arpakola wrote:



arpakola wrote:
AirCargo wrote:Further Evidence of GRU Operations in Ukraine
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7frKzBIbbQnZFZxVFFMdG9meW8/view?pli=1
http://crime.in.ua/statti/20150521/krah-gru
OminousSpudd wrote:AirCargo wrote:Further Evidence of GRU Operations in Ukraine
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7frKzBIbbQnZFZxVFFMdG9meW8/view?pli=1
http://crime.in.ua/statti/20150521/krah-gru
Are you actually posting SBU reports now? Seriously?
Ivan the Colorado wrote:A new fighter would be close to the top of the Ukrop military's priorities. Rebuilding the outdated Su-27 and MiG-29 fleets is extremely difficult without Russia and any effort to try to get as many of as airworthy as possible would be shoddy at best.
Ivan the Colorado wrote:The chronic shortage of money would mean that these fighters would have to have the lowest operating costs. The two Western fighters that are the cheapest to operate would be the Lockheed-Martin F-16 Falcon and the Saab JAS-39 Gripen.
The sale of any Falcons would likely be prohibited by Congress after seeing how the Ukrops are so good at keeping weapons and other tech in their own hands.
I would choose the Gripen and try to opt for the NG models. There are a lot of attractive features that the Gripen offers, like low maintenance, which would be a blessing to the Ukrops. It could even use recce pods to take over some of the Su-24MR's duties.
I am confident that you speak for at least 99% of the members here when saying you want the Hohol's fighting capabilities destroyed, myself included. I don't want Ukraine to be integrated into Russia but that is a whole other topic. It's also kinda obvious that the West will not let its experiment called Ukraine go down the drain that easily.Werewolf wrote:I am honest and i think i will speak for more than just me when i say that there are many not wanting to see Ukrop military rebuilded but rather destroyed, Ukraine absorbed into Russia so they actually can have peace and order and than rebuild into russian military, no other way around it unless you want for next decades the shit like it is now.
The UAF doesn't need to a new fighter right now. However, I expect it is a high priority in Kiev in the future. For a government that thinks that the EBIL RUSKIES will invade any second and for a government that knows that they wouldn't last a few hours in an air war with the VVS, I would think new fighters are high on the priority list for Ukraine.ExBeobachter1987 wrote:Ivan the Colorado wrote:A new fighter would be close to the top of the Ukrop military's priorities. Rebuilding the outdated Su-27 and MiG-29 fleets is extremely difficult without Russia and any effort to try to get as many of as airworthy as possible would be shoddy at best.
Why would the UAF need a new fighter ASAP?Ivan the Colorado wrote:The chronic shortage of money would mean that these fighters would have to have the lowest operating costs. The two Western fighters that are the cheapest to operate would be the Lockheed-Martin F-16 Falcon and the Saab JAS-39 Gripen.
The sale of any Falcons would likely be prohibited by Congress after seeing how the Ukrops are so good at keeping weapons and other tech in their own hands.
I would choose the Gripen and try to opt for the NG models. There are a lot of attractive features that the Gripen offers, like low maintenance, which would be a blessing to the Ukrops. It could even use recce pods to take over some of the Su-24MR's duties.
Why wouldn't old second/third-hard F-16 be less acceptable than new Gripens which contain more advanced US-hardware?
Ivan the Colorado wrote:The UAF doesn't need to a new fighter right now. However, I expect it is a high priority in Kiev in the future.
Ivan the Colorado wrote:For a government that thinks that the EBIL RUSKIES will invade any second and for a government that knows that they wouldn't last a few hours in an air war with the VVS, I would think new fighters are high on the priority list for Ukraine.
Ivan the Colorado wrote:As for the F-16s. Those used F-16s could not come from the US and they can't contain advanced US avionics (at least until after 2016) and why settle for a few worn down airframes when you could get something newer? The Gripen has the same upgrade capability as the Falcon and is compatible with NATO equipment as well.
Well Ukraine is convinced that they need a strong and active military and nothing will change that under the current political climate. The EU and NATO have been biggest instigators of this conflict from the very beginning. Russia isn't deterred by any political or economic means from the West, Crimea is still Russia and that won't change soon. And thanks to the liberation of Krim, Ukraine is convinced that their biggest threats are from the outside from the start. What Ukraine has said about Russia invading them has also been reflected in their actions. Like rumors of heavy militarization with S-300 batteries all along the border to Sumy, far removed from the conflict. Ukraine's military would find itself getting annihilated by Russia on all fronts. One would think that they would commit all their usable resources to the fight but that isn't the case. The West already eats up all the crap that the Ukrops are spewing without any evidence provided. If you want, I will gladly discuss the politics here elsewhere with you, (Ukraine thread or PMs).ExBeobachter1987 wrote:Ukraine does not need a military. EU/NATO are supposed to be friendly and Russia is deterred by political and economical means.
The main threats are domestic.
Consequently, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine should be dissolved and its assets moved to other ministries (mostly Internal Affairs) or sold.Ivan the Colorado wrote:The UAF doesn't need to a new fighter right now. However, I expect it is a high priority in Kiev in the future.
If it is not a high priority now, it is not a high priority.Ivan the Colorado wrote:For a government that thinks that the EBIL RUSKIES will invade any second and for a government that knows that they wouldn't last a few hours in an air war with the VVS, I would think new fighters are high on the priority list for Ukraine.
Don't confuse what the say with what they think.
The Kiev government knows that they won't invaded by Russian forces, but they keep talking about it in order to maintain support in Ukraine and the West.
IIRC Russia's VVS is history.Ivan the Colorado wrote:As for the F-16s. Those used F-16s could not come from the US and they can't contain advanced US avionics (at least until after 2016) and why settle for a few worn down airframes when you could get something newer? The Gripen has the same upgrade capability as the Falcon and is compatible with NATO equipment as well.
Because they are more affordable and would be delivered sooner than the Gripens.
George1 wrote:Ukrainian Defense Ministry announced plans to increase its military budget by 5% of GDP
|
|