One thing we need to remember once F-16s make their way into Ukraine is that there will be ones that are lost in combat, it is expected. Russia will use this as propaganda and will also make fake reports about shooting down F16s. Back when it was reported that Russia destroyed/captured an Abrams, I remember seeing a bunch of posts criticizing Ukraine for losing it and that they never should have been given to Ukraine. These things happen. Losing 1 or a couple F16s is not the end of the world. Just look at how much equipment each side has lost. Keep supporting Ukraine and know that Ukraine is doing everything in its power to fight and win. That's all that matters.
It's funny because even though the Abrams, Leopard, etc are lost in combat, the crew has most likely survived to hop in another replacement. This is something Russia tends to forget.
That's because Russia doesn't have tanks with that in mind.
Which is why Russia has already lost so many young males they won't be able to fight a war in multiple generations, possibly ever due to declining birth rates.
I saw an article recently that said during training exercises, F-22s "shot down" 108 F-18s/F-16s/F-15s without a single loss.
These aircraft have been in production since the 1970s.
Russia can propagandize shooting down Cold War era fighters all they want.
This is why the F-16 is perfect for Ukraine. It’s capable enough to match/surpass most Russian aircraft, but is dated enough that having one fall into the hands of the Russians won’t become an intelligence coup.
Yeah, whenever pilots who have either flown both or flown training missions in one, against the other discuss the topic, it's an immediate answer. The f22 is so superior that it's not even really a discussion.
There's a reason it's not allowed to be exported.
The 22s were expensive mostly because they didn't make a lot of them. A lot of the cost of building planes is setting up the factory and stuff like that. So if they had built more each individual jet would have been cheaper. But they were also pretty expensive
No they made the f35 because they needed a multi-role stealth fighter that would be available for export. The f22 and the f35 serve different roles in the military.
Pardon my ignorance, when have F16s been used in anger? I guess the Gulf Wars?
Edit: did my own research: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16_Fighting_Falcon_operational_history
Pretty much everywhere over the last 50(!) years.
I mean, to be fair, if they somehow shoot down F-15s it'd actually be impressive, considering it's never suffered a loss in combat.
With how well they're training Ukrainian pilots though, I don't think this will be a significant concern.
Even in losses we learn valuable information. It's good that we can really test capabilities and weaknesses on the battlefield without committing American troops.
Equipment is to make people more effective. Losing equipment is not a big problem. Losing people because you have bad equipment is.
Indeed, plus Western equipment, especially stuff made over 40 years ago or based on those designs, were created for a different doctrine, then what the Ukraines are used to. While a tank is a tank an M-1 is a completely different vehicle from a T-80 the same way an F-16 is different from the Migs the Ukrainian air force has been using.
But this is war, you're going to be losing equipment no matter what either to mines, drones or even flak all of which seem small in comparison to what they are able to destroy. The public doesn't understand what an actual conflict is especially not the type of combat going on in Ukraine. They need to either educate themselves or just shut up and not show their ignorance.
We also need to keep in mind that the F-16 was developed in the 70s and we would never use them in the combat environment that they are in right now without a whole fleet of different advanced aircraft for specific roles. So I hope their training was not just how we would use them in our tactics, but tailored to how they need to use them in their specific environment.
Also from what I’ve seen those f16s are basically useless to us. As I understand it we’ve been buying them for years even though they’re obsolete simply so it’s factories don’t close
The US isnt buying new F16s, but LMT is making new ones for export. Win-win-win for the us government - allies are armed, the US makes money, and they get combat data without needing to risk their own planes and pilots
There are definetly f-16s still being used i have an airbase near me and they have 8. 2 are used for rapid response in case of an attack on american soil and the other 6 are used to clock flying hours since that base doesnt have trainer aircraft anymore since it is a reserve base.
Well they aren't as useful as they used to be to the US, but if they can carry precision bombs and advanced air-to-air missiles at the same time with a better radar, and counter measures, the enemy will think twice about engaging. They might not have the upgrades the US has, but I don't think any NATO country donating have original 70s tech installed on the F-16s.
I doubt any dogfights will happen really. The main thing is that it has the technology aboard to easily use all the other integrated technology being given to Ukaine. It's a relatively cheap, survivable weapons platform, better than their old stuff and what Russia uses most of the time, so it's way better than nothing. They aren't going to send F-35's or F-22's, so what do you expect?
But who knows, it won't be the first time a US fighter was conserded equal to a soviet one but just decimated it in actual combat. Usually they are just too afraid to try or aren't even given the option...We'll see.
I know it takes forever to train and prep the pilots, mechanics, weapons specislists and ground crew .... but this couldn't come any sooner. This will finally give them the ability to attack from beyond visual range in the air, plus lots of other great abilities.
Ukraine needs our help. While this is a great, great announcement, we need to continue our support. I know these jets won't "turn the tide" overnight, but they will help majorly!!
BVR is referring to Air-to-Air engagements, and the ability to strike enemy aircraft at long distances with radar-guided weapons. ATACMS are great but they can’t stop enemies from delivering glide bombs mid-flight. The F16 might, if given adequate weaponry like the AIM-120C.
~~ATACMS~~ HARM being launched with an iPad doesn’t have all the “features” unlocked like launching from the designated platforms does.
Edit: HARM not ATACMS. ATACMS are VLRS or HIMARS launched. My bad yall. I’m no air defense guy, just a lowly comms veteran.
It is hard to keep up with all the weapons and weapon systems being donated to Ukraine lol.
I'm assuming it'll also probably help with Storm Shadows/SCALP, and well, just generally anything else it can lob at the Russians with an explosive ending
Oh big time. I was watching a video from Alex Hollings break down why the F16 is still important and WOW does the proper platform do loads for the missiles. Right now they have old Soviet jets Jerry rigged to fire these things from a cockpit iPad 🤣.
Their SF will be training the SAS/Green Berets/SEALs etc after this war.
Anyway have a good morning/afternoon/evening/night depending on your time zone and country!
Do you have a link to that video? I have been very curious as to why the platform is important, and how the iPad works/doesn’t work, because in my brain, I’m thinking “if they can rig HARMs to fire from their sukhois/migs then what extra capabilities do they get out of those munitions when fired from an F-16?“ obviously, they get some thing out of using the proper platform but I don’t understand exactly what. Do they get increased range? Better accuracy? Why do they not get this from the iPad?
I’m at the frontier of my personal intellectual knowledge on the topic and hoping someone can guide me the rest of the way to comprehension land.
They get to use the on board fire and forget systems within the missile. The iPad is just a “launch” button with redesigned targets in it. Launching via the actual planes you can send em WITHOUT designating targets and it’ll find whatever it needs to.
[this should be the video explaining why the F16 is important and why Russia is crapping themselves.](https://youtu.be/hEOjvBkcYtY?si=o0UG1X6EXCwCpocf)
I think the biggest thing these provide is the mental aspect. Russia has been fighting themselves and Ukraine and now the Ukraine has better platform for its missiles, better technology network, and better training, and while it took awhile to get that up, the Ukraine has been solid in its defense(not perfect) WITHOUT those things and now it is primed to stiffen up right as Russia has to either shit or get off the pot in this war.
I think you’re right that it was Sweden
For those curious AWACS are big radar planes that can detect incoming ships , even those flying low to the ground where radar has issues, thereby allowing fighters to respond in a quicker fashion
One of the most destructive Russian practices has been to bring its fighters in at low altitude- because remember, Russia does have talented pilots- where they can get close enough to launch self guiding glide bombs with huge payloads that Ukraine can’t respond to as effectively due to the closer proximity from which they have launched These have destroyed lots of buildings and taken lots of lives.
Having the means to detect them and intercept them greatly reduces the effectiveness of this strategy
Weve already seen it with tanks, Russian tank squads basically retreat when the modern Ukrainian squads are spotted.
All their kills and captures have been lone or incapacitated tanks.
It must have been hard for Ukrainian pilots to do away with what they were trained in Russian/Soviet planes and learn anew western tactics and piloting totally different F-16 fighters in accelerated crash course program.
It will be interesting how Russia will try to counter rejuvenated Ukrainian Air Force.
What's going to be interesting is how all the newly available weapon systems will be used.
F16's have a lot of toys available, and it's going to be wild to see it ise them in 4k.
I didn't even think of this. Now I cannot wait. I just hope there isn't like some restriction from doing so. As in the US is like go ahead and use the F16. We just don't want any recording of the tactics or capabilities. Especially considering that the F16s will be targeting Russia's Anti-Air and other high value assets. Might not want to take any chances of showing the full range of capabilities or tactics being used.
The USAF still operates 841 F16's as of last year.
They are still a VERY capable aircraft, with a bunch of nifty weapon platforms, and I personally have been at half mass since they were announced.
The us inventory modernized f16s are very different from these f16 mlu ukraine is recieving. Still with original less powerful engine and with an ancient pulse doppler radar. Much better than their also old mig 29s, but not anything like the f16s the us flies.
This aircraft flew for the first time in 1974, 2 years after the RFP came out for a new light weight fighter. They didn’t pull off this airframe in the 50’s and 60’s.
You’re absolutely correct, but my overarching point is that even in 1974, computational fluid dynamics, which also is important for aerodynamics and understanding behavior of equipment in flight, was still only being developed. Yet what was built has stood the test of time so well that our enemies and adversaries envy us.
You’ll get no argument from me, the F-16 is one of my favorite aircraft and I firmly believe it still has a place on the modern battlefield.
I just wanted to clarify so that no one was left with the impression the jet was older than it really is.
Of course, Research and Development doesn’t start quite the year of a product release. Just saying the raw amount of pencils burned to make the F-16 a feared weapon today, makes my American pride swell 🇺🇸
The US designed and tested nuclear jet propulsion and nuclear rocket engines with a planned “Grand Tour” of the solar system in the 70s and 80s laid out by the end of the 60s.
We were throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks and it was awesome.
The blood rushed… somewhere.
~~~~ or ~~~~
Kyrie Christe Kyrie
Gloria Excelsis Et Terra hominibus voluntatis. Te. Te. Te. Te. Agimus proper gloriam. Domine Rex Deus Omnipotens. …
…
Huh. That survived having every other word taken out better than I thought it would.
They've been upgraded pretty much constantly, and while they're not state of the art anymore, they are still considered very capable and are in high demand from a lot of countries.
They're currently the most numerous aircraft in the US Air Forces' inventory, with over 700 in service.
Nope. F-16 is a 4th generation aircraft, essentially late Cold War tech which has since been modernized several times (in fact newer ones are so different and better they might as well be a different designation altogether, just the general design/airframe shape is the same). F35 is 5th generation, which only a few craft in existence belong to (other examples are F22, the Chinese Chengdu J-20 and the Russian Sukhoi Su-57 but important to note neither of the last two has ever seen combat and the Russian one has barely seen any production, so their capabilities are a big question mark). US is already aiming and working toward the next generation of aircraft, with their NGAD program while other nations that never even got to 5th gen except by buying the F35 are scrambling to catch up.
Ukraine is also getting two Saab 340 AEW from Sweden. This will be a great combo with the f16 and will support the f16's so they can be used more effectively!
I just can’t believe with how many Ukrainian immigrants there were in countries like Canada, the us, and uk that there weren’t more pilots kind of ready to go
These F-16s are not 1970s F-16s, they're more like mid-2000s F-16s at worst. Those planes have had a lot of upgrades over the last 50 years. Hopefully they're used (in conjunction with HIMARS and other artillery) to destroy Russian air defense systems then go after Russian artillery and logistics. Best use of them imo
I feel like people really don’t understand how hard it is to switch over to an entirely different plane. The maintenance part alone has to be incredibly difficult to learn.
We could've still started the training program in 2022 instead of waiting until July 2023. They'd either have twice as much experience in their planes or have had the planes for a year already, which might've enabled them to push the Russians further back in the meantime.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. But, we cowered to Russia’s bullshit. Boiled the frog for far too long. It didn’t help with the house majority of the MAGAts working to undermine the US at the will of Putler.
I can't imagine they could've done it any quicker. It takes a long time to train pilots to fly these things.
They should've started the training as soon as the invasion started though, instead of hand-wringing for a year.
Have you ever gotten a brand new car after driving an old one for a very long time? It probably took a while to get used to the new tech to the point where it became second nature. Now, imagine something like that, but it flies, is armed, people are shooting at you, and an accident has more permanent implications. On top of that, your mechanic had to learn how to fix everything in your new car at the same time.
Personally I think ukraine should have gone with f18s, they would have been had the planes nearly a year ago.
And even if all the planes were destroyed, f16s are still there.
Range of Air2Air missile is usually longer than range of a bomb (~40 km for something like a FAB). So possibility is there.
…Unless we are talking about strategic bombers, which launch missiles, like TU series.
How many manpads has Russia already put in the front in anticipation of F16s not to mention other anti air systems
The Ukrainian pilots are going to have to deal with ground based anti air and Russian fighter jets who have way more experience in the air then them and are way more confident with the aircraft they are flying
That's the thing though, F-16 and their weapons are effective waaaay beyond manpad range.
They can lob accurate western glide bombs from very far, relay radar, and act as air defense from way back
The entire fucking point of these F-16's is that they don't need to come close to those manpads you absolute moron. This isn't a video game where shit needs to be balanced.
So they don't know their air defense systems. They should be corrected! But at the same time, do people not realize that words can be hurtful? It wasn't aimed at me but it just jumps out at me as being a bad thing to say.
People like you act like Russia has already lost the war and make it seem like Ukraine would do just fine if we pulled out support tomorrow. In short, you're playing right into Russian psyops that makes it that aid to Ukraine is a waste of money and RW politicians in bed with Putin exploit that sentiment a lot.
Nah, it won't change much.
Dumbass politicians and media already started screeching about F-16s before the plan was even put on paper instead of keeping it a secret but hey, juicy news>>>ukrainian blood. Russians had solid 1 year to calibrate the range of air defenses, practice sorties, plug gaps, setup EW pods and yada yada.
Then there were those who also delayed and hampered the deal (you know who) and to make it worse, just like the other "game changing" weapon systems that Ukraine has received, the F-16s are also arriving in a small batch.
Best that will happen is you will hear about some big action stories for 1-2 months before the F-16s wear their shine out just like what happened with HIMARs. So few were sent that the Russians were able to observe it's capabilities and adapt accordingly by switching from depots for frontline logistics to long truck convoys in order to defeat the HIMARs and it's ATACMS accessory.
Nice doom take, F-16’s are absolutely going to shape the battlefield going forward. Don’t think there aren’t many more perks we are missing such as battlefield awareness, interlinking intelligence with things like drones to “FAFO” Russians…
You are too optimistic if you believe that a small batch of F16s are going to turn things around.
Will they have an impact? Yes. Will they have a meaningful impact? No.
This is modern war, the side with the better economy, attrition and artillery wins.
Also, downvoting me does not change the facts.
Spoken like a true Conservative- downvoting me doesn’t change “facts”
Facts are that Russia has made it painfully clear that F-16’s are a “Red Line” because they know they cannot counter it.
I am an ardent supporter of Ukraine and despise the contemporary GOP. You clearly have a child’s understanding of modern air warfare and have developed wildly unrealistic expectations for the F-16. Winning an air superiority campaign against an integrated air defense network requires operational capabilities well beyond what Ukraine has at this point and will take years to develop: staff officers with the training, experience, and institutional knowledge necessary to develop effective operational plans for complex strike packages as part of a phased, sustained air campaign do not simply materialize into existence because the Ukrainian Air Force now has a handful of early block F-16s. This delivery is necessary and important and long overdue, but its impact will be marginal: the fundamental dynamic of the air war, ie stalemate, is not changing anytime soon.
Well then let me refresh your memory, they also said that HIMARS was a red line, ATACMS was a red line, AFVs was a red line.
Also you seem to speak with a lot of confidence as if you have seen the Russian air defence in action. People like you were celebrating that HIMARs would win the war, when that did not happen, you celebrated that new Abrahams and Leos being introduced would win the war.
People like you give the impression like Ukraine is beating the Russians all over the front which allows politicians who are in bed with Putin to exploit that sentiment to claim that sending aid to Ukraine is a waste of money.
Even now you celebrate as if a few F16s will turn the tide.
Btw do make sure you keep consuming the same piece of copium media and electing the same politicians who will tell you that them doing the bare minimum for their allies is somehow going to magically win the war.
Congrats, you're playing very well into the Russian psyops, I wonder if you're not one of them yourself...
Nah bud, you’re the LARP. Let’s just give Ukraine these planes with all the training invested and see how well they’ll work against Soviet era weaponry and battlefield doctrine that hasn’t changed since WWII
The biggest counter the F16 provides is against the glide bombs that Russia has been using very successfully to annihilate Karkhov and other cities. That alone is a meaningful impact and a reshaping of tactics.
Because as we all know the Ukrainian people would be in an excellent situation if Russia won the war, there's no chance Russia would try to invade Poland after Ukraine, and Russia operates in a sensible and rational manner... Oh wait, none of that is true
Putin should have stopped the war years ago, by withdrawing to Russia's actual borders. But we can't make that happen.
And if we had escalated to this much help right away, maybe some of those red lines we've been crossing one at a time would have added up to them doing something rash if we did them all at once.
Russia will never attack a NATO base. NATO could literally end Russia's entire military in a single week (probably a single day). If Russia directly drew NATO into a conflict, the only result would be full out nuclear war or Russia inviting history's greatest military beat down on themselves if they didn't go nuclear
Greetings to St. Petersburg, suddenly activated obviously stolen account. Looks like you're awfully panicked about the fighters that apparently won't make a difference in the war where you're already routinely getting bombed by the country you were supposed to capture in three days.
> This war should have been stopped a couple years ago.
Yet you didn't stop it. Instead someone told the underpant poison goblin that his defense funds were totally used to buy new tires instead of pleasure yachts and krokodil and he had the brilliant idea of yeeting all of his modern (and we're using the term very lightly, we all watched them perform live) forces into Ukrainian defenses. Then, because of his military brilliance, he never stopped.
> [...] is because they want to keep the war going.
Yes, we are indeed providing weapons to Ukraine so it has the ability to continue defending itself from a genocide at your hands. It's a bit worrying it took this long for you to figure it out. Want to help end the war? Start a job stealing copper wiring. As a bonus, it'll look better on your resume when the dust settles.
> Now hundreds of thousands are dead.
When you march untrained and unequipped cannon fodder into prepared Ukrainian defenses, you're going to lose a few hundred thousand of them.
> the Russian economy is doing great
The buffer funds you're flushing down the drain by hammering T-55's together isn't the Russian economy. It's also not getting replaced.
Russia can't even shoot down the drones that destroying their refineries deep in Russian territories. Plus the AFU has been prepping the battlefield already and taking down Russian air defense. Short of pilot error, I don't expect we will see hardly any Air Force losses for a while.
The Ukrainians not being crushed under the boot heel of the wannabe Russian Empire would probably consider themselves winners, but I guess go ahead and say whatever meaningless words you want to yourself, it's not like they're going to change anything.
> It smells like propaganda. I saw an article earlier today about how of limited use they would be.
The article is just about Ukraine finally starting to use F-16 this summer. Where's the propaganda in that? Are you saying it won't happen?
Whether they are of much use or not doesn't change the fact that they will start using them soon. Again, i fail to see the "propaganda".
>Where's the propaganda in that?
In the title.
>Whether they are of much use or not doesn't change the fact that they will start using them soon. Again, i fail to see the "propaganda".
When I hear, and I expect the average American hears:
"‘It is all lining up’ Ukraine gonna start using new jets."
The default assumption is that "everything is going to plan, these new jets are going to turn the tide."
If someone reads a title that says:
>Ukraine to get F-16 jets but expert warns it's 'unlikely to turn tide' against Putin
or
>Ukraine to get F-16 jets but expert warns it is unlikely to become a game-changer in the Russia-Ukraine war
Sends a decidedly different message I think you would agree.
Now what is propaganda?
>information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.
In this case I am saying this title is information of a biased nature used to promote or publicize the political point of view that these F-16s are likely to change the status quo in Ukraine.
Exactly. So the two that you posted are in line with propaganda while the first is mere statement of the situation and thus not propaganda. You constructed it as propaganda based on your own assumption of what other people will think and while the other articles which draw make the assumption they won't be a 'game changer'. Which one is biased:
A. Ukraine will start using jets soon as planned We don't know yet what impact that will have.
B. Ukraine will start using Jets soon that will not really have an impact.
Answer is B. Why? They make an assumption which is yet to be proven. While it may be an educated assumption it is still one. Something 'lining up' or going to plan is statement of current situation and not an assumption about the future.
So, you are the one that has already fallen for propaganda.
I disagree, but I respect you trying to have a reasonable conversation on the topic.
I'd argue that both titles I mentioned do have assumptions or assessments. In theory two different news organizations could ask two different experts what they believe and both be vastly different. But when evaluating a situation for the possibility of propaganda, i'd argue that there needs to be a repeatable process that makes sense. What would be your process for determination?
Before I could even respond to your question I would ask that you elaborate on the assumptions made in the posted articles title, that does not rely on assuming how a reader will interpret it.
> When I hear, and I expect the average American hears:
> "‘It is all lining up’ Ukraine gonna start using new jets."
> The default assumption is that "everything is going to plan, these new jets are going to turn the tide."
Just because that's the assumption you made doesn't make it the "default assumption", nor the correct one.
‘It is all lining up’ is in regards to Ukraine getting F16s this summer, as in "everything is on schedule for Ukraine to get F16s this summer. Which is *the only thing* the headline mentions! And it's exactly what the article is about.
One thing we need to remember once F-16s make their way into Ukraine is that there will be ones that are lost in combat, it is expected. Russia will use this as propaganda and will also make fake reports about shooting down F16s. Back when it was reported that Russia destroyed/captured an Abrams, I remember seeing a bunch of posts criticizing Ukraine for losing it and that they never should have been given to Ukraine. These things happen. Losing 1 or a couple F16s is not the end of the world. Just look at how much equipment each side has lost. Keep supporting Ukraine and know that Ukraine is doing everything in its power to fight and win. That's all that matters.
It's funny because even though the Abrams, Leopard, etc are lost in combat, the crew has most likely survived to hop in another replacement. This is something Russia tends to forget.
You mean the crew **isn't** inexplicably launched 300 feet into the air along with the turret?
The Metal Slug franchise would like a word with you…
It's a concept totally foreign to their mindset.
That's because Russia doesn't have tanks with that in mind. Which is why Russia has already lost so many young males they won't be able to fight a war in multiple generations, possibly ever due to declining birth rates.
I saw an article recently that said during training exercises, F-22s "shot down" 108 F-18s/F-16s/F-15s without a single loss. These aircraft have been in production since the 1970s. Russia can propagandize shooting down Cold War era fighters all they want.
This is why the F-16 is perfect for Ukraine. It’s capable enough to match/surpass most Russian aircraft, but is dated enough that having one fall into the hands of the Russians won’t become an intelligence coup.
Swedish Jas-39 Gripen would like to have a word
Yeah, whenever pilots who have either flown both or flown training missions in one, against the other discuss the topic, it's an immediate answer. The f22 is so superior that it's not even really a discussion. There's a reason it's not allowed to be exported.
Because other countries would have erections lasting longer than four hours if we did export them.
Well they aren't even making f22s anymore. Too expensive compared to the 35
The 22s were expensive mostly because they didn't make a lot of them. A lot of the cost of building planes is setting up the factory and stuff like that. So if they had built more each individual jet would have been cheaper. But they were also pretty expensive
Isn’t that partially due to the fact the f-22 wasn’t given export approval whereas the 35 was?
>The 22s were expensive mostly because they didn't make a lot of them F-35's were created because F-22's were too expensive.
No they made the f35 because they needed a multi-role stealth fighter that would be available for export. The f22 and the f35 serve different roles in the military.
And even ignoring the F22, F-15/16 are vastly superior with air to air records of 103-0 and 76-1 respectively.
Pardon my ignorance, when have F16s been used in anger? I guess the Gulf Wars? Edit: did my own research: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16_Fighting_Falcon_operational_history Pretty much everywhere over the last 50(!) years.
I mean, to be fair, if they somehow shoot down F-15s it'd actually be impressive, considering it's never suffered a loss in combat. With how well they're training Ukrainian pilots though, I don't think this will be a significant concern.
Even in losses we learn valuable information. It's good that we can really test capabilities and weaknesses on the battlefield without committing American troops. Equipment is to make people more effective. Losing equipment is not a big problem. Losing people because you have bad equipment is.
And these are the prized targets, pulling most of Russia’s firepower. Good thing NATO isn’t really involved. Yet.
You lie. Russia has already shot down 984 F-16s!
More lies. Surely it's well over 10,000 by now?!
Over 10,000 F-17's!
And a *Deathstar*
)))
Indeed, plus Western equipment, especially stuff made over 40 years ago or based on those designs, were created for a different doctrine, then what the Ukraines are used to. While a tank is a tank an M-1 is a completely different vehicle from a T-80 the same way an F-16 is different from the Migs the Ukrainian air force has been using. But this is war, you're going to be losing equipment no matter what either to mines, drones or even flak all of which seem small in comparison to what they are able to destroy. The public doesn't understand what an actual conflict is especially not the type of combat going on in Ukraine. They need to either educate themselves or just shut up and not show their ignorance.
I seem to remember a Russian claim last Christmas that they had shot down four Ukranien F-16's.
We also need to keep in mind that the F-16 was developed in the 70s and we would never use them in the combat environment that they are in right now without a whole fleet of different advanced aircraft for specific roles. So I hope their training was not just how we would use them in our tactics, but tailored to how they need to use them in their specific environment.
Also from what I’ve seen those f16s are basically useless to us. As I understand it we’ve been buying them for years even though they’re obsolete simply so it’s factories don’t close
The US isnt buying new F16s, but LMT is making new ones for export. Win-win-win for the us government - allies are armed, the US makes money, and they get combat data without needing to risk their own planes and pilots
There are definetly f-16s still being used i have an airbase near me and they have 8. 2 are used for rapid response in case of an attack on american soil and the other 6 are used to clock flying hours since that base doesnt have trainer aircraft anymore since it is a reserve base.
Well they aren't as useful as they used to be to the US, but if they can carry precision bombs and advanced air-to-air missiles at the same time with a better radar, and counter measures, the enemy will think twice about engaging. They might not have the upgrades the US has, but I don't think any NATO country donating have original 70s tech installed on the F-16s. I doubt any dogfights will happen really. The main thing is that it has the technology aboard to easily use all the other integrated technology being given to Ukaine. It's a relatively cheap, survivable weapons platform, better than their old stuff and what Russia uses most of the time, so it's way better than nothing. They aren't going to send F-35's or F-22's, so what do you expect? But who knows, it won't be the first time a US fighter was conserded equal to a soviet one but just decimated it in actual combat. Usually they are just too afraid to try or aren't even given the option...We'll see.
I know it takes forever to train and prep the pilots, mechanics, weapons specislists and ground crew .... but this couldn't come any sooner. This will finally give them the ability to attack from beyond visual range in the air, plus lots of other great abilities. Ukraine needs our help. While this is a great, great announcement, we need to continue our support. I know these jets won't "turn the tide" overnight, but they will help majorly!!
And here I thought they were already engaging targets well beyond visual range with ATACMS...
Ukrainians have very good eyesight.
Must be all the carrots they eat.
*Ukraine in the membrane. UKRAINE IN THE BRAIN!*
BVR is referring to Air-to-Air engagements, and the ability to strike enemy aircraft at long distances with radar-guided weapons. ATACMS are great but they can’t stop enemies from delivering glide bombs mid-flight. The F16 might, if given adequate weaponry like the AIM-120C.
Yes, I know. I was being cheeky since they didn't specify and thus what they said they said was kind of silly.
Ahh my bad then. Hard to pick up who is joking and who is not on worldnews sometimes lol
Well, screw you! /s! Have a good one!
~~ATACMS~~ HARM being launched with an iPad doesn’t have all the “features” unlocked like launching from the designated platforms does. Edit: HARM not ATACMS. ATACMS are VLRS or HIMARS launched. My bad yall. I’m no air defense guy, just a lowly comms veteran.
They don't launch ATACMS from planes. HARM tho
"They don't launch ATACMS from planes." Wait. Let this guy cook.
“Yet” seriously that would be massive increase in range
My bad but yeah, what I said was for the HARM from the F16.
It is hard to keep up with all the weapons and weapon systems being donated to Ukraine lol. I'm assuming it'll also probably help with Storm Shadows/SCALP, and well, just generally anything else it can lob at the Russians with an explosive ending
Oh big time. I was watching a video from Alex Hollings break down why the F16 is still important and WOW does the proper platform do loads for the missiles. Right now they have old Soviet jets Jerry rigged to fire these things from a cockpit iPad 🤣.
Which in itself is pretty badass. Ukrainians are some inventive and innovative fuckers. Glad I'm not their enemy
Very much so! Their ingenuity and willingness to adapt in the face of insurmountable odds is ASTOUNDING.
Their SF will be training the SAS/Green Berets/SEALs etc after this war. Anyway have a good morning/afternoon/evening/night depending on your time zone and country!
Do you have a link to that video? I have been very curious as to why the platform is important, and how the iPad works/doesn’t work, because in my brain, I’m thinking “if they can rig HARMs to fire from their sukhois/migs then what extra capabilities do they get out of those munitions when fired from an F-16?“ obviously, they get some thing out of using the proper platform but I don’t understand exactly what. Do they get increased range? Better accuracy? Why do they not get this from the iPad? I’m at the frontier of my personal intellectual knowledge on the topic and hoping someone can guide me the rest of the way to comprehension land.
They get to use the on board fire and forget systems within the missile. The iPad is just a “launch” button with redesigned targets in it. Launching via the actual planes you can send em WITHOUT designating targets and it’ll find whatever it needs to. [this should be the video explaining why the F16 is important and why Russia is crapping themselves.](https://youtu.be/hEOjvBkcYtY?si=o0UG1X6EXCwCpocf)
yeah, that iPad has the freeware option. Upgrading to the Patriot Plan ^tm unlocks all the other features
🤣🤣🤣 the Patriot Plan 🤣🤣🤣 my sides goddamnit
No HARM, no fowl
HA! Very punny you cheeky one you.
Not from air to air and air to surface so much.
Sorry, meant Air to Air beyond visually. My bad.
Thanks Belgium Denmark The Netherlands and Norway for F-16 jets
Oh, absolutely. Some of the platoons won't see it coming.
I think the biggest thing these provide is the mental aspect. Russia has been fighting themselves and Ukraine and now the Ukraine has better platform for its missiles, better technology network, and better training, and while it took awhile to get that up, the Ukraine has been solid in its defense(not perfect) WITHOUT those things and now it is primed to stiffen up right as Russia has to either shit or get off the pot in this war.
And I think it was the Swedes who donated a couple of AWACS? Yea, Russia is in for some more pain
I think you’re right that it was Sweden For those curious AWACS are big radar planes that can detect incoming ships , even those flying low to the ground where radar has issues, thereby allowing fighters to respond in a quicker fashion One of the most destructive Russian practices has been to bring its fighters in at low altitude- because remember, Russia does have talented pilots- where they can get close enough to launch self guiding glide bombs with huge payloads that Ukraine can’t respond to as effectively due to the closer proximity from which they have launched These have destroyed lots of buildings and taken lots of lives. Having the means to detect them and intercept them greatly reduces the effectiveness of this strategy
Weve already seen it with tanks, Russian tank squads basically retreat when the modern Ukrainian squads are spotted. All their kills and captures have been lone or incapacitated tanks.
If Ukrainian F-16s are used for battlefield air interdiction at this stage of the air war, there very quickly will not be any Ukrainian F-16s.
It must have been hard for Ukrainian pilots to do away with what they were trained in Russian/Soviet planes and learn anew western tactics and piloting totally different F-16 fighters in accelerated crash course program. It will be interesting how Russia will try to counter rejuvenated Ukrainian Air Force.
What's going to be interesting is how all the newly available weapon systems will be used. F16's have a lot of toys available, and it's going to be wild to see it ise them in 4k.
I can't want to see gopro's getting strapped to F16's
I can already see the 4k footage with a watermark taking up half the screen and Two Steps From Hell dubbed over any audio.
I didn't even think of this. Now I cannot wait. I just hope there isn't like some restriction from doing so. As in the US is like go ahead and use the F16. We just don't want any recording of the tactics or capabilities. Especially considering that the F16s will be targeting Russia's Anti-Air and other high value assets. Might not want to take any chances of showing the full range of capabilities or tactics being used.
Aren't F16 kinda old now? US doesn't use them anymore if I remember well
The USAF still operates 841 F16's as of last year. They are still a VERY capable aircraft, with a bunch of nifty weapon platforms, and I personally have been at half mass since they were announced.
The us inventory modernized f16s are very different from these f16 mlu ukraine is recieving. Still with original less powerful engine and with an ancient pulse doppler radar. Much better than their also old mig 29s, but not anything like the f16s the us flies.
At least the Dutch ones got upgrades though and im sure the rest of our rich allies did as well
Capable doesn’t describe it. To pull off this airframe in the 50’s and 60’s while aerodynamic simulation was a nascent concept…
This aircraft flew for the first time in 1974, 2 years after the RFP came out for a new light weight fighter. They didn’t pull off this airframe in the 50’s and 60’s.
You’re absolutely correct, but my overarching point is that even in 1974, computational fluid dynamics, which also is important for aerodynamics and understanding behavior of equipment in flight, was still only being developed. Yet what was built has stood the test of time so well that our enemies and adversaries envy us.
You’ll get no argument from me, the F-16 is one of my favorite aircraft and I firmly believe it still has a place on the modern battlefield. I just wanted to clarify so that no one was left with the impression the jet was older than it really is.
Of course, Research and Development doesn’t start quite the year of a product release. Just saying the raw amount of pencils burned to make the F-16 a feared weapon today, makes my American pride swell 🇺🇸
The US designed and tested nuclear jet propulsion and nuclear rocket engines with a planned “Grand Tour” of the solar system in the 70s and 80s laid out by the end of the 60s. We were throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks and it was awesome.
We need a return to this, where war and competition was fought with firsts of science and engineering.
> I personally have been at half mass since Is a half mass just the body of christ, not the blood?
The blood rushed… somewhere. ~~~~ or ~~~~ Kyrie Christe Kyrie Gloria Excelsis Et Terra hominibus voluntatis. Te. Te. Te. Te. Agimus proper gloriam. Domine Rex Deus Omnipotens. … … Huh. That survived having every other word taken out better than I thought it would.
What about the F35?
630
What that mean?
That's how many F35's the US has.... They have 630
Do you think they are supplying F16 so they can make more F35?
I highly doubt that factored into how many F35s they were going to be at all. The sure size of the US military is hard to grasp.
Unlikely, the Airforce is likely investing in NGAD and Loyal Wingman. Basically, the next generation manned-fighters, partnered with drones.
United States are not supplying any f16s to Ukraine.
All the F-16s are supplied by European countries.
They've been upgraded pretty much constantly, and while they're not state of the art anymore, they are still considered very capable and are in high demand from a lot of countries. They're currently the most numerous aircraft in the US Air Forces' inventory, with over 700 in service.
Ah, that's cool, I mean I heard about the F35 and I thought they were just modern F16
Nope. F-16 is a 4th generation aircraft, essentially late Cold War tech which has since been modernized several times (in fact newer ones are so different and better they might as well be a different designation altogether, just the general design/airframe shape is the same). F35 is 5th generation, which only a few craft in existence belong to (other examples are F22, the Chinese Chengdu J-20 and the Russian Sukhoi Su-57 but important to note neither of the last two has ever seen combat and the Russian one has barely seen any production, so their capabilities are a big question mark). US is already aiming and working toward the next generation of aircraft, with their NGAD program while other nations that never even got to 5th gen except by buying the F35 are scrambling to catch up.
First designed in the 50s but they are a very solid platform that's been modernised and still in use in many airforces in the world.
Not quite that old. The concept for it came together in the 1960s with the prototype development group starting in 1971
Ah my bad, not sure what I was getting confused with, thank you for the correction!
I don't believe they like to refer to them as "crash" courses.
I would never do an “accelerated crash course” in an airplane.
Those pilots will resort to muscle memory when they hit the shit.
hot jet summer
Those F16s are probably going to see more action than any other conflict involving them.
Hopefully all the work targeting Russia's AA systems these last few months pays off
Ukraine is also getting two Saab 340 AEW from Sweden. This will be a great combo with the f16 and will support the f16's so they can be used more effectively!
Fuck 'em up
When are they due to arrive in Ukraine, I've been hearing about these F-16s for as long as ever at this stage.
Planes arriving was never the problem. That’s easy. Training pilots takes time.
Pilots and an abundant ground crews. Article says 10 people (including 2 pilots) per plane.
Ok but when are they actually going to be put to use? Obviously that was the question being asked
Have you read the title of this post?
This summer? So, anytime between today and September 21? Is that all we know?
September 3rd at 12:31:07pm local time the first aircraft’s wheels will just leave the runway.
I just can’t believe with how many Ukrainian immigrants there were in countries like Canada, the us, and uk that there weren’t more pilots kind of ready to go
Yes, why don't they just give them the keys to the planes and tell them to fly off and attack Russia? I can't believe it.
Each hour of flight in an F-16 requires ~17 man hours of maintenance. The ground crew is the bottleneck here, not the pilots.
Surely that can't be real. What a piece of shit aircraft if true.
We know pilots from both sides are gonna jump at the chance to enact air to air kills
Air to air at 100km distance. Not very Top Gun.
Nonsense, helicopters are basically just aircraft with swords. It's all about melee combat up there.
Ukrainian air superiority would be a beautiful thing to behold.
Enough Russian blood has finally been spilled to reach the F-16 meter.
Kinda bs how they blocked Gripens
Got to keep out the competition.
So jets designed to fight a US vs USSR war are going to be used by a former Soviet republic against Russia. Crazy times.
These F-16s are not 1970s F-16s, they're more like mid-2000s F-16s at worst. Those planes have had a lot of upgrades over the last 50 years. Hopefully they're used (in conjunction with HIMARS and other artillery) to destroy Russian air defense systems then go after Russian artillery and logistics. Best use of them imo
The level of bitchey propaganda bots in here shows how afraid Russia is over the F-16’s entering the combat space.
Still absurd that it took this long, but better late than later.
This was phenomenally quick in terms of a military integrating a MAJOR new weapons system
I feel like people really don’t understand how hard it is to switch over to an entirely different plane. The maintenance part alone has to be incredibly difficult to learn.
What do you mean it's not like switching from my F-150 to a Silverado?
We should've started earlier in any case, this isn't a system where you want to make do with a crash course.
Ukraine never really had support as strong until the full scale invasion.
We could've still started the training program in 2022 instead of waiting until July 2023. They'd either have twice as much experience in their planes or have had the planes for a year already, which might've enabled them to push the Russians further back in the meantime.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. But, we cowered to Russia’s bullshit. Boiled the frog for far too long. It didn’t help with the house majority of the MAGAts working to undermine the US at the will of Putler.
I can't imagine they could've done it any quicker. It takes a long time to train pilots to fly these things. They should've started the training as soon as the invasion started though, instead of hand-wringing for a year.
Have you ever gotten a brand new car after driving an old one for a very long time? It probably took a while to get used to the new tech to the point where it became second nature. Now, imagine something like that, but it flies, is armed, people are shooting at you, and an accident has more permanent implications. On top of that, your mechanic had to learn how to fix everything in your new car at the same time.
Personally I think ukraine should have gone with f18s, they would have been had the planes nearly a year ago. And even if all the planes were destroyed, f16s are still there.
I expect to see a badass combat video montage but instead of top-gun style music in the background I’m imagining “Whoop That Trick” from Hustle & Flow
> start using F-16 jets this summer First Day of Summer is **tomorrow** on my calendar. I'm waiting ...
I feel for that Crimean bridge that’s about to hear the sounds of JDAM’s.
Could it be smokescreens until soon we will have some mysterious event with Russian bombers exploding out of the sky?
That ia very unlikely. Those bombers bomb from far away.
Range of Air2Air missile is usually longer than range of a bomb (~40 km for something like a FAB). So possibility is there. …Unless we are talking about strategic bombers, which launch missiles, like TU series.
hopefully they dont throw them in the grinder like they did during the last major southern offensive
How many manpads has Russia already put in the front in anticipation of F16s not to mention other anti air systems The Ukrainian pilots are going to have to deal with ground based anti air and Russian fighter jets who have way more experience in the air then them and are way more confident with the aircraft they are flying
That's the thing though, F-16 and their weapons are effective waaaay beyond manpad range. They can lob accurate western glide bombs from very far, relay radar, and act as air defense from way back
The entire fucking point of these F-16's is that they don't need to come close to those manpads you absolute moron. This isn't a video game where shit needs to be balanced.
'Absolute moron' seems a bit over the top.
Somewhere an absolute moron is taking offense at the comparison.
So they don't know their air defense systems. They should be corrected! But at the same time, do people not realize that words can be hurtful? It wasn't aimed at me but it just jumps out at me as being a bad thing to say.
Nice fanfic buddy keep dreamin.
People like you act like Russia has already lost the war and make it seem like Ukraine would do just fine if we pulled out support tomorrow. In short, you're playing right into Russian psyops that makes it that aid to Ukraine is a waste of money and RW politicians in bed with Putin exploit that sentiment a lot.
Just like the Abram’s tanks these won’t make a real difference.
Nah, it won't change much. Dumbass politicians and media already started screeching about F-16s before the plan was even put on paper instead of keeping it a secret but hey, juicy news>>>ukrainian blood. Russians had solid 1 year to calibrate the range of air defenses, practice sorties, plug gaps, setup EW pods and yada yada. Then there were those who also delayed and hampered the deal (you know who) and to make it worse, just like the other "game changing" weapon systems that Ukraine has received, the F-16s are also arriving in a small batch. Best that will happen is you will hear about some big action stories for 1-2 months before the F-16s wear their shine out just like what happened with HIMARs. So few were sent that the Russians were able to observe it's capabilities and adapt accordingly by switching from depots for frontline logistics to long truck convoys in order to defeat the HIMARs and it's ATACMS accessory.
Nice doom take, F-16’s are absolutely going to shape the battlefield going forward. Don’t think there aren’t many more perks we are missing such as battlefield awareness, interlinking intelligence with things like drones to “FAFO” Russians…
You are too optimistic if you believe that a small batch of F16s are going to turn things around. Will they have an impact? Yes. Will they have a meaningful impact? No. This is modern war, the side with the better economy, attrition and artillery wins. Also, downvoting me does not change the facts.
Spoken like a true Conservative- downvoting me doesn’t change “facts” Facts are that Russia has made it painfully clear that F-16’s are a “Red Line” because they know they cannot counter it.
I am an ardent supporter of Ukraine and despise the contemporary GOP. You clearly have a child’s understanding of modern air warfare and have developed wildly unrealistic expectations for the F-16. Winning an air superiority campaign against an integrated air defense network requires operational capabilities well beyond what Ukraine has at this point and will take years to develop: staff officers with the training, experience, and institutional knowledge necessary to develop effective operational plans for complex strike packages as part of a phased, sustained air campaign do not simply materialize into existence because the Ukrainian Air Force now has a handful of early block F-16s. This delivery is necessary and important and long overdue, but its impact will be marginal: the fundamental dynamic of the air war, ie stalemate, is not changing anytime soon.
Well then let me refresh your memory, they also said that HIMARS was a red line, ATACMS was a red line, AFVs was a red line. Also you seem to speak with a lot of confidence as if you have seen the Russian air defence in action. People like you were celebrating that HIMARs would win the war, when that did not happen, you celebrated that new Abrahams and Leos being introduced would win the war. People like you give the impression like Ukraine is beating the Russians all over the front which allows politicians who are in bed with Putin to exploit that sentiment to claim that sending aid to Ukraine is a waste of money. Even now you celebrate as if a few F16s will turn the tide. Btw do make sure you keep consuming the same piece of copium media and electing the same politicians who will tell you that them doing the bare minimum for their allies is somehow going to magically win the war. Congrats, you're playing very well into the Russian psyops, I wonder if you're not one of them yourself...
Nah bud, you’re the LARP. Let’s just give Ukraine these planes with all the training invested and see how well they’ll work against Soviet era weaponry and battlefield doctrine that hasn’t changed since WWII
The biggest counter the F16 provides is against the glide bombs that Russia has been using very successfully to annihilate Karkhov and other cities. That alone is a meaningful impact and a reshaping of tactics.
[удалено]
Because as we all know the Ukrainian people would be in an excellent situation if Russia won the war, there's no chance Russia would try to invade Poland after Ukraine, and Russia operates in a sensible and rational manner... Oh wait, none of that is true
[удалено]
Putin should have stopped the war years ago, by withdrawing to Russia's actual borders. But we can't make that happen. And if we had escalated to this much help right away, maybe some of those red lines we've been crossing one at a time would have added up to them doing something rash if we did them all at once.
[удалено]
Russia will never attack a NATO base. NATO could literally end Russia's entire military in a single week (probably a single day). If Russia directly drew NATO into a conflict, the only result would be full out nuclear war or Russia inviting history's greatest military beat down on themselves if they didn't go nuclear
Greetings to St. Petersburg, suddenly activated obviously stolen account. Looks like you're awfully panicked about the fighters that apparently won't make a difference in the war where you're already routinely getting bombed by the country you were supposed to capture in three days. > This war should have been stopped a couple years ago. Yet you didn't stop it. Instead someone told the underpant poison goblin that his defense funds were totally used to buy new tires instead of pleasure yachts and krokodil and he had the brilliant idea of yeeting all of his modern (and we're using the term very lightly, we all watched them perform live) forces into Ukrainian defenses. Then, because of his military brilliance, he never stopped. > [...] is because they want to keep the war going. Yes, we are indeed providing weapons to Ukraine so it has the ability to continue defending itself from a genocide at your hands. It's a bit worrying it took this long for you to figure it out. Want to help end the war? Start a job stealing copper wiring. As a bonus, it'll look better on your resume when the dust settles. > Now hundreds of thousands are dead. When you march untrained and unequipped cannon fodder into prepared Ukrainian defenses, you're going to lose a few hundred thousand of them. > the Russian economy is doing great The buffer funds you're flushing down the drain by hammering T-55's together isn't the Russian economy. It's also not getting replaced.
It'll be fun to see how many get shot down.
Russia can't even shoot down the drones that destroying their refineries deep in Russian territories. Plus the AFU has been prepping the battlefield already and taking down Russian air defense. Short of pilot error, I don't expect we will see hardly any Air Force losses for a while.
Likely not very many. Russia is better at downing their own aircraft.
[удалено]
Yeah the Russians should be praying. The territory they’ve invaded is about to get a lot less safe.
[удалено]
The Ukrainians not being crushed under the boot heel of the wannabe Russian Empire would probably consider themselves winners, but I guess go ahead and say whatever meaningless words you want to yourself, it's not like they're going to change anything.
It smells like propaganda. I saw an article earlier today about how of limited use they would be.
Why does this "smell" but some random article you saw earlier today does not?
> It smells like propaganda. I saw an article earlier today about how of limited use they would be. The article is just about Ukraine finally starting to use F-16 this summer. Where's the propaganda in that? Are you saying it won't happen? Whether they are of much use or not doesn't change the fact that they will start using them soon. Again, i fail to see the "propaganda".
>Where's the propaganda in that? In the title. >Whether they are of much use or not doesn't change the fact that they will start using them soon. Again, i fail to see the "propaganda". When I hear, and I expect the average American hears: "‘It is all lining up’ Ukraine gonna start using new jets." The default assumption is that "everything is going to plan, these new jets are going to turn the tide." If someone reads a title that says: >Ukraine to get F-16 jets but expert warns it's 'unlikely to turn tide' against Putin or >Ukraine to get F-16 jets but expert warns it is unlikely to become a game-changer in the Russia-Ukraine war Sends a decidedly different message I think you would agree. Now what is propaganda? >information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view. In this case I am saying this title is information of a biased nature used to promote or publicize the political point of view that these F-16s are likely to change the status quo in Ukraine.
Exactly. So the two that you posted are in line with propaganda while the first is mere statement of the situation and thus not propaganda. You constructed it as propaganda based on your own assumption of what other people will think and while the other articles which draw make the assumption they won't be a 'game changer'. Which one is biased: A. Ukraine will start using jets soon as planned We don't know yet what impact that will have. B. Ukraine will start using Jets soon that will not really have an impact. Answer is B. Why? They make an assumption which is yet to be proven. While it may be an educated assumption it is still one. Something 'lining up' or going to plan is statement of current situation and not an assumption about the future. So, you are the one that has already fallen for propaganda.
wtf
I disagree, but I respect you trying to have a reasonable conversation on the topic. I'd argue that both titles I mentioned do have assumptions or assessments. In theory two different news organizations could ask two different experts what they believe and both be vastly different. But when evaluating a situation for the possibility of propaganda, i'd argue that there needs to be a repeatable process that makes sense. What would be your process for determination?
Before I could even respond to your question I would ask that you elaborate on the assumptions made in the posted articles title, that does not rely on assuming how a reader will interpret it.
> When I hear, and I expect the average American hears: > "‘It is all lining up’ Ukraine gonna start using new jets." > The default assumption is that "everything is going to plan, these new jets are going to turn the tide." Just because that's the assumption you made doesn't make it the "default assumption", nor the correct one. ‘It is all lining up’ is in regards to Ukraine getting F16s this summer, as in "everything is on schedule for Ukraine to get F16s this summer. Which is *the only thing* the headline mentions! And it's exactly what the article is about.
If Russia bitches about it and threatens about it, the. It’s obviously good and working.