美国的F-16战斗机在乌克兰上空能打仗吗？

远航一号

https://twitter.com/imetatronink/status/1661059852897259521

Can F-16s Fly Combat Sorties Over Ukraine?

— A discussion of some of the most relevant considerations —

It is effectively impossible to base F-16s in Ukraine. The available runways are woefully deficient, and any aircraft remaining at one base for more than a single sortie are going to become a target of Russian strikes, along with the base infrastructure.

The Ukrainian air force has only managed to retain a handful of airframes to this point in time by assiduously hiding them, and constantly moving them around, using improvised airfields much of the time (highways, grass fields, etc.) The sortie rate of the remaining UAF aircraft is so small as to be nearly invisible. Indeed, with few exceptions, if they fly, they die.

But at least Soviet-era jets were designed and constructed to fly out of "guerrilla airfields". F-16s are not. F-16s require pristine runways and intensive maintenance after each sortie — almost 20 hours of maintenance for each hour of flight time!!!

This means highly trained / exceedingly experienced NATO ground crews and fully equipped maintenance hangars would need to be available anywhere the F-16 seeks to fly — along with an abundant supply of spare parts, spare engines, etc.

That simply is not going to happen in Ukraine.

‼️ This means the only plausible basing option will be at NATO facilities in Poland and/or Romania. And anyone attempting to argue against this reality is engaging in pure fantasy.

And, of course, flying F-16s against Russia from bases in Poland and/or Romania is tantamount to a formal declaration of WAR.

But let's assume NATO chooses that option ...

First, we need to consider what the mission of these F-16s will be. Is it to launch with long-range cruise missiles, rise to high altitude, and fire them from distant stand-off range? Because, as I understand it, the F-16 cannot carry, for example, a British Storm Shadow missile. The F-16 is not well-suited for the long-range stand-off role.

Furthermore, an F-16 at altitude over Ukraine is going to be seen by Russian AD assets from hundreds of miles away, and Russian air to air missiles and S-400 SAMs will outrange the F-16s capability to defend itself in almost any scenario.

Additionally, the Russians have clearly demonstrated the capability to routinely shoot down any stand-off munition NATO has launched against them.

I don't see how an F-16 mission to launch long-range stand-off strikes against Russian targets is going to produce any meaningful tactical successes, let along appreciable strategic effects. And I am certain it would only take the Russians a day or two to formulate highly effective ambushes against this tactic. Each subsequent F-16 sortie would then become a one-way kamikaze attack.

As for close-air support (CAS) of ground troops or combat air patrol (CAP) against Russian attack aircraft, there is simply no way the F-16 can accomplish either of those missions without readily available in-air refueling! And that is simply not going to happen over Ukraine. NATO's big, fat, slow tankers will be shot out of the sky at will by the Russians! There is no way of getting around that reality.

Moreover, from the moment the first F-16 commences an attack sortie from a NATO airfield, all NATO ISR assets in the theater will become targets. They will either cease to fly, or cease to exist. And, without them, the F-16 is no longer a useful tool.

Neither F-16s, nor any variety of NATO strike aircraft, are made to function in isolation from the huge logistical infrastructure that supports them. Therefore, the very sentence "Send F-16s to Ukraine" is a logically nonsensical statement.

Simply put, I cannot conceive of ANY way F-16s can be used against Russian forces in Ukraine, even if the latest generation of F-16 Vipers were being flown by experienced NATO pilots.

And, quite frankly, the same limitations would apply to ANY variety of NATO strike aircraft attempting to fly against the Russian military in its own backyard.

If the policy makers of the #EmpireAtAllCosts cult succeed in initiating an air war against Russia in eastern Europe, it will result in catastrophic losses for US/NATO air power and the comprehensive destruction of the myth of US military supremacy.

远航一号

主要观点：

1 F16对机场的要求特别挑剔，必须完全整洁，而且维修要求很高（每一个小时飞行，就需要20小时维修）；所以不存在任何使用乌克兰机场的可能性。这样，F16只能从波兰等北约机场起飞。但是这样，在国际法意义上，波兰就成了交战国。

2 F16能干什么？如果用来升空后发射远程巡航导弹，那么在发射巡航导弹的高度上，可以轻易被俄罗斯发现。俄罗斯的防空导弹射程有几百公里，超过F16可以自卫的攻击距离。很快，每一次F16岂非都将成为神风式自杀攻击，不会有战术效果，更不必说战略效果。

3 如果用来近距离对地支援或进行空战，从波乌边境到战场的航程意味着中间必须加油，而北约巨大、肥胖、缓慢的加油机将是俄罗斯可以随心所欲击落的目标。

4 不仅如此，既然F16可以从北约机场起飞，俄罗斯就可以攻击北约在战场周边的情报监控侦察系统。如果这些系统被消灭了，F16就是聋子瞎子，毫无作用。

5 北约的任何飞机，离开了北约庞大的后勤和情报设施，都毫无作用。所谓”向乌克兰提供F16"完全是无稽之谈。

6 如果那些“为了帝国，不惜一切”的集团孤注一掷，要在东欧与俄罗斯展开空战，结果将是灾难性的，美国军事优势的神话将荡然无存。

井冈山卫士

总结：F-16是一个用着很不顺手，而且乌克兰即不知道怎么用，也不知道怎么顺回来的落后武器。

龙翔五洲

只是为了美霸军工集团的利益。东欧国家借此更换F35.

王导

据说丹麦和葡萄牙确认要转让F16了。