What's new

Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

Yeah...And we can sure that whatever 'renowned' university that you claimed to work in, you empty the trash produced by all those 'credentials' people.

Says the F-111 and F-16 pilot LOL

You are an absolute joker of PDF LOL at F-111 and F-16 pilot. You got some nerve pretending to be a pilot LMAO
 

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has proven that air superiority is vital to success in conflict, Gen. James B. Hecker, the top U.S. Air Force commander in Europe, said March 22.​
Hecker laid out a sobering argument: if Russia had gained air superiority early in the conflict, Ukraine would have been finished off militarily long ago.​
Instead, Russia was stymied by Ukraine’s air defenses and its own poor tactics, buying valuable time for Ukraine to gather international support.​
“At least from the Russian side, they don’t care if you hit hospitals, they don’t care if you hit schools, they don’t care if you hit malls,” Hecker said. “Massive destruction, massive casualties—just something that we’re not used to.”​
“What we’re looking at and concentrating on at USAFE is what can we do to ensure that we get air superiority should we have to invoke Article V, and then what can we do to make sure that our enemy doesn’t get air superiority,” Hecker said.​
Hecker’s focus is on ensuring that NATO can quickly suppress enemy integrated air defense systems (IADS).​
“What we’ve seen on both sides, both Russia and Ukraine, is their integrated air and missile defense is working pretty well, to the point where they’re shooting down the other’s aircraft and the aircraft aren’t as visible as they should if they’d concentrated more on air superiority.”

The highlighted is what I have been saying all this time.

Air defense is point defense. Fixed or maybe some limited geographical mobility. What happens is that we ended up with isolated airspaces where airpower is denied and the rest of the theater is open. But even so, neither Ukraine nor Russia benefits from those open airspaces because (a) they do not have the doctrine and (b) they do not have the airplanes. So that leaves ground forces to fight it out man-to-man, dragging the war out.

Had US/NATO air forces entered Ukraine, the VKS would be quickly driven from the sky, and Russian points air defense would be quickly overwhelmed.

The End.
 

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has proven that air superiority is vital to success in conflict, Gen. James B. Hecker, the top U.S. Air Force commander in Europe, said March 22.​
Hecker laid out a sobering argument: if Russia had gained air superiority early in the conflict, Ukraine would have been finished off militarily long ago.​
Instead, Russia was stymied by Ukraine’s air defenses and its own poor tactics, buying valuable time for Ukraine to gather international support.​
“At least from the Russian side, they don’t care if you hit hospitals, they don’t care if you hit schools, they don’t care if you hit malls,” Hecker said. “Massive destruction, massive casualties—just something that we’re not used to.”​
“What we’re looking at and concentrating on at USAFE is what can we do to ensure that we get air superiority should we have to invoke Article V, and then what can we do to make sure that our enemy doesn’t get air superiority,” Hecker said.​
Hecker’s focus is on ensuring that NATO can quickly suppress enemy integrated air defense systems (IADS).​
“What we’ve seen on both sides, both Russia and Ukraine, is their integrated air and missile defense is working pretty well, to the point where they’re shooting down the other’s aircraft and the aircraft aren’t as visible as they should if they’d concentrated more on air superiority.”

The highlighted is what I have been saying all this time.

Air defense is point defense. Fixed or maybe some limited geographical mobility. What happens is that we ended up with isolated airspaces where airpower is denied and the rest of the theater is open. But even so, neither Ukraine nor Russia benefits from those open airspaces because (a) they do not have the doctrine and (b) they do not have the airplanes. So that leaves ground forces to fight it out man-to-man, dragging the war out.

Had US/NATO air forces entered Ukraine, the VKS would be quickly driven from the sky, and Russian points air defense would be quickly overwhelmed.

The End.

Had... When are you going to fly into Ukraine and challange the Russians? You are just fantasizing about something which hasn't happened.
 
Well, even Putin has stated that Russia is no match for the West militarily. Nobody doubts that. Thus why Russia categorically states that should Russia feel it's integrity is threatened, they'll use nukes realising that they themselves will also be destroyed. Mutually assured destruction.
Do we as a human race really want to go down that road for a Zionist clown sitting in Kiev? I for one don't, but it seems many on this forum seem to like playing around with that idea.
Russias integrity isnt threatened and never has been. Its just a fabricated narrative meant to scare european countries. Russia was hoping this nuclear bluff would give them carte blanche to do some annexation.
Why would Russia commit suicide because of a failed invasion?
 

As a combat veteran F-16 pilot and commander, I know this firsthand: Russian surface-to-air missile sites can be lucrative targets for the Viper.

General Bruce Wright was an F-16 pilot, so his comment is understandably biased. But the reality is that any armed platform, from the F-15 to the AC-130, can be used to attack Russian air defense points. In SEAD/DEAD, the best air environment is when the attackers do not have to focus on enemy air. Air defense technology and tactics are sophisticated enough that we can justifiably grant 'ace' status to any combat pilot who successfully outsmart and destroy his ground opponents.

The comparison that comes to mind in Ukraine, however, is not America’s overwhelming victory in Iraq, born largely on dominant airpower, but rather Vietnam, where self-imposed limits on airpower undermined the war effort and ultimately led to failure.

Poor combat doctrines and lack of resources are the equivalent of political self restraints. We are seeing this in Ukraine.
 

As a combat veteran F-16 pilot and commander, I know this firsthand: Russian surface-to-air missile sites can be lucrative targets for the Viper.

General Bruce Wright was an F-16 pilot, so his comment is understandably biased. But the reality is that any armed platform, from the F-15 to the AC-130, can be used to attack Russian air defense points. In SEAD/DEAD, the best air environment is when the attackers do not have to focus on enemy air. Air defense technology and tactics are sophisticated enough that we can justifiably grant 'ace' status to any combat pilot who successfully outsmart and destroy his ground opponents.

The comparison that comes to mind in Ukraine, however, is not America’s overwhelming victory in Iraq, born largely on dominant airpower, but rather Vietnam, where self-imposed limits on airpower undermined the war effort and ultimately led to failure.

Poor combat doctrines and lack of resources are the equivalent of political self restraints. We are seeing this in Ukraine.

If the US send F-16 to Ukraine then China send J-20 to Russia to hunt F-16.
 
Had... When are you going to fly into Ukraine and challange the Russians? You are just fantasizing about something which hasn't happened.
At one point in my life, I put myself at risk serving my country. I was on Victor Alert duty, that is nuclear armed F-111s. What have YOU done? If nothing, then you have no cause to criticize anyone so do everyone a favor and STFU. :enjoy:
 
Back
Top Bottom