Jump to content

Bevo

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    12807
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bevo

  1. How F-16s could change the war in Ukraine Peter Brookes Reading time: 10 min April 11, 2024 While F-16 fighter jets are unlikely to deliver Ukrainian air superiority against Russian invaders, the aircraft will provide a powerful advantage to Kyiv’s forces. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen sit in the cockpit of an F-16 fighter jet during their visit to the Fighter Wing Skrydstrup air base of the Royal Danish Air Force in Vojens, Denmark, on Aug. 21, 2023. © Getty Images In a nutshell After two years of contested control of the skies, Russia may have gained limited air superiority F-16s are no cure-all for Ukraine’s defense challenges, but will create a new threat vector for Russia The fighter jets will increase Kyiv’s defense capabilities; the sooner they are delivered, the better With the war in Ukraine now in its third year, the pitched battle this past winter between Russian and Ukrainian forces for the town of Avdiivka now appears notable for at least two reasons. The first is that Ukraine’s loss of the town marks the latest in a series of high-profile military setbacks, including its counteroffensive; the second is that it appears that for the first time in the war, Russia has, at least for the moment, gained a degree of local air superiority. This report will focus on the role command of the skies may play in the Ukraine conflict, especially with deliveries of Western F-16 Fighting Falcon jets expected to start in limited numbers this year. What is air superiority? In Western military doctrine, modern warfare has long consisted of three key domains: the ground, the sea (surface and subsurface) and the air. Now, cyber and space are also – rightly – included in that list. While these domains are distinct, they are also deeply interconnected. This is the idea behind the concept of joint military operations and joint warfare: Success in the battlespace is best achieved through command of all, or as many as possible, of these domains. Air superiority is, in its simplest sense, control of the skies, including the capability to address airborne threats such as aircraft, unmanned combat aerial-vehicles (UCAVs) and mobile and fixed air defenses. Support in this domain is what Kyiv has been seeking from its Western allies since the onset of the war. According to the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff: The degree of [air] control can range from no control, to a parity (or neutral) situation wherein neither adversary can claim any level of control over the other, to local air superiority in a specific area, to air supremacy over the entire operational area. Control may vary over time. As a fundamental element of modern warfare, air superiority has the potential to provide critical advantages in the battlespace for those forces that are able to contest for it and achieve it. Does air superiority matter? In Ukraine? One may reasonably expect that the response to both of those questions is a resounding “Yes.” But, in fact, the answer is more nuanced. While there are seemingly a number of significant military advantages to air superiority if it can be achieved, in reality, the strategic value of air superiority – which is costly to provide and complex to maintain – largely depends on the context and goals of the conflict. When air superiority is a given, for example if the opponent does not have any air assets or air defenses, the situation is positive for the side with air supremacy. But even then, it may not be a determinant of the conflict’s outcome. Take the example of the U.S. and coalition allies in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In both conflicts, the coalition forces had clear air superiority over their opponents, yet while that enviable state of play was important, it arguably did not prove decisive in the end due to the nature of the warfare. The reason is that those two wars were fought against terrorist networks and violent extremist insurgencies, which can operate differently than conventional forces. Insurgents often use hit-and-run and terrorist tactics conducted by small, paramilitary units or terror cells, especially in urban environments or other favorable terrains. This situation makes air power a challenging tool to use efficiently and effectively if the employing force is concerned about issues such as collateral damage, particularly civilian casualties. On the other hand, consider World War II, which was primarily a conventional war between large militaries, with a plethora of air targets on the battlefield, from storage and supply depots to mechanized units – which is in some ways similar to the disposition of Russian forces occupying Ukraine today. Military-industrial targets far behind enemy lines also offered objectives of a strategic nature. The allies’ eventual destruction of enemy military targets from above – while providing air cover to advancing allied ground and naval forces – was a critical factor in the conflict’s outcome. The allies’ ground and maritime military campaigns became less costly, more efficient, more effective – and arguably more decisive – because of their air superiority. The same could be argued for the Ukraine war, in which traditional army units and related infrastructure are found across the theater of operations. The achievement of air superiority could be decisive for either side in achieving their long-term political and military objectives. Allies providing Ukraine with the Patriot and similar air defense systems have already significantly slowedthe Russian campaign – instead of taking Kyiv in three days as Russia seemed to have planned, Moscow’s invasion is now in its third costly year. Additionally, Ukrainians have been using their own drones as well as those made by others, including Turkish defense company Baykar, to strike Russian forces. Read more on air defense systems Drones and asymmetric warfare in Ukraine and Israel The quest for military superiority in Ukraine Ukrainian air power, even such as it is currently, has played an important role in blunting Russian aggression thus far. Nevertheless, recent setbacks on the ground for Kyiv and a military resurgence by Moscow in the aftermath of the Russian presidential elections highlight the need for additional Ukrainian air power. Current debates on the provision of new armaments for Ukraine center not only on procuring basic defense needs such as artillery shells, but on whether to provide longer-range offensive missiles and to what degree fighter jets should be incorporated into Ukraine’s military capabilities and strategy. To date, Denmark, along with the Netherlands, Norway and Belgium – NATO countries that worked with the U.S. to jointly manufacture F-16s – have pledged the aircraft to Ukraine. Additional NATO allies are providing training to Ukraine’s pilots and ground crews. Scenarios Despite initial expectations that Russia would dominate the air battle against Ukraine, the skies over the battlefield have been best described as “contested,” with neither Moscow nor Kyiv dominating extensively or exclusively. While Ukraine’s air force was smaller and less capable in comparison to the Russian air force at the beginning of the war, the provision to Kyiv of air defenses such as Soviet-era and NATO surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems and man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) was able to keep the control of the skies over Ukraine in dispute. So, will the delivery of some 60 F-16 Fighting Falcon (aka Viper) jets – possibly beginning as early as this summer – have an effect on the air battle and, potentially, the course of the war in Ukraine? Less likely: F-16s will make no difference It is possible that the transfer of NATO F-16s will make no major difference in the air battle over Ukraine and, ultimately, in the war. Despite intensive flight training in NATO countries, Ukrainian pilots are relatively new to this airframe and, despite their patriotic zeal, their lack of flight hours and combat experience in the fourth-generation (non-stealth) F-16s could be costly. Russian fighter jets such as the fourth-generation Su-27, Su-30 and MiG-29 are a match for the NATO F-16; Russian Su-34 and Su-35 aircraft, as fourth-generation-plus fighters, are generally considered superior to the F-16. The Russian Su-57 is considered a fifth-generation fighter and has stealth features. The airmanship and dogfighting capability of Russian pilots may also be a match for Ukrainian pilots, resulting in significant losses in terms of F-16 aircraft and, equally importantly, F-16 trained pilots. (Most Russian air losses to date have been to Ukrainian air defense systems.) Perhaps more challenging for Kyiv, Moscow also has very capable land-based air defenses including the S-300/-350 and S-400 SAM systems that threaten Ukrainian aircraft flying within its extended range. Importantly, the S-400 is considered one of the world’s most capable SAM systems. In addition to strategic SAM systems, Russia also has mobile air defenses and MANPADS; A-50 airborne warning and control aircraft provide air situational awareness to friendly Russian forces. Keeping Ukrainian F-16s airborne may be a challenge as well. Ukrainian airfields will be prime targets for Russian strikes from ballistic and cruise missiles, bombs and one-way attack drones, challenging aircraft sortie rates. Moscow has also threatened to strike allied NATO airfields outside Ukraine that host F-16s bound for Kyiv. Ukrainian maintenance technicians are being trained on the new aircraft, but the F-16s are likely more sophisticated than the systems they are used to working on. Foreign, private contractors may supplement the technicians, but the availability of spare parts will also be critical to keeping planes in the air. As a result of these challenges, informed analysts and policymakers reasonably argue that NATO’s time, money and effort would be better spent on other advanced weapons systems (ATACMS and UCAVs) and ammunition (artillery and air defense missiles) rather than F-16 fighter jets. More likely: F-16s will make some difference The arrival of NATO F-16s will clearly bring a new political and military dimension to the war. The skies over Ukraine could become increasingly contested, stretching Russian military resources and complicating Moscow’s operational strategy. While the F-16 is not a panacea for all that ails Ukraine’s armed forces and its campaign, for instance personnel shortages, the fighter jets will significantly increase Kyiv’s potential offensive and defensive air capabilities, creating a new threat vector against Russia at a critical point in the conflict. The F-16s offer the possibility of close air support to friendly ground forces, the suppression of enemy air defenses and an enhancement to the capabilities of the country’s missile and air defenses. The initial success or failure of the F-16 in these missions will likely be predicated on the weapons (such as air-air and air-ground) and the avionic capabilities of the newly arriving jet fighters, as well as on the skills of the pilots themselves. Moreover, high-risk F-16 raids into Russian-held territory in Ukraine against military or highly symbolic targets could draw Moscow’s ire but also could put political pressure on the Kremlin and further weaken the Russian public’s support of the war. In the ongoing management of escalation risks with Russia (conventional weapons to weapons of mass destruction), U.S. officials have said that Kyiv’s use of F-16s must only be in Ukrainian airspace and not in Russian sovereign territory. Of course, that policy may change over time, depending on circumstances. The expected arrival of these aircraft from the West this year will also likely counter perceptions of sagging morale in Kyiv, in the Ukrainian armed forces and among the country’s people fighting for self-determination and their very existence. It will also provide a clear statement to Russia of NATO’s continuing support of Ukraine, undermining Moscow’s current message that the West is abandoning Kyiv. Despite not being a cutting-edge military aircraft in comparison to fourth-generation-plus and fifth-generation aircraft, the multi-role F-16 is nevertheless widely considered to be the “Swiss Army knife” of modern jet fighters. If employed innovatively and jointly with other Ukrainian service elements, the jets could be a force multiplier for Kyiv. While new Ukrainian F-16 air assets are unlikely to be decisive in achieving air superiority in the current war or in ultimately deciding the outcome of the war, these aircraft will increase the versatility, firepower and responsiveness of the Ukrainian forces at a critical time in the conflict, potentially helping to thwart and reverse Russian political-military objectives in Ukraine. For industry-specific scenarios and bespoke geopolitical intelligence, contact us and we will provide you with more information about our advisory services.
  2. I like his film a lot. He is big (6'5" 230lbs) and very athletic (Plays LB and there is a decent amount of film of him in coverage). He will have to learn to play Edge but the physical traits are there.
  3. That seems like about the nicest thing I've seen posted about an aggie female.
  4. Last night as I was going to bed, I was thinking about the chart that @956 Worldwide provided regarding percent of GDP and how poorly the US is doing with regard to Ukraine (I think he said something like .002% of GDP) - I know lame bedtime thoughts, right? I think what spurred the thought was seeing that we give $300M to Iran in foreign aid and real quick it was easy to see that it was a dollar per person. The more important stat is dollars per tax paying family. Can we do that for the Netherlands? Like take the 17.7M. How many households is that? And then what percent of households pay taxes? Then divide that number. I bet $248 per person ends up something like $700 per tax paying household. That is a lot of money even if it is only 1% of their GDP.
  5. Milla's first outfit was pretty good - a little too flat chested, but still would 100X.
  6. Long-term I disagree. Iran will see this as a sign of weakness and continue using Huthi rebels and Hezbollah and will continue its hijacking of vessels and such. And my fear as it has always been is nuclear weapons in the hands of this theocracy. Short-term, you are absolutely correct that Israel not doing anything will keep this war from escalating. Then you just have to deal with a vessel shot at or hijacked here and there and missiles launched weekly from proxies at Israel population centers. At least until it has nuclear weapons. Then we really are at WWIII with Saudi Arabia and Israel on one side and Iran and Russia on the other.
  7. I get it - and quite possibly aren't as far apart as you may think - By deterrence I mean we aren't going to sanction Iran and we aren't going to do any joint operations with Israel. We also stated publicly that Israel is on their own with any offensive which indicates to Iran that our position is equivocal. Iran has only understood force so maneuvers away from that actually emboldens Iran rather than deters. And while our goal is de-escalation, I think our statements and position work against that goal.
  8. Maybe respond to an article vs. responding to me. I feel my words may have been presented stronger than what others are saying. And don't worry about me - I don't need to respond to what you have to say so it shouldn't have to be too CR. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68813496 US tells Israel it won't join any retaliatory strikes on Iran 17 hours ago By Bernd Debusmann Jr,BBC News, White House Reuters Israeli and US aircraft and air defence systems shot down 99% of the drones launched by Iran. The White House has warned Israel that the US will not participate in any retaliatory strikes on Iran, senior administration officials have said. Over 300 drones and missiles were fired at Israel overnight, which Iran said was in response to an 1 April strike on its consulate in Syria. Almost all weapons were shot down by Israeli, US and allied forces before they reached their targets. Officials said Joe Biden urged Israel to consider its response "carefully". Speaking to reporters on Sunday, a senior administration official said that Mr Biden told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to "think very carefully and strategically" about how his forces replied to the unprecedented action, the first direct attack by Iran on the country. The official added that the Biden administration believes Israel "got the best of it" in the exchange, which began when senior Iranian military commanders were killed at an Iranian consular building in Syria. About 99% of the missiles, drones and cruise missiles launched during Iran's retaliatory operation were shot down or intercepted - which US officials point to as a sign of Israeli military superiority over Iran. US aircraft and naval vessels shot down dozens of Iranian projectiles as the attack took place. More than 80 drones and at least six ballistic missiles were downed by US aircraft and vessels or by air defence forces over Iraq. This includes seven drones and a ballistic missile as they prepared to launch from Yemen, US Central Command (Centcom) added in an update on Sunday. A conversation took place between Mr Biden and Mr Netanyahu at a time "of heightened emotion" just after the attack, which included about 100 ballistic missiles simultaneously flying towards Israel. During the call, the two leaders had a discussion "about how to slow things down and think through things", with Mr Biden emphasising that Israel has "gotten the best of it". The official declined to say, however, whether the White House warned against a significant response, saying only that "it is a calculation the Israelis have to make". In a string of television appearances on US networks earlier in the day, national security spokesman John Kirby repeatedly said that the US had made it clear to Israel that it seeks to avoid a wider conflict. The senior administration said that the same message has been sent to Iran through diplomatic channels. As Israel debates Iran attack response, can US and allies stop slide into all-out war? What was in wave of Iranian attacks and how were they thwarted? All eyes on Israel's response to Iran drone and missile attacks Both Mr Kirby and the official said that the US would continue to defend Israel, but has ruled out participating in any Israeli response. The stance is one that has sparked criticism from some US lawmakers and former officials from both sides of the political spectrum. Ohio Republican Representative Mike Turner, who serves as chair of the House intelligence committee, said that Mr Kirby's comments about de-escalating the conflict were "wrong". "It is already escalating, and the administration needs to respond," he said on NBC. And John Bolton, who served as national security adviser under President Donald Trump, said the US should join Israel if its chose to launch a retaliatory attack on Iran's nuclear programme. "I think it [Israel] can destroy or disable a very substantial part [of the programme], if not totally," he told NewsNation. "Frankly, if Israel is prepared to go after Iran's nuclear programme, the United States should proudly join them." In the wake of Iran's attack on Israel, Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, said that the body would "try again" to pass military aid for Israel. Previous attempts to send more aid to Israel have stalled amid Democratic calls that the aid package should also include assistance for Taiwan and Ukraine. Mick Mulroy, a former Deputy Secretary of Defence for the Middle East, told the BBC that aid for Israel should be passed "without delay". "If it wasn't for US security assistance, we could be facing a major regional war," he said. "That supplement and the ones for Ukraine and Taiwan are in our national security interest. It is not charity. It's part of the US national defence."
  9. We've been pretty terrible on ME issues since pretty much forever. As for disproportional responses - they have worked in the past as a deterrence in the ME. And personally, I would love for Iran's nuclear program to be destroyed. But, the US currently has no interest in deterring Iran. And with the US' tepid backing of Israel, Israel would probably be unwise to go after major targets such as nuclear, drone manufacturing and military targets. So, it may be limited to targeted hits against individuals. OTOH, if Israel uses patience and waits until after it exits Gaza and until there is a more favorable environment in Washington, it may be able to actually work in conjunction with the US to deter Iran.
  10. Thanks. Question because - Isn't he in the 270 range going into his senior year?
  11. You don't send 100s of ballistic missiles and hundreds of drones into a foreign country's civilian population without intent to damage and kill. If that happened to the US, we would not be listening to other countries about using restraint. Israel warned us what was likely to happen in Iraq at pretty much every step along the way. Yet, we think we know what Israel should and shouldn't do. It is pretty funny if you think about it. Luckily, Israel is much smarter than us about ME affairs. I have a feeling that they will act much more deliberately than us. But, I also hear that a response is necessary as to stop precedence.
  12. I think it depends on what we think of Trey Owens and Lacey vs. Russell. If Owens isn't good enough to start, we are going to have to rely on Lacey or Russell or try getting someone in the portal. We need a solid starter every 2 years at QB or it won't matter who is at receiver.
  13. Wasn't Indiana State's second best player Ryan Conwell?
  14. Probably shouldn't do the project right now and maybe do the project piecemeal or just save up in the meantime. Rates are terrible and ROI on backyard projects are terrible.
  15. Those guys are good plus they don't really need a coach.
  16. I think the 3rd ISU guy will be a PF at Texas. Wolf posted a “not to be contacted” notation on his portal entry, which usually indicates that a college destination has already been chosen.
  17. I guess we will have PFs but will we have a center who is any good?
×
×
  • Create New...