as for the jets, I for one know that Mig-29's have not been supplied, the discussions, months ago, about the pros and cons were all over the Western media, where it is allowed.
And the decision of the US was not to facilitate the supply of them.

But not for spares, they have been a feature of US and NATO help from early on, for Ukraine's existing fleet.
A fleet that the supposed mighty Russian AF has failed to suppress, much less gain air superiority in general.
That's the link between an official US announcement of small numbers of HARMs being delivered, not just Mig spares but modifications too. The US has the airframes and facilities to do just that, on their soil.

And Ukraine already has SU-25's, if nothing else those from others can be spares sources, or even in a poor state, decoys.

Yes GDB, you're right about the US supplied Mi-8/17 (ex-Afghan). I had forgotten about those. As for the rest I completely agree, more than likely any benefit from jet donations have been potentially for parts. That's why I said combat effectiveness has been "close to zero". Many of the parts on jets sitting for 20 years have also timed out, or have rotted (think anything with rubber seals and gaskets). But in time of war it could be argued that a plane in the air sometimes is more important than following maintenance and airworthiness directives to the dot...

sovietjet wrote:

That's why I said combat effectiveness has been "close to zero".

Glass half empty?

From the glass half full perspective: The existence of flying Ukrainian aircraft (along with SAM) have kept Russian jets from deep strikes. And did they not say some of the Russian missiles were shot down by Ukrainian aircrafts?
If the Ukrainian can integrate the Harpoons on to their aircraft, similar to the HARMs, then pushing the Russian fleet out of Crimea is worth something does it not?

See all those ships coming and going from Odessa.

bt

lightsaber wrote:

bikerthai wrote:

Zeppi wrote:

They fail to even intercept rather basic ballistic missiles and the ukrainian airforce is still very much alive and kicking till this day. Talk about massively overrated stuff.

May be not overated. The Ukrainians are shooting down many Russian missiles with their own Soviet SAMs. But I guess they are not revealing their own failure rate. And these are Soviet SAMs and not Russian SAMs if it makes any difference.

bt

I'm flabbergasted that 3 decades later, the "advanced" equipment is still Soviet equipment. Once the chip sanctions really hit, Russia will truly be short of weapons. So much for the "reform" of the Russian military.

Who else finds it amazing that Russia turned out to be a paper tiger and not the #2 army in the world?

Lightsaber

At risk of repeating myself. A whole lot of people, especially in military circles.

It just turns out that making the apparent enemy bigger than it actually is makes for a nice fund raiser for the armed forces.