Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Netherlands Halts F-16 Sale to U.S. Company - Sending to Ukraine Instead
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 02. 2024
- Mover, Gonky, and guest host Casmo discuss recent news of the Netherlands halting the sale of F-16s to Draken so they can give them to Ukraine instead. www.defensenew...
Every Monday at 8PM ET, Mover (F-16, F/A-18, T-38, 737, helicopter pilot, author, cop, and wanna be race car driver) and Gonky (F/A-18, T-38, A320, dirt bike racer, author, and awesome dad) discuss everything from aviation to racing to life and anything in between. Guest host Casmo (AH-64, OH-58, and 737 pilot) joins us! Send your voice message for the show: podcasters.spo...
Looking for a good book? www.cwlemoine.com
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Views presented are my own and do not represent the views of DoD or its Components.
We, Dutch, have score to set with Putin: 198 civilian deaths in the MH17. Supporting Ukraine is quite uncontroversial.
Another good reason to send F16's from the Dutch and other smaller NATO partners is that Putin will make himself even more ridiculous if he says to in a live-or-death struggle with the Netherlands and Norway.
Passenger jets get shot down in wars. Remember when the US killed 290 passengers on a jet? Do you think that grudge should remain against the US?
the odd part is ukraine is the only ones that had the anti aircraft system that shot down that plane and also wouldnt let investigators to the crash site my dad died on it and it was absolutley Ukraine that shot it down the state department of the US told me so how about you stop trying to use deaths to push your bullshit theories so your score is with ukraine the people of the donbass didnt have the system direct quote from the state department to us
Why don’t the Dutch do their own fighting?
@@EdFertikOn the western side, it is the Ukrainians who do the fighting. Russians on the other side. What are you suggesting?
Mh17 strayed into no fly zone
Might not be goodness of heart but the Dutch are still very, very pissed for Russia for shooting down the MH17 with many Dutch passengers on board.
Yeah, sure. But we also have a prime minister who want to become the new head of nato.
I wish we were as pissed about MH17 as you believe, and I still am.
Everyone knows someone from somewhere who died on that plane.
and?@@brulsmurf
Highly doubt EVERYONE personally knew someone who died on it but agree@@sybrandwoudstra9236
You are right.
The advantage of the F-16 over the Gripen is availability. There are lots of F-16s out there, over 4000 produced, and they’re gradually being replaced by F-35s, so there are more countries willing to donate F-16s than Gripens.
Yepp. Love the Gripen, but it's not a plane for big numbers. If Sweden joins NATO the Gripen program is as good as dead. If Sweden is in the same war as the rest of NATO, they won't be able to supply anybody but themselves. No wonder Gripen user Czechia is replacing them with F-35s & Gripen user Hungary is dragging its feet ratifying Sweden's accession to NATO.
Is it a question of "or" ... or is it a question of "and?"
@@nevisstkitts8264 Well, Ukraine's maintenance crews might prefer that it's one or the other, but not both? I feel for them with all the different ground vehicles they have to maintain. Every additional system is an additional training complication, an additional parts supply chain, etc. But I expect they'd take "and" if it meant more fighters, no question. They can't afford to refuse any help, and the Gripen's a great platform.
And its also hard to get mig-29, su-27 and su-24 from somewhere else (and their parts). Having a system that don't need the mechanicus to talk an translate the machine spirits between former soviet and nato parts is an improvement.
Agree, availability. The Gripen was designed for just this kind of scenario, operating from roadside bases. But there are so few of the Gripens. The F-16 is not at all well suited for this scenario, operating from road bases, but there's lots of them.
Thats what i call a true allie! God bless the dutch and the great Netherlands, truely moving decision, somthings are just above money. Thank you Netherlands!
Kudos to the Netherlands for their generous contributions to the Ukrainian defense forces.
I don’t really like that, because our own air force is bleeding out right now.
Unlike America you can rely on UK and France Poland, and Finland with their naval airforce and nuclear deterrent capabilities (former two) Nobody is getting through Finland fast in a ground attack@@snipedduck743
Not really. Theyre needed in Ukraine NOW. When Ukraine wins with the help of these planes then Nederland won’t need theirs. Also creates time for Nederland to purchase more modern equipment.@@snipedduck743
Not 🙄
@@snipedduck743, no it’s not.
Sure, Gripen is a great aircraft. The problem is, and has always been, that SAAB has only built a couple of hundred of them, and almost all of those are still in front-line service with the air forces that acquired them. So "Gripens to Ukraine" would almost certainly mean that some country (presumably Sweden, since they're the only country that has more than a couple of dozen of the type) would have to run down their active forces in order to provide the aircraft. For contrast, I believe there are more F-16s in the process of being retired and replaced by F-35s _just in European NATO countries_ than there are Gripens in the whole world. So F16s might not be perfect for Ukraine's situation, but they're a LOT more available.
Gripen would be PERFECT for Ukraine. But sadly - as you say - there aren't enough. Even here in Sweden, the C/D won't be sold off when the E gains numbers. They will be upgraded as far as possible with that airframe.
We do have a fleet of Gripens in Hungary that could be handed over though... Not sure that Hungary has shown that they really *need* them...
I do believe SAAB responded regarding the 'gripens to ukraine' movement that they could ramp up production numbers for Gripen E
@@skagerstrom
Exactly! F-16 are being retired by the Netherlands, Belgium and Denmark at the moment so it's pretty easy to transfer a Combat ready jet without a lot of work to Ukraine. And they are available now!
Don't know how many is still capable of flying, but 15 times more F16s (4600) have been produced than Gripen (Close to 300. All generations A-F.).
Agreed, it just seems most of Europe's weapons only serve their delusions. Never close to enough built for war.
Thank you Netherlands from Ireland.
Ukraine is already getting AIM-120s as part of the NASAMS transfers from Norway. So all the transfer requirements have been met over a year ago.
@@RussianThunderrr Oh they're bombing Ukraine to a very limited manner. But what is not happening are successful missile strikes on airfields. Russia's ability to conduct missile strikes of any strategic outcome is so limited now that we did not see a successful campaign against Ukrainian electric infrastructure like we saw last winter. The only large strikes that make it thru Ukrainian air defense are strikes against civilian Kruschovka's. Which I assume if they have any military value are being used as things like listening posts or communications relay posts.
@@RussianThunderrr do you understand the difference between a missile on the ground and a missile on the pylon of a jet and how does it change its capability? Has Andrew said ANYTHING about that delivery of AIM-120s somehow could stop strategic bombers from launching their missiles a hundred miles away from the frontline?
@@TedFanat AIM-9 as an antitank, AIM-7-Sea Sparrow,ESSS
the entire point of nasam is it uses the same missiles from the jet without modification.@@TedFanat
One important point about NASAMs though is that (from what I read at one point, don’t know how true it was then or is now) is the AIM120s provided for that were B models, which are LEAGUES different from present day AMRAAMs
One correction to the quoted piece. It notes the Dutch F-16 fleet once was 138 aircraft, however it was once 213 aircraft.
Yeah, and then the cold war ended and we kept reducing. Not just the air force, but also the army and navy. Now we're slowly expanding again. But yeah, it's slow going.
Thank you, Netherlands, for showing the civilized world how it's done. This is the advantage of a country without subversive and seditious people in their gov.
Just wait a few months and after last election we will have subversive and seditious people in our government. Fortunately, civil servants in the Netherlands are professionals and not political appointees.
Don’t worry Trump wins in 24 and all snowflakes will cry 🤣🤣
I believe that the MiGs they have today are more maintenance intensive than the F16s. Besides that, Ukraine is not some third world country. Ukraine was in many ways the core of Soviet air industry.
Ukraine is far from perfect. Extremely corrupt and a crooked economy. And many people are very poor.
Maybe a less dangerous Cleveland comes to mind
All Russian military planes have intake doors which close during landing, takeoff and taxing. When the intake doors are closed, air is vented from grills which open on the top of the airplane. This is to protect Russian planes from FOD. Russian military airports are like junk yards, they leave a lot of rusty broken equipment lying around, which is different from the pristine US airports. From a maintenance point of view US planes are sports cars and Russian ones are tractors. This has been the philosophies of these militaries for well over 60 years and nothing is about to change that.
I thought the MiG 29s were more battle hardy and easier to maintain. As they put it “MiG you need one tool to fix a problem, an F-16, ten tools”
@@Tipsi89 the mig 29 was upgraded many times to be somewhat competitive in a modern world, so it has become, purely out of necessity, what it was made to avoid: very technically complicated. You can't just make a 'simple' jet fighter for all environments anymore. If it has to be able to do everything, it's just going to get complicated.
@@Tipsi89 There are NATO countries that operated both at one time, it'd be nice to here opinions on it. I have a feeling last generation Soviet and modern Russian equipment aren't so easy to maintain.
The note that the US is somehow paying for The Netherlands providing Ukraine with the F-16M's with the insinuation that The Netherlands will get benefits while upgrading to the F-35A is off IMHO. The Dutch were a development partner of the F-35A and have thus invested in these aircraft and have bought those F-35A's sometime ago. Where the US will most likely help is providing logistical help to the Ukranians and helping in the joint Dutch-Danish-Norwegian operation to train the Ukranian pilots and groundpersonnell.
And then there' is MH17. They have193 very good reasons to just hand over those jets for free and more.
@@menninkainen8830 We don't forget.
No doubt some politicians in the US will portray it that they are paying in full 4 the Dutch to send them
@@deanrobinson4129 No doubt. Lying seems to be the norm for a lot of US politicians these days. The Trump-appointed ambassador to the Netherlands tried that in his first interview in office. Yeah.... that didn't go down well. We don't like bullshit.
Great choise of my neighbour, thank you for securing the safety of the EU and the Netherlands.
I think the biggest boost the F-16 will be for Ukraine is in employment of AGM-88, they have those already but can't use them as effectively as they otherwise could as the missile can't talk to the planes they have. As for the prepared field part, Patriot has been shown to be able to protect it's self and it's area from the best that Russia has in inventory, hypersonics included.
Very. At the moment, they've been forced to only use them in the mode where target locaitons are known ahead fo tiem, in pre-planned co-ordinates. Being able to use them on radars detected in flight, will be hugely advantageous.
The NATO F-16's have on-board ECM which the USAF is still using external pods, Ukrane already has AIM-120 (A and C-3/5 models) HARM (not HARM-ER). These aircraft will be able to effect the Forward Edge of Battle. You are correct as to airfield requirements and the maintenance will probably be contracted maintenance. This will be interesting to see.
It takes along time to train a fighter mechanic, weapons and avionics are different skills so likely civilians will be doing all three.
@@GoonyMclinux years and years of training to efficiently service a jet maybe some heavy work will be done outside of Ukraine if they can still fly it out and back. Contracter ground crew hope they have plenty of cash to pay those guys!!!,
@@Rob-vv5yn yeah, civilians.
What makes you think Ukranian ground crews are not being trained just like the pilots are? Or that the Ukrainian airforce doesn't have competent technicians to begin with?
@@CarlAlex2 they don't have any technicians for those planes, you can't just throw a dude that worked on russian crap on there and expect something to get fixed, just replacing a wing takes years and years of doing it to even get it correct, the electronic troubleshooting alone takes a team.
As far as protecting the jets or operating dispersed, Ukraine has known for at least a year that they need to do this, I'm sure they have some smart people working on a solution, and they have some smart allies that know how to operate the jets. They have been protecting their airfields for a couple of years now and it seems certain that the Russians would have taken them out if they could. It's not like the F-16s will arrive and Russia will suddenly wake up and go "we need to take out these airfields". They've been at war for a while and the Ukrainians have been operating fast jets, they have had time to prepare for the complications that the F-16s will bring. There should be no surprises here.
Really? The connected are drinking and dancing in Kiev every night. How can that happen? Not because The Ukraine has prevented the Russians from changing that scenario, but because the Russians have chosen not to turn off the power. The same can be said for a future F-16 base. There can only be 2 or 3 candidates for basing. For one to believe that The Ukraine is successfully defending those bases is delusional. What is accurate is that Russia has chosen not to destroy them. Yet.
@@kennethyoung2221 What's delusional is you. Russia is as powerless as a generator that's run out of gas.
UKR already has AIM-120 on NASAMS and already is using AGM-88 HARM on their Su-27 and MiG-29. Their pilots also are well trained, having actual combat experience against RUS SAMs.
F-16A MLU already is AIM-120 capable anyway, and IIRC doesn't have AIM-7 capability at-least for European variants.
Sure buddy
@@elcormoran1 ; What do you not get in regards to my comment?
@@FirstDagger Don't bother engaging, it is likely a russian vatnik.
I believe AESA RADAR and other compatibility upgrades are planned, and some parts already purchased (RADAR upgrades) on at least a good number of the total delivered from various countries, hence the deployment delay. They also need training aircraft not all are for combat.
The F-16 is the best fighter for Ukraine for one simple reason: it's available now. The NATO Mig-29's have all already been given to Ukraine. Russia won't be selling Ukraine replacement Mig-29's or Su-27's, and nobody has surplus Grippens - they are the latest and greatest, and about as likely to be given to Ukraine as F-35's. After Pearl Harbor the US Navy had to make do with the aircraft and carriers it had, waiting years to get the aircraft and carriers they wanted wasn't an option. That is the situation Ukraine now find themselves in. They need to make do with what they can get. They can't afford to waste time dithering and whinging that that isn't good enough.
I just heard on Canadian news that the Defense Dept will bring 60 million CND, 47 US for maintenance/service on the F-16
Meanwhile in the UK the Ministry Of Defence have looked at the RAF's inventory, and have offered Ukraine a Glider.
We don't have anything they can be trained on, US is behind in deliveries of F35, and next gen fighter still in development. is stormshadow not a big deal? We have no F-16's, F35 and Typhoons only
Yeah well that would be better than supplying a Russian Naval Ship oh Sorry Now Submarine from the Black sea Fleet...HA HA HA🖕Funny Huh!! T**T
about 4:11 so the weird thing is that it does seem to be from the goodness of their (well, our, in my case) heart (we've been trying to send them since at least 2022). There's usually immediately rumours flying around and there've been none. The F-35 deal was signed in early 2015, so that can't be an option. This story also fits the story about Abrams being sent. This heavily involved lobbying from the Netherlands and a lot of couriering between Germany and the US.
And to respond to the later point about it impacting the US: I think that may not be true (at least to the extent implied). Currently there's a lot of pilots being trained using Dutch fighters in Romania which would otherwise have been trained in the US.
The middle man company says the jets need more service so they can be paid for more service. I am totally surprised.
Just want US taxpayer money
I think Draken wanted to pay less money for the F16’s than The Netherlands wanted for the planes. It was just a business negotiation that didn’t go through. And there was also the possibility that Draken would sell the F16’s to Ukraine for a far bigger price than they paid for it. To exclude that change, The Netherlands retracted the sell of the F16’s and gave the planes to Ukraine instead.
Western fighters seem to be real Primadonas. And we can remember that excessive engineering was actually one of the downfalls of the German army in WW2...
Hey, Sweden is a western country, and we practice what is called practical Germanic engineering!
I think NATO jets is a better grouping, haha
@@NotASeriousMooseGripen is 2nd class performer with IT limited thrust to weight ratio, combat range and weapon payload.
Hosted an F-16 squadron at our air show . Great group of pilots who flew aircraft not nearly as well maintained as we keep ours. They had some unique artwork painted on some of the aircraft though.
12:30 The F-16 handles cold weather just fine. The Norwegian Air Force flew them in arctic conditions for more than 40 years and never complained. One of the Norwegian fighter bases is in Lakselv at 70° North. Temperatures down to -20 Celsius (-4 F) is perfectly normal there in winter and it's not at all unusual for it go go below -30 C (-20 F).
Norway has never had F-16s based in Lakselv. But operated at times from there for sure. Biggest base for F-16s was in BODØ and even it is not the coldest place in Norway, it surtainly gets below -20 even down to -30 in the winter.
Russia is waging war against Ukraine, a country that has its border approx. 750 miles from the border of the Netherlands. Contrast that with a commercial company, located in a country that has its closest border over 3000 miles away, on the other side of an ocean. Take a wild guess where the old jets will be sent.
Always shocking and good to remember how small Europe is. I know people who drive 750 miles in a day. I don't think I've done more than 600. But still. 900 in 2 days though is routine.
As an American, I totally support their decision to give them to Ukraine. I am really disappointed in my government not providing Ukraine with more aid, and whatever Europe needs to do to help Ukraine it should be done. It’s baffling how all aid stopped because it’s an election year. The politicians are more interested in their own self interests instead of the interests of the US.
@@Thetequilashooter1your president is too busy supporting genocide in Gaza
I guess for every dollar of material sent to The Ukraine, about 50 cents goes to a corrupt politician in The Ukraine or in the USA. There will be money changing hands on an F-16 donation, and in the end, you will never see an F-16 flown in this war.
@@Thetequilashooter1if you are so righteous why don't you donate your Social Security to Ukraine?
I was about to mention the Grippen when you mentioned it. Its build for the Swedish doctrine of operating them from roads serviced just by an NCO and a few conscripts out of a truck.
Based on the experience from Ukraine I think we need to rethink land doctrine to no longer assume we have air superiority when facing peer or near peer oponents - air denial is just be too effective for that.
Fair point, however, if this is the example, Ukraine was not and is not a peer or near-peer adversary for Russia, so they wouldn't have, and didn't have, any chance of air superiority from Day 1. I don't think operating a very, very small number of available Grippens from a highway, or an airfield for that matter, would have made a difference to where Ukraine is now IRT the air side of this.
Even with F16s and fully up trained pilots, maintenance crews and plenty of ammo supply, they're going to take a lot of human and air frame casualties trying (a) knock down the established air defenses and then (b) make forward progress with ground forces. Could happen of course, but reality isn't with Ukraine in this regard. The Russians aren't super heroes or anything, but It's going to take a lot more blood to knock them back across the border.
Most fighters can operate from roads
@@jeffbeck8993 You think the Ukrainians are less capable of doing air denial than the Russians?
The Russians had a few weeks of air superiority at the outset of the war after having successfully interupted the Ukranian air defence C4I - now flying near the front is death to both parties.
I dont think either party will have the ability to achieve even temporary air superiority any time soon and without that its unlikely they will be able to achieve a breakthrough anywhere.
It's called both the A10 and Harrier. They should be in Ukraine now
There are literally hundreds of F-16's sitting in the desert at Davis-Monthan, are they so far gone from a maintenance perspective that they cannot be recycled/upgraded?
There are almost as many operational jets about to be retired in Europe so it's probably not worth it to pull them out of storage at the moment
Months ago, they were going to be sent to Ukraine and Ukrainian pilots were apparently udnergoing covert training, then teh US govenrment suddenly got cold feet and the training atrophied.
It was a fair while after that European operators decided to take that plunge, instead.
The F-16's that are in the boneyard are older A&B models. They have not had any serious upgrades done to them. The F-16's that Ukr is getting have all been through the Euro MLU and have a lot of life left in them. There are about 185 A & B's in the boneyard. Take a look at them using Google Earth. They are junk. most of them have been sitting out there since the mid 90's. The 151 C & D's are not in much better shape. A lot of them were retired in the early 00's and more have been retired since the early 20's. They are good for targets and parts.
God bless the Netherlands 🇳🇱🙏👍
In my opinion one airframe not many people are disscussing is the Harrier. Yes it´s flight performance is awfull at best, but it is 100% compatibilie with most modern western munitions, and it is designed to be used on improvised airfields.
It would make for a great ground support airframe, with limited AA/sead capability.
Mover thinks resolve was what was lacking in Afghanistan? Twenty years of wasting men and material to enrich the defense contractors wasn't enough?
Yeah, i don't know what these guys' problems are, but my god do they have awful takes....
Amen on the Gripen. Love the Viper as well.
What hurts the readiness of NATO and the US? Allowing Russia to occupy Ukrainian and Crimean airfields, airspace, and territory
With MAGA backing Russia, Iran and North Korea I can understand them sending them direct to Ukraine
The U.S. Air Force stated they were cutting ties with Draken because the aircraft they have aren’t effective against jets like F-22s or F-35s. “What we’re finding now though is these contracts aren’t very effective at Nellis in that high-end training environment,” said Lt. Gen. David Nahom. The military is augmenting its aggressor F-16s with more of the service’s F-35s and F-22s. “Five, six years ago, we wouldn’t be talking about F-35s being adversary air because our adversaries didn’t fly fifth-generation airplanes,” Nahom said. “Well, the Chinese do now. So as the China threat has stepped up, we have to step up our replication.” All from an article on Aviationweek by Brian Everstine. Basically, the aircraft Draken flies are too old and do not reflect the threat and performance the Air Force expects in a near-peer conflict.
All the Adversary Contractors for FWS @Nellis were advised in 2018 in writing to update their Gen III fleet to Gen IV for all the reasons as explained by @reckless97. I am a participant, then and now. The Contractor acted way too slow for Nellis. Even Top Aces were too late with their 30 Ex-IAF F-16 Block 15s and they now (for unexplained reason) only have a ($150M) $30m per annum BFM Contract at Luke "to keep them alive, where as they should have a comprehensive Adversary Air contract with FWS at Nellis.
NATO's current Advanced Gen V combat training Doctrine states real metal Adversary aircraft are required for proper advanced combat training.
Currently and unfortunately, except for one airforce, the US, no one else is providing proper live/metal advanced combat training for the Gen V capability Space because they do not have the capabilities or the budget.
But this has to change or all the non US F-35s' pilots will not be properly trained to fly their F-35s to their designed combat capabilities.
Yeah but the only question I have that would truly explain it, did Draken lose the contract before or after Biden was elected?
@@chrissinclair4442 Draken did not legally "Lose their Nellis Contract". FWS simple elected to not activate a provision in the Contract for it to be extended, as had been normal practice. So technically Draken didn't "Get Fired" but the manner in which FWS did it and required Draken to depart Nellis within 6 weeks, was a clear signal, the Draken was essentially fired.
Thankyou Netherlands for giving direct help to Ukraine 👏👏🙏🙏
I don’t think it’s debatable that the F-16 will be effective in Ukraine. They need a platform that can launch Storm Shadow/SCALP, and they’re running out off SU-25s to do it with (and the Storm Shadows need to be modified for the SU-24). Having an air platform that can fire a wide variety of NATO-donated munitions is critical, and the F-16 is very appropriate for that purpose.
Additionally, the Ukrainians have been strategic in what they ask for, and have put it to good use in every case. In the case of HIMARS and drones, we’re learning tactics from THEM. Using HIMARS as a single missile shoot-and-scoot sniper to take out depots, and as counter-battery fire? Genius. So if they’re asking for F-16s, I trust that they’ve considered the options.
I believe you mean the SU-24 Fencer rather than the Frogfoot. I’m not sure the F-16 has been made capable of firing Storm Shadows but Ukraine is reportedly in the makings of a deal to receive a dozen Mirage 2000Ds from France.
@@BullGator-kd6geabout the Mirage 2000Ds, it is just a supposition based on the interest shown by the Ukrainians for the airplane, but France didn’t say anything about that and it will most likely not happen since there are only a very small numbers of 2000Ds in the French air and space force and that they can’t spare anyone.
But, there are some 2000Ns that have been retired a few years ago and are in storage…. With some work these 2000Ns could be in flying condition again and modernised to operate the SCALP and maybe even a Thales pod to launch guided ammunition… who knows
Edit: due to the nuclear role of the 2000N, all airplanes cant be sold to or given to another country and were broken.
They aren't going to move the needle. There aren't an endless supply of storm shadows and they aren't going to make triple stacked landmines disappear.
@@ScrapKing73You point about HIMARS... Why wouldn't something with the name "High Mobility" and the rockets come in pods be designed to launch and run? We didn't learn anything from them. Only thing we might learn is their arcgis artillery platform and drone warfare.
Mover, is there some reason you said that they couldn't operate from forward based roads with F-16s? Ukraine has never ever done that with anything and as far as I know has no plans to do so. If the F-16 is so FOD sensitive that it can't operate in anything except pristine environments, how come it did so well in the desert with sand getting into everything?
It didn’t. Rocks were swept constantly.
@@CWLemoinePoland is doing that. czcams.com/video/OsdVVIM_qh8/video.htmlsi=7grJKOSbUnCHyhGD
@@CWLemoine It didn't? I beg to differ. Two hundred and forty-nine F-16s were deployed to the Gulf. These aircraft flew almost 13,500 sorties --- the highest sortie total for any system in the war --- and maintained a 95.2% mission capable rate --- 5 % above its peacetime rate. I say it did better than any other aircraft in the war. It performed way way way better than the Navy's F-18 fleet in virtually every category. The Navy aircraft in Desert Storm that out performed all other Navy aircraft in almost every category was the A-6.
@@michaelrunnels7660 yup, and zero of those sorties were on roads or unimproved fields.
The Netherlands did the right thing on this one. Given a choice between a private company and their desired collection of fighter jets and a country of freedom seeking people who are literally fighting for their lives, it is better to side with the country. The private company can always source their fighters elsewhere for whatever private purposes they have.
Don't know if time is Ukraine's ally here. Supplies are drying up and countries aren't endlessly feeding Ukraine with free stuff.
I think it’s Draken that are doing the training there in Romania, isn’t it? I think the Dutch Vipers were always well maintained and there have been several excuses to hand the jets over to Ukraine. I think because the subject is sensative inside Netherlands, in NATO and for Russia and some stories had to be created.
Did Draken lose the demostic contract for USAF after Biden was elected?
My 2 cents. - Ukr will not have heavy maintenance facilities for the F-16 in country.
That will be contracted out to someone in a neighboring country. F-16 front line maintenance will be performed as far away from Russia as possible.
The maintainers will be Ukr. On-site I and D level maintenance will be performed by a mix of contractors and Ukr military.
Ukr may have to have some sort of a rotating maintenance and warfighting base plan.
Great call !!!
That'll be Romania then. It's the only F-16 operator bordering to Ukraine.
@@tessjuel you can fly those aircraft to the Netherlands within an hour.
Beautifully stupid logistics but what else can you do when you’ve lost so badly you can’t even operate in your own country
Even ww2 Germany had more industry on April 45
@@tessjuellol. Poland have 48 F-16 C/D Block 52+ since 15 years, you mo ron😂
With all respect Mover, but you are wrong.
F16 is the best solution for Ukraine. Shitload of them available, parts are still produced and in stocks. Plus, you have 2 neighboring NATO countries of Ukraine operating and maintaining versions of Viper. Gripen had a lot of hype around it, but that with operation on dispersed required Sweden to also pre-prepare dispersed Maintenace base. Yes, they could rearm and refuel by some conscripts and checked by a mechanic while dispersed but fixing them it is a different story. Like with your car - you can refuel, refill washer fluid, inflate a tire and eyeball it that all is not falling apart and you are good to go, but if it goes "clunk, clunk" you have to go to a shop with proper tools. I am assuming that a plane is more complicated than a car...
You say I’m wrong and then you type this nonsense? 😂
@@CWLemoine He's talking out of his ass..🤪
The F-16's where bought together with Norway, so they could use the Norway roads, with their tail mounted parachutes, in case Netherlands airports where put out of action.
So you might want to dive down into that one, because Norway can get quite cold.
9:00 True! I saw that at an airbase show here in Portugal, it was raining at the time, and i could see the vortex of water vapour going into the intake, i even have it on video, pretty cool...
Show us the video?
@@fantabuloussnuffaluffagus i hope Mover doesn't mind, not trying to plug my videos or anything... but search for "F-16 AM back to ramp and powerdown" and look from 1 minute into the video...
Gripen or F16? Both of course. These combat aircraft complement each other and can solve different types of missions.
When NATO member Romania was shopping around for used f-16s to replace their Mig-21s, nobody wanted to give them a decent deal except Portugal. Glad to see the Netherlands is such a significant and eager broker of F-16s 🙄.
Oh, Romania was invaded by Russia and I somehow forgot?
Ummm, Romania bought their F-16s from Norway, not Portugal. Are you suggesting they settled for an indecent deal?
It's remarkable to see such significant decisions being made on the international stage, especially involving the Netherlands and Ukraine. The F-16 is a renowned aircraft, known for its versatility and performance. This kind of geopolitical maneuvering showcases the dynamic and complex relationships between countries. It's fascinating to think about how these actions can have far-reaching impacts on international relations and defense strategies. The world of global politics and defense is always full of intriguing developments!
They have the AIM 120 (NASAM) Already
Awesome Netherlands!!!!
They hit on a very good point. What munitions will be provided. The older Aim-7 Sparrow (although upgraded still no AMRAAM), AIM-P? Whats the point if they aren't going to get the advanced weapons.
I think some are for training, others will have radar (AESA) upgrades and compatibility upgrades, I'm sure AMRAAM was promised or delivered in a large deal with the US, I wish people would stop undermining this F-16 handover, all the info is online if you just look
I got 2 points. 1, the USAF needs to build an austere field kit for existing, if not austere capable, fighters. 2, the Gripen already is this and they would work in Ukraine. In reply, who has Gripen to buy or pass forward? Is there a way to retrofit an austere kit for the F16?
The biggest question: is there any sort of infrastructure to support fighter jet operations in ukraine?
Easy to fly. But the maintenance will be a challenge. On aircraft maintenance is not to hard (if you have the supplies/spares). But how about higher level maintenance? If that is to far away you need a lot extra spares to fill pipelines. And what about operational support like mission planning or link16 management? I hope it all works out.
Industry will do the maintenace in romania.
@@johanfeenstra8778 So they fly an unserviceable aircraft to Romania to repair it! By an Ukrainian pilot? Or a non-Ukrainian pilot? HI hope the plot works.
@@aamiddel8646 At this moment Lockheed Martin does the maintenace on the 18 Dutch F16 in Romenia. These aircraft are fore training Ukranian pilots.
We don`t have the people because we just got het F35.
Well there are a lot of former/retired F-16 people around. If the pay and benefits are great who knows how many will sign up.. @@johanfeenstra8778
5:10
The main point with the F16 is *not* its air to air capabilities, although the added radar range definitely helps.
The main benefit of the F16 is that it's capable of carrying and shooting the long range missiles being donated to Ukraine.
They already have a *few* Soviet planes capable of firing them, but their number is extremely limited, and they're not getting any spare parts, and they're getting a *lot* of flight hours on those hulls...
So they're going to fail soon, and once they do...
Well, Ukraine will need a replacement.
And for the time being, that's the F16.
5:48
They're getting the best missiles that certain European countries are allowed to give away.
Unfortunately there's restrictions on sales/donations due to the agreements made upon purchase...
So a lot of stuff can't be given away even if a country has these things and *wants* to give it away...
7:12
Well, yes and no...
Europe is slowly getting into a better position to donate more, but the US political climate means that US aid is unreliable in the long run.
8:08
The long term objective is to outlast the Russian political endurance.
While the costs of maintaining the war is high it's more so for Russia and if this keeps going they're going to run out of Soviet stockpiles, they're going to run out of the goodwill of the population with increased discontent being shown, possibly leading to a untenable situation for Putin long term.
He's going to be forced to sue for peace eventually.
And it would be a nice feather in the cap for the US and NATO to show that it can indeed outlast a opponent in terms of political will if something matters enough for us.
Pulling out from Afganistan, Iraq, Víetnam and so one and so forth, staying power is clearly a achilles heel for the US and the west.
But Ukraine is a relatively speaking cheap way to draw a line in the sand and show long term commitment to a cause in order to actually win not just on shock and awe, but endurance too.
If we *can* outlast Russia, even if it does end up with a diplomatic compromise it would still strengthen the credibility of NATO and US allies around the world, potentially discouraging China from behaviour that might lead to a war with the US.
And a war with China is definitely more expensive then a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.
11:11
Hopefully Sweden will be able to provide a few Gripen now that they're joining NATO.
They're designed to do that too, and might be able to operate from forward positions where they *hopefully* can cut off some attacks against the F16s bases.
But yeah this is definitely going to be a issue...
13:23
Yep, pretty much...
But there's always going to be a quantity problem with the Gripen...
Still, a few in forward positions flown by elite pilots could take some of the heat away from the F16s operating as far away from the Russian border as possible.
And honestly if the war drags on I suspect that Gripen hulls will survive longer in Ukraine then F16s providing support for longer.
The US should buy some Gripen for use as aggressors in training. Buy some Boramae too. Phase out F-5 and eventually F-16 for that role. Gripen can function as a stand in for J-10 and Boramae can be a stand in for J-20. Sure you can use dissimilar aircraft to simulate them but a canard delta and semi stealthy fighter are a bit closer and might provide some additional training value. Nice thing about Gripen is the low cost of operation would make it a relatively painless transition from F-5. Boramae isn’t exactly cheap but cheaper to operate than F-117 or F-35 and uses the same engines as Super Hornet for straightforward support.
For Ukraine, they are short on funds but need both quantity and quality. They also need a long term plan to rebuild their air force. A mix of used F-16s and new build Gripen could be a decent option. They have stated a desire for around 200-300 fighters. That is enough to have several squadrons of Gripen in the East operating as dispersed as feasible plus several squadrons of F-16s operating from bases in Western and Central Ukraine. The F-16s would probably focus more on air to ground while the Gripen focus mostly on keeping Russian aircraft away from Ukrainian airspace. New Gripen would have more modern radars than the older model F-16s and could scare off Russians by threatening them with Meteors. The F-16s are no slouch in air to air even with the older models but might be better suited for replacing Su-24 in the strike missions.
F16s have flown in an ice hell know as Norway for decades.
And bombing airfields is impossibly expensive and inefficient.
Comon, you know this stuff.
Beggars can't be choosers.
They still use ice FOD procedures. They’re not magically immune.
America never had an End Goal in Afghanistan. That was the problem! Ukraine has had an end. It knew right from the start in 2014 that it was to liberate all of the territory occupied by the Russians.
@C.W. Lemoine Yesterday Denmark announced a sale of 24 F-16s to Argentina instead of Ukraine. Can you give an opinion on this? I think it is outrageous and out-of-character for Denmark. There must be something else we're not being told.
What I really do not get is why the USA do not provide some F16 to Ukraine. They have plenty of them, and they are replacing them with the F 35
Think those planes would be a heck of a lot more useful in the hands of some pilot with dozens (if not hundreds) of combat missions in contested airspace and that has never flown above 100 feet than some asswipes who think they have combat experience because they dropped some JDAMs on some mud huts from 40 miles away without ever facing anything more dangerous than a DSHK hard-mounted on the back of a Toyota pick-up truck.
I agree. If available in enough numbers, the Gripen would be a better plane for Ukrainian needs, but they are not available. There for, that makes the F16 the best fighter for use by the Ukrainians. How productive they will be depends on the weapons available to equip said F16s. Thank you Netherlands👍
Pretty incredible that the Netherlands could just give the F-16s to Ukraine. The US forces it's taxpayers to pay for everything sent to Ukraine. Even if the taxpayers paid for it already, and with everything that was taken out of storage, also paid for the replacements years ago as well.
You guys know a lot more about jets than me but i just want to say that ukrainian engineering until now has been very impressive in my eyes. They'll come up with a cool solution for the FOD problem, i'm sure.
they will not be upgrading those f-16 radars - I'd be willing to bet the house and dog and woman on that.
they will have the same 1990s radars they've had for 20 years. the same old inferior pulse doplar radar that stands out like a bright red beacon when you turn it on and has other bigger deficiencies too.
and they won't be getting aim-120ds anyway so not like a better radar would even really matter. It will be suicide for the Ukrainians to try to use them to rest limited air superiority over the donbas.
But these f-16s will be very competent running cruise missile CAP over the Lvov.
So a very expensive air defense system over Lviv.
but seeing as we have nothing else to give them (out of AD systems) that can do that it's a big plus still.
bullshit, the ones that need the radars will get them, done deal, like the ASRAAM
We in Europe have negotiated the price of F35 many years ago.
The question is training of Ukrainians as our own pilots are trained in USA and what technology is allowed on the planes for Ukraine.
Time is not Ukraine's friend if the West tires of giving it to them!
Great show and great to hear it from the experts, some interesting times ahead.
The environment on the ground just doesn’t suit the F16s it’s going to be a FOD fest and an engineers nightmare. Better hope they have some spare engines ready to swap out. The situation in Ukraine is exactly what the Grippen was built for.
Ukraine have plenty of airfields that will be fine for the F-16
@@billthomas7644 no they don’t and good luck trying to disperse them all over the place, thats easy with aircraft they are familiar will and have a ton of parts and logistics and staff to look after them they have very limited resources to look after the F16s zero experience operating out if basic rugged airfields. Plus we are still waiting for the pilots and aircrew and reading and listening to what they saying the ones from Denmark/Noway August at the earliest and I suspect they would like to have them longer before sending them to Ukraine. But looking at the attrition and the current Russian progress on the ground they may forced to send them sooner which would be a disaster. You can bet they will be at one or two airfields heavily protected with patriots and what Other systems they have left like the German IRIS-T which they are running out of.
Just wondering if the A/C are configured with the same OFP/software.
I respect the experience speaking, but all we are hearing is a "can't do attitude".
Yay!!! I m an American and I don't blame them.
So stupid question. In WW2 Britian allowed pilots from other countries to fight in the Royal Air force. Can Ukraine do the same or are the politics much different?
No the same situation, RAF was augmented with Czechoslovak, Polish, Dutch and other nationalities, but these were all countries that were occupied by Germany, which made those pilots especially aggressive. No other country is at war with Russia now.
Off course western personal could be offered jobs in the Ukrainian army. In my opinion that would be especially useful for maintenance crews for F16, Leopards and Bradleys. I would not be surprised if that is already being done.
As to what this will mean for the war... I don't know. The Russians have been there for almost 2 years now, and the counterattack mostly failed. If Russia continues to push, Ukraine can make them pay for that, as they have. Provided we support them enough to maintain that line of defence. But regaining lost territories? I don't see it happen soon. The Russians are just dug in way too much.
Guy upper right spoke the truth. The F16 is great jet but it requires a very carefully groomed field to fly. If you don't think Russia will damage the fields to prevent their use... well it is just wishful thinking. The F16 is in practical terms a high maintenance jet. It requires perfect conditions to operate.
Mlu viper is pretty advanced..
Makes sense.
The F-16 air intake just behind the front wheel throws up debris into the fans like crazy! Send F-16s send runway cleaner vehicles!!! ;p
1. Red Air is already better than everything any opponent has I estimate. So weakening Red Air for Ukraine should be the better thing for the US
2. They HAVE HARM ... but with the Su 24 it has to be programed before flight - with the F 16 hopefully you can challenge the AA using decoys and HARM and then Storm Shadow...
3. Infrastructure is the key for the operations - but if they had enough AA systems that could work out - this year not much infrastructure was hit by russia.
Gripen would be the answer... if they could get a number of them - wich is not the case.
Haven’t they been retrofitting the Ukrainian mid 29s to fire US missiles anyway? Where is that just for air to surface work?
The tank is a T, a T-34, the Moscow victory parade has never been cancelled before, the Moscow victory parade can’t cease to exist, this year thought there might be a twist, just four days after Cinco de Mayo, the T will be back, a tank in denial, a so called Armata, or maybe a Proriv, or maybe whatever is left in da storage.
100% the Gripen would be perfect for their needs, but politically and production wise it is not available. Another good option that was ignored is legacy hornets. Most of Australia's fleet is mothballed and available. For just short term launch platform to sling AMRAAMs, or launch harpoons, it would be fine, and much better suited to austere environments than F-16. As Gonky said, this is more a signal that Ukraine is thinking medium to long term. F-16 will put them in the same potential upgrade pool as many NATO nations, as well as making potentially available a huge range of US air launched weaponry.
They won't be getting any aussie f 18s , what nonsense !!!!!
@thecount2130 not particularly good at attention to detail. I didn't say that they were getting Aussie Hornets, but that the offer had been ignored.
You guys are a couple of years behind the news, Australia sold our old Fa-18's to Canada a few years ago and Canada is upgrading them, maybe you missed the memo.
Not all of them.
Asian countries have been running F-16s for decades! So find out how they deal with all that!!!
before the war started there was serious plans to destroy ca 60 or so JAS gripen C/D since it was more expenssive to maintain them while switching over to version E.
The problem with getting the Ukrainians the Gripen, is that the only Gripens around are the ones owned by Sweden, and they need those.
It'd have to be new production, which would take half a decade.
why do they not get the f16 from the bone yard? i thought they were meant to be keeping planes in a semi servicable capability
If Ukraine doesn’t have an AWAC’s aircraft these won’t be of much use. This is not like Topgun. This is a high threat environment.
What about the airfield, ground crews and infrastructure
As much as i like to help Ukraine, i wondering: when is it enough? How much do we need to give up before its ok? Ollongren said there is no limit. In the mean time: 1,5 milion people dont go to the dentist because they cant afford it anymore. Its a lot to take from Dutch people while spending this amount of money on a country that is not part of EU nor NATO.
Wouldn’t a Gripen be an incredible option here?
Indeed it would but the infrastructure and numbers arent there. Theres a few hundred grippens vs a few thousand F-16s. Parts are plentiful.
Gripens simply aren't available in any meaningful numbers , JAS39C/D or E/Fs.
Yeah. To be available would take a decade. Sweden would need a long term contract and to be willing to risk the tech being leaked to Russia and have to build out new production lines.
Gripen needs trained crew and pilots used to train/working with a different mind-set, able to organise themselves into local cells and run missions. Totally different to centralised thinking of most airforces..
Its simple ...The Dutch have simply cut out the middle man who is just adding unnecessarily to the price. They are doubling the price ...just for what they call maintenance.
I've been envisioning guys with label makers madly translating dials and notices....
Stupid question. Is it impossible to operate F-16 from roads only because of intake, or it’s about landing gear? Or something else?
Well said
Weak gear and intake is underneath the aircraft so fod is almost guaranteed
It's also that maintaining them in that kind of improvised environment would be practically impossible.
Possible to fly F16 on roads, but some conditions applies. The road must be prepared, road is strong, clean enough [obvious FOD due large intake], long/wide. etc. Some countries have tried it before like in Asia.
Many of the NATO platforms did take part in training and operations from roads, the JAS39 is simply marketed with the great capabilities it has. The F-18s from Finland,Switzerland, Australia and the USMC do a good amount of roadwork. Combat Aircraft did a cool article years back with Hornets, Vipers and other birds operating from roads. The Hornets were designed to operate from Carriers but also the portable Marine Expeditionary Field. With Sister Squadrons operating Harriers and Skyhawks, the Marines did practice Operations from places like Bogue Field and other less than established Air Fields. Not a stupid question at all.
"how effective it will be in Ukraine is debatable"...
OTOH "how effective is not having them?"
Slava Ukraini!
NASAMs is already firing older 120's in Ukraine. But I don't see them being in a position to employ them vs russian aircraft, other than maybe the odd heli. I imagine it'll mainly be a way of throwing cruise missiles and glide bombs.
Ucraine is prepared for the F-16 and has appropriate ground infrastructure in the west. F-16 Block 30 is the best choice, since we have got Block 30ies in Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Greece, Romania, Turkey, and ? Italy. Training and supplies through Romania also makes pretty much sense. And ucraine cannot be picky. They are on dire straits in terms of air space superiority and ammo in general. Most A/G weapons used by european Nato countries will work on F-16s on short notice respect. fast modification.
Im dutch but nice of the F16 but dutch oil carries still dock in rusian harbors to get oil.....
Yes!
Good!