British F-35B jets have joined British Typhoon jets in an effort to reinforce NATO air policing efforts in Eastern Europe.
RAF fighter aircraft are patrolling NATO airspace over Poland and Romania currently.
The Royal Air Force say here that the Lightnings from RAF Marham joined the Typhoon jets taking part in pre-planned Enhanced Vigilance Activity, “a NATO led Operation initiated due to the unfolding events in Ukraine. This activity provides air policing of NATO airspace ensuring a robust response to the Russian aggression seen in Ukraine and further contributing to the security of Europe”.
The RAF say they are currently contributing Typhoon aircraft, flying from both RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire and RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus as well as F-35 Lightnings from RAF Marham on the NATO Mission.
The Station Commander of RAF Marham was quoted as saying:
“The F-35 is an incredibly capable and versatile aircraft. Operating alongside the Typhoons to maintain the integrity of the European airspace and contribute to the NATO Mission, the 5th Generation Fighter is a world beating fighter aircraft which can simultaneously provide Information Warfare, Intelligence gathering and Air-to-Air missions.”
You can read more here.
This may be an ominous development. The Lightning F-35B is a bomber/strike aircraft and as far as I can recall, 207 Squadron at RAF Marham only has 8. Apart from the blobspeak “pre-planned Enhanced Vigilance Activity” what are they likely to be used for?
Don’t read too much into it. Firstly it’s a statement of intent, aimed at reassuring allies as much as Russia. Secondly its a perfect opportunity for a real world exercise in deploying these new jets, best time to learn on the job is while there’s no shooting going on.
NATO for the first time activated their Response Force last week, this is the standing force each country maintains as a pooled NATO rapid response.
HI Watcherzero,
I read somewhere that this force currently stands at 22,000 declared. This does not sound like many, but these are troops the Generals have direct control over, within rules of engagement obviously.
It represents a significant delegation of authority to the military command, not something politicians do lightly…
Cheers CR
No NATO rapid reaction for is 40,000 strong. 22,000 stand at rapid deployment readiness able to move in 12hrs-48hrs. The remaining 18,000 with 3-7 days.
If a NATO country is attacked you would surely want a stealthy attack aircraft especially in the early stages to take out incoming armour and especially take out mobile missile batteries before you start sending Typhoons into danger, they would be primarily tasked with Air cover early on anyway. I would assume this would be standard tactics determining the breakdown and task of the two types.
Exactly.
I don’t see 8 x 5th gen with NATO backup as a small force at all.
8 F35B and 16 Typhoons, with backup, would tip the balance in the Ukrainian air war.
How many AA batteries, tanks and other bits do you need to shred before Vlad’s generals got the message?
Yes even 8 fifth generation aircraft backed up by a good number of top end 4+ generation aircraft would carve a huge hole in a 4 generation only airforce. The sensor fusion and ability of the 5 generation aircraft to see and communicate the situation and manage The 4+ generation aircraft offensive capability while leaving them safe is huge.
Exactly that
How many Ukrainian troops, civilians, towns, cities & villages have to die, get wounded, terrified, traumatised, ruined before we step in? How many lies & threats from Putin before we call his bluff?
Do you have some desire to start World War III and risk billions of deaths? Ukraine war broke out in first place because Ukraine called what they thought was Russia’s “bluff”. Best not to do so again, yeah?
Wasn’t a bluff. Putin had been planning for this since 2014. If you track the build-up of Russian bases around Ukraine in Russia over the years you can see the massive build-up that only had one purpose of invading Ukraine. For NATO to be directly involved it would dramatically raise the chances of going very hot very quickly. If you have been tracking Russian stategic posture they have embraced doctrine of going nuclear very early as a way to descalate a conventional threat i.e. first strike. Putin knows his conventional forces are a hollow force and will rely on his nuclear assets very early in a confrontation with NATO. There is a reason he constantly telegraphs all his “wonder” weapons be they hypersonics or nuclear torpedos.
And herein lies the problem, Putin has to rely on nukes, against which only a very effective ballistic missile defence system will do….
+1
Dp are you by any chance typing away with lies in the basement of the Kremlin? How and why do you think Ukraine called Putin’s bluff?
Russia not Ukraine is the aggressor here.
Ukraine took zero offensive military action against your mother Russia. Its a pity Russia cant let its neighbours live in prosperity and peace.
Glory to Ukraine.
Nothing you have identified will trigger us stepping in to the Ukraine conflict. The Ukrainians need to do it themselves. I suspect that provided they get a steady supply of weapons & supplies from around the world this is possible. Putin is getting frustrated and dangerous and lots more innocent people are going to die but NATO forces are for NATO countries.
I wonder what would happen if Ukraine’s airforce was based in Poland? So flew from Poland over their airspace.
Russia couldnt touch them without declaring war on NATO and the Ukrainian would be free to build up, train and resupply as needed.
Seriously think NATO should offer this as the most we can do short of a no fly zone.
That might be pushing our luck unnecessarily. Need to base the aircraft in the Ukraine but it could be in the West near a NATO border where they could be resupplied by road or by air.Would that keep us the right side of the line?
Easy statement to hide behind…as plenty of people have done.In the meantime we all hyprocritaly stand by and watch Putin destroy a democratic country then another then another and NATO tell Finland and Sweden they can’t join in case it upsets Putin.
Appeasement has always , and will always, have consequences.
I think that Ukraine will win with a little help and I think Putin will be gone. That might just give the whole region a whole new lease of life. We need to help but we must leave the fighting to those fighting for their freedom.
Personally, I would want them slotting RusMil COC as identified by our Rivetjoints.
And then work down the chain. Anyone steps up, you die.
Should cause a few hearts to quake
And resolution to shake.
“what are they likely to be used for?”
A very good question David Lloyd, gathering intel perhaps? it was never designed to be an air superiority fighter after all And Meteor on Typhoon will destroy anything Russia currently has available to them.
“The planned entry into service date for the SPEAR-3 medium-range stand-off missile of 2025 is likely to slip to 2026 as there are limited resources available for the integration work. To a large extent, MBDA is dependent on Lockheed Martin’s software development prioritisation for integration projects, despite the UK being the sole Tier-1 partner in the F-35 programme.
Until the F-35B can carry SPEAR-3, UK carrier strike is somewhat blunted and dependent on dropping laser-guided bombs, typically requiring aircraft to get within lethal range of surface-to-air missile systems.
In 2019 the MoD awarded a demonstration contract for an electronic warfare variant of the SPEAR-3 missile. There is no funded plan to procure SPEAR-EW, even though this is a stated requirement and a credible Suppression of Enemy Air Defences (SEAD) capability is needed if striking well-defended targets.
In the longer term, it is planned that FCASWcould be carried (externally) by F-35B, providing a long-range standoff shipping/land-attack capability but this is will not be available before the early 2030s at least.
Integration of the Meteor BVR air-air missile with F-35 is not now anticipated to be completed until 2027 and there is a possibility that integration pressures in the programme may incur further delays because of challenges in the wider F-35 programme.
The F-35 can already carry up to 6 very effective AIM-120 AMRAAM but Meteor offers considerably superior range and performance.”
“The anticipated timeline for a Block IV upgrade to the F-35 fighter jet may be impacting the Air Force’s decision to slow the procurement of the F-35A variant of the aircraft, according to a newly released report on the future fighter force by The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies.
The report says that delays in the delivery of Block IV to 2029 are potentially impacting the service’s delivery”
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/slow-show-air-force-needs-quickly-upgrade-its-fighter-jets-195665
F35 can find targets for Typhoons with Meteor without being detected. The Meteor can then be fired without the Typhoon needing to use its radar. The Meteor can use 3rd party data to guide it onto the target. The target may or may not pick up the missile radar, but at M4.5 it will have little time to react. With a 60km no escape zone there is little chance for the target.
With AMRAAM, ASRAAM, the superb APG81 AESA radar, all aspect stealth, and world leading situational awareness, amd ISTAR capability, plus digital helmet mounted display. It’s a very capable fighter.
And LGBs to take out static things?
Yes, and moving targets. And electronic attack with its own radar. Early day’s still for F35, but It’s ISTAR capabilities are more like the capabilities of the E7 packed into a stealthy fast jet. The situational awareness it can generate and share is on another level.
It is interesting that most contributors on here don’t appear to grasp the level of game changer having this stuff packed onto a number of fast jets and networked together actually makes.
As you say never, mind having EW and stealth built in.
With Radar2 Typhoon catches up on EW and general area awareness.
Then you have the local F35As around as well.
The Russian stuff may fly fast but I’m always dubious about the stated ranges as there are certain physical fundamentals you can’t change: drag being just one and weight of fuel the other! Speed on their airframes is pure brute force with a bit of Concordski thrown in.
Yes it’s not the individual capabilities of the aircraft ( which are on their own far better than any 4 generation aircraft) . It’s that one sees all see element. Allowing an offensive co-ordination that 4 generation Fighters on their own just cannot do.
Not that I want to see our forces have to fight, but there will likely be some very significant re-evaluation when a 5 generation led force meets a four generation force.
How much of Russian airforce really is even 4th gen?
Analogue radios with dated hybrid radars?
Again updates that will have been lost to corruption……
Yes you do have to wonder and the fact is pretty much every Russian weapon system ( even the most modern ) are in reality based on dusted off and reactivated Soviet programmes.
You just have to look at the SSN fleet that everyone talks about ,Yes it’s a threat that needs countering, any SSN does.But Even the Project 885 submarines now being build started life as a 45 year old Soviet programme. With Astute in reality being a twenty year newer design. So the project 885 Severodvinsk is probably closer to a trafalgar with the newer 885m are probably somewhat better that a Trafalgar and not as good as an Asute ( but they only have two of these). Everything Else is was built or started being built in the Soviet Union. It’s one of the reasons the Russians are basically moving all the SSN to more of a cruise missile boat, that can stay in safer seas. It’s unlikely they would take their boats against modern western ASW assets.
As for the helmets!
“The initiative hit another hurdle when the first helmets came in: One component didn’t last as long as expected, causing Collins to partially redesign the OLED display, company spokesperson Megan Strader said.
Collins resumed work on the improved helmets in October under a $20.7 million contract awarded to jet manufacturer Lockheed Martin. The company expects OLED will come standard on F-35 helmets starting in 2023.
“Upon successful testing of this mature OLED design, the JPO will buy production and retrofit OLED capability firstly for the USN and USMC F-35C pilots, and if required, to the wider F-35 community,” Seal said.”
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2021/12/08/f-35-helmets-that-fix-green-glow-are-on-their-way-but-not-to-the-air-force/
https://taskandpurpose.com/military-tech/air-force-f-35-helmet-fitting/
Typhoon
Worth reading in full.
“The data is compared with the database of radar signatures stored in the Electronic Support Measures suite.
Using this information the ESM allows the identification of the radar and thus the platform it is deployed from and presents it on a moving map or multifunction display producing a 360° threat picture around the aircraft including identifying targets and even their zones of lethality.
This allows the pilot to fly around these zones to avoid detection or being engaged.”
https://eurodass.com/praetorian/praetorian-today/
“The Eurofighter Typhoon has one of the world’s most advanced Electronic Warfare (EW) systems.
This allows the Typhoon to operate stealthily, evading threats and preventing engagement.”
https://eurodass.com/news/digital-stealth/
Big fan of Typhoon. I’m sure Radar 2 will be a huge step forward. But F35 has this capability today. Not in 6/7 years time. F35 has the capability and stealth to be used on night 1 of any conflict along with F22, B2, and cruise missiles. Typhoon would not.
Other than launching storm shadow from over 560km out.
Day one Typhoon stike utility that is…
Could just hit murmansk naval facilities from northern Atlantic side of Norway with that.
Paveway IV
That answers my question, Nigel. Many thanks.
This should be our next priority.
https://www.mbda-systems.com/product/marte-er/
207 Squadron is the F35B OCU,617 Squadron is the only fully operational unit at present,with the Pool of Aircraft available im sure there is more than 8.
we have currently approx. 14 Pilots ONLY. for 26 airframes, but 3 are only just delivered. 8 is squadron strength.
but no one will confirm that. as its a sore subject
Squadron strength is 12 jets and we cannot even reach that yet with the low number of pilots, given a few must be in the US. Do you have any idea as to how many typhoon pilots there are?
I think you need to do some homework before making stupid comments. The UK JLF ( Joint Lightning Force) is currently at 26 Air Frames. One being lost Nov 21 whilst taking off of HMS Queen Elizabeth. 3 Air Frames are with 17 Squadron in the USA for Test and Evaluation. Using simple maths that leaves 22 air frames available in the UK. Public records show 26 pilots were trained for the F35 in 2018.
Simple maths actually leaves 23 in the UK as 27 F35B jets have been delivered to the UK so maybe you’re the one that needs to do some homework.
How do you know only 14? Even if 617 has only 8 jets, surely that equates to 12 pilots. 207 is running training courses – I’m sure it must have at least 6 pilots. And then those with 17R and those in training. Surely we have 20-25 pilots at least?
Your number regards Pilots is out – i have read there are more Pilots than Aircraft.
At present, those Typhoons are more capable for strike than the Lightnings, frankly. F-35B in UK service is only cleared for Paveway IV, AMRAAM and ASRAAM, whereas Typhoon can carry Brimstone and Stormshadow in addition (maybe some others, but those are the main ones we use).
Think of the Lightnings as very expensive L/O CAP and spotters for the Typhoon force, or a decapitation strike at best (although Stormshadow is arguably the better choice for that too). Until Spear 3 and FC/ASW get integrated, F-35B is not the striker we need.
Bomber Strike ? Best to use an analogy to answer your statement . F-35 is a white pointer Shark and the Typhoon is an Fat American tourist with one of his floats deflated . Sorry guys but this forum has no IDEA what the F-35 really is .
I regretably see this as utterly ineffective sabre rattling, whilst thousands of european civilians are slaughtered AGAIN, just like in Bosnia etc Clearly no lessons about appeasement does not work, have been learned from WW2.
God help the Ukranians today and the Finns, Swedes and Moldovans tomorrow.
Hi bill,
Justed watched the BBC lunchtime news and John Simpson was on the Finnish Russian boarder. Two things of real interest;
1) For the first time Finns are in favour of joining NATO;
2) There is a steady trickle of Russians apparently leaving Russia because they fear what is coming in Russia!
I also read yesterday that Sweden now favours joining NATO.
Putin has really miscalculated if he wanted to divide the West.
Throw in the big increases in defence spending being declared across Europe and he appears to have united Europe in rearming to defend against him! Not the smartest move he has ever made.
OK, as ever it is patch and not really coordinated, but…
Cheers CR
Do you think Putin cares ? He seems to have lost all sense of rationality..
“Two things of real interest; 1) For the first time Finns are in favour of joining NATO; 2) There is a steady trickle of Russians apparently leaving Russia because they fear what is coming in Russia! I also read yesterday that Sweden now favours joining NATO.”
I mentioned this only the other day on here, how odd.
As I have often stated where do we draw the line if despite a treaty we don’t defend Ukraine then why would Putin think we would Moldova and once that’s gone why would he think we will defend Finland and there’s the rub. If it goes that far with no response he will go into Sweden and there we have the problem that if we don’t defend this non NATO country we effective lose the war without an inch of NATO soil being touched. Sweden falls NATOs Northern flank can not be defended.Noway goes quickly the NE Atlantic becomes a Russian lake rather than ours and part of the UK is closer to them than it is us. NATO and Europe is effectively a vulnerable rump, Britain on the front line and all of us heading towards vassal state status unless it wants to risk nuclear war the US effectively outflanked. Then we are forced to use our economies to feed back into Russia on their terms and suddenly Russia has a way of avoiding becoming a Chinese lapdog while the US sets out on a declining arc to pocket power on its own island while China/Russia create that new World Order they promised. Would the US too late to stop this in Sweden try to do so thereafter can’t see it myself. Would China want to stop it as empowering Russia too much, who knows. As I say either this is stopped at Sweden at the latest or seriously risk nuclear strikes on Russian terms thereafter and at best the loss of thousands of troops in Norway in an almost impossible strategic position. We could attack elsewhere but would we I don’t think the US has the stomach for it and I’m sure a new Trumpist President would prefer to make money from doing deals with the new Oligarchs thinking he can claim to his people they no longer have to defend Europe while selling the idea that this Dunkirk is really making America independent and great again. Hey it will be peace in our time till all their trading partners become Chinas poodles.
What nonsense! Russia are struggling to invade Ukrain never mind march Finland and Sweden.
There is that minor fact.
The Swedes and Finns may not have massive militaries but they are well educated, equipped and trained. They will also be very well motivated.
With the carp tactics and comms skills demonstrated Russia is rerunning WWII with marginally better kit. Well maybe not the radios!!
Tgat said I’d see them joining NATO after Mad Vlad’s exploits.
I don’t see Full NATO membership going ahead for both Sweden and especially Finland – which has a Long Border with Russia,this was Putin’s Red line regarding the Ukraine obviously.What i do see happening is’ Partner Nation’ status or something similar.
Hmme
Well Putin has crossed a few red lines invading a European country?
We must contain him otherwise where/who next?
Can you imagine this devastation being unleashed so close to home?
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2022/03/04/finland-and-sweden-may-take-unhurried-route-to-nato-membership/
We too have military power & a deterrent yet we allow Putin to wield his uncontested as if we had nothing. Tea & sympathy isn’t stopping the carnage.
Agree a polite reminder to Putin and his cronies that he is not the only person with nuclear weapons. Russian population need to be told that Putin is using nuclear threats against the world and the dangers are real. If he uses a single nuclear warhead NATO will retaliate with equal measure. No one wins a nuclear war. Therefore we cant be blackmailed.
Well, invading a former Soviet republic that at one point was the historical capital of greater Russia (little Moscow village came later). Some of the southern cities besieged are steeped in Russian imperial history – founded by Potemkin, Catherine the Great, etc. So maybe one can sort of see why a fanatic nationalist like Putin thinks of them as something different than, say, Sweden or Finland?
Russian invasion is brutal and unjustified, and certainly the Baltic States and Moldova are indeed in real danger as well, but using it to revive the sort of Cold War domino theory of the sort that led to Vietnam War is probably not the best option.
“We must contain him otherwise where/who next?”
My money would be on Georgia then Armenia + Azerbaijan. The Russians can then link up with the Iranians and push through Iraq into Saudi Arabia and link up with Syria.
That would completely cripple the west as they would control most of the worlds oil.
Just look at a map Russia + China + North Korea + Burma + Pakistan + Iran + Syria. That’s most of Asia and all those countries do not like the west and would love to overthrow the current world order.
Not sure i agree – Georgia was dealt with in 2008,no need for Russia to go down that path again,as for Armenia and Azerbaijan Russia has good relations with both,it is a major Arms Supplier to both,it actually has substantial Forces based in Armenia and since the September 2020 War provides Peacekeeping forces in the Nagorno-Karabakh Region and was instrumental in the Ceasefire and end of War Negotiations.
I didn’t know that about Armenia & Azerbaijan, thanks for the info.
As for Georgia from what I remember at the time. One of the main reasons Putin went into Georgia in the first place was for the tunnels through the mountains. So if it did ever kick of big time, Russia could steam roll into the Middle East from The Caucasus.
Dam with him having Armenia & Azerbaijan on side it looks like the situation is even worse than I thought. Especially as I’ve just read that Russia was supposed to start mass-producing T-14 the start of this year.
“Russia to Start Mass Producing T-14 Armata Tanks in 2022”
It’s on thedefensepost
That’s it, I’m going BM on Monday and stocking up on tinned steak. If the crap hits the fan, I can at least make a nice steak pie & mash.
The T14 cant be any good otherwise they would be demonstrating its combat prowess in Ukraine. The reasons its not been deployed to drum up export orders is because Javelin and NALW would likely knock it out.
Its all bluster. Besides i dont think with sanctions they can afford massed T14 production.
Ask Ukraine how that’s worked out for them so far. If we’d stated we’d send troops or airpower if Russia Invaded te invasion may never have happened or would’ve been stopped dead.
Western leadership is grandstanding. Lots of hot air. Probably more interested in buisness as usual than doing the urgent right thing.
If NATO membership for Ukraine was unacceptable to Putin im pretty sure pre-positioning Troops or Air Assets there would have met with the same response -whatever Ukraine did Putin had this obsession with it that could only result in War.
I don’t think anyone cares about Putin read lines any more, they are more interested in calling is bluff short of direct military support for Ukraine.
You make me laugh. Seriously after seeing how inept the Rusdian military is attacking Ukraine I can guarentee you that Finland and Sweden whilst concerned will not be losing any sleep. They have well developed and sophisticated militaries able to match Russia and defeat them until inevitable attrition kicks in. Finland and Sweden would not be fighting alone. UK, Norway, Denmark, Poland would support them.
Id be more worried about Romania and Bulgaria. They look vulnerable with inadequate poorly prepared and equipped militaries.
Which is why I wrote:-
“ The Swedes and Finns may not have massive militaries but they are well educated, equipped and trained. They will also be very well motivated.”
If the Russians tried a rerun of Ukraine in those countries they would be destroyed – not a nice image but a fair one.
Spot on.
Agreed, it seems shambolic and even if they do suppress Ukraine, at what cost men and kit? The men will be shattered and the kit worn out. The political damage, economic damage and decimated armed forces mean its unlikely he’ll be able to take on prepared opponents elsewhere. He will need hundreds of thousands of troops to hold down Ukraine and conscripts won’t cut it elsewhere. Of course he could totally lose his head and go nuclear everywhere.
Right. The best move in *cold strategic terms* is for the west to actually get a little less strident on the sanctions while continuing to supply military aid, and let Putin wreck his military in conventional war and then the cost of occupation, while at the same time Germany et al doubles or triples their defense budget.
The world’s reaction and the cost of even a limited invasion well resisted should also send a strong signal to China of the risks of trying the same at Taiwan.
Again, from a very cold, realist approach the WORSE thing we can do is push Putin into a corner and either, god help us, go nuclear or retaliate with cyberattacks, etc. or create a whole new Russia-Chinese financial axis immune to later sanctions.
Of course, this doesn’t help Ukrainians, any more than sanctions helped Afghanistan when the Soviets invaded it. Still, at least we’re doing more for the Ukrainians then for Tibet or the Uyguhurs? Oh, right, not white people, and we have more business tie in with China than with Russia.
(It would also have been good if Bush-Blair hadn’t done the idiotic Iraq War, as that sort of thing — up there with the Suez attack in the 50s – is just the moral cover that Putin needed.)
Bravo. At some point we need to ease off a tad, once the Russians have castrated themselves in Ukraine, which is underway.
To be honest Finland and Sweden are pretty easy, the U.K. and other simply depot the JEF and it becomes a NATO tripwire which would make the fact they are not NATO members a moot point, most of the JEF resources come from NATO members so if Russia attacked the force it would trigger article 5.
This is one of the interesting things that most people forget, it is sort of possible for one NATO nation to push its forces forward as a trigger point for the whole of NATO.
I am afraid Ben Wallace May have made a blooper. After the president of Ukraine and deputy president have basically begged for a no fly zone to be enforced by NATO he has come out and said that would be a disadvantage for Ukraine and it’s about that as well as NATO entanglement with Russia. I can accept NATO is not willing to go to war with Russia and a no flu zone would effectively mean that. But to try and say there is anything else behind it, especially that it could effect Ukraines ability to defend itself just sounds like excuses.
No flu zone 😀
I am a health care professional 😂😂😂
Can we have No Flue Zones at schools and workplaces?
Or was it a Harry Potter reference, to banning flue powders: I ask for my daughter?
On my keyboard the U is next to the Y.
With all this Eastern European and Russian stuff we need to go French and switch to AZERTY, so we can all find Z.
Strictly speaking he is correct. Currently Ukrainian AD, given the virtual lack of any UkAF planes in the sky, can fire at anything that moves from their hide, fire, scoot and hide AD systems. Putting NATO aircraft in the sky would add a whole new complexity to their operation and would almost certainly put them at risk of friendly fire.
No need for a no fly Zone. Reality is Russian corruption, laziness and ineptitude in basic maintenance is bringing their efforts and advances on the ground to a grinding halt. The lack of basic routine is litteraly resukting in their kit grinding to a halt …and ultimately result in significant death on the Russian side. Enjoy the read.
https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1499491477239566336?t=1P5YCWGe9VlOw5gjCrV_gA&s=07
And some more
https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1499763286392385541?t=ebXONjcm521N1oFWg-wpBA&s=07
Yes the potential flaw that might save us from my fears above. What Putin would like to do and what his army can do are not necessarily coherent. It’s mediocrity may be our greatest ally there is only so much you can do with their budget. Let’s hope even Putin gets that message though the trouble is it might make him even more likely to use tactical nukes.
And some more 2
https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1499894935209795594?t=a59FBKHXIQpCKOu99g1I3w&s=07
If that chaps explanation is true, that is hilarious.
It’s not just poor maintenance….the Russian conscripts are deliberately pulling the fuel tank plugs out so the run out of fuel and so cant fight a war they don’t want too. Most of them feel betrayed and lie to by there superiors they have no food rations and don’t want to fight. The only troops that are well supported are their special forces and paras. The rest were given a few days rations most of which were out of date.
Hi Pete,
That is a really interesting read, thanks for putting it up.
I hadn’t really appreciated how much kit was being taken by the Ukrainians, say a lot if farms can just turn up an d tow it away!!!
Nor had I considered the point made about the IFF, no wonder the RuAF is not performing as stated…
There were a a number of apparently undamaged SHORAD systems found by Ukrainian force a couple of days ago that were neatly parked off the road again with no crews around them. The Ukrainian (iiregulars I think) appear to then petrol bomb them!
The Russians are in trouble no doubt about it. Mind you they still have the ability to win, but they’ll have to do much much better than they currently are.
Cheers CR
I don’t disagree as that’s beyond my knowledge only the Ukrainian armed forces would know what would benefit them. The concern I have that the Ukrainian government is begging for a no fly zone and we then say but they don’t really need one. It means one side or another is being incoherent or incongruent.
Yaaaaawn, ha ha ha hilarious. The only thing at risk will be the l100 hrs per annum RuAF pilots flying about with minimal combat skills and capability. Keep going troll biy this is hilarious.
Ben Wallace is not a NATO spokesman
Hes right, Russians havent achieved air superiority despite expectations. The Russian artillery outranges the Ukranian so air strikes are the only way to hit the Russian convoys from a distance. The Ukranians have also been using helicopters to reposition their forces. So there are advantages to Ukraine of not implementing it. But whatever happens the problem remains that NATO cant enforce it without attacking Russian troops on the ground.
Yes, I agree.
Hi Watcher, it’s not so much the right or wrong of a no fly zone ( I don’t think we can have a no fly zone). It’s more how it’s sounds and comes across when Ukraine is coming out and begging for a no fly zone and then for the U.K. Minister of Defence to then say they don’t need a no fly zone, they are better off without one sounds odd. It was fine to just say, we cannot do it due to risk of a general war between Russia and NATO. That is a fine reason on its own.
Hi, do we know if the supply of MiG 29 aircraft from NATO countries to Ukraine has stalled?
Non starter. Was proposed by the EU and NATO vetoed it apparently.
Quite right too as the EU is not a military power NATO is.
I read their concern was it would denude those NATO nations of fast jets at the exact moment they would be needed to the higher alert status. New replacements would take a long time to arrive.
Hi Daniele, I think that is a shame, but failing that there is nothing stopping Eastern European countries from supplying parts and weapons to keep as much of the Ukrainian Air Force flying. Probably being done on a much lower profile basis.
Where do the parts come from?
So if they given them to Ukraine and call Uncle Vlad to order some more what do you think the response might be?
Lack of spare mission kills a plane as well as a missile.
Hi Supportive Bloke, I’m no expert, but aren’t there unused MiG29s in Hungary that could be raided for parts? This can’t be the only example for possible spares in Europe or further a field.
If they haven’t already been cannibalised?
Hungary is a funny country and might not want to totally burn bridges with Mad Vlad just in case.
Bear in mind most of the active ones elsewhere in Europe are kept flying by Russian maintainers! That might stop in which case the geometry changes….
I was also going to say America, as they purchased the MiG 29s from East Germany, The Slovak republic and Moldova. But so much time has passed useful parts would most likely already be harvested.
Very interesting about Russian maintainers keeping the East European fleets active. Again I might be showing my ignorance on such matters; but that seems to be a ludicrous position for those countries to be in.
I think the Ukrainians want an attrition reserve.
Yes, the maintainers thing is crazy. But at the same time so is the parts thing.
Can’t imagine those aircraft being allowed to fly against Russia the GRU plant in the maintenance team would make sure of that?
Totally bonkers the sooner all NATO members uses non ex soviet kit the better
It was the one thing that did make sense was Borrell understanding that this would cost cash.
I don’t think he understood how much it would cost or the training costs.
It is easy as UK, with a relatively huge economy, to say why can’t small country XYZ buy ABC. Then you realise that the one purchase alone would be a big % of GDP.
I heard that Eastern European AFs would use just this opportunity to start standardising on western built aircraft. Migs will be replaced by used F16s more likely
There will never be a better time for Eastern Europe to go fully F16.
Ukraine has traditionally overhauled alot of Russian built aircraft for different operating countries.
Yes, it does have the indigenous capabilities.
A lot of the high end soviet metallurgy was based in Ukraine.
Mr J Borel makes a fool of himself #3?
Guy is hopeless.
Now is not the time to be retraining crews to fight on another platform.
EU needs to stay out of things it doesn’t understand: defence being one of them.
They are NATO assets and not EU assets. Its an interesting point – NATO still trumps EU and even the EU countries recognised that. The EU is providing funds more military hardware supply to Ukraine. Are those supplies brand new or acquired, used equipment. I wonder what it will be
Im not sure its veteod. I think its on the cards. Poland has 30 mig 29s in flyable combat ready condition. USA has offered to replace the Mig29s 1:1 with F16s which the Poles are already flying and love. So win win for Poland.
Yes seen on Twitter it’s back on. But from USA to Poland and not with EU involvement.
And now reading it’s not, it’s fake news.
Your ahead of me there!
Apparently back on now.
US is in talks to supply F16’s to Poland and Poland then releases its MiGs to Ukraine.
That at least makes sense as Poland can support F16……
It’s on; but can they actually make a transfer in time to make a difference?
The idea literally crashed and burned – it seems Josep Borrell was talking out of his backside when he suggested this,plus all the Countries that possessed the suitable Aircraft were horrified about the thought of having to give them up.
Hi Paul T, I actually thought it was something that was doing. I wonder if more MiG 29 can be acquired from the world market for Ukraine? Actually while I’m typing this I’m thinking it would be close to impossible to do.
All the MiG29 owners club were Russian client states.
How many of those states voted against Russia in the UN?
So the only sources you would have are the ones that voted against and have MiGs and want to sell them which is a subset of approximately zero.
That is why the idea doesn’t fly.
I could only think of any possibly still used by the US with their Red Hats Sqn.
The US has acquired many migs by covert and overt means.
Yes, I was saying to Supportive Bloke further up the thread, US squired MiGs from the former East Germany, the Slovak republic and Moldova. But that was so long ago, those craft could be far from flyable today.
We need to give air support to Ulraine, not ground their air force. Contest Russian air cover & strike their forces inside Ukraine.
Well the Ukrainians still have the majority of their aircraft operational, which is why the Russians have mainly switched to night flying. But they are running short of weapons to arm them with and Zelensky was appealing for exactly that just a couple of days ago.
It would be great to see some of Ukrainian’s air assets destroying that column to the north of Kyiv.
I think a general war could be avoided even with a no-fly zone by limiting action to Ukraine. The understanding that NATO doesn’t attack airfield etc on Russian soil and vice versa. The question would be whether an increasingly desperate Putin would escalate to attacking the NATO airfields enforcing the no-fly zone. That would trigger Article 5.
I suspect the problem is western leaders cannot get a reading on where Putin will go. If they were dealing with a stable executive, they could plan in any response, on one knows how far Putin will go. He could quite possibly target ballistic or cruise missiles at western sites.
Putin is staying in power by copying gangster tactics. We should be wise to that. He has made a lot of enemies in Russia, destroying their careers to keep himself in front. If Putin stumbles over Ukraine, they will take their chance for revenge. It is down to the West to make sure Putin stumbles.
I wonder if here’s playing up the deranged megalomaniac to try and make his actions more unpredictable and NATO more wary of provoking him.
But he would know that if he extended military action to targets outside Ukraine then NATO would respond accordingly. Increasing the theatre beyond the Ukraine would be his decision, would he blink or not?
Very possibly, but I don’t think you can rule out he is essentially out to lunch, there are a fair few people that have come to lead nations who were, I’m hoping for everyone’s sake he’s not one of these individuals who would prefer to see his own nation burned to the ground the lose power.
At present he does have the initiative around moves he could make and NATO have sort of locked themselves into a we will defend NATO. Which leaves a few small none NATO, European and Asian nations that border Russia a bit out in the cold.
I truly do pity the decision makers in NATO, Putin has almost given them a dammed if you do dammed if you situation and at some point I think Putin will force the point, his type of government a
ways do.
Well he apparently spent most of the pandemic in isolation, petrified of catching Corvid-19, so that might have unhinged him from reality a little.
NATO has boxed itself into a corner with regards to taking action by telling Putin what he can get away with. I think you’re right, I doubt Putin had any self-restraint, and it’s an inevitability that he’ll push NATO too far so that they feel forced to respond. It might not be this conflict, but the next country he goes after.
Personally I wonder how we can possibly stand by as he reduces every Ukraine city to a copy of Dresden at the end of WW2…
The only reason we do stand back is fear. I suspect of NATO leaders though it would only stay conventional we would see an intervention. I think NATO leaders think Putin would go Nuclear and the unfortunate and truly said reality is If it’s the choice between saving Ukraine and Preventing a Nuclear exchange they will prevent the exchange ( it is after all the first duty of government to protect and defend a nation).
My worry is Im seeing very few ways out of this for the west that don’t involve either a retreat and slowly be becoming second fiddle to the totalitarian powers or a general war between nuclear powers. I think the only possible way through that will maintain western power is NATO sets a firm line and stabilises/expands militarily, before beginning to counter china’s Mercantile strategy and Russian expansion via means of containment and restricting access to markets and resources. Trouble is that’s going to leave a lot of small nations as victims and battlefields. It’s a crying shame caused by 20 years of the west pretending the world had become safe and cutting defence spending posture and allow ing pretty nasty governments to think the west was weak.
The problem with a no fly zone is you have the kill all the SAMs on the ground to make it safe to fly. That will involve killing Russian troops.
The are also a number of other reasons why it’s really difficult to do without killing Russians.
Hi Monkey Spanker –
No – despite what the American’s say, the SAMs don’t need to be attacked.
“No Fly Zone- the short pitch: UN authorised; defensive only; Article V suspended for NATO participants; engage hostiles inside Ukraine airspace/border only (not Crimea); Ukrainian air ops continue in de-conflicted operating areas”.
See retired RAF senior airman @gregbagwell
Ukraine could not fly their own TB2 and other systems to see where Russian troops are manouevering. They could not use helicopters either
As Putin said earlier, he would consider it an act of war. Iskander missiles from Kalingrad would get fired at Nato bases taking part , then the gloves come off, and a port, airfield or army barracks gets nuked.
No thanks
Hi David, I’m not advocating for it, I’m commenting on the messaging and what it look like when Ukraine is begging for a no fly zone, and a U.K. minister then says not having one is for their own good….I sounds incongruous. I was happy with the reasoning we can’t do a no fly zone as it will trigger an immediate general war. That’s fine.
The West should man up & offer Ukraine a NATO guaranteed safe haven around Lviv. Putin would bluster, but attacking NATO would be a step too far for many around him.
But the question John is would you bet your life and your families life on Putin Backing off, because that’s what NATO leaders will be betting ( all of our futures). I really is not a great time to be a European leader.
Putin modelled himself on Godfather & Tarantino movies. That is how his PR people project him. To him you are either a predator or prey. If we offer concessions, he will see us as prey & keep demanding more. We need to play his game. Say we will not lift sanctions until Russia gives up its veto at the UN, cuts its nuclear arsenal to no more than 350 warheads, hands Putin over to an International war crimes court. Russia did not nuke Afghanistan when they retreated from there. Do not fall for Putin’s bluff.
The very scary truth is the Soviet Union and the Cold War was a far more stable time than we have now. The red lines were know, both western and Soviet red lines and resolve had been tested and found strong, the areas of allowable geopolitical strife and conflict were also clear.
No one knows if Putin is bluffing, we don’t know his red lines and he had no idea of ours or if the west is bluffing.
simple question if Putin put a nuclear weapon on London, what would we do ?
1) would the U.K. launch it’s CASD knowing that the response would lead to the end of British civilisation and most of the citizens of the nation.
2) would America actually launch its nuclear weapons again knowing the response would end it as a nations and the outcome would be the almost complete loss of food production production globally for 10 years, killing almost everyone.
knowing actually these are very hard questions, knowing how weak the west has been for a decade in its response to threats ( we let him get away with using a never agent and nuclear isotopes on our home soil). Can you be sure Putin would not gamble…..I don’t thinks he bluffing, and people like Putin do think differently from everyone else (it’s how they become brutal dictators)…Hitler willingly sacrificed his nation instead of surrendering.
Fire the whole Trident boatload at Russia in return. Otherwise, we might as well scrap the deterrent.
Lol and that’s the fun thing. Does Putin think we will or we will not. It’s only a deterrent if he thinks we will and western weakness over the last decade my mean he thinks he can get away with things.
In effect if you are going to a purist about CASD it’s mean to also deter Nuclear blackmail, but in reality that’s exactly what Putin has done to the west over Ukraine, or it’s all least what he thinks he’s done. So does that now mean he would be willing to take it a step further in the future.
Geopolitics is all a bit mind blowing at present.
In thinking this through I think the only real option for Ukraine is to do a deal with Russia to split the country and try and protect at least some of Ukraine. How well they can do that will depend on how much hurt they do to the Russian armed forces…but if they can keep it up I’m sure Putin will come to the table, but I suspect Putin. Will want to much so it’s unlikely.
If they do agree to a partition ( which will stick in craw ) I think the west should offer immediate membership to NATO and the EU to any western Ukrainian nation…this is the only way I can see Ukraine surviving, I may be wrong, but I think Putin is willIng to grind Ukraine to a Pulp to get what he feels he needs.
What happens if THAAD intercepts the missile(s)?
It is not a joke system.
And there is one or more in Poland (announced a few years back).
Does Mad Vlad have a stropski?
But it is very unlikely that it would intercept all the missiles, only one has to get through to cause devastating effects.
Ukraine are bombing the Russians and attacking with drones. That was his point the russsian Air Force is not doing much. It’s Russian artillery causing the problems.
Its more about what the Ukrainian government are asking vs the U.K. defence minister Is then saying they do not need it. That starts to give confusing messaging and sounds like excuses over reasoned decision around the best interests of NATO ( which needs to the the primary driver. Even though I feel very sorry for Ukraine)
So what aircraft are being deployed with the Prince of Wales as she is heading up North.
Probably none. We currently only have about 12 to 15 aircraft available to share between the RAF and the RN and it will be another three years at least before that improves, seven years after the QE. Even then they will have to be split between the services. I know the theory about they are joint service aircraft but this has always been nonsense.
The RAF should have got 35a’s but that would have meant ordering 100 aircraft in total to field 3 RAF and 3 FAA (35b) front line squadrons. If RAF pilots had wanted to land on ships they would have joined the bloody navy!!
Exactly. Plus there are a lot of weapons that fit inside F-35A, that are too big to fit in F-35B.
With you on the numbers Bill although I don’t really mind if the RAF has A’s or B’s. Their choice. What we do need to do is ensure that both the RAF and the RN can operate the Lightning at the same time should the need arise.
What we are seeing now is a small example. The RAF wants the 35 in Eastern Europe so no aircraft for the Navy, or so few it would hardly be worth doing. In a serious conflict or war we would be in serious trouble.
And that problem is the procurement rate, something that I have been banging on about for too long! 2 operational squadrons in total will not be available until 2024. For a Tier 1 partner it’s pathetic. It literally boils my p*** having 2 aircraft carriers unable to put to sea with a full complement for years to come. And l do mean just ONE carrier.
Also, 2 new Typhoon squadrons must replace the ones being binned years ahead of there time, now. Fat chance of that!
You and me both Bill. I keep plugging the argument here and elsewhere and often get shot down because of it . How we can build two of the biggest carriers in the world and the have a dozen or so planes , not only for them but for the RAF as well, is laughable. By my reckoning we’ll have enough F35’s for two or three squadrons of eight or ten aircraft, fully equipped and pilots trained up by 2026/2027 if we’re lucky.
Agree with on the Typhoons as well but I won’t put my bet down.
I think the problem is that early F-35 were expensive & not very good. As time goes by, they get cheaper & more capable, hence the delay in building up numbers.
It’s fair to say that a 35 is today about 20 per cent cheaper than say five years ago but if he ordered more together the price would have been similar to now. Our problem is always one of never seeing the job finished. Lightning, Type 45 , strike brigade, no strike brigade, Boxer ,no Boxer…. oh Boxer again the list keeps going.
A much bigger order then 100 F-35’s, for a split buy. But the RAF be unable to refuel the F-35A’s with the present A-to-A contract.
USAF has tankers in UK.
To be honest more like 180 aircraft would be needed to for an effective A/B split buy.
– 4x F35A squadrons (48 planes)
– 4x F35B squadrons (48 planes)
– 2x OCU/1 large mixed OCU (24 planes)
– 2x OEU/1 large mixed OEU (6-8 planes)
– 25-30 spare F35A airframes
– 25-30 spare F35B airframes
Could get away with 3x F35B squadrons for the FAA I suppose but still a bare minimum of 150-160 overall, all in service simultaneously.
Split how ever you like until the RAF can train a F35 Pilots in under 2.5 years, numbers are always going to be low. currently there are 14 in total with 3 in the states. others are still some 2 years away. failure in the training program is highlighted in the NAO reports
We have 22 F35b’s at present with more than double that in trained pilots.
I’d be happy at this point with the original 138 for both services!
I agree. In fact I’d be happy with an even 100; that could give us 4 squadrons, an OCU, and enough spares to replace battle losses or even surge to a 5th squadron if SHTF.
It would have to be just the B model, though. The 180 number I gave was what the minimum would be for a credible A/B split force.
Helicopters.
The way I see it, the F35 capability is seen as more useful to NATO ( at this moment ) flying from land bases than from the airfield that is the QEC Carrier.
So our assets slot in where they are most useful.
We all know ( or should know by now ) the delays to the F35 programme and why the POW does not have an full air group.
Hi Ron,
Merlins and Wildcats and yes these are aircraft, rotary aircraft he be sure but aircraft none the less.
Having said it woudl be nice if we had enough F35B to equip the PoW this time out, but we gave up our naval fixed wing capability in 2011. Carrier flying is not easy and the fact we have been able to regenerate so quickly after the carriers entered service is entirely done to the US and French Navies allowing our sailors and pilots fly of their carriers.
I am hoping that we buy at least another 24 F35, preferrably more, but the Treasury needs to be kicked in to line. They need to realise that the world has changed – big time – and we need to start to beef up are capabilities now.
Cheers CR
Let’s celebrate the fact we have two working carriers and some very special planes that all exist. Could be worse: a lot worse.
UK is miles ahead of Invincible level capability.
Didn’t we just get a few more F35B’s delivered?
I agree the order needs to be increased but that will depend on Block4 availability.
At least Sea Harrier had Sea Eagle.
Not much use in a LAND WAR.
Look at all those Russian Navy ships sitting off Ukraine’s coast.
We could have Matre ER with a land-based option too.
Typhoon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBP7dl-IHq0
Land-based:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AFF7NLluOU
Yup, with you on that.
Yes, 3 arrived the other day, but that still only brings the total up to 26 what with one having been lost during CSG 21.
She’s still sitting in Portsmouth, hasn’t sailed yet.
Norway has 24 F35A’s anyway.
So some F35’s are flying around in Poland. Whoop dee doo! If they are not going to enforce a no fly zone over Ukraine, what are they doing… other than giving more photo shoot opportunities to the capitalist commies??
Defending NATO. The whole point of NATO.
And doing a useful high intensity exercise?
All valuable work and worth every £.
Defending NATO from what? Putin may be a 24k demented scummy horrible murdering dipstick, but he will not attack any NATO country, or member.
He teases, torments and antagonises NATO, trying to goad them into doing something first. That’s as far as he will go. So, why are NATO forces moving around like chess pieces on a board, when the other bloke is playing draughts.
Its ok I’ll answer… to play who can rattle the sabre the loudest, to a dude who really does’nt care.
“but he will not attack any NATO country, or member.”
Until NATO attacks him first, which a no fly zone would entail.
” He teases, torments and antagonizes NATO, trying to goad them into doing something first. That’s as far as he will go.”
Pleased to hear it! So NATO can continue what it is doing then protecting NATO nations without further provocation like entering combat with Russia at a moment which we are not prepared.
No… its pointless! Putin does… not… care about NATO jets swanning around OUTSIDE his sphere of influence.
He will NOT enter NATO’s sphere of influence.
“Putin does… not… care about NATO jets swanning around OUTSIDE his sphere of influence.”
I’m glad. But would he care if they were INSIDE his sphere of influence, what he sees to be Ukraine? I say he would. So why push him. They don’t need to be there.
“No… its pointless!”
NATO mobilising to its eastern borders is not pointless. It shows Russia NATO will respond if it is attacked.
Which is the whole idea of NATO, is it not?
NATO should not be some police force opposing Russia wherever they appear around the world. It is not good for world peace and is quite unnecessary.
Tom
Apologies, I don’t agree with how you phrase things –
NATO doesn’t have a “sphere of influence” – it has members.
When he’s invading a soveriegn nation, killing its people & threatening anyone who intervenes, it’s a sure sign someone should step in.
Exactly… but NATO will not step in, even though the bodies of innocent women and children are piling up, and schools have been hit… still… NATO will not step in.
Because chess takes skill, intelligence, practice and tactical knowledge, draughts is played by kids and people who can’t play chess. Therefore let’s play chess.
Quite correct… putin is not playing chess though.
And that is why he will lose!
I hope so, would like to think so, and really wish so. However, as Ukraine stiffens it defences more and more, beats back Russian forces more and more, his only option, to save face and embarrassment, will be to unleash his massive army, including 13,000 tanks, which will result in Russian levelling Ukraine.
How much longer are we going to sit back and watch Ukraine civvies being bombed with impunity? The West needs to stand up to Putin.
The leadership of NATO should announce that unless Putin accepts an immediate ceasefire and begins a withdrawal in 3 days, Ukraine will be accepted as a member of NATO, the nofly zone will be imposed and Russian forces will be expelled. That is what I suspect Kennedy would have done, call Putin’s nuclear bluff with brinkmanship.
If we don’t, Moldova will be next, followed by Finland and Sweden. After having lost a brave ally in the Ukraine while we prevaricate.
We watch as long as it takes Russia to defeat and overrun Ukraine because we are too late and
will not interfere directly because that means WW3. What we could do is offer Moldova, Sweden and Finland immediate NATO membership if they want it.
Beyond that Europe needs to rearm and wean themselves off Russian gas. We also need to rearm to meet the threat because we are totally unprepared.
Yep. I wrote a long condemnation of DLs quite crazy ideas but did not post it. There is no point, some are itching for WW3 sooner rather than later. In fact, it would have kicked off weeks ago as he wanted the Russian ships sunk in the English channel.
Hi Danielle you should have posted it I’m sure I would have enjoyed reading it. Maybe you should read up on how JFK handled the Cuba crisis
Hi David.
No, it was a quite angry post written from the heart as I feel strongly about my view. Best not!
On Cuba, withdrawing some missiles to avoid nuclear war as opposed to a dictator stopping a massive military operation in progress with all the loss of face that entails in an age of instant news makes Cuba a simple decision by comparison. Putin and Kruschev are different people. This is too raw to get involved now beyond what NATO has already done.
And as always, the irony of missiles next door to the USA which set the crisis off while the US happily based its missiles in Turkey is lost on most. And we still think NATO next door to Russia does not have exactly the same effect on them???
If you think that Biden is going to go to war with Russia over Latvia, or Estonia etc you are going to get a big surprise. NATO Article 5 is toothless without American support and Biden is sending all the wrong signals to Putin. Putin’s threats are bluster and it is clear that a NFZ is what he fears. We should call his bluff now. Come on, this bastard is bombing civilian kids and women!
Hi D well said- the Cuba crisis is a poor analogy to the Ukraine. I think NATO played it correctly by not enforcing a no go fly zone. That would be an act of war and rapidly escalate to open conflict. That being said. I suspect things would not go well at all for the Russians.
I don’t believe Putin is rationale and certainly no Kuschev. I can’t see him negotiating or taking the so called “off ramp” option He gambled and now has a tiger by the tail.
I find myself seeing him less like a Stalin figure and more like Mussolini. That’s about the best insult I can throw at him, although he deserves far worse. My Mussolini analogy may well play out with Putin also hanging upside down from a petrol station forecourt.
“the Cuba crisis is a poor analogy to the Ukraine”. Clearly, you were not around in 1962. Clearly you know nothing, of how the WORLD were on a knife edge, expecting nuclear war in 1962. Clearly you have no idea, how frightened people in Europe, and the rest of the world for that matter, people really were.
To be fair, I can see how you would attract negative feedback and a poor response, due to your uneducated mind, and facetious comments.
Thank you for your reply Tom. Correct, I was born in 1964. You clearly have a distorted view on current events. I intended to outline 4 bullet points in clear simple English to clarify. But if you can’t see what is self evident, I can’t be bothered.
Sadly, you made no effort to read the remainder of my post to DM, which gives context.
P.S. I have never received negative comments on this site from any one but you – so congratulations. On a personal note, I’ll defer to Johan’s comment which was far more eloquent than I can manage.
Have a nice day.
Tom, my apologies. I note Johan’ s comment was not directed to you.
Hi K
Apologies accepted, and apologies to you too, for ruffling your feathers, that was not the intention. Oh and I am older than you… unfortunately.
All good Tom , we are all understandably angry and upset over the terrible events in Ukraine .
Let’s keep faith and hope that cooler heads prevail. It is a pity we have to deal with Putin and not Kruschev, who seemed a reasonable human being.
just make you look like a keyboard warrior, as you sound like a full blown Knob and sat in mummies basement, playing tour of duty. with a hard on
dont breed as there enough vegetables in the world
Hi… just to say I’m still laughing here at your reply to the uneducated dude. 😂
We don’t want nuclear war, we want Putin stopped. Standing back permitting him to invade, murder, annex & cancel free Ukraine is a huge mistake & appeasement. Meet him head on or give way & what we’re doing is giving way & permitting him.
He crossed the red lines invading, he can’t be trusted, and neither can we if we hold back when we are needed to stand up. There is no easy option left having done too little too late to stop him invading & nothing yet to get him to stop.
The path to joining NATO currently requires a membership action plan. This plan involves a formal invitation and a tailored road map for future membership. To obtain such a plan, prospective members must first peacefully resolve outstanding international, ethnic and territorial disputes.
One of the points of Transnistria is that it constitutes disputed territory for Moldova and unless Moldova agrees to give up its internationally recognised claim to the territory, it will be tough to join NATO.
So Putin will be told with a formal declaration that Moldova wants to join NATO, followed by a protracted time when it can’t.
NATO could waive the whole plan thing, which was introduced by the US in 1999. Unless and until it does, the process of joining NATO is very dangerous for Moldova.
Jon all very true and Moldova represents a specific problem as you quite rightly point out but waiting to issue a formal declaration does rather sound like something you might do in normal and not extraordinary times.
Or Moldova could give up its claim on Transnistria & be admitted into NATO & the EU on the same day, if the West makes a united special decision.
Sjb1968 et al
I certainly don’t want WW3 either, but I think it’s going to become increasingly difficult to sit back and watch a dictator do the “Full Grozny” to fellow Europeans every night on television.
This isn’t 1939, or even 2000, we’re a much more inter-connected world – Eastern Europe no longer consists of far-off people of whom we know little etc
It also seems somewhat cowardly to hide behind NATO Article 5 and allow thousands of Ukrainians to be slaughtered by a dictator – but if one Latvian is killed, NATO apparently wades in with all guns blazing? (Just an illustrative example, I’ve nothing against Latvians!)
I don’t go along with David’s proposed “ultimatum”- that seems far too dangerous. But there are things the West (or more importantly the UN) may be able to do …… For instance, an intervention need not be NATO.
Just to recap, if Russia is making an apparently “humanitarian intervention” (!?!) into an independent Ukrainian sovereign state – then the United Nations can certainly do so too. (And they will just have to find a way to get around a Russian veto).
I don’t have all the answers – but over the last 24 hours Greg Bagwell has been tweeting on potential options for a No Fly Zone. Just to recap, he is a retired senior RAF airman, ran RAF combat operations – and has commanded NFZs.
Greg has outlined some potential options for a UN NFZ.
Based on past experience, our moderator (the lovely Lisa) doesn’t like URLs pasted onto chat! So I will put some links down below.
Intervention is a risk – but have we perhaps become just a little too risk-adverse in Europe? No-one can fail to be impressed by the Ukrainians, by their bravery and spirit (these are inspirational people) – and rather than write them off and state that it is all too difficult – perhaps we need our leaders to look more seriously at some potential options to close this war down.
Greg Bagwell (@gregbagwell) / Twitter
“My thoughts are based on my experience: as the RAF’s ex Commander of Operations (2013-16), years of flying in or commanding NFZs, years of sitting on 15’ readiness Nuclear QRA; and playing Russia in multiple strategic wargames.
The full facts are not out there and I offer some options as we watch idly as Ukrainians die”.
Would a no fly zone result in escalation or salvation for Ukraine? | Feature from King’s College London (kcl.ac.uk)
Greg Bagwell (@gregbagwell) / Twitter
An extract published on the Kings College London (KCL) site –
“As the situation in Ukraine deteriorates and Europe confronts for the first time in a generation the realpolitik of a nuclear equipped Russia, some have either called for or ruled out military intervention. The ubiquitous No Fly Zone (NFZ) has been proffered as a limited military response to “level the playing field”. Indeed, I have turned to social media to add my considered support; this has met with stiff resistance, almost all of which has been based on a concern about escalation and the inevitability of nuclear war.
So, what is a NFZ and what are the pros and cons of its implementation ……………………..
It is impossible to cover every facet of the operation in this short article but I believe that there is sufficient merit in the benefits and practicalities of implementation of a NFZ that it should be firmly on the table for discussion. The most disappointing aspect of the debate so far is that we have done exactly what Putin thought we would do, and if we aren’t going to change his calculus now, then when? I fear that the opportunity to establish a NFZ is fast receding, and that if the situation worsens into a humanitarian crisis and a prolonged siege of major cities, we will be completely impotent. It would appear that we have much to relearn on conventional deterrence vs nuclear escalation in the context of Russia – if the West can’t stomach that debate now, it better get an appetite quickly because next time we might not be able to hide behind Charters”.
Alan, we are not going have a NFZ over Ukraine but we are sadly going to continue to see some horrible things over the next few days and week I fear.
Your comment about it not being 1939 or 2000 perfectly demonstrates how the west has lost its way. Peace and freedom has to be protected and sometimes fought for and we have lost that instinct particularly at the political level. We do not live in some happy clappy global village and asking people not to do something doesn’t work with dictators.
1930’s appeasement has been alive and well in our modern interconnected world and the Ukrainians are going to feel the impact of that policy.
Hi SJB …. I think the example of the Ukrainians fighting hard for their freedom is really inspirational.
But like you, I fear we might see some terrible scenes over the next few weeks.
Here here!!
David we cannot draw a red line behind what is already happening. That would put us instantly at war with a nuclear power. It’s really shitty and horrible, but Ukraine will need to fight its battle alone. All NATO can do is draw that big red line in front of Putin, using the time to stabilise and rearming, using all other means to combat Russia ( as we did in the Cold War) we do have a model to deal with this, the Reagan model worked.
Given the way that the Ukrainians are resisting, Russia, should it manage to eventually conquer and hold every square metre of Ukraine ( not a certainty given their performance to date), will not really be in a position to move on anyone else. It will be licking its wounds financially and militarily for a long time. This will allow NATO and other European forces to build depth and capability , I think this is an intention of NATO – to allow the Russian military to exhaust itself on Ukrainian soil. To paraphrase Yamamoto after Pearl Harbour , Putin has awakened a sleeping giant in NATO.
You can be guaranteed one thing, the Swedes and the Finns would make absolute shit of an advancing Russian armoured division.
Exactly this. How are they going to be invading other nations ( apart from tiny ex Soviet states in the south ) if they are bogged down in Ukraine?
NATO would make short work of them. Even if they recover from this kicking.
And how much of their forces will they have to commit to occupy? Given 35 million plus angry Ukrainians out for blood resupplied by the worlds richest nations?
NATO must rearm and shout loud and clear what it is doing.
NATO needs a summit with Russia after this televised to the world at where our red lines are.
So there can be no ambiguity.
Ukraine situation is tragic and there might be some merit in Alans UN proposal. How that is done I have no idea.
If Russia follow the same model for the Crimea and the Donbas region. Then they will put heavy pressure on local Ukrainians to leave, unless they heavily support Putin, which is doubtful now!
In the Crimea there has been a drawdown of “ethnic” Ukrainian Crimeans, who have been leaving to move back into Ukraine proper. I would expect Russia to do the same thing with Eastern Ukraine. Allow “humanitarian corridors” to allow Ukrainians to leave, thereby putting more pressure on the West for humanitarian support. Then move in more Russians to take over. Basically ceding southern and eastern Ukraine to Russia. Will they push further west than Kyiv towards Rivne and eventually Lviv?
Well I hoped they would not invade.
Then I hoped they’d “only” occupy the breakaway Oblasts.
Then I hoped they’d only go up to the Dnieper but it seems they’ve forayed beyond it at Kherson looking at the maps unless they’re inaccurate or I’m looking at it wrong.
Would Ukraine sue for peace ceding the east and Crimea?
I think the threat of Putin moving on to other countries is a little overblown. It’s still unclear if he can pacify Ukraine as is. Russia simply does not have the man power or the economic capacity to sustain the long term occupation of Ukraine. Much less the invasion of other countries. I think the smart play for NATO is rather than risking a nuclear confrontation with an increasingly desperate Putin, arm and fund a Ukrainian insurgency. That with the crushing sanctions will bleed the Russian military, economy and public support. Death by a thousand cuts.
So do I. I see no evidence for it.
Keep all those sanctions on for decades, if need be.
be carful what you wish for .Once you switch this on, it will escalate and get out of control.
The very Simple answer to that question is IS UKRAINE A MEMBER OF NATO. no should it of joined previously YES but it didn’t, much like Finland who and Sweden who have traded both ways for decades.
But now want to join the members club, NATO defends its members not people who have ignored it for decades because it suited them. And if NATO calls a No Fly there are 100,000s of people on its borders that suddenly become a target for a MADMAN with nothing to lose. its why your on here and not in NATO. you would kill everyone over a problem caused by a country which sold weapons to Russia and China.
if we attack Russia, Russian support for the war would harden and maybe some of these troops still sat on the borders would join in.
Russian anti air missiles are also placed on the Russian side or the border, so you have to attack Russia.
and in one stroke idiots start WW3 for what exactly
Yes, spot on. This needs careful handling not going all magnum like Dirty Harry.
Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer is the saying I believe?
Agreed.
Good. Let’s get them doing some night-time deniable sorties against Russian ground targets and aircraft – blow them out of the sky without anyone knowing what’s hit them, and deny we’re doing it.
Let them think it’s the Ghost of Ukraine.
I for one agree that a NATO enforced no fly zone is impossible. But what likelihood is it that the UN could vote for it and impose it on Russia? Probably unlikely as it would need some major non NATO countries to lead it in numbers, but it’s what should be pushed for IMO. If only to turn the tables on those who keep pushing NATO to do something.
You know how UN works? Russia has a veto.
If the UNSC can’t agree it goes to the general assembly. Not sure how that works with action like a NFZ though. The point is to turn the question UN wide rather than just NATO, which won’t happen.
I agree, Rob – the West’s response has been stymied with all this talk about NATO. It needs to be a UN led intervention.
But I’m not saying it’s easy …………………….
Although we do have some very talented and intellectually agile diplomats!
UN is to busy delivering food and water in Africa like Sainsburys deliver the same here.
shipping food and water 50 miles by truck to villages with no water supply. WHO BUILDS A VILLAGE without a water source. THE UN
When your country is being invaded & occupied, your troops & people killed, no way should the Ukrainian AF be constrained. Ukraine has the right to defend herself & if we are civilised & as friendly as we have talked about since the 1990s we’d be stepping in instead of trembling at the borders, discussing how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. Either we support freedom & democracy & rule of law in Europe or we’re little better than those we despise as dictators & tyrants. Putin must not be permitted to “ethnically cleanse” Ukraine.
So your solution is all out war with Russia? NATO have made it clear that isn’t going to happen, nor would the public support it as much as they are sympathetic to Ukraine. With that off the table what else is there but try and give Putin a way out. The alternative is just to watch Ukraine burn.
oh and Ukraine are calling for a NFZ, they wouldn’t be doing that if it would disadvantage them.
Nowhere have I called for an “all out war on Russia”, your words not mine Rob. And we are watching Ukraine burn as it is. I’d like an intervention in Ukraine to drive Russia’s illegal invaders out if Ukraine wants that but at least the air support she requests, that’s all. All the escalation has been done by Russia.
We’ve been head to head with Russia & China in Korea but never extended ops into China, despite even with MacArthur calling for atom bombing China, he was kept in check.
I think by standing off just giving weapons & intel support, we’re making WW3 more likely as Putin sees he can get away with it & sanctions will likely eventually provoke him to more aggression.
You can have as many F35s and whizz bangs as you like, if your politicians are “frit” to do anything we might as well have bought a load of pea shooters. I’m 65, and on and off I have been threatened by Russia with nuclear Armageddon. I’m still here, what does that tell you ? With reports of Russians shooting unarmed civilians; the Russians are right ,it’s not a war ,it’s becoming genocide. The subject has gone beyond moaning about military equipment woes.
Hi Stc
I agree with your sentiments – and I’m also a child of the Cold War (indeed, the Cuban missile crisis).
I don’t believe Ukrainians should be abandoned to the brutality of a Russian dictator and his generals.
This is a very dangerous situation, and I don’t want WW3 – but I’m persuaded that the West can push this a bit further. I’m not ready yet to play a game of strategic patience.
It would be good to see the West seize back some of the initiative in Ukraine from Putin. At the moment we still seem to be dancing to his tune. Perhaps a UN led No Fly Zone might be a start – that’s certainly what the clever and courageous Ukrainians are calling for ……….
I fear the longer we take to stop Putin – the greater will be the cost.
Issue is YOUR NOT DOING ANYTHING, just want to send others to do it are you related to Putin. IQ is about the same living in the past and a safe distance from anything.
Johan
No – I’m not related to Putin.
Thanks for your contribution to the debate.
Perhaps try getting that Caps Lock fixed next time.
Well said Alan.
Does anyone know whose troll, johan, is? He seems very angry, but I can never figure out why.
I agree. Also survived the cold war omnipresent nuclear armageddon hanging over us. We are failing dreadfully this test. Only good thing is it’s made Putin’s nature plain & showed our leaders up for the weasels they are. In the same way he poured empty words over the NHS during Covid but refused to give them a meaningful pay rise, Boris wanabe Churchill Johnson makes speaches & writes newspaper articles but fails to be Churchillian to see the real danger of not acting decisively.
He needs to own his party’s gutting of our forces to the extent Putin can feel confident to do this.
Why blame Boris??
Even if the UK said to NATO lets go for a NFZ. Seriously how many NATO countries would vote for it? Get real – as tragic as the situation is the UK has stood head and shoulders above the usual hangers on – and I’m including France & Germany as star performers in that category.
Hi Old School – On the NFZ, see what Greg Bagwell (retired RAF Air Marshall) is tweeting.
“No Fly Zone- the short pitch: UN authorised; defensive only; Article V suspended for NATO participants; engage hostiles inside Ukraine airspace/border only (not Crimea); Ukrainian air ops continue in de-conflicted operating areas”.
@gregbagwell
He believes it is entirely possible – but UN led, not NATO.
How many?
For sure
Slovakia
Czech Republic
Poland
Latvia
Estonia
Lithuania
Romania
Bulgaria
Iceland
UK
Croatia
Albania
North Macedonia
Montenegro
Probably
Canada
Denmark
Norway
Holland
Italy
Spain
Portugal
Slovenia
Not sure
USA
France
Germany
Greece
Turkey
I know I miss Corbyn too !!!
Thanks Frank – like you, I still feel the West could be doing more for the brave people of Ukraine.
I’m not a Boris fan – although, I think he’s not doing too bad over Ukraine. But I think the most impressive member of the government
during the current crisis has been Ben Wallace.
Wallace is dismal and keeps playing on his minor role as a tick tock rupert not anything he ever achieved in green.
The alternative to Boris in 2019 was Corbyn, were you a Corbyn supporter? Shame on you!
The USA is a major Nuclear power. Did it nuke Vietnam in 1975, or Afghanistan, last year? No of course not. Nuclear powers can lose conventional wars without going nuclear. Britain in Suez 1956. Putin might threaten. Its his gangster nature after all, but he puts himself at risk from his own inner circle if he tried to launch nukes for real.
You may be right but the flip side of the coin is that how many NATO countries want to engage Russia in a full out conventional war? I’d guess the number is pretty close to zero. So intervention will be indirect only (supplying intel and arms etc).
Putin has modelled himself on the Godfather. He projects himself as the “boss of bosses”. Normal diplomacy will not work on him. Look how Macron & the Israeli PM failed. The united free world need to tell him, we are a bigger, tougher, more ruthless gang. That is the only approach that stands a chance of working.
Lots of combat helicopter losses, expect its usulfulness being put into question.
Who’s?
Depends on the level of tech.
If we are talking 1980’s Hinds I’m not surprised as they were not Stinger proof.
No combat heli is Stinger proof. With thousands manpads a combat heli is more vulnerable than a tank and costs several times more while its advantages : mobility mean it only make sense to use it in certain circumstance like blunting a penetration.
Some are more resistant than others; and
Some have better defence aids than other; and
Some are better tactically deployed than other…..
It depends on the aircraft’s defensive aids system, but also on the version of the Stinger. Older Stingers using 2nd and 3rd gen short wave and long wave IR sensors are relatively easy to decoy with flares and active IR jammers, similar with Grom. The newer Stinger uses a dual sensor that incorporates UV and an imaging infrared sensor. This is much harder to jam and decoy. Multi-spectrum flares have a so-so chance, but directed infrared countermeasures should be able to decoy the missile away from the aircraft or blind the IR sensor enough for the aircraft to manoeuvre out of the UV field of view.
If you have enough old Manpads, you can get several launched from different positions, & only one needs to hit.
True we lost so many apaches to stinger equipped taliban in Afghanistan.
Not at all, training and tactics mitigate possible losses and you use your assets in a way that emphasises its strengths. In war you lose people and platforms, doesn’t mean we get rid of both!
According to Oryx, Ukraine has now lost 41 tanks. But they have also captured 48 Russian tanks. Does this mean that the Ukrainian tank force is getting stronger ?
Of course, the captured Russian tanks may be damaged. And Oryx himself admits that his figures are not the full picture. But it’s an interesting angle.
OT
Oryx is doing a good job with what information is available but the reality is in war you dont have someone tweet photos of every destroyed vehicle. You shoot down an aircraft and there isnt somone on the ground to photograph the debris within 2 hours. A lot happens that is unseen, millenials seem to have a hard time understanding this, its all ‘pics or it didnt happen’. I personally would take Russian and Ukranian figures and work out the average or use the UK/US estimates based on their sat/aircraft recon.
Couple more SU35s shot down, one near Odesa and on film. Pilot captured. His “interview” is on Twitter.
Lots and lots of KIA letters will be hitting Russian doormats. The one thing Putin can’t hide from the Russia is physically missing people. The more casualties he takes and the longer this goes on his choices become more limited between withdrawal (and the end of his regime) and using tactical nukes.
Hi Rob, As Russia is now again almost entirely a totalitarian regime, I fear he can certainly news-manage – and hide the overall losses.
Individual families will struggle to join-the-dots, and see the “big picture”.
And another one!
https://news.sky.com/video/ukraine-crisis-footage-released-by-ukrainian-forces-appears-to-show-russian-helicopter-shot-down-12558318
Thanks Daniele – Did you see the beer-belly SU-34 driver who had his smiling picture taken with both Putin and Assad? A real double-whammy of dictators! He’s now also in the custody of the Ukrainians. 😀
Yes I did. Look at the state of those pilots.
It was them that ate the pies! 😀
Fascinated by the bright orange flight suits, straight out of the Firefox film. Their aviation losses are mounting.
Yeah – with an orange flight-suit he really should have come down in the sea!
Losses widely reported as following during the last 24 hours
If accurate, FIVE fast-jets is certainly some serious attrition in the modern era. (Probably mostly to SAMs).
Even in the worst moments of Gulf War 1 (1991), the RAF was losing only one Tornado GR1 per night – and six losses in total over the entire six week campaign.
RAF losses in the Gulf War were abysmal and due to our shitty unadaptable tactics crews were lost unnecessarily. We lost many more aircraft as a percentage of sorties than the US in the Gulf War.
Hi Louis
I think that’s a myth – the RAF crews were adapting their tactics all the time during GW1. The Tornado GR1 low-level phase only lasted 4-5 nights. Plus the Jaguar force didn’t even operate at low-level in the desert (despite 15-20 years of practising that flight profile).
Tornado GR1 losses during the low-level phase were comparable with other collation aircraft at the same altitude: US Navy A-6s, USAF F-15Es etc Plus the Tornado force flew the most dangerous missions: against Iraqi airfields using the JP233 runway-busting weapons system.
Of those six Tornado losses (and five airmen) : Four were at low-level, two aircraft being lost to SAMs, while another two are believed to have hit the ground while manoeuvring at night.
According to Lindsey Peacock (Aviation News, August 1994) – at least 53 JP233 sorties were flown in the first 72 hours of the war, with only one JP233 carrier lost, a 27 Squadron Tornado, which flew into the desert a couple of minutes after leaving Shaibah airbase in circumstances which cannot be directly attributed to enemy action. Although a very demanding flight-profile for aircrews – the loss rate was only 2%.
There were other Tornado sorties flown in support of JP233 raids, including defence suppression missions with ALARM and air-burst 1, 000Ib bombs. One of those loft-bombers was hit by a Roland SAM at Tallil airbase on the third night of the war.
To sum-up:
Through crating runways, JP233 raids disrupted the operations of the Iraqi Air Force during the critical early phase of the war – allowing air-superiority to be achieved more easily than it might otherwise have been.
It’s known that a Tornado destroyed an Iraqi Mirage F1e during a JP233 attack-run while the Iraqi fighter was landing back at its airbase. A MiG-25 was also damaged by a JP233 sub-munition while taxing out for a mission. There may have been others ………………….
Thirty years later, we can certainly compare favourably the professionalism of the Tornado GR1 force, against their hapless modern-day Russian counterparts.
Sorry for the long post – I enjoyed writing it!
Feel free to share any views 😉
Cheers for that Alan -excellent interesting post
Hi Klonkie
Many thanks indeed for those very kind comments.
If you’re interested in reading more, I can certainly recommend John Nichol’s recent book “Tornado – In the eye of the storm” (2021). It mainly covers the intensive early phase of low-level operations by the Tornado force. It’s written very much in the same page-turning style as Roland White (he of “Vulcan 607″ fame). It could maybe do with a bit more analysis – but it’s still a very powerful narrative history.
Famously, Nichol himself was shot-down during the only daylight low-level attack on an Iraqi airbase mounted by Tornados (at Ar Rumaylah in southern Iraq). His aircraft was struck by an SA-14 MANPAD while egressing the target. This is the subject of his earlier book – “Tornado Down”.
He certainly writes with a great deal of feeling and insight.
Hi Daniele, As the Russian air-force is operating at low-level, you might be interested in further details on those Tornado GW1 losses – in response to a query by Louis.
Morning Alan. As I said, I knew you were the aviation man.
Just read it, and in complete agreement. I have long known the RAF took on the most dangerous missions with the JPs.
Which is what they trained for, night operations in all weathers into East Germany and Poland.
We once had 13 front line squadrons if I remember correctly?
4 at Bruggen, 3 at Laarbruch, and 2 each at Lossi, Marham, Honington? RAFG alone was larger than the current RAF fast jet fleet.
Thanks, Daniele
Yes – I make it 11 front-line Tornado GR1/GR1A squadrons in 1991 (plus an OCU and the joint TTTE with the Germans and Italians). In addition, there were 7 Tornado F3 squadrons – plus an OCU.
You’re absolutely right about RAF Germany – at the end of the Cold War there were 12 combat jet squadrons (including eight Tornado GR1 units). In terms of numbers, much bigger than the RAF combat-jet fleet of today.
Those were the days! 😉
Those were indeed the days. I spent 2 tours at RAF Swanton Morley buying spares for the Tornado and it’s RB199 engine – using computerised mathematical models. Great trips to Munich (if possible always arranged at Octoberfest time), Milan and Turin.
Swanton Morley, that’s a station I’d long forgotten. What’s there now, housing?
I think the Army are there. Most redundant RAF stations seem to end up recycled into housing.
Was it 11? Ah, maybe the Honington ones moved?
12, yes, including 2 GR3 Sqns at Gutersloh, 2 Phantom at Wildenrath. And Chinook and Puma Sqns also at Gutersloh. There was also a comms unit there flying a transport type I forget and the infamous Gatow stn flight!
I think Honington was the OCU (45 Squadron?); the TTTE was at Cottesmore.
Other bases: Bruggen, Laarbruch – and Marham.
Later Lossiemouth.
I’ve a feeling the Gatow station flight was Chipmunks!
Indeed. 2 Chipmunks. There to “exercise the UKs right to fly over Berlin”
In reality, spy planes that sometimes worked with BRIXMIS.
The 7 F3 units were 3 Leeming, 2 each at Leuchars and Coningsby. Plus 2 Phantom at Wattisham and for a time earlier last of the Lightnings at Binbrook. 2 of these squadrons remained by the time the Tories came to power in 2010. All cut.
Hi Di , I think the transports were Andover’s -60 sqn at Wildenrath?
Hi Klonk mate. I cannot remember. Probably. Will be in one if my old books. 😆
Just looked, I could picture the aircraft livery in my mind and wasn’t sure about Andover. It was a Pembroke. I’d totally forgotten them..
😂
He looks like the ex Russkie pilot who chugged us around Afghanistan for a while, mature, overweight, ruddy vodka cheeks and not a care in the world for H&S, both in the air or on the ground!
Hi Alan’ His ejector seat will be working overtime to propel that bulk.
😀😀😀
If you want to deter Russia I’d suggest we send light infantry armed with Javelins, NLAW, Stingers and tractors.
That seems to all that is need ATM.
But IRL some F35B’s to take radar and AA offline permanently and then to clear space for Typhoons to chop up the armour with the Apaches swinging by with top cover to clean things up.
They won’t require the F-35B to achieve that goal.
“The Eurofighter Typhoon has one of the world’s most advanced Electronic Warfare (EW) systems. This allows the Typhoon to operate stealthily, evading threats and preventing engagement.
This vulnerability against high-end threats with counter-stealth techniques is difficult to address because the basic elements of physical stealth (an aircraft’s skin & surface treatments, internal structure, and configuration) cannot easily be changed.
However, in contrast, the Typhoon’s EW systems, which are readily re-programmable, can evolve digitally to maintain the aircraft’s combat advantage even as threats change around it.”
https://eurodass.com/news/digital-stealth/
Well maybe.
T1 had a reasonable mechanically scanned effort.
T2/3 something significantly better with higher RF power abs cooling. So the sustained power output was massively higher.
Radar2 is well in advance of the F35 radar. This what will go into T2/3 under RAF plans.
“Radar2 is well in advance of the F35 radar.”
And another very good reason to purchase more Typhoons now!
Well it is the reason why the new UK centric projects have legs.
Whilst Typhoon isn’t ‘stealthy’ it is pretty stealthy and it is more manoeuvrable.
BAE also did some work on sensor fusion and came up with an impressive demonstrator.
We have perfectly well got the tech and the partners. All we need is the funds and then we will to go Gen6.
“Whilst Typhoon isn’t ‘stealthy’ it is pretty stealthy and it is more manoeuvrable.”
And could be even more so!
https://tacairnet.com/2015/07/15/improving-the-typhoons-aerodynamics/
That isn’t the direction of travel: is it?
To make it more stealthy the characteristics would be worse but vectored thrust would be used to overcome that and return the same excellent results as before?
That kit could be used to pimp T2/3?
There isn’t a requirement to make it more stealthy, electronic stealth takes care of that problem until the arrival of Tempest.
Plus: “Leading technology materials and design provide Eurofighter Typhoon with a reduced radar signature, while its superior avionic processing speeds, aerodynamic agility and beyond visual range (BVR) capabilities enable it to operate effectively while avoiding detection.”
“According to Eurojet, a Typhoon equipped with thrust vectoring nozzles (TVN) could reduce fuel burn on a typical mission by up to 5%, while increasing available thrust in supersonic cruise by up to 7%.
Typhoon is already capable of performing ‘super-cruise’ (flying supersonically without afterburner) and the proposed modification will further increase this capability.
Other cost-saving aspects of thrust vectoring include the potential to extend engine life by reducing operating temperatures at a given power setting.
It could also be used to reduce take-off and landing distances and approach speed.
Besides the operational cost savings, TVN enhances the aircraft manoeuvring as it becomes a ‘virtual control surface’ when coupled with the aircraft flight-control system.
Another aspect is improving the aircraft’s ability to carry an asymmetric weapons load.
Eurofighter is considering to fund a flight demonstration of TVN equipped Typhoon to test these capabilities.
According to Eurojet, TVN could be retrofitted to the existing EJ200 without the need for structural changes to the engine or airframe.”
If defence spending does increase in response to Ukraine we should definitely purchase more! Up to around 180 planes/10 squadrons!
I agree we need to purchase more Typhoons as you quite rightly say Steve R.
Radar 2 and LERX will keep us ahead of the game and with technology being developed for Tempest which can be added to them in the future the RAF will be in very good shape.
Keeping the F-35B purchase to an absolute minimum and using drones instead to increase our carrier strike capability makes even more sense to me personally given the limited use it has at present due to the ongoing problems it is suffering from most of which will not be rectified much before 2027 at best.
https://tacairnet.com/2015/07/15/improving-the-typhoons-aerodynamics/
It doesn’t need to be more agile. Stop and think for one minute why not one single Typhoon costumer hasn’t chosen thrust vectoring or aero kits. They want the new radar, they want more situational awareness, new weapons, new defensive aids. Because that is what achieves air dominance. Not who can turn tighter, or fly the fastest. Lessons learned from decades of experience. Remember, in the last 40 years, the USAF hasn’t shot down a single aircraft within visual range, all have been at BVR ranges. Typhoon has bags of performance and agility. The investment is best spent on it’s avionics. TVN and aero kits will not be at the top of Typhoon pilots wish list. They would pick the striker 2 digital helmet and blk 6 ASRAAM over any aero kit.
Some more info on RADAR 2
The initial plan is to retrofit all 40 of the UK’s Tranche 3 Typhoons with ECRS Mk 2, although there is an option to re-equip Tranche 2 Typhoons as well. Both tranches have the necessary pre-mods to allow the retrofit, but the decision does not need to be made yet.
The Bright Adder test radar will now fly on a Typhoon as part of the ECRS Mk 2 test and evaluation (T&E) effort, along with a number of other test radars and the first three production systems.
The first Radar Two will fly in a Typhoon in 2022 and the T&E fleet will build steadily from there, achieving initial operational capability (IOC) for the ECRS Mk 2 soon after 2025.
A programme insider noted that the September 2020 contract was the fifth cycle of activity that he had personally seen on ECRS Mk 2, and that during those cycles, the schedule and planned timeline had been maintained, giving him confidence that the IOC will be achieved.
A carefully co-ordinated test plan will ensure that an ambitious timetable is achieved, using a comprehensive array of airborne and ground-based test assets.
The latter include Leonardo’s Edinburgh roof lab and test facilities at Warton, where the radar can be operated 24 hours a day, seven days a week if required.
Synthetic and modelling assets will also be employed, reducing programme risk and flight test time. Flight testing is expensive and often limited by weather and asset availability, leading to delays.
In a typical beyond visual range missile engagement, this will allow Typhoon pilots to get the ‘first look’ and the ‘first shot’ and enable them to ‘crank’ harder, turning further away from the enemy fighter. This will leave the Typhoon less vulnerable to a return missile shot, while still keeping the target in the radar’s scan and continuing to support a missile in flight with mid-course updates.”
https://www.key.aero/article/depth-look-eurofighters-next-gen-radar
Just ask the RAF Nigel they’ll tell you 😂
“The maiden flight is anticipated to occur by 2025 ahead of entry into service by 2035. Tempest will replace the Eurofighter Typhoon in RAF service.”
TEMPEST AIRCRAFT CONCEPT
Team Tempest is delivering world firsts in advanced technical capabilities.
The Tempest aircraft will deploy new, game-changing technology and is set to join the RAF fleet from 2035, replacing the Typhoon.
https://www.raf.mod.uk/what-we-do/team-tempest/
like most people Nigel. We will believe it when we see it. I for one certainly hope it sees the light of day. But as with every fighter project before it, the timelines very often slip considerably from the brochures statements. Just ask the RAF. When was the original Typhoon entry to service date again? 1995? then 2000, then 2003, with the first front line sqn forming in 2005. That’s the reality of these very complex and expensive projects.
The problem with that plan is, Tempest doesn’t exist yet. And probably won’t see it entering service before 2040 if it survives the countless spending rounds and the politics. And 6th gen platforms will replace Typhoon, F22, Rafales ect. And without F35 manufacturing and operational experience, Tempest would be even further from becoming a reality. Every comment you make about F35 is the complete opposite from what our Armed Force’s and every single F35 customer says about it’s capability and long term growth potential. It’s going to be in our sky’s for a very long time.
Except it won’t be in operational service for another 5/6 year’s, maybe more And F35 radar development certainly isn’t going to stand still.
Hi Nigel, Robert;
Always interesting to read you two locking horns over the Typhoon and F-35 😉
Keeps us on our toes 😆
It’s always good to know the facts that’s for sure! In short, purchase more Typhoons.
With an up-to-the-moment, accurate and comprehensive picture of the environment, a Typhoon pilot can make sure they don’t even come within range of potentially-dangerous radar.
However, staying away from threats isn’t always possible, so the second core element of stealth is to make yourself hard to see.
Here, the Typhoon EW suite employs a range of electronic countermeasures that allows the aircraft to digitally hide its signature, becoming invisible to radar, or to digitally create a complex and confusing picture (noise) for a threat operator, denying them a clean targeting opportunity and preventing them from launching a missile in the first place.
https://world.eurofighter.com/articles/digital-stealth
Hi Nigel, I certainly wouldn’t be adverse to a top-up Typhoon purchase by the MoD (or at least keeping T1). Although admittedly, I’m a bit of a Typhoon fan boy!
But I do also feel that the capabilities of the F-35 are a significant transformation in Situational Awareness (SA).
I guess that I agree with both of you!
But where to invest scarce resources – that is the pertinent question. Beyond my pay scale!
I think most people missed the tractor bit !!!!!!!! 😆
Surely it’s the Toyota hi lux pick up trucks with stingers on the back
Haven’t you seen Ukraine farmers towing off Russian kit with their tractors?
I think it is a sad fact that Mr Putin sees the West as soft, we are weak militarily after years of cutbacks, and the fact that mainland Europe is now hooked on Russian oil and gas. But he has hot thought out his campaign despite the fact that he has had a number of years to plan it out. I believe that the sanctions on Russia are more likely to make Putin use his Nuc’s before he loses control of the government.
Only my opinion’ but I believe the Americans still have a direct line into the Kremlin to help stave off a Nuclear exchange I think they should be on the phone bending the ears of the Russians to try and talk some sense into them or give them a get out of jail free card if they can set up an alternative government with the cutting of sanctions as a gift if they take control of the government.
I doubt Putin expected this level of sanctions, I dont think anyone did!
The gameplan from the captured war plans seems to have been take Kyiv within 72 hours and the whole country within 14 days and then you can transition from active combat to occupation and begin repairing the international relations (sanctions gradually removed as people choose commerce and jobs over the heart strings).
Your are right but I think Putin’s miscalculation will have ratifications for a long time to come as he is not a person to back down so unless we can come up with a plan to put down this Rabid dog we are all going to be dragged into this war, but our politicians and military leaders must have there hoops twitching as we have very little to put towards the war. Maybe the rabid dog will wait 10 years so we can get our armed forces up to speed.
I’ve been thinking similar, surely someone, both diplomats and intelligence, has contacts who they will be giving the signals to that sanctions etc can be lifted if a more moderate government can be installed.
It’s the only way I can see this ending without at some point having to go head to head with Russia militarily.
The only way is for the Russians to take away the power that Mr Putin has at the moment but I do not thing he will go willingly!!
I suggested exactly the same the other day but was told they should stay as it shows weakness in the face of bullies.
Backing someone into a corner is inherently dangerous and there needs to be an off ramp.
Absolutely, like it or not Putin is in charge of Russia until the Russians do something about it.
We need to give him a way of saving face. A UN force of peacekeepers going in, primarily made up of non NATO countries. With the Russians going home and a guarantee that Ukraine will not join NATO or the EU within the next 25+ years, more if necessary.
Sanctions can be lifted and Putin can claim whatever he wants domestically. At least it stops the war and allows Ukraine to be free, albeit probably without Donbas and Crimea. Those would probably need to be recognised as part of Russia.
Many won’t like it but they aren’t the ones dying protecting their country and homes.
Or we make sure Putin stumbles in Ukraine, so all his domestic enemies pounce on his weakness.
Who are these domestic enemies, how long would that take and what’s left of Ukraine and it’s people by the time it happens, if it happens?
Well, there was this bloke called the Czar who was fighting an unpopular war in the region of the Ukraine… what happened to him?
The head of the FSB & anti drug police, were both from St Petersberg like Putin. The press suddenly did its job of exposing corruption in both organisations, which had leaked each others crimes to the press. It was a turf war to see who was top dog. Putin stayed quiet. When the reputations of both leaders were trashed, Putin stepped in & sacked both of them. That way he got rid of two potential rivals. Putin has done this to many in Russia. One day they are rich & powerful, then out in the wilderness. Putin does not anyone to equal him. Those he has ruined, are biding their time.
Bravo, Rob, Bravo.
It is so easy, so easy. Why NATO did not offer that in the first place is beyond me. It is not necessary for the defence of NATO countries to keep adding members, Ukraine included.
Why shouldn’t Ukraine be allowed to join NATO? They’re a sovereign nation and it’s not for Russia to decide what their neighbours do.
If Russia wasn’t an asshole neighbour in the first place then maybe the countries near it wouldn’t feel like that they needed to join NATO.
Sanctions should stay until Russian troops leave Ukraine. Personally I’d have them pay reparations to Ukraine for the next 20 years, too.
How long will this war go on, how many dead and how much of Ukraine will be left by the time sanctions have any affect on the leadership in Russia? No one knows the answer to that. In an ideal world Ukraine would be free to choose if it wants to apply for NATO or EU membership, but it isn’t an ideal world and they are being killed and bombed right now with no end in sight.
Of course, what will likely happen in the situation you describe Ukraine being split in half ala East/West Germany.
West Ukraine being democratic and part of NATO, East Ukraine being occupied by Russia.
Beginning of the 2nd Cold War.
Possibly, but I wasn’t suggesting going quite that far. Donbas and Crimea, if they have to give up access to the Sea of Avov (spelling approximate) ok, but not much else and definitely not Odesa. All hypothetical of course. Mad Vlad must be willing to take a way out. Less of a country is better than no country.
If that were to happen then the rest of Ukraine must be allowed to join NATO. Finland and Sweden must be accepted quickly, too. All three fast-tracked.
Then we need to boost defence spending to expand and add depth to our armed forces; money to be spent on increasing lethality and boosting numbers.
Even if what you say happens and a peace is restored, Europe must wean itself off Russian gas and oil permanently.
Talks would be doomed to fail if that was NATO’s stance. The UN to be the guarantor of peace in Ukraine with a peacekeeping force there. Finland and Sweden may well change their mind if everything calmed down.
At the monment it seems deafening that Putin may talk, make agreements & ceasefires but he’ll not be bound by anything. We simply can’t trust him.
I’d trust Putin as far as I could throw John Prescott!
Always provide a face saving apparatus.
To paraphrase the late great fictional Sir Humphrey Appleby.
Or to take one from Terry Waite.
‘After a negotiation always leave a doorway where both parties can leave the room together.”
Not sure how to achieve that with Putin – but what is needed is ultimately as successful a transformation as Germany / Japan after 1945, by different means.
But that is perhaps a Generation Game.
Such considerations & civilities were lost to Putin when he declared Ukraine not a state & invaded them(again!).
Entirely correct.
Yet it is the only real long term way ahead to avoid Cold War 3, after the Cold War 2 we have really been in since 2010 or so.
Putin has been offered multiple ‘off ramps’. He isn’t interested in saving face or saving lives, he is only interested in achieving his objectives. The majority of Russians believe the propaganda that state media put out. The only way to stop him is to bog him down in Ukraine so the Russian army cannot deliver what he wants. Unfortunately we aren’t supplying enough aircraft, kit or means to do that. So millions of Ukrainians will end up displaced, many more dead and Ukraine occupied. NATO will look like an impotent organisation unable to act to even protect their next door neighbour. Then it’s China’s turn. Taiwan obviously, maybe something more exotic. Either way we won’t do anything, so it’s over to you Xi.
Putin had no scruples backing Ukraine into a corner & beating them mercilessly.
I do believe that Mr Putin himself has back himself into a corner but that said we must give him room to get out, that is assuming he wants an out,
I think we have to keep trying but at the moment we do not have a lot of choice unless we can convince him to stop for 10 years while we get our armed forces up to speed.
I think he knows we have nothing in the locker room so he is going to keep pushing and that will drag us all into a war that we are going to struggle with.
Thing is though his forces arent exactly performing are they, if they come up against much better trained and equipped forces he can clearly see they wont stand a chance.
Which if he starts losing and being pushed back towards Russia itself then he has the ultimate justification to press the red button.
Putin doesnt want a conventional war with the West, even if its just a handful of European nations as he clearly can see his forces wont last long.
You are right our (Nato’s) equipment and the average squaddie is far superior to that which Putin can feild but after years of being gutted by the do good’ers who insist this sort of thing would never happen we are a bit thin on the ground. This is why he has chosen this moment to invade Ukraine. What he has not counted on is the resistance from the people of the Ukraine and the amount of sanctions Russia has been hit with.
So in my meagre estimation we have limited options.
I am not normally one for the middle ground but at the moment it looks like option 3 would be the best one to follow at the moment. I do not think he is looking for an off ramp just yet but in the next week or so when the full extent of the casualties starts to be come apparent in Russia then I believe it will be the Russians themselves that give him the good news.
Options 1 and 2 will just end up in the same scenario very quickly as you say and hes not going to stand by as Nato forces roll up to the Russian border.
Its no coincidence the US sent over the constant phoenix device as they are clearly concerned hes going to start using small tactical weapons on the ground. Part of me thought thats why they disturbed the lands around Chernobyl to put up a radiation mask in the air to possibly hide the use of small scale nuclear weapons.
Hopefully it does not come to this as if they do its a severe escalation and im sure the West/Nato despite saying they arent going to go in must have a few red lines themselves to trigger a response against Russia.
Only my opinion but I believe that he is taking control of the Nuclear power stations so that he can stage manage the evidence that Ukraine has its own enrichment program for Nuclear weapons so that he can then have some justification for using his. I hope I am 100% wrong but I have a feeling that he is desperate and is looking at every option.
Was it not the great Sun Zsu himself who once said
“Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the face”
I think that was Mike Tyson.
I don’t know about you but Nestor’s comment did make me laugh out loud.
Nah, DaveyB has me rolling around the floor.
Currently the F-35s seem most useful as ISR assets. Their strike capabilities are basically dependent on the SPEAR programme which is currently far from complete.
The Germans’ substantial emergency defence funding goes some small way to amending the sustained neglect of the past decade. Parliament – and indeed every NATO nation – should seriously consider funding something similar, in addition to raising defence budgets back up to their proper levels. Make no mistake, such a measure will not accelerate by much the introduction, integration, production and useful deployment of new capabilities, but it would at least increase the readiness of existing capabilities in the near term.
Is it a bit far fetched to describe the F35 as “world beating” when it hasn’t actually been used in combat against any hostile forces with advanced fighters?
That’s the end of any plans to deploy Queen Elizabeth as a ‘strike carrier’ in the next few months. 617 Squadron can’t be in two places at once, and with the maintenance heavy Lightning needs months of down-time to recover after every deployment. Maybe 809 NAS could reform a year earlier than expected with perhaps 6 aircraft on strength but that won’t constitute a credible air group. Basically the UK needs another dozen F-35B’s now, and also for them to be cleared to use Meteor AAM’s!
https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/480xany/8/1/4/81814_f35bmeteorcjamiehunter_mbda_623851.jpg
Meteor is the more important factor as it is much better than AMRAAM but I don’t think that it is such an issue right now deploying PoW with no F35B as they are more useful for air to air on land and given they can’t carry any ASMs anyway they will hardly be able to protect it. Hopefully 6 meteors can be carried per F35B
There are good reasons why the Uks don’t attack that column. If, as it seems, it is unable to manoeuvre off road due to the mud, is short of fuel and food then it is actually one big POW camp that the Uks don’t have to feed. If the Russians want to resupply it they will need to withdraw most of it in order to get fuel tankers towards the front of their column, that or man handle jerry cans up. Also the Uks are now saving their remaining ammunition for those forces that are actually a threat. The Russian officers weren’t allowed to fight the battle in front of them but had to slavishly keep to a plan that was in the process of implosion. That’s the problem with dictatorships; if you don’t allow people to think you end up doing dumb things.
It seems to me that there is one big choice the Allies have to make and after that obviously other choices then need to be made.
The big decision is whether we consider Ukrane sovereignty or the avoidance of conflict with Russia is the most important, it seema to me that this has not yet been decided.
Any thoughts as to what the Ukrainians used to down this Russian helicopter?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-60630352
Well there was definitely no survivors from that. Given the low level I would presume a stinger but I am probably wrong. It would be quite a large missile.
Definitely none.
Looking at the exhaust trail left by the missile it looks like a very close shoot down at roughly 2 o’clock to the flight path. The Ukrainians have claimed over 30 helicopters so far, watching this video I can believe it.
I’ve seen some comments on-line, Sean, that the kill it was probably too low for a Stinger.
A Polish Piorun MANPAD has been suggested instead. (The Poles dropped off supplies last month).
It did seem low for a Stinger, but I don’t know if it has a minimum effective height. The launch position and the opportune video camera, it’s almost appears that Ukrainians were already set up simply waiting for it.
Yep looked like a well thought out SAM trap
It was a Piorun, its essentially a Polish manufactured (Grom) version of the Soviet 9K38 Igla with an upgraded seeker head. It was known in development as the Grom-M.
Just come across this
https://twitter.com/uaweapons/status/1500257767365435395?s=21
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1500099189061173249?s=21
“No Fly Zone- the short pitch: UN authorised; defensive only; Article V suspended for NATO participants; engage hostiles inside Ukraine airspace/border only (not Crimea); Ukrainian air ops continue in de-conflicted operating areas”.
See retired RAF senior airman @gregbagwell
Agreed, I think UN sanctioned is the only way to do it. Those NATO members would have to declare that losing an aircraft would not constitute grounds for invoking Article 5. Ideally involve none-NATO members too, though the options there are limited.
I think it would probably have to include the Ukrainian Air Force too to get UN backing. But I would expect Zelensky would be fine with that caveat.
I’m pretty sure Russia would veto and no fly zone at the UN.
Hi Martin
Like you, I’m pretty sure the Russians would indeed try and veto a NFZ – but that’s for the diplomats to sort out. And those at the UN are the best in the world. And as Greg has tweeted –
“But it is about time we reviewed a system that allows a protagonist to veto their own sanction when it is this blatant”.
What I’m trying to get across is that people who aren’t professional airmen are complacently claiming a NFZ isn’t feasible. But in Greg Bagwell we have a retired RAF Air Marshall who has gone on record – and stated that it is possible (albeit difficult). I’ve posted one of his NFZ diagrams below.
Reports suggest the Ukrainians seem to be doing a good job in shooting down Russian aircraft! But they are still crying out for a NFZ – and I think we have an obligation to try and facilitate that request.
I would keep an eye on Greg’s Twitter feed (and Justin Bronk) – there is a lot of good content and opinion on the air-war.
This of course means that both carriers will be short of F35 aircraft. Do we have 23 or 24, I can’t remember. Lets hope we do not loose any of these precious assets while rattling the NATO sabre.
After yesterdays(5 Mar) RuAF performance it will be russia asking for a no fly zone so that they dont need to put aircraft up.
With the reserve Kalibr stocks being heavily depleted and little in the way of PGMs for attack aircraft the RuAF is going to need to go low to drop dumb iron. If it continues doing low level sorties then its going to have a lot of really bad days.
One of the captured pilots has already been OSINT’d being stood next to Putin and Assad in Syria after they successfully flattening Alepo. Lets just say that the guy was the wrong side of 40 ate a lot of pies and would I guess struggle to finish a Bleep Test. If he is the best of the best and a Syrian combat vet then things are not good for the RuAF
A rather reliable and neutral source ( They report Ru and Ukr losses in equal measure and validate using Geo Location, pictures, OSINT ) confirmed yesterdays RuAF air losses as
1 x Su 30 Flanker
2 x Su 34 Fullback
2 x Su 25 Frogfoot
2 x Mil 24/35 gunships
2 x Mil 8 Transport Helos
1 x drone.
Ignoring the loss of experienced pilots that’s a lot of supposedly high tech front line russian kit up in smoke from SAMs and there are now a lot of SAMs in Ukraine.
I really wish we would send them something beyond stinger. A bunch of Eastern European members have heavier Russian stuff like s300. It’s not the latest but s300 is enough to give NATO air operations pause for though so it is probably devastating to mad vlad and his collection of antiques. Starstreak could be another candidate from us. It can also be shoulder mounted.
The S300 is highly regarded indeed – that’s why the Ukraine Armed Forces already have it.
Morning. Outstanding sitrep, tnx
Keep reporting the good news GB👌.
I resemble that description… ! haha 😂
Also I read/heard recently from an informed source that, for cost reasons, RuAF pilots average 50% less monthly flight hours than a typical equivalent in a western air force and substantially less than that compared to a US pilot. If so that has to have some impact on capability. Regardless of how experienced the aircrew are.
Would you think?
Hi Richard,
Yes – the advanced combat skills of Russian fast-jet pilots have always been hampered by the low number of flying hours, even during the Cold War.
They are certainly good “stick-and-rudder” men, though – as some dynamic air-show displays have demonstrated.
But professionalism is also lacking, as can be seen through the number of crashes at air-shows – MiG-29(s) and SU-27 hitting the ground at Fairford and Paris spring to mind. Check out these on You-Tube, if you have time.
Indeed i remember the RAF Fairford crash very well as i was there – from what i gather the Russian Contingent weren’t shy in exploring the delights of London with their new found freedoms.
Yes I was at Fairford too that day, sitting up in the stand. The collision happened practically right in front. Ironically the aircraft were in yellow/blue that day. It was certainly exciting to have the Russians participate and recall feeling a real sense of optimisim that these guys – for so long in black hats – were now our friends. Sad.
Here is the li k to the info I was referring to. As I said it’s as unbiased as it can be and pretty even handed.
The Russian losses are staggering…
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com
RAF deploys F35s whilst massive RN carrier simultaneously deploys with with no more than a few helos. A sorry state of affairs. We should revisit the split buy to give the RAF the F35A it reportedly wants, and the give the Navy operational control over its own (F35B) jets otherwise the carriers will always loose out when resources are so scarce. Since so many European countries are buying the A version, there should be critical mass and economies of scale in supporting the fleet.
Which magical source of funding are we going to get the cash from for this?
Not disagreeing but we dont have the money, quite simply that is the problem.
A reasonable possibility of some more funding judging by recent press articles. Let’s hope.
Lets see, depends how much money gets put up and what capability gaps it is used to fill as opposed to just adding newer platforms.
Realistically we wont get the A variant and might look to replace T1 Typhoons with a newer variant that is more capable.
The F35’s until they are updated themselves we dont want too many being delivered as they will just need updating not long after delivery at further expense.
Take it from the Army Command and Defence Nuclear. Rewarding planning screw ups with £23bn of extra spend, when Air Command and surface shipbuilding have to take cuts is just bad practice and will lead to more screw ups and more waste.
The F35s are flying from Marham, to Northern Poland And the carrier is supporting an amphibious exercise with 35,000 NATO troops. So it isn’t a sorry state if affairs. Just different operational requirements. When the Invincible class supported similar exercises in the far North, we didn’t take Harrier’s.
I’m just concerned that have become used to accepting certain capability gaps using a risk-based approach. The risk has changed so our calculus ought to as well.
I agree, but F35 numbers will increase, and I’m sure a new defense review will be conducted, and properly funded this time.
Hi OOA
Would it be better to more Typhoons instead of mixing in another type of jet 👍
Intuitively I would think the newer plane is a better bet but as an interested layman (but a layman nonetheless), I’d happily defer to the experts on that. What I do feel strongly about is not accepting that recent history is any index whatsoever of the adequacy of our posture. Circumstances can and do change – history is full of examples – and we must respond. I’ve read Germany’s recent change of direction on defence described as a ‘screeching handbrake turn’ which I thought was rather apt. I’m not sure we’re quite in that situation but I’m fed up – in fact sick of – reading about frigates with no sonars, carriers with no planes, tanks with obsolete guns, aircraft weapons taking years to be integrated etc etc etc.. People can and do try to explain these things away but who are we kidding? Only Ourselves I would suggest. Putin has called our collective bluff and despite the bluster, I have the impression that we’re concerned about staring him down with conventional forces. Not only does this potentially speed up the nuclear escalation ladder but it also sends a message to China and the rest of the world: The only credible Western power is the USA. Are we really prepared to settle for that? Sorry I know it’s a bit of a rant but this is serious. The letter to my MP is in the virtual post.
No rant at all- I think you summed up well how most of us feel.
Any info on how many Russian helicopter gunships have been shot down? Do they have any kind of sideways ejection seat; obviously cannot do it through the blades?
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html
Hi Puffing Billy
The Kamov KA-50/52 gunship is equipped with ejector seats.
That aircraft has been widely deployed in Ukraine.
When the ejection handle is pulled, the rotor-blades are firstly blown off, then the seat’s rocket motor is fired.
I think it’s the only such system in the world on a helicopter – and has been used during the last ten days!
Thanks Alan. I have often wondered about the vulnerability of these relatively slow, low flying gunships on a modern battlefield – with cheap MANPADS galore around. I know they carry defensive equipment like flares, chaff etc but how much of this kit is carried to be effective when threats of different types are coming from all directions. From what you say there is no escape from an Apache gunship once hit. That video of the downed Russian helicopter gunship is scary.
Hi Billy, In Western gunships (like Apache) I think the pilots are relatively well-protected in the cockpit for a hard impact.
But that video of the downed Russian helicopter is terrifying – no escape from that one. Looks like a Mil-24 – part gunship/part troop transport.
Apologies if its been sign-posted here already – couldn’t see it. I thought contributors and readers here might find this assessment of the poor performance of the VKS (Russian Aerospace Forces) of interest. Its from the RUSI (UK’s leading defence and security think tank); published 4 March. It questions the VKS capability to conduct complex air operations. I won’t attempt to summarise, you can read it (c. 7 min read.)
https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/rusi-defence-systems/russian-air-force-actually-incapable-complex-air-operations
Yes – an excellent read, Richard.
Justin Bronk is good-value – see also @gregbagwell for some great content.
It makes you wonder that perhaps for decades we have been basing Russian aircraft combat effectiveness on a sort of “top trump” basis.
Impressive figures on the card, but divorced from reality.
We will see I suppose as the final die has not been cast yet, however surely this is giving us some great intel.
AA
We should immediately supply Uks with all Warsaw Pact legacy aircraft which the Uks can operate. This is a no brainer. It improves dramatically the Uks ability to resist and also improves NATO’s ability to operate because the US should backfill all such donations for F16’s which are on the way to the bone yard anyway.
Perhaps that’s why Putin played the nuke card so early? He knows his mob is mostly shit in every aspect and NATO will roll him back to Siberia in a month, nukes excluded.
I read that the other day and it really struck a chord as being a very plausible explanation to their apparent ‘underperformance’.
As Armchair Admiral states below, maybe we’ve overestimating the capability of all Russian forces for the last decade or so?
Interesting article in Guardian. Poland will give Ukraine their mig29 fleet. Approx 30 aircraft in exchange for US F16s. Thats a good deal
I think Bulgaria and Romania have legacy Warsaw Pact aircraft too. Give the whole lot to Ukraine who can operate them without further training and replace the lot with F16s (on the way to the bone yard anyway) increases NATO capabilities too. It’s not the time to quibble about money.