Romania has a fleet of heavily upgraded MIG 21s that would also fit the bill. Once they get the F16s they bought, they will no longer have a use for them.
You are referring to the "LanceR" MIG 21s upgraded in Israel I guess. Built in the 60s (actually until the 80s, but by then I guess they were badly outdated), upgraded in the 90s - I'm not sure how I would feel if I was an Ukrainian pilot ordered to fly into combat on such a plane...
You could still defend returning fighters / bombers. The missiles on the MIG21 could still be decent if allowed to carry them. Ukraine alreday used western anti-radation missiles successfully on their MIGs.
Slovakia is going to receive F-16s in 2024 the earliest, but we have transferred our MiGs to Ukraine already, after signing an agreement where Poland and Czech Republic committed to protect our skies in the mean time. Thanks!
Those upgraded MIGs use technology provided by Elbit Systems which means that Israel can oppose such a transfer. Anyway, the planes are really old and set to be decomissioned in a couple of years, so it could be pointless to train new (Ukrainian) pilots to fly them.
MiG 21s are not only one of the shittiest fighters ever built, they're significantly older (and far worse) than anything Ukraine currently operates...
Ukraine is currently using 4th generation fighters (Su-27 and MiG-29) that were both upgraded in the 2010's and are more akin to 4.5 generation... The F-16 isn't even an upgrade per se, they're just numerous and Ukraine only has so many fighters left...
Fighters are a defensive weapon for Ukraine . The Russians had no issues with transferring jets to our enemies in the past. I don't understand why we didn't start doing this (or F16s or F18s) months ago.
Actually what would help more would be anti-missile systems (Patriot, Iron Dome etc.). But the sad fact is that there's not enough of those to go around - Israel needs all the production capacity for itself for obvious reasons, and the U.S. apparently don't even have enough Patriot missiles for their own needs.
That is an argument, but it has to be weighed against the cost of re-acquiring the planes that will either be lost or on permanent loan to Ukraine after the war is over. A defeated Russia can still strike back with isolated terror attacks and a Bear with a nuke is a good way to effect those.
Sweden has come a very long way in regards to international security operations since the war began, but there are still Putin-lovers who'd love nothing more than to turn public opinion against Ukraine. Asking Swedes to give up the "crown jewels" of our defense is one way.
I have to say though, the cost of re-acquiring the planes is not a simple thing to evaluate, at least if you think strategically what is best for the country.
The cash cost is irrelevant compared to the cost to society if we actually had to use them. I guess what I'm trying to say is, using them now has a known, huge cost. Not using them, can have a much higher cost later on.
But if we are disregarding what is feasible, and just playing RISK, Sweden should just send its own figher pilots and planes to the Ukraine, right now. It wouldn't be a NATO attack, and what is Russia going to do? Bleed on us? It's either that or nukes, but they always threaten with nukes for everything. I see no signs the Kremlin wants to be martyred themselves, just send others that way.
> The Swedish Saab Gripen C/D [...] was designed from the outset for ease of maintenance, and can be refuelled, re-armed and given basic maintenance by teams of just six ground crew using two vehicles on small airbases or highways, even in the harsh conditions of the northern winter. Moreover, only one of each crew needs to be a highly trained maintainer; the rest can be conscripts or even troops.
If this is true and the Gripen can achieve performances similar to other western fighter jets, I'm really wondering why maintenance of other planes is so much more complicated and costly or why the Gripen is not selling much better than it currently is.
19 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 122 ms ] threadEDIT: add link
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/romania-should-give-th...
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/25274/f-15s-arrive-for...
Ukraine is currently using 4th generation fighters (Su-27 and MiG-29) that were both upgraded in the 2010's and are more akin to 4.5 generation... The F-16 isn't even an upgrade per se, they're just numerous and Ukraine only has so many fighters left...
There will never be a cheaper opportunity to put Russia out of commission.
Every Russian military asset defeated there is one threat removed.
Sweden has come a very long way in regards to international security operations since the war began, but there are still Putin-lovers who'd love nothing more than to turn public opinion against Ukraine. Asking Swedes to give up the "crown jewels" of our defense is one way.
I have to say though, the cost of re-acquiring the planes is not a simple thing to evaluate, at least if you think strategically what is best for the country.
The cash cost is irrelevant compared to the cost to society if we actually had to use them. I guess what I'm trying to say is, using them now has a known, huge cost. Not using them, can have a much higher cost later on.
But if we are disregarding what is feasible, and just playing RISK, Sweden should just send its own figher pilots and planes to the Ukraine, right now. It wouldn't be a NATO attack, and what is Russia going to do? Bleed on us? It's either that or nukes, but they always threaten with nukes for everything. I see no signs the Kremlin wants to be martyred themselves, just send others that way.
> The Swedish Saab Gripen C/D [...] was designed from the outset for ease of maintenance, and can be refuelled, re-armed and given basic maintenance by teams of just six ground crew using two vehicles on small airbases or highways, even in the harsh conditions of the northern winter. Moreover, only one of each crew needs to be a highly trained maintainer; the rest can be conscripts or even troops.
If this is true and the Gripen can achieve performances similar to other western fighter jets, I'm really wondering why maintenance of other planes is so much more complicated and costly or why the Gripen is not selling much better than it currently is.
https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-built-a-russian-fight...