Neither of us made it clear but it was reported that the UK would be providing trading for pilots and long range weapons and marines training.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Russia/Ukraine conflict
- Thread starter amolina
- Start date
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
I'm sure there are a bunch of Ukrainian pilots on DCS right now getting familiar with the F16 
I can tell you from the L-39 flight dynamics model that the sim is almost identical to the real thing.
I can tell you from the L-39 flight dynamics model that the sim is almost identical to the real thing.
I'm sure there are a bunch of Ukrainian pilots on DCS right now getting familiar with the F16
I can tell you from the L-39 flight dynamics model that the sim is almost identical to the real thing.
The F-16 has a fragile landing gear system. The F-18 is a better choice for the kind of airfields they will be facing in Ukraine. The Gripen is also a good choice for the kinds of fields in Ukraine.
trayloader
Member
Dunno if this was discussed here yet, but Senjor Musk will clip starlink support.
That might be changing the game in favor of the Russians. Now it’s clear why Selenskyi is on his toes.
Put it into Google translate:
amp.n-tv.de
www.spiegel.de
That might be changing the game in favor of the Russians. Now it’s clear why Selenskyi is on his toes.
Put it into Google translate:
Starlink schränkt Einsatz ukrainischer Drohnen ein
Für die Kommunikation der ukrainischen Streitkräfte spielen die Starlink-Satelliten eine wichtige Rolle. Doch im vergangenen Herbst häufen sich die Ausfälle. Nun bestätigt SpaceX-Präsidentin Shotwell, dass man die Nutzung des Systems für offensive Zwecke behindere.
amp.n-tv.de
News zum Russland-Ukraine-Krieg: Das geschah in der Nacht zu Donnerstag (9. Februar)
Starlink möchte verhindern, dass die Ukraine sein Satelliteninternet weiter für militärische Angriffszwecke verwendet. Selenskyj kommt nach Brüssel. Und: 120 Milliarden Dollar flossen bisher von Nato-Staaten. Die wichtigsten Entwicklungen.
www.spiegel.de
ISW is reporting that the Russians are attempting an offensive. That's probably why Russian losses have gone up the last few days.
Institute for the Study of War
Another 900+ Russians dead. Third day in a row with these kinds of losses.
https://www.mil.gov.ua/en/news/2023...osses-of-the-enemy-from-24-02-22-to-09-02-23/
Some sources are saying that the Russians are throwing 100,000 troops into this offensive. The Ukrainians have been holding the line for three days now. I expect they will probably lose some ground just from the sheer weight of Russian bodies being thrown at them, but the Russians will pay a steep price for every meter and then the Russian offensive will start to falter when they start running out of supply or they struggle to move the supply they have on hand.
Assaults consume tremendous mountains of supply and as the troops move forward, the supply train needs to keep up. Russia has shown weak logistics when it comes to moving supply the last leg from the railhead to the frontline. Russia's rail is very good at getting supply near the front. They have an entire branch of the military dedicated to the railroads. But they started the war with too few trucks, have lost a staggering number of the trucks they had, plus after a year a lot of the surviving trucks are wearing out. They have pressed civilian trucks into service, but those aren't equipped for the types of conditions battlefield trucks have to face and their life expectancy is probably pretty low. Because of its rail network Russia has a small civilian truck fleet for the size of the country.
When the supplies run out, the offensive stalls. Operation Bagration was probably one of the largest single battles in history. To keep the Germans tied down on the Eastern Front and give the western Allies a chance in France the Soviets launched a massive assault on Germany's Army Group Center in August 1944. Zhukov piled up a staggering mountain of supplies for the operation and had a massive fleet of American built trucks to move it.
The Russians blasted a hole in the German line close to 1000 miles long and pretty much obliterated Army Group Center, which was a massive force of about 850,000 men. The German casualties range from 150K to 500K depending on the estimate. Russian casualties were around 770K.
Army Group Central was devastated and nothing stood in the way between the Russians and Berlin, but they burned up so much supply and took so many casualties on the initial assault they couldn't exploit the opportunity and the Germans had time to regroup and build a new defensive line.
Operation Bagration - Wikipedia
It all boils down to logistics in the end. And Russian logistics once away from rail lines in the last 100 years have never been very good.
ISW suggests that Russia may be handing over the frontlines to DNR and LNR units to free up Russian units for their offensive. That exact thing happened 81 years ago when the Russians were bogged down in a massive attritional fight at Stalingrad. The Germans stripped out all their units holding the flanks at Stalingrad and threw them into the cauldron in the city. They gave the responsibility to holding their flanks to the weaker Hungarian, Italian, and Romanian units fighting with the German army. Zhukov took advantage of this once he had built up enough forces and supplies to conduct a Russian offensive. He attacked the German's flanks and broke through the weak forces holding them. This allowed the Russians to surround the city and trap the German 6th Army inside the perimeter.
In Igor Girkin's latest interview he was talking about how the Russian don't have enough of anything to go over onto the offensive successfully. He's very pro-Russian, but he's also the most realistic of the commentators on the Russian side. In his estimation the Russians don't have the supplies for a full offensive and the troops are too poorly trained to sustain an offensive.
I expect the Russians will make some gains in the offensive, and there will be plenty of hand wringing that Ukraine is doomed and/or "see the Russians were just sandbagging". But the offensive will fall apart and the Russians will then have a much weaker force to defend against the next Ukrainian offensive. If the Russian flanks are being held by LNR and DNR forces exclusively, expect there to be the point for the Ukrainian offensive.
Institute for the Study of War
Another 900+ Russians dead. Third day in a row with these kinds of losses.
https://www.mil.gov.ua/en/news/2023...osses-of-the-enemy-from-24-02-22-to-09-02-23/
Some sources are saying that the Russians are throwing 100,000 troops into this offensive. The Ukrainians have been holding the line for three days now. I expect they will probably lose some ground just from the sheer weight of Russian bodies being thrown at them, but the Russians will pay a steep price for every meter and then the Russian offensive will start to falter when they start running out of supply or they struggle to move the supply they have on hand.
Assaults consume tremendous mountains of supply and as the troops move forward, the supply train needs to keep up. Russia has shown weak logistics when it comes to moving supply the last leg from the railhead to the frontline. Russia's rail is very good at getting supply near the front. They have an entire branch of the military dedicated to the railroads. But they started the war with too few trucks, have lost a staggering number of the trucks they had, plus after a year a lot of the surviving trucks are wearing out. They have pressed civilian trucks into service, but those aren't equipped for the types of conditions battlefield trucks have to face and their life expectancy is probably pretty low. Because of its rail network Russia has a small civilian truck fleet for the size of the country.
When the supplies run out, the offensive stalls. Operation Bagration was probably one of the largest single battles in history. To keep the Germans tied down on the Eastern Front and give the western Allies a chance in France the Soviets launched a massive assault on Germany's Army Group Center in August 1944. Zhukov piled up a staggering mountain of supplies for the operation and had a massive fleet of American built trucks to move it.
The Russians blasted a hole in the German line close to 1000 miles long and pretty much obliterated Army Group Center, which was a massive force of about 850,000 men. The German casualties range from 150K to 500K depending on the estimate. Russian casualties were around 770K.
Army Group Central was devastated and nothing stood in the way between the Russians and Berlin, but they burned up so much supply and took so many casualties on the initial assault they couldn't exploit the opportunity and the Germans had time to regroup and build a new defensive line.
Operation Bagration - Wikipedia
It all boils down to logistics in the end. And Russian logistics once away from rail lines in the last 100 years have never been very good.
ISW suggests that Russia may be handing over the frontlines to DNR and LNR units to free up Russian units for their offensive. That exact thing happened 81 years ago when the Russians were bogged down in a massive attritional fight at Stalingrad. The Germans stripped out all their units holding the flanks at Stalingrad and threw them into the cauldron in the city. They gave the responsibility to holding their flanks to the weaker Hungarian, Italian, and Romanian units fighting with the German army. Zhukov took advantage of this once he had built up enough forces and supplies to conduct a Russian offensive. He attacked the German's flanks and broke through the weak forces holding them. This allowed the Russians to surround the city and trap the German 6th Army inside the perimeter.
In Igor Girkin's latest interview he was talking about how the Russian don't have enough of anything to go over onto the offensive successfully. He's very pro-Russian, but he's also the most realistic of the commentators on the Russian side. In his estimation the Russians don't have the supplies for a full offensive and the troops are too poorly trained to sustain an offensive.
I expect the Russians will make some gains in the offensive, and there will be plenty of hand wringing that Ukraine is doomed and/or "see the Russians were just sandbagging". But the offensive will fall apart and the Russians will then have a much weaker force to defend against the next Ukrainian offensive. If the Russian flanks are being held by LNR and DNR forces exclusively, expect there to be the point for the Ukrainian offensive.
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
I'm no expert, but perhaps there's a way to sufficiently beef upp the front landing gear on the F-16. Maybe all it takes is some other titanium alloy, or some incrementally beefier landing gear parts. Maybe the manufacturer has been working on something that could be implemented in a couple of weeks...
Isn't the main gear strong enough as is?
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
And that's consistent with what retired General Ben Hodges said in the interview I posted here:
Russia/Ukraine conflict
I made this point about the zombie-like nature of the Russian attack on Bakhmut back on Oct 30, 2022. Somehow, 'World War Z' seems appropriate (WFT do Ruzzians paint a 'Z' on their vehicles?) This is not a new comparison if you've been reading this thread. The siege of Bakhmut is over 100...
teslamotorsclub.com
petit_bateau
Active Member
Dunno if this was discussed here yet, but Senjor Musk will clip starlink support.
That might be changing the game in favor of the Russians. Now it’s clear why Selenskyi is on his toes.
Put it into Google translate:
Starlink schränkt Einsatz ukrainischer Drohnen ein
Für die Kommunikation der ukrainischen Streitkräfte spielen die Starlink-Satelliten eine wichtige Rolle. Doch im vergangenen Herbst häufen sich die Ausfälle. Nun bestätigt SpaceX-Präsidentin Shotwell, dass man die Nutzung des Systems für offensive Zwecke behindere.
News zum Russland-Ukraine-Krieg: Das geschah in der Nacht zu Donnerstag (9. Februar)
Starlink möchte verhindern, dass die Ukraine sein Satelliteninternet weiter für militärische Angriffszwecke verwendet. Selenskyj kommt nach Brüssel. Und: 120 Milliarden Dollar flossen bisher von Nato-Staaten. Die wichtigsten Entwicklungen.
Shotwell: Ukraine “weaponized” Starlink in war against Russia
SpaceX’s president said that Ukraine used Starlink for offensive purposes in its war against Russia, an application SpaceX didn’t intend to support.
spacenews.com
My personal suspicion is that Ukraine used Starlink to operate the drone boats for the various attacks on Sevastpol harbour and Kerch bridge, and that is likely what Shotwell is referring to. It is notable that subsequently there have been no such attacks. And we know Starlink has the capability to geofence terminals.
My personal opinion is that offensive tactics carried out by a defender who is seeking to expel an aggressive invader are perfectly reasonable. However it is also reasonable that a service provider can set their own use limits.
Tricky.
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
Paywalled...
WASHINGTON — China is providing technology that Moscow’s military needs to prosecute the Kremlin’s war in Ukraine despite an international cordon of sanctions and export controls, according to a Wall Street Journal review of Russian customs data.
The customs records show Chinese state-owned defense companies shipping navigation equipment, jamming technology and jet-fighter parts to sanctioned Russian government-owned defense companies. [..."
www.wsj.com
"China Aids Russia’s War in Ukraine, Trade Data Shows
Despite sanctions, Moscow equips its jet fighters, submarines and soldiers with help of Chinese companies
Feb. 4, 2023 9:00 am ETWASHINGTON — China is providing technology that Moscow’s military needs to prosecute the Kremlin’s war in Ukraine despite an international cordon of sanctions and export controls, according to a Wall Street Journal review of Russian customs data.
The customs records show Chinese state-owned defense companies shipping navigation equipment, jamming technology and jet-fighter parts to sanctioned Russian government-owned defense companies. [..."
WSJ News Exclusive | China Aids Russia’s War in Ukraine, Trade Data Shows
Despite international sanctions, Chinese state-owned companies are shipping navigation equipment, jamming technology and jet-fighter parts to Russian government-owned companies, customs records show.
www.wsj.com
On this point only. Most of UK initial commercial flight training is done in Australia and US. The first UK PPL done outside UK was in 1990. (fWIW I owned the school). Within months Australia and US became dominant, in large part due to weather. US military flight training for UK and EU. (NATO) has been done for decades. Bad decision making may have had a role but economy, scale and logistics was more important.
ukraine is benefitting also.
petit_bateau
Active Member
This is about military flying training, not civilian. And most specifically about fast jet training. (I understand your points re civilian training.)
During WW2 there was a lot of UK+Empire military flying training done in Canada, Australia, Kenya, USA.
But since then almost all the straightforward UK military training has been done at UK areas or UK aviation support/training vessels, i.e. through up until first operational posting (i.e. BFT, AFT, OCU are all in UK). Generalising somewhat it is only operational squadrons who tend to use non-UK range areas.
There are a whole slew of problems in the UK military (RAF/RN) fast jet fixed wing flying training. The specific one right now is that the Hawk trainer jet has a problem with its RollsRoyce engine that grounded them all. (Limited flying has resumed, well below the necessary rate). But that is the icing on a very sh1tty cake that has been festering for years and is not just about equipment.
If the UK starts putting its fast jet trainees into the NATO courses run by the USA (or in Australia) that is going to be quite a hit for UK-Inc. There have historically been quite a lot of non-UK students going through alongside the UK ones. Currently mostly the Quataris, but not just them.
So I think that if any training is to be done in the UK it will tend to focus on simulator work, and perhaps conversion courses (if Typhoon is released). I am fairly sure that behind the scenes there is a lot of recrimination going on about quite how empty the shelves are in the UK military - and it is the politicians who are to blame.
(Dealing with northern European weather in the dark in the winter, in congested airspace, is part of the military training ! It is only for very basic military flying training that the good weather is wanted)
====
What I find interesting is that there is very little point in Ukraine sending students to UK to train if they are not subsequently going to fly Western jets, and/or use Western weapons and mission planning tools. Ditto the maintainers. So there must be reasonably well progressed options amongst the Western allies re the relevant aircraft and weapons/etc to make this a worthwhile effort.
The various retired Jaguar and Tornado fleets are now junk, well beyond resuscitating (yes I know India still operates Jaguar, but .... ). So the realistic options seem to be:
- Typhoon tranche 1
- Gripen early models
- various Mirages
- F16
- F18
- and of course any ex-Soviet aircraft that can be usefully rounded up around the world from willing sellers
In my prior post I spoke only of civil training because I cannot discuss anything else that isn't already public. Given that, military basic, jet and combat training has been happening for decades in North America and the US, replicating every weather, defense and navigation environment. That has been both NATO and non-NATO.
Specific national criticism aside the coordinated training within NATO and other allies has become very refined over decades. I'll still point out that military/civil cooperation is rather extensive, particularly in specialized equipment. That applies to rotorcraft, and every specialized function such as rescue, medivac etc.
As this applies to Ukraine, much of the training is quite definitely already under way. Further, I think there is rather more UK activity and cooperation in these efforts than some of us think.
The UK air services have become quite adept at finding economical solutions IME.
The F-16 may be most numerous of them all for rapid delivery but... The US Nave N version and the Israeli ones are both equipped with heavy duty landing gear that is suitable for poor conditions, but those are less numerous. The Gripen will the the easiest to maintain and are not so numerous either. Both still have extensive training requirements for maintenance and pilots. No non-Soviet aircraft will be anything approaching plug-and-play.
As always the Ukrainians have an unusually adaptable maintenance industry often using seemingly incompatible equipment is surprising ways. Even for maintenance hogs like the US so loves, Ukrainian farm-trained mechanics will be far more versatile than the poorly educated urbanites of older NATO members. Somehow many people forget the value of lifelong mechanical deice operation, even in a high-tech world.
Obviously these are just my opinions. I admit to bias, since my fear of training peopling ground-hugging flight operations was exactly correlated with life experience of the trainee, with only the urbanite academically trained ones raised my fear. Even advanced avionics are simpler and easier for people who grew up operating machinery.
The only exception is avionics repair, but it seems Ukraine has quite a supply of those people too, if rapid field operation of complex targeting technologies are indications.
I addd that my experience with all this is old, so may be obsolete now, but I doubt it.
@petit_bateau yes that is something else I didn’t make clear to others on my question to you....long work days this winter. Thank you for closing the gap.
F16 is the request and for good reasons but I am sure they will take them all.
ISW post on the renewed offensive is interesting, also explains the destruction of tanks & APC again. This could go on for a few weeks.
F16 is the request and for good reasons but I am sure they will take them all.
ISW post on the renewed offensive is interesting, also explains the destruction of tanks & APC again. This could go on for a few weeks.
My 24 year old millennial son frequently comments on the mechanical aptitude he sees in the field now that he has to support heavy equipment instead of some advance AI code. Your point is spot on, attitude and aptitude honed by life experiences will go far. This holds true for supporting the abrams as well.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
I can add that the contractor based non-US pilot fast jet training industry within the US has been buzzing with activity over the past year and a half and the tempo is ever increasing.
I would add to the above post - attitude and aptitude tenacity and will to survive (focus)
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
"Im Gen Z and we do not like labels"
I heard something like that and just smiled.
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
And those F-16s that doesn't have this heavy duty landing gear – can't those be upgraded?...
But maybe this stuff is classified, so any people who might know in the thread may not be able to answer...
Back when I was on the flight line, working on F-16A’s and B’s, we had one landing gear failure to drop down. This was an early issue and resolved by General Dynamics. The one case I recall, the pilot pulled negative G’s and everything was good.
True failure of the landing gear from a weak design was not seen, even when fully loaded with armament and external fuel tanks.
If the concern is the condition of the airfield, slap on a top coat of smooth asphalt. Just stay away from the far ends where the afterburner blast zone is
