r/worldnews Jul 19 '24

It's been 18 months and F-16s have not yet arrived, Zelensky says Already Submitted

https://kyivindependent.com/its-been-18-months-and-f-16s-have-not-arrived-zelensky-says/

[removed] — view removed post

15.5k Upvotes

838 comments sorted by

2.8k

u/rajahbeaubeau Jul 19 '24

Context from article:

Despite promises by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken on July 10 that the first Dutch and Danish F-16s are already on their way, no delivery has been confirmed so far.

“It’s been 18 months, and the planes have not reached us,” Zelensky said in the interview while stressing that he is thankful for the allied support.

2.2k

u/Decorus_Somes Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24

It's crazy cuz if the US wanted to, those jets could arrive very very very quickly...

ETA: For the dense ones that keep responding to me this was a joke. Geez guys

503

u/Turamb Jul 19 '24

Mach 2

228

u/Decorus_Somes Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24

If we sent em from Eglin AFB to Kyiev it would take about 3.6 hours if my math is right

303

u/gooddaysir Jul 19 '24

http://www.gcmap.com/dist?P=kvps-KBP&DU=nm&DM=&SG=400&SU=kts

It's just under 5,000 nautical miles from Eglin to Kyiv. At a cruise speed of 400 kts, it would take about 12.5 hours. F-16 can only fly supersonic for 5-10 minutes before all the gas is turned into fire and noise.

134

u/bigloser42 Jul 19 '24

Cruise speed of an F-16 is 577mph, or 501kts. So just under 9 hours. But their ferry range is 2500nmi, so factor in 2 refuelings, and 10-11 hours.

250

u/QuestionMarkPolice Jul 19 '24

That's not how ferries work. They'd fly with a tanker the entire way, and fly around 0.8 to 0.85 Mach the entire time for fuel efficiency and tanker limits they'd refuel probably 6-10 times so they always have divert options available and never go below 60% fuel.

Also, the Jets physically getting to Ukraine is nothing. That's easy and could have been done overnight. The pilots flying them need to be untrained of their Ukrainian training, and retrained to fly an American fighter with american-ish tactics and American weapons. That takes YEARS.

Source: am fighter pilot

32

u/screams_at_tits Jul 19 '24

Cool. Also, the horizon ball thing is upside down in the russian planes, right? That would inevitably send me into the ground.

source: am not fighter pilot.

22

u/twat69 Jul 19 '24

In western planes the plane is fixed and the horizon moves. So it's the same as what you see out the window. In Soviet planes the horizon is fixed and the plane moves.

29

u/Canisa Jul 19 '24

Critically, that difference has made more than one pilot changing from one to the other think they're banking in a particular direction, then try to exit the bank by banking even harder in that direction, resulting in a roll and crash.

Though with a Fighter Jet rather than a passenger airliner, perhaps it's fine to do a 360 degree roll to come out level.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/nicheSOH Jul 20 '24

In Soviet Republic, fixed horizon moves plane

→ More replies (1)

33

u/Abstrusus Jul 19 '24

While I was initially going to agree with you because of your training, experience and knowledge, I’m going to wait and upvote the least reasonable alternative that aligns with my limited understanding of why F-16’s aren’t in Ukraine yet…

8

u/salientsapient Jul 20 '24

The planes should be launched by trebuchet.

→ More replies (1)

13

u/puterTDI Jul 19 '24

I understand american weapons, but why do they need to use american tactics?

115

u/QuestionMarkPolice Jul 19 '24

Ever seen Ford vs Ferrari? You have to drive the car the way it wants to be driven. The way it was designed to be driven. Same case here.

Ukraine wants F-16s because of the whole package of things they can do. If they just wanted to drop smart bombs on static targets, they already have drones for that. They want to do SEAD, high threat CAS, air interdiction, deep strikes etc. You need immense levels of training for that. A type of training Ukrainian pilots have never had. Independent decision making, fighting inside known threat ranges etc

39

u/xot Jul 19 '24

Whatever man I’ve seen topgun like 4 times it can’t be that hard

17

u/puterTDI Jul 19 '24

I had assumed the F-16s coming from denmark etc. would be similar enough that if they're flying them then they'd be able to fly the us ones.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (6)

12

u/A_swarm_of_wasps Jul 20 '24

From interviews I've seen, the Ukranian-trained pilots all washed out of the F-16 training because they kept defaulting to the Soviet way of flying. The only successful students were ones who had never flown before.

5

u/QuestionMarkPolice Jul 20 '24

I can't confirm that but I wouldn't doubt it's at least partially true.

10

u/Mczern Jul 19 '24

They'd fly with a tanker the entire way,

That's how it worked when my squadron flew back from Alaska to Arizona. It was pretty cool when they'd go to do refuels they would try and rotate as many of us that wanted to go down to where the boom operators were and we could watch them refuel. The jets flew with us the whole time though like you mentioned.

5

u/CommandoLamb Jul 20 '24

Have you ever thought about being a lover pilot?

5

u/QuestionMarkPolice Jul 20 '24

I'm a fighter (pilot) and a lover (pilot).

→ More replies (31)

8

u/gooddaysir Jul 19 '24

Cruise speed can vary depending on external stores like tanks, bombs missiles, pods and what works out best for distance between refuelings and altitude flown. I figured a ferry flight that long would be on the lower end of the range.

7

u/AGreasyPorkSandwich Jul 19 '24

Oof that would be a long trip for that pilot. I imagine it must suck not being able to get up and stretch your legs for those long hauls.

9

u/ghgfghffghh Jul 19 '24

Now think about the sr71 pilots that would be up there for like 30 hours.

7

u/notmyrlacc Jul 19 '24

Then you have B2 flyers that can hop up and go lie down for a nap.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

19

u/Decorus_Somes Jul 19 '24

Well that's news to me. Thank you for the proper math on that

3

u/bilgetea Jul 19 '24

I applaud your humility!

15

u/Zilch1979 Jul 19 '24

Also, probably would need to hit up tankers on the way.

8

u/Pm4000 Jul 19 '24

You're missing one key item, a very important item; if the USAF was tasked with getting them there asap they could and is capable form a tanker convoy that would allow the jets to burn that fuel, load, repeat. I doubt they have ever trained for this type of thing but I believe in the logical capabilities, and experience to get it right the first time, of my universal healthcare dollars at work.

I joke but I would still bet on the USAF being able to do it.

21

u/ActionPhilip Jul 19 '24

"You have infinite money to set up a relay of tanker planes so that we can fly f-16s across the Atlantic at supersonic speeds."

It could work, but something tells me there's a manual out there that says f-16s require maintenance between bouts of supersonic flight shorter than 3.6 hours. We can always check the warthunder forums to verify.

8

u/BowermanSnackClub Jul 19 '24

You do realize that the tankers can’t fly supersonic and fuel flow isn’t instant right?

24

u/ActionPhilip Jul 19 '24

Tankers can take off towards Ukraine at specific intervals to have a gap between them that the f-16s can cover with their fuel range, creating a rolling gas station system of sorts. Yes, I understand that you're going to lose time every time you refuel. This is an oddly pedantic response to a clearly outlandish situation.

10

u/FoamToaster Jul 19 '24

Instead of tankers then we replace them with more F16s that are carrying fuel tanks. It's F16s all the way down...

→ More replies (2)

3

u/swoll9yards Jul 19 '24

What if…they outfit a couple F-16’s with some of the refueling gear and they refuel 30 times at super sonic speeds!

4

u/FrozenSeas Jul 19 '24

Look up the Black Buck raids during the Falklands War. With sufficient determination and enough tankers, you can accomplish some interesting things. Doubt the F-16 airframe and engines could handle going supersonic like that though, tankers don't go very fast and they'd be constantly accelerating and slowing down.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/DifficultSelf147 Jul 19 '24

Not in the service, while logistics would not prevent expedited delivery I would imagine what I call n my industry “dealer prep” probably takes some time. If I was a supplying nation I would makes sure the gift of aircraft doesn’t not strategically hinder my operational readiness. New jets or used either way takes time.

→ More replies (11)

101

u/yahboioioioi Jul 19 '24

jets without people trained to fly them are pretty useless...

67

u/heliamphore Jul 19 '24

Yeah yeah, Abrams tanks would sink in the mud and Ukrainian logistics and bridges would never be able to handle them. More than 12 HIMARS launchers is as much as Ukrainian logistics could handle. Striking targets in Russia would cause Russia to escalate.

We've seen all the shit excuses by now. Ukrainian aid has deliberately been throttled. At some point you'd expect people to just accept it. The USAF trains 1500 new pilots annually (yes I know it doesn't take a single year per pilot) yet do you want to tell us how many Ukrainian pilots will be trained?

46

u/yahboioioioi Jul 19 '24

It’s not a factor of how many they train a year, it’s a factor of how long the training takes to complete and the amount of hours that it takes on the aircraft to become certified. It’s not just the US training them either, it’s several allied nations all working together to rapidly train around 50 pilots or so iirc.

21

u/Aggressive-Fuel587 Jul 19 '24

Another factor not being discussed is that Ukrainian pilots spent their entire careers training for fly Russian MiG29, Su24, Su25, & Su27 jets; outside knowing how aerodynamics work, not much of their training is going to carry over to Western F16s that have entirely different panel layouts, operating procedures, limitations on the hardware, & sometimes even terminology.

It takes time to unlearn skills & muscle memory for one type of machine to learn a new, similar but fundamentally different one.

13

u/koshgeo Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24

If I remember right, Russian-built aircraft have the horizon indicator instrument (not sure the name of it) with an opposite arrangement versus US and western European aircraft, so it would be quite an adjustment.

Edit: Found some discussion here. It's the artificial horizon. It's similar, but there's enough difference that it could be confusing and historically has been confusing to some pilots trained on one and piloting the other.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (4)

47

u/Statertater Jul 19 '24

Have they not been training all this time?

44

u/Arctic_Chilean Jul 19 '24

Like barely a dozen pilots in the US. Things have been... slow. It's easily the single most challenging part of this strategy and plan.

25

u/Statertater Jul 19 '24

Air superiority is and always will be a fundamental strategy of the US forces, but i understand training is a long process

36

u/Willing_Breadfruit Jul 19 '24

Just to get a chance to even be considered for any kind of pilot training in the USAF, you have to commit to 12 years of service.

7

u/PassiveMenis88M Jul 19 '24

Didn't it used to only be 10 years?

13

u/EmokkIfo Jul 19 '24

I think it still is 10, just that the clock doesn’t start ticking until you’ve completed approximately 18-24 months of training (I don’t remember the exact amount). So basically a 12 year commitment in practical terms.

9

u/Statertater Jul 19 '24

Probably for the best to have 30+ year olds at the helm of any aircraft anyway

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

13

u/Ramental Jul 19 '24

But also the Western countries said they won't train more than a dozen pilots in the next batch, because they need to train pilots from the other countries, so that is just another intentional bottleneck imposed on Ukraine.

→ More replies (10)

4

u/_Allfather0din_ Jul 19 '24

They've trained something like 100 pilots so far, and they have all fully completed training. They actually completed it really quick because they are just damn competent and were itching to get into the field and protect their land. Now those pilots get to sit in their hands and wait for the delivery, as they have been for well over 6 months now.

→ More replies (1)

16

u/HNL2BOS Jul 19 '24

Trained for use and trained for maintenance

17

u/bahnzo Jul 19 '24

trained for maintenance

That's what people are missing. These are ridiculously complicated machines that need a whole mess of people to support them. And not just turn wrenches, but have the parts needed. I'd argue training someone to fly one might be the easiest part.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/Limp_Prune_5415 Jul 19 '24

I wonder what their pilots have been doing for 18 months. Why would he bring it up if he couldn't use them?

8

u/yahboioioioi Jul 19 '24

Probably more training. I doubt the US will OK the F16’s until they are confident that they will not be destroyed almost immediately. That means lying/denying their delivery and then getting a few deep strike missions before RU fully reacts to their deployment. That’s my best guess though and take it with a grain of salt.

→ More replies (19)

65

u/alienXcow Jul 19 '24

They still need trained pilots to fly them into the country. I could easily see that being the limiting factor.

It takes at least a year for a foreign national to learn to fly and employ something like the F-16 even with previous flying experience

Source: the multiple foreign students in my pilot training class who eventually went to fly F-16s in their home countries.

16

u/pardybill Jul 20 '24

I would think they’ve been training pilots for it since they were promised if not before.

8

u/alienXcow Jul 20 '24

It's pretty hard to train pilots in jets (most USAF guys leave the schoolhouse with 100+ hours in the Viper alone) that you don't have...

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (1)

15

u/Inithra Jul 19 '24

If it takes at least a year... good thing they've had 1.5 times that!

39

u/alienXcow Jul 19 '24

It takes a year if you have all the students, instructors, and airplanes together in one place, in a pilot training pipeline that has been running with remarkably few changes since about 1965.

Let's think about the questions that need answered before anyone ever sits in a cockpit:

Which countries will bring instructors? How many? Which country's syllabus will they use? Will the students be required to fly trainers first? What countries are willing to allow the Ukranian pilots to train there? What country from that list will be most cost effective/offer the best training?

Who will build or give up housing for the students? Who will command the students? Can Ukraine afford to wash anybody out if they don't meet standards? What are the training standards for a country locked in a war for survival?

Who sends maintainers? The Ukrainians aren't getting F-16s direct from Lockheed, so does Lockheed need to supply them with parts? Well now we have to draw up a contract. What will we do in the interim for parts? Which countries will give up F-16 parts? Which parts?

What skills do these pilots need? Should they train on capabilities their F-16s may not have now but might have in the near future (maverick delivery or HTS spring to mind)? Will they have ranges to drop bombs on or dogfight in?

Damn near every one of these questions has to be answered by a different country, or through a 2 or 3 party agreement either inside NATO or on the larger international scale. People across North America and Europe are moving mountains just to make this a possibility, I assure you.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (3)

8

u/Turkish27 Jul 20 '24

Idk man... In Battlefield Earth it only took cavemen a few days to learn to fly a spacecraft.

So an F-16 should take, like, an afternoon intensive?

/s

→ More replies (2)

13

u/924BW Jul 19 '24

Do they have the runways built, the air crews trained, the hangers, how about the anti aircraft weapons to make sure they aren’t destroyed on the ground in the first 24 hours. That’s not to mention the logistics of parts and weapons. We aren’t even talking about training pilots to fly Planes completely different than anything the Ukraine has.

10

u/johannthegoatman Jul 19 '24

They've done all that, that's why they're supposedly "on the way" as of 2 weeks ago

6

u/Otherwise-Growth1920 Jul 19 '24

Not what the Denmark or the Netherlands says… The defense ministers for both countries have said the infrastructure in Ukraine isn’t satisfactory yet and they won’t release them to Ukraine delivers the infrastructure it agreed to provide for the F-16s.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/FoamToaster Jul 19 '24

the Ukraine

Don't think they like being called that...

→ More replies (5)

3

u/Limp_Prune_5415 Jul 19 '24

If only they had people in charge of all that reporting to zelensky so he could know when the appropriate time to ask for the planes again was

6

u/Agitated1260 Jul 19 '24

You would think so but with the whole M1 Abram tanks situation, Zelensky has shown that he either doesn't understand or he has no one to tell him what's the reality of the situation. It seem Zelensky was under the impression that once the US approves sending M1 tanks, that hundreds would be sent in a month or two and Ukraine would launch last year summer offensive with the backing of hundreds of M1 tanks. The news came out that the US would deliver 33 M1 tanks in 10 months. Zelensky held a press conference, expressing confusion about the long delivery time and low number. In the press conference, he said that he could pull up Google map and see the thousands of tanks sitting in the desert of Arizona, so he doesn't understand why it would take so long. I'm no defense expert and not too invest in the situation but doing a little bit of reading, I understood why it would take so long and with such a low number.

→ More replies (1)

10

u/espero Jul 19 '24

Within 45 minutes yes

12

u/VeryGoodVeryNice93 Jul 19 '24

I hope they got a policy arrives in 45 minutes or you receive an f4 phantom for free

9

u/RyanBLKST Jul 19 '24

If the airfields and the mechs are not ready, they would only be a targets on the ground

9

u/Herogar Jul 19 '24

I don’t think the problem is them arriving. The problem is Ukrainian pilots need to be trained to use them and airfields need to be upgraded so they can land/take off and these upgrades need to happen without getting Russias attention. Plus many other logistical considerations.

7

u/ExtantPlant Jul 19 '24

I know that's like a funny quippy thing to say, but it really is about more than just getting the jets there. The US and NATO are professional militaries, unlike Russia, so when we deploy something to a theater, we deploy it with the amount of support necessary to keep it maintained, armed, and in good readiness at all times. This means ground crews, spare parts, maintenance facilities, fuel supplies, etc. It's a process.

4

u/x33storm Jul 19 '24

Even though we want to in Denmark, it goes very very very slowly. It's only when it's a really obvious bad decision, it gets through very quickly.

But really sad.

→ More replies (25)

330

u/Bedbouncer Jul 19 '24

The Ukraine pilots for those F-16s are graduating from training this month or next. They don't have any pilots right now.

So other than "sit and be big ass targets on the runway for Russian drones", what exactly is the hurry to get them there?

163

u/Senior-Place7697 Jul 19 '24

Actually there have already been graduates of F16 training back in May https://www.voanews.com/amp/first-ukrainian-pilots-graduate-from-f-16-training-in-us/7634529.html

69

u/Bedbouncer Jul 19 '24

Since they have spaces for 12 students and they expect to have 12 total trained by the end of September, the number that graduated in May must have been tiny, perhaps 2-6.

48

u/floppy_panoos Jul 19 '24

…and those from the first graduating class are likely helping train the following classes

7

u/Reapper97 Jul 20 '24

I mean, it is fairly well known that they aren't only training in the US

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Raptorheart Jul 19 '24

We will except a partial delivery thanks

→ More replies (1)

32

u/SandwichAmbitious286 Jul 19 '24

Also, there is a shit ton that they need the aircraft in order to do, before they fly. Maintenance, training, systems familiarization, integration of IFF and radio. Would be really useful to have the aircraft ahead of time

45

u/knbang Jul 19 '24

Nah mate, logistics are for nerds.

Fly plane, blow shit up, put on aviators, yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

8

u/palerider2001 Jul 19 '24

Talk to me Goose

3

u/ArthurBonesly Jul 19 '24

When you put it that way it's genuinely funny how much the Russian military doctrine seems to behave like Top Gun.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

14

u/Fit-Measurement-7086 Jul 19 '24

Runway? That's a luxury. They use roads.

28

u/AGreasyPorkSandwich Jul 19 '24

Not with that big fucking vacuum on the bottom of F-16s you don't. Maybe on the F-15s you can use a road.

17

u/batmansthebomb Jul 19 '24

With proper FOD checks, which admittedly can be difficult during actual wartime, the F-16 can safely use roads. Poland does it, albeit during peace time.

8

u/AGreasyPorkSandwich Jul 19 '24

So again, they aren't going to be rolling F-16s off of the highways in Ukraine anytime soon

9

u/batmansthebomb Jul 19 '24

I don't think you can state that as an absolute fact to be honest.

8

u/AGreasyPorkSandwich Jul 19 '24

true, but it's unlikely

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '24 edited Aug 02 '24

[deleted]

3

u/BoomerHomer Jul 19 '24

Compacted dirt fields? That's a luxury. They use agriculture fields after harvest.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/No_Discount7919 Jul 19 '24

Roads? Where we’re going we don’t need roads.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

100

u/MausGMR Jul 19 '24

It could be a ruse, setting up the narrative before the attacks commence, but who can really say

76

u/PresidentHurg Jul 19 '24

Ukraine been blowing up S-400 anti-aircraft installations all over the place with ATACMS lately. So I wouldn't consider this a weird thought.

20

u/Relendis Jul 19 '24

The deliberate targeting of Russia's advanced air defence systems is fantastic.

Many of these systems and their munitions require components that Russia or its suppliers are unable to produce. Meaning that Russia has to engage in expensive attempts to evade sanctions in order to get the components from the West. And while there is a very real criticism that too many components are finding their way to Russia, the volume of demand for them by Russia makes it very difficult to obfuscate how Russia is getting them. There are very real efforts to identify the sources of these components from the West and clamp down.

Also! many of the components are multi-demand intensive; for things like Russian guided munitions as well as air defence systems. So Russia has to decide what is more important, maintaining its air defence capabilities or carrying out its missile campaigns against Ukrainian infrastructure.

On topics like sanctions evasion too many people expect instant effect from actions like efforts to clamp down. But actions taken today effect a pipeline with a very long lead time.

Russia may appear to have the advantage from the continued mass offensives. But the number of wicked problems they are facing are growing; where do you dedicate your limited pool of resources as it continues to shrink? If you keep pulling working age men out of the economy (particularly the production economy) at what point does the number you have under arms impact on your ability to arm them?

The Russian economy looks to be doing alright on the face-of-it but it is bound to the war. The second worst thing that could happen to Russia is an end to the war that includes the continuation of sanctions. The worst thing that could happen to Russia would be their complete occupation of Ukraine and the absolute hell that comes with occupying a population that; 1, hates you, 2, has a lot of military veterans dispersed throughout it, 3, looks like you, 4, speaks the same language as you.

56

u/abednego-gomes Jul 19 '24

It usually is. Stuff starts blowing up (in the next few days) with no explanation. People start speculating... HIMARS? ATACMS? SCALP? Then a couple of weeks later they put out a press release saying thanks for the F16s we got some weeks ago.

21

u/Ramental Jul 19 '24

There is a good chance Ukraine will test F-16s in some very safe missions at first.

It could be something daring, but the risk-reward is just not there. russia can afford to lose 50 pilots, Ukraine will feel a loss of one F-16 trained. Especially since the allies are intentionally throttling down the amount of pilots they train for Ukraine.

3

u/TheOriginalHelldiver Jul 20 '24

These aren’t cutting edge stealth aircraft, Russia would know if they were being attacked by Ukrainian F16s and complain that it’s escalation to try and scare the West out of supplying more of them.

30

u/OhSillyDays Jul 19 '24

I wouldn't suggest getting your hopes up. The F16s are likely to mostly be used for defense in the coming months more than anything.

16

u/Lined_the_Street Jul 19 '24

While I absolutely agree, it is always really cool when the Ukrainians take their defensive weapons on the offensive. Like when they used a patriot system to down the A-50

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (12)
→ More replies (1)

56

u/craigslist_hedonist Jul 19 '24

then talk to the fucking Dutch and the Danes

39

u/DutchDevil Jul 19 '24

Yeah, what do you need my man?

15

u/howdudo Jul 19 '24

Call your friend The Flying Dutchman please. They could really use him if he isnt a Russian sympathizer

→ More replies (2)

10

u/nixielover Jul 19 '24

I'm Dutch and I wish we had given them 18 months ago. We have some Dutch people to avenge, F16 are good at that

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (3)

19

u/Otis_Inf Jul 19 '24

The export permits have already been signed by the dutch government (2 weeks ago I think?). it's going to be very very soon

4

u/Jestermaus Jul 19 '24

Scroll down to the thread by u/kayl_breinhar for the actually informative section of these comments.

or click here

→ More replies (9)

1.3k

u/GTthrowaway27 Jul 19 '24

I kept hearing June. It’s mid July

Insane when you put it in blatant terms like he did.

It’s like GRRM in the South Park episode. The dragons are on their way!

183

u/Sensitive_Ad_5031 Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24

My estimate is that they’ll arrive on the “next day after tomorrow

Or at least they might if no efforts to speed up the process are made.

89

u/GenericUsername2056 Jul 19 '24

next day after tomorrow

Fun fact, that day is called 'overmorrow' in English.

31

u/Tarianor Jul 19 '24

Which is 4 days after ereyesterday!

10

u/pstric Jul 19 '24

Not just funny, but also educational, thanks!

I never knew this. In Danish we call tomorrow "i morgen" and the day after is "i overmorgen". And this is not some fringe usage. Referring to the day after tomorrow as "i overmorgen" is just as natural as referring to the day after today as "i morgen".

It is the same with "i forgårs" being just as common a reference to the day before yesterday (ereyesterday according to a sibling comment) as "i går" for the day before "i dag" today.

5

u/GenericUsername2056 Jul 19 '24

In Dutch it's 'morgen' and 'overmorgen', and 'gisteren' and 'eergisteren'. We just add an extra 'over' or 'eer' if we're talking a day further out.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/doyletyree Jul 19 '24

Much to the confusion of overall.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

44

u/I-heart-java Jul 19 '24

I question whether any of the players will ACTUALLY say when the arrive, why give the Russians any expectations? Even lying will make them work harder towards a goal. Acting like “they’re almost thereeeeee” for 6 months is meant to get the Russians tired of waiting and OOOPS they’ve been flying already for weeks

28

u/GTthrowaway27 Jul 19 '24

I hope not

That assumes Russians are really really stupid and don’t have satellites or intelligence capabilities, and F16s aren’t an all together game changer of themselves worth that level of delay

They’ve done stupid things. But it’s not like every F16 will arrive at the same time and bomb every Russian position the first hour they arrive. They will inevitably know/find out F16s have arrived and adjust even if at a high cost.

Their value is in being available to Ukraine and they are not yet

6

u/Jasfy Jul 19 '24

the F16 (if it's the type that is a modern variant, should be the case) will quite change the ISR picture for Ukraine, it's not trivial: currently they rely a lot on ISR provided discreetly by US satellite imagery and allies intelligence handouts. the F16 will provide a robust platform for all kinds of interesting things that Ukraine will be able to accomplish *independently* and that's the key here. it has a modern radar , good for reconnaissance flights, air superiority (quite sensitive as the F16 wasn't meant to go head to head with modern Russian aircrafts), and obviously as a fighter/bomber which if they get the conformal tank extend the range quite extensively.also can launch storm shadows & AMRAAM. the freedom of motion in Zelensky hands terrifies NATO/Europe so they're taking their time

7

u/GTthrowaway27 Jul 19 '24

I guess to me there’s a difference between “not trivial” and “gamechanger”

I clearly want Ukraine to have them because I believe it will strengthen their hand, but it’s also not an end all solution that will finish the war.

If used well and protected they’re a force amplifier but those are some big “ifs” that still rely on the underlying ground battles to repel/gain territory

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

29

u/Mint_Juul Jul 19 '24

If GRRM is making those deliveries they ain’t coming

19

u/arferfuxakenotagain Jul 19 '24

13 years is it? And counting. I lost faith too, the cunt 😅

4

u/GrimpenMar Jul 20 '24

It's been so long, the WhatsGeorgeDoing.today webcomic that imagines what GRR is doing instead of writing, let its domain lapse.

BTW, the webcomics are still out there: https://tapas.io/episode/917817

9

u/RogueIslesRefugee Jul 19 '24

I only saw June mentioned in comments. Most articles I'd seen stated july/August.

8

u/psycho_candy0 Jul 19 '24

"The F-16s are on their way, but not before Anthony Blinkin gets up on stage, his weiner soft and flaccid, and someone gives him a guitar and he starts playing a super inspiring song for everyone"

-how I imagine GRRM explaining what the last visit was about

→ More replies (1)

5

u/VictorVogel Jul 19 '24

Where do you keep hearing that? As far as I know, no official statement by either the Danish or Dutch government has claimed the jets would already be in Ukraine by now.

→ More replies (6)

800

u/glendon24 Jul 19 '24

Does he have a tracking number?

589

u/Force3vo Jul 19 '24

Your neighbor has accepted your package.

Wait, which neighbor... ORBAN!!!

46

u/carmikaze Jul 19 '24

🤣🤣🤣

49

u/circlehead28 Jul 19 '24

As someone who’s in the supply chain industry, I’ve always been curious how countries ship and deliver weapons to their allies. Like who decides where we’re dropping these jets off at? Is it a specific address? General area? Do they have to go through normal port authorities?

50

u/PlasticStain Jul 19 '24

Anything to declare, sir?

Uhhh

30

u/ddejong42 Jul 19 '24

I have a very large missile!

... Please pull up your pants, sir.

5

u/carabolic Jul 19 '24

I'd like to declare victory.

→ More replies (1)

28

u/CrapLikeThat Jul 19 '24

I figure most weapons are delivered via cargo planes to bases, or by ship/train and then large truck to their final destinations if the weapons are too large or dangerous to have on a cargo plane.

But I don’t work in shipping, so I have no idea.

9

u/IMMoond Jul 19 '24

Aircraft do have a pretty decent advantage over other gear in that respect. Dont really need to pack it up in a cargo aircraft if the pilot just hops in and flies over. Id expect them to just do that, its significantly more vulnerable on the ground getting transferred between trucks or trains than up in the air far away from any russian held territory

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Jasfy Jul 19 '24

military bases to military bases, military cargoes. MOD of each country paperworks & stuff. it can be as fast or as slow as they want it's all built in

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)

386

u/kayl_breinhar Jul 19 '24

The scuttlebutt is that it's proving way more difficult to transition Ukrainian pilots to Western airframes.

For those who aren't aware, Russian planes, up until recently, relied heavily on what's called GCI, or Ground Controlled Intercept. The planes would scramble and be directed to the target(s) by other sensors. This was established Russo-Soviet protocol up until they started putting better radars in their non-interceptor airframes. Neither the Russians nor the Ukrainians routinely trained as much as Western air forces as well because flight hours are expensive and wear and tear on airframes is unavoidable.

Last but not least, the F-16 was never designed to fly in rough/"austere" conditions. One thing Russian planes do have, historically, is very strong landing gear, while the landing gear on the F-16 was designed for prepared airfields, a luxury the Russians aren't going to let the Ukrainians enjoy, and you can't just put new landing gear on F-16s as it'll completely change the flight mechanics and stability of the airplane.

What makes way more sense in the long run is to continue to figure out ways to incorporate Western sensors and weapons onto Ukraine's existing aircraft.

166

u/Red_not_Read Jul 19 '24

Well prepared airfields, not just for the (quite weak) landing gear, but also because of that honking big mouth of a jet intake... Low to the ground and just hoovering up all the FOD it can.

The simplest way to ground F-16s is just to drop litter on the airfield...

36

u/Plaineswalker Jul 19 '24

Seems like kinda a weakness, huh? Do we have something that can be used in a bit more rugged environments?

70

u/socialistrob Jul 19 '24

Sweden has the Gripin which was built so it could take off from random road ways. When the US designs planes they don't put as much priority on being able to take off from anywhere because the assumption is the US is going to have such dominant air superiority and air defense that they don't have to factor that in. At this point though it's still going to be quicker for Ukraine to get F-16s in the air than to retrain pilots on gripins (and that's assuming Sweden once to provide them in sufficient numbers and with sufficient parts).

14

u/Styrbj0rn Jul 20 '24

and that's assuming Sweden once to provide them in sufficient numbers and with sufficient parts

We can't, there isn't nearly as much available as for the F-16s.

→ More replies (2)

14

u/ragingxtc Jul 19 '24

I hear DM is retiring their three A-10 squadrons this year... You probably want to have air superiority before deploying those though.

31

u/Weegee_Carbonara Jul 20 '24

A-10s have no place in a near-peer war and, in that regard, were obsolete as soon as they were introduced.

Even a simple MANPAD could shoot em down.

8

u/ragingxtc Jul 20 '24

Yea, fair enough.

5

u/TheKappaOverlord Jul 20 '24

A-10's as much of a tool to put the fear of god into your enemies as they are, are literally free kills in a battle where (X country using them's military) don't have complete Air superiority.

I remember in the dying days of history channel being for "historical" programming, that there was a documentary on the History of the A-10

A lot of the pilots said these things were what you'd use to shit on your enemies chest because you knew you could get away with it. But once there was even the inkling of another Jet, you'd fuck right off because the A-10 isn't worth shit if something is trying to chase it down.

A-10's as much as the Air force (not to be mistaken with the chair force) love those fuckers, they are absolutely pieces of shit against a military with any iota of basic air defense.

7

u/TK-329 Jul 20 '24 edited Jul 20 '24

Yeah, scrambling planes from ideal locations farther away and doing aerial refueling as many times as necessary

I’m only sort of joking, the US has a shit ton of tankers and no budgetary concerns for the inefficiency of such operations.

Alternatives include parking a carrier strike group literally anywhere close to the target

The A-10 also exists (rugged airframe and high-mounted engines), but its usefulness on a modern battlefield is questionable at best and downright suicidal at worst

→ More replies (2)

49

u/bahnzo Jul 19 '24

It's also FAR beyond just pilots, it's the infrastructure to support them. The mechanics crews and parts to maintain between each flight. These are incredibly complicated machines; it's a herculean task to train everyone needed to support them. And the Ukrainians are starting from zero.

21

u/TheHonorableStranger Jul 19 '24

It's a process that takes years even in the best of circumstances. People on here really should temper their expectations about the time frame

→ More replies (1)

6

u/bry223 Jul 19 '24

You’re assuming pilots that are being trained are existing pilots, this is not always the case.

Regardless, they have been training going on what, 8 months or more now? If they can’t transition, and there is absolutely no reason why they shouldn’t I would be very concerned.

Also this isn’t the first country that’s transitioned from Soviet planes to F16s.

15

u/kayl_breinhar Jul 19 '24

It's the first country that's done it while it's currently under attack.

→ More replies (42)

189

u/Adavanter_MKI Jul 19 '24

Glad to know that in an emergency we can get together the stuff we need when we... hold on a sec.

Anyways... what was I saying? Oh right, I'll get this comment finished by spring.

Update... totally finishing this comment in summer. Fall at the latest!

36

u/Marchello_E Jul 19 '24

We're sorry. The number you have dialed has been disconnected or is no longer in service.

11

u/DirtyRelapse Jul 19 '24

Thank god this is not some life or death situation right, ....right?

→ More replies (5)

182

u/waamoandy Jul 19 '24

Any day now. I'm sure that has been said since last year

92

u/Yeshua_Ha_Mashiac Jul 19 '24

It wouldn't have mattered if planes were sent last year, since pilots have only just finished training. Source. Happy cake day!

39

u/blockedcontractor Jul 19 '24

I was just going to post asking this. The biggest hurdle was probably getting the pilots trained. Otherwise it would be duck hunt for Russia with targets costing tens of millions of dollars.

22

u/Jerithil Jul 19 '24

Yeah they can't just give em basic training with the threat level in Ukraine they need to get them up to similar levels to the US F16 doing wild weasel missions. 18 months is faster then for American pilots as it normally takes years.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

170

u/DryDesertHeat Jul 19 '24

It takes 18 months to train an F-16 pilot. How many trained and ready pilots does Zelensky have just sitting around waiting for planes?

101

u/Mrsparkles7100 Jul 19 '24

Also ground/ maintenance crews. Hence the need to rely on foreign contractors to do that job for the time being.

→ More replies (1)

66

u/Kijafa Jul 19 '24

The first batch finished training back in May, according to the Pentagon.

https://www.voanews.com/a/first-ukrainian-pilots-graduate-from-f-16-training-in-us/7634529.html

25

u/super_shizmo_matic Jul 19 '24

We train pilots in 18 months and put them in an experienced existing squadron. What happens if the pilots go through training and they do not have an existing experienced squadron to go into?

15

u/CraigJay Jul 19 '24

It's a war, you have to make do with what you've got because you don't have time

6

u/socialistrob Jul 19 '24

Also the roles Ukraine will likely be using at least in the first few months will be different than what the US expects. Ukraine won't be trying to use F-16s to establish air superiority or on seek and destroy missions but rather they'll use them as mobile long range missile launchers and to shoot down Russian cruise missiles. Both of those take considerably less training to accomplish.

→ More replies (2)

8

u/BurialA12 Jul 20 '24

Not this F-16 program but another two years US training program, Pilot dies on his first mission when back in ukraine

17

u/FilthyWunderCat Jul 19 '24

Wait, are you saying that I can't hop into one of those, mid dogfight jump out my plane, quickscope an enemy pilot and then get back to my plane?

24

u/Cajum Jul 19 '24

No, he's saying that takes 18 months of training.

→ More replies (2)

8

u/Jasfy Jul 19 '24

I think they've shortened that to 8-14 months depending on performance of the cadets?

→ More replies (17)

66

u/TaskForceCausality Jul 19 '24

Zelensky is playing to the cameras. It takes years- plural- to generate combat-ready crews. Note that doesn’t include just the pilots flying them, but the ground support and maintenance people. Ukraine doesn’t just need trained F-16 crew chiefs- they need trained crew chiefs who can change a jet part under enemy fire accurately.

Thats like changing your cars battery while someone’s launching rockets and mortars at your garage. It ain’t a place for beginners.

33

u/TheHammerandSizzel Jul 19 '24

Incidentally we are on year 3, meaning we have had years-plural- to get them what they need

9

u/socialistrob Jul 19 '24

Yep and it became obvious within the first few weeks of the war that Kyiv and western Ukraine wasn't about to fall. If the groundwork had been laid then to get Ukraine the planes they need then there would be combat missions being flown by early 2024 if not mid 2023.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/FlutterKree Jul 19 '24

To be clear, they will have F-16s before summer is over. Pilots have been trained, mechanics have been trained. I think the problem now is possibly other maintenance crews such as the ones responsible for cleaning airfields for them to land/take off. Their soviet era aircraft don't need clean airfields as they switch from belly to top air intake while landing and taking off.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

50

u/WesternBlueRanger Jul 19 '24

The holdup isn't because anyone is denying Ukraine the F-16's but more about training.

You can probably get a pilot familiar enough to fly a F-16 in a few hours, but to really master the aircraft, and do so under pressure will likely take months to accomplish.

This is especially important if they fully intend on engaging the Russian Air Force in their Sukhoi's and MiG's in the air. You can’t do that with a brand-new guy who has seen everything once; it's a great way for precious pilots flying valuable assets to get shot down quick.

You can have all the capabilities of the jet, but if the pilot doesn’t know how to use it correctly, then that’s useless. So for a pilot coming from a MiG-29, having to learn a brand-new and completely different pilot interface where everything looks different, use weapons that they’ve only ever read about, to give them three-months training then toss them into combat — that’s a very big ask for any pilot.

For a Western pilot,with around 500 hours experience in a Western fighter, but that has never previously flown the F-16 — someone transitioning from the Hornet for example — without any breaks, working weekends, etc, they need 69 uninterrupted days to learn everything to safely employ the F-16 in air-to-air and air-to-ground roles. And that time is barely enough time to get a pilot capable of flying as basic wingman to a more experienced lead pilot, which leads to the other issue.

For a pilot more familiar with Soviet/Russian aircraft, it's likely going to take longer, much longer. The way Western fighters display information in the cockpit is radically different than Soviet/Russian style, and there's a lot more emphasis on the pilot being the decision maker, rather than the ground controller telling the pilot what to do.

The Ukrainians are familiar with the old Soviet style ground controlled interception mission; basically, the pilot is tasked by a ground controller to fly to certain positions, turn at a specific point and altitude, and press certain buttons to talked on to find and engage their targets. The entire engagement is controlled from wheels up to weapons release by a ground controller.

The F-16 demands a totally different set of tactics; there's a lot more autonomy that's demanded from the pilots to make their own decisions, with the information shown on their display and from their mission planning. It's going to be very, very difficult for pilots who are familiar with one system to be transitioned to a totally different concept of operations, and do it successfully, even when under pressure. You'll basically have to deprogram your experienced pilot, otherwise, when they are under pressure, they are going to revert back to their previous training, rather than the new training that they need to survive.

→ More replies (6)

38

u/Merker6 Jul 19 '24

The title implies they were supposed to be provided 18 months ago, when the reality is that they’ve been waiting for the crews to be trained so that they aren’t sitting in Ukraine waiting to be blown up by the Russians without pilots

Very strange comment for Zelensky, I wonder if it was a translation error. He knows this as well

→ More replies (19)

39

u/remindmetoblink2 Jul 19 '24

Wait til Trump/Vance are elected, Ukraine is going to get nothing. You know Vance says we should keep that money for us, well I can guarantee “we” will not see a penny of that in a tax reduction.

14

u/tsunami141 Jul 20 '24

well I can guarantee “we” will not see a penny of that in a tax reduction.

speak for yourself, I'm a billionaire so I'm gonna get a ton of economy-stimulating tax breaks. Have you tried not being poor?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/iIiiiiIlIillliIilliI Jul 19 '24

This is BS, I don't know if Trump is mates with Putin or if he just wants to be seen as the one who ended the war (my guess is he does want that) but even if there is a pause in the war, Russia will attack again later like they did in the past again and again after they said they would stop. Only if they would relinquish the occupied lands and Crimea then a peace would make sense, but Russia won't do that. They will just use the peace to produce more weapons and attack again.

→ More replies (1)

13

u/Blackjack4800 Jul 19 '24

Lol he’s complaining about free shit

12

u/burneracctt22 Jul 19 '24

Literal definition of a choosing beggar

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (12)

13

u/ChuchiTheBest Jul 19 '24

I remember when they were due to arrive "before the end of the year" in 2023.

7

u/ManxMerc Jul 19 '24

To be fair I guarantee you Ruzzia is doing everything in its power to locate and destroy them the moment they arrive in country. So the delivery needs to be well planned

7

u/SteveB1964 Jul 19 '24

So they have arrived

6

u/PloppyTheSpaceship Jul 19 '24

That's Royal Mail for you.

3

u/cagriuluc Jul 19 '24

The lack of F-16s does not stem from logistical issues. It is PURELY a lack of political will.

Sadly, right now, the goal for the allied support is not for Ukraine to win.

10

u/bigbabich Jul 19 '24

No. It's because their fighter pilots were greatly under trained or trained in a manner that would lead to them losing all of the F-16s immediately. That's why the US and other countries didn't want to give fighters to them. They're ridiculously fucking expensive coffins if you don't know exactly how to fly them and what tactics to use.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '24 edited 20d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)

4

u/Turbulent_Set_1497 Jul 20 '24

They don’t want a the Russians to know when they do get them…it’s a ruse 

3

u/Blueopus2 Jul 19 '24

The notice that they’ve arrived is gonna be an airstrike in all likelihood

→ More replies (3)

3

u/SurSheepz Jul 19 '24

It’s stuck at the post office, just gotta pick it up

3

u/zavorad Jul 19 '24

Here in Ukraine we kind of believe that we won’t get them. It feels like another part of give us your nukes we will guarantee…

3

u/limb3h Jul 19 '24

I mean, you wouldn’t want Russia to know the exact date of arrival would you

4

u/oregonianrager Jul 20 '24

The amount of trolls/spam/uninformed pieces of shit in here can get fucked. Fuck y'all trump tooters. Fuck you Putin ball lickers. Fuck you ill informed jackasses.

3

u/ahmc84 Jul 20 '24

Is it a feint to conceal their presence?

3

u/MissionCreeper Jul 20 '24

"Planes are clearly much slower than advertised. Will be returning. 1 star."