Ukrainian Air Force F-16

Archibald said:
Surprised russians haven't overclaimed yet having shot it down... 100 times. Shouldn't take long !
Click to expand...

The victory was officially credited to the S-400 complex crew of the Nth division.
Click to expand...
t.me

Воевода Вещает

11:45 время уничтожения F-16 противника. Победа официально засчитана расчету комплекса С-400 N-ой дивизии. Спасибо за внимание.
t.me t.me
 
Is this actually confirmed from Ukrainian sources or satellite images? I remember Ukraine claimed they killed a Russian admiral for the Russian admiral to only appear on Russian news a few days later.
 
F16 is excellent design and performance plane , but it’s a old plane design in 1970S, f16 model A/B and C/D can’t win the air combat against SU35 and SU30 warplane equip passive phased array radar.

And F16 fighter no invisibility coating absorb radar wave, it easy be target acquisition and shoot down by air-defense missile like SA-6 ,SA75, S-300 .

It’s just personal thinking.
 
Is it possible that the S-400 tracking radar is so powerful that it cannot be jammed easily?
 
Null said:
Is this actually confirmed from Ukrainian sources or satellite images? I remember Ukraine claimed they killed a Russian admiral for the Russian admiral to only appear on Russian news a few days later.
Click to expand...
Nothing in the videos showed clear dates of the footage and Russians didn't confirm or deny his death either. He since was never seen again. Some Russian telegram/bloggers and former Kremlin adviser Sergei Markov claimed he was actually removed from post following continuous failures to protect Russian ships from Ukrainian attacks even though no official firing was announced/posted (but I guess this isn't usual).

The truth? Who knows.
 
donnage99 said:
Nothing in the videos showed clear dates of the footage
Click to expand...
Here is the video with admiral Viktor Sokolov attending ceremonies and gives a speech on the Saint Fyodor Ushakov Memorial Day, which is celebrated on October 15.

The commander of the Black Sea Fleet, Admiral Viktor Sokolov, who was killed and buried several times by the Ukrainian side, was once again "resurrected" and even attended a prayer service at the Vladimir Cathedral in Sevastopol and took part in a religious procession.

t.me

Военный Осведомитель

Несколько раз убитый и похороненный украинской стороной командующий Черноморским флотом адмирал Виктор Соколов очередной раз "воскрес", и даже посетил молебен во Владимирском соборе в Севастополе, а также принял участие в крестном ходе. Военный Осведомитель
t.me t.me
Click to expand...
 
Su-35S guided the missiles, Inokhodets acted as a relay and S-400 launched it. Same as last time, but now it hit.
 
NovaGA said:
Su-35S guided the missiles, Inokhodets acted as a relay and S-400 launched it. Same as last time, but now it hit.
Click to expand...

That's rather unnecessarily complicated scheme, like If Su-35 provide designation to the S-400, why it cant just use its own datalink the S-107 to directly provide designation to the S-400 battery or through a relevant air defense management (e.g D4M Polyana) ?. Not sure what role the Inkhodets playing, considering that there will be no line of sight blockage between Su-35 which fly high with the S-400 battery.

For me it's either the R-37 or the F-16 were happen to fly bit on the high side.
 
stealthflanker said:
That's rather unnecessarily complicated scheme, like If Su-35 provide designation to the S-400, why it cant just use its own datalink the S-107 to directly provide designation to the S-400 battery or through a relevant air defense management (e.g D4M Polyana) ?. Not sure what role the Inkhodets playing, considering that there will be no line of sight blockage between Su-35 which fly high with the S-400 battery.

For me it's either the R-37 or the F-16 were happen to fly bit on the high side.
Click to expand...

It is complicated but probably necessary in order not to spook the F-16 until it's too late. They probably have orders to turn and run at the first inkling of being painted/targeted by anything, be it SAMs or russian fighters, so the russians have to resort to complicated schemes such as this to catch them.
 
lancer21 said:
It is complicated but probably necessary in order not to spook the F-16 until it's too late.
Click to expand...

No. Even back in 1970's there exist thought to illuminate the target as late as possible and rely on mid course update to keep the missile on track. This is SARH era. S-300/400 series took the step further with SAGG and GAI scheme where they will only switch to fully illuminate the target maybe few seconds before impact (S-300V for example have mode which to only illuminate in 3-15 seconds before impact).

Then active radar missiles come. This add extra flexibility that you dont need to do continuosly illuminate the target as what it used to be with SARH and its deriviatives, no more one have to have to switch on specific modes for illuminating target as what was customary with SARH missile. Thus enemy RHAWS/RWR may not necessarily indicate "launch". It is of course still have to emit datalink for mid course update but datalink emmission is typically very small, only few Watts or even less, thus even harder to pick by ESM gear. Missile is then can be launched in say "search mode" like TWS then updated regularly, then it reach the range where the seeker goes active and home in. This "A-pole" Range is typically very close that target is expected to be late to react.

That would be how R-37 and R-77-1 or even general Active homing A2A missiles work. SAM with active homing work in similar manner except there will be horizon limit.

If The Su-35 providing designation for S-400 battery, odds are active radar homing 40N6 missiles are used for long range beyond the horizon shot. Su-35 providing designation and tracking, the S-400 then transmit mid course to the 40N6 from launch to when it cross horizon limit and activate its seeker to home into target. There is no need for a 2nd airborne platform.
 
stealthflanker said:
That's rather unnecessarily complicated scheme, like If Su-35 provide designation to the S-400, why it cant just use its own datalink the S-107 to directly provide designation to the S-400 battery or through a relevant air defense management (e.g D4M Polyana) ?. Not sure what role the Inkhodets playing, considering that there will be no line of sight blockage between Su-35 which fly high with the S-400 battery.

For me it's either the R-37 or the F-16 were happen to fly bit on the high side.
Click to expand...
What if… the data receiver in S-400 complex was itself located below horizon for Su-35S, haven’t your mind looked into that idea?
 
NovaGA said:
What if… the data receiver in S-400 complex was itself located below horizon for Su-35S, haven’t your mind looked into that idea?
Click to expand...
It's a mast, and unless su-35 was performing stunts below tree top, it shouldn't be necessary from this point of view.
That region is quite flat.

Otherwise, I don't think it's necessary.
It's far more likely through battlefield internet, rather than peer2peer.
 
NovaGA said:
What if… the data receiver in S-400 complex was itself located below horizon for Su-35S, haven’t your mind looked into that idea?
Click to expand...

If it's below the horizon for Su-35, then i wonder how far the S-400 is ? 800 km ? like Su-35 flying at 12000 m will have essentially 400 km Horizon coverage.

This is example of radar coverage of an S-400 battery somewhere in Belgorod. No 40V6M mast. against target flying at 12000 meter.

Friendly Su-35 is always visible to the battery up to 400 km. It doesnt need any middleman.

RadarCoverage-20250413-192438.png
 
I haven't researched the S-400 capabilities and how it's constructed. However, aren't there the S-400-compatible missiles, which are equipped with a radar, which basically make them capable to finding a target without illumination from the ground or a Su-35?
 
yahya said:
I haven't researched the S-400 capabilities and how it's constructed. However, aren't there the S-400-compatible missiles, which are equipped with a radar, which basically make them capable to finding a target without illumination from the ground or a Su-35?
Click to expand...
Missile has flight time, measured in multiple tens of seconds(that's usually "omae wa mou shindeiru") to minutes.
Minutes lead to such a huge mistake in position of the bandit (compared to prediction from last known course), that chance to close the engagement ends up very low.
 
Defense Updates has a video out concerning the F-16 that was lost a few days ago speculating whether or not it was an SA-21 Growler or an AA-13B Axehead:


Ukraine has faced a devastating setback. The Ukrainian Air Force stated, “On April 12, 2025, while performing a combat mission on an F-16 aircraft, 26-year-old Pavlo Ivanov died (…) he died in combat.”President Volodymyr Zelensky vowed a “strong and precise” response, implying that Russia was responsible for downing the aircraft.
Click to expand...
In a heartfelt tribute posted on social media, Rostislav Lazarenko, Deputy Commander of the 299th Tactical Aviation Brigade, honored Ivanov’s life, reflecting on his journey and ultimate sacrifice.
Click to expand...
He said, “I was so proud that we managed to pull you from combat missions and send you for retraining on the F-16. One of the first Ukrainian F-16 pilots – a combat assault pilot who completed 130 combat sorties before retraining,” He added,“You never refused combat missions, and I don’t even know if it was such strong trust in me as a commander, or if it was deep faith in yourself – because you were truly a strong pilot.”
Click to expand...
According to BBC Ukraine, a Ukrainian source reported that the F-16 was shot down by Russian missile. The source stated, “The Russians launched a total of three missiles at the aircraft. It was either a guided surface-to-air missile from an S-400 system or an R-37 air-to-air missile.” It also dismissed the possibility of friendly fire, noting that Ukrainian air defenses were not active in the area at the time.
Click to expand...
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes how Russia managed to down F-16 in Ukraine?
Click to expand...
#defenseupdates #f16ukraine #ukrainewar
Click to expand...
Chapters:
0:00 TITLE
00:11 INTRODUCTION
01:50 SPONSORSHIP - NordVPN
02:24 F-16 for UKRAINE
04:26 R-37M AIR to AIR MISSILE
06:05 S-400 AIR DEFENSE SYSTEM
Click to expand...
 
A small airforce which succeeds to fight on equal terms with what used to be the second airforce in the world as strenght.
 
Archibald said:
Surprised russians haven't overclaimed yet having shot it down... 100 times. Shouldn't take long !
Click to expand...

Russians hardly say anything, they certainly don’t brag about what means they use or brilliantly announce and brag about “spring counter offensives”. Remember when Ukrainians claims they downed 12 SU-34s within weeks without proof? Every western media outlet picked it up like wild fire. There was also claims that F-16s downed Russian aircraft. All of this was debunked by Russian blogger with Russian Air Force connections “FighterBomber” which is highly regarded and even cited in the western press for his honesty and transparency by acknowledging Russian losses even when there is no visual proof.

The F-16 in question was most likely hit with an S-400 by all reports. In my opinion there was a Russian aircraft that picked up the F-16 since it was likely too far away and too low for S-400 radars to track. This coincides with reports that an R-37M was also launched at the F-16.
 
Wotan said:
A small airforce which succeeds to fight on equal terms with what used to be the second airforce in the world as strenght.
Click to expand...

Small for western and Russian standards yes but Ukraine had around 300 aircraft prior to the war. It’s not exactly Zimbabwe. Ukrainians also received spare parts to get decommissioned aircraft air worthy along with dozens of MiG-29s, F-16s, Mi-8s, Sea Kings, Mirages, Bayaktars, ect along with cruise missiles, avionics upgrades and NATO global intelligence. Plus Ukraine had hundreds of S-300s and other Soviet air defense along with getting Patriots, IRIS-Ts, Gepards, ect.
 
Galaxy said:
Plus Ukraine had hundreds of S-300s
Click to expand...

In addition to having hundreds of SA-12 and SA-20 SAMs they still have large numbers of the SA-5 Gammon which have been used to good effect (IIRC an SA-5 was used to shootdown one of Russia's very rare and critically important A-50U aircraft).
 
Wotan said:
On paper it was impresive, but at the moment of the start of the conflict Ukraine had 43 MiG-29s, 12 Su-24s, 17 Su-25s, and 26 Su-27s in active service in 2021 according to data from Flight Global.

Still, it holds its own against a russian airforce several times its size.
Click to expand...
That's still 69 front-line fighters, 12 long-range strikers, and 17 CAS/BAI planes. 100 combat airframes is on par with Australia.
 
One thing that the Ukrainian F-16s (Now that they are starting to arrive in relatively large numbers) do if they get large quantise of the AGR-20 APKWS missile is in addition shooting down Russian drones and cruise-missiles is also to start taking out Russian Su-25 Frogfoots, Mil Mi-8 Hips and Ka-52 hokum Bs for example to further degrade Russian air support of their troops.
 
Wotan said:
On paper it was impresive, but at the moment of the start of the conflict Ukraine had 43 MiG-29s, 12 Su-24s, 17 Su-25s, and 26 Su-27s in active service in 2021 according to data from Flight Global.

Still, it holds its own against a russian airforce several times its size.
Click to expand...

That fine that you say Ukraine had 12 SU-24s but even according to bias ORYX they already lost 20. Ukrainians had inherited at least 120 SU-24s so they had a lot.

Ukrainians had around 300 aircraft in 2022 which was operational, maybe slightly less perhaps more (depending on maintenance) at least according to most sources but Ukrainians had a huge stock in storage with as many as 70 MiG-29s and 27 more donated by Poland and Slovakia. Plus ChatGDP says Ukraine received around 150 helicopters from various countries along with having 122 in 2022 plus F-16s, Mirages and SU-25s that were donated along with what they had and a few dozen SU-27s and L-39s.

So Ukraine actually had and received a huge some of aircraft…somewhere around 200 plus over 100 F-16s were pledged with at least 21 already handed over. In total Ukraine had, restored or received well over 500 aircraft probably over 600 if you count trainers and transport. Plus thousands, yes thousands of drones and hundreds of air defenses.

The Ukrainian Air Force is mostly destroyed, they are operating aircraft that were predominantly donated. Ukraine is also not “holding their own”. NATO countries are providing Ukraine with global intelligence, logistics, training, aircraft, avionics and weapons.

Imagine if a coalition of countries gave Iraq global intelligence, thousands of drones, hundreds of aircraft, training, spare parts, long range weapons, maintenance support, air defenses and replenished all losses in aircraft, air defenses and weapons. At that point no one would claim Iraq was fighting alone. And US/NATO losses would be much higher.
 
NMaude said:
One thing that the Ukrainian F-16s (Now that they are starting to arrive in relatively large numbers) do if they get large quantise of the AGR-20 APKWS missile is in addition shooting down Russian drones and cruise-missiles is also to start taking out Russian Su-25 Frogfoots, Mil Mi-8 Hips and Ka-52 hokum Bs for example to further degrade Russian air support of their troops.
Click to expand...

That’s really optimistic, the chances of Ukrainian F-16s shooting down Russian aircraft especially helicopters at tree top is very unlikely to nearly zero despite the F-16 having very good long range missiles. There is some nuance with range and detection of targets especially at low ranges.

From my research the Ukrainian F-16 come with AN/APG-66(V2) its look down range is 40km at least what I found. Now the F-16 comes with the AIM-120Ds, fantastic missiles with ranges reported to be as high as 160-180 KM, the problem with that is that is that the stated maximum range is if the missile is released at high altitude and high speed. At sea level its range will be at most 30-50 KMs.

The other problem is radars have a really difficult time actually detecting low altitude targets because of ground clutter especially older radars. This means that the F-16 may never actually even detect a hovering helicopter at low level unless it really close to the target. Most radars a programmed at least to an extent to disregard ground clutter such as cars, buildings, ect so a helicopter especially a stationary one may be included as clutter.

Even if the F-16 could detect low altitude targets at 40-50 KMs, they themselves would be in danger of getting knocked out from Russian aircraft operating high and fast armed with long range missiles plus long range air defenses and MANPADs. Russian helicopters are also armed with LMURs which can fire at over 14.5 KMs that means the F-16s would have to get to at least 30 KM of the line of contact, get a lock and then fire.

Those F-16s are primarily used to deliver air to ground payloads and engage drones, maybe something they might be sent to try to take down manned Russian aircraft but Russian aircraft likely fly at low levels, quickly gain altitude and then release FABs then they break away and go low again. It’s really hard to know when they would approach and just as hard to hit because they would not stick around long and are probably protected with air to air escorts and air defense batteries.
 
According to a video i saw few days ago from a ukrainian source, presumably someone with knowledge to quote these figures, they were complaining that the F-16 were outmatched because their radar could only see russian fighters from 100-120 km, and their missiles (presumably various AIM-120C models at most) had a range of 100km, while the russian fighters (presumably referring to Su-35) could see them from 300 km, and their missiles (R-37) also had a range of around 300 km.

I think this is a useful real world anecdote of how the opposing aircraft really compare. I doubt the Mirages are any better, and probably worse than the F-16s in this respect.
 
VKS undoubtedly has a huge range advantage, and I cannot see the ZSU being able to alter that. The F-16s probably are by far the best A2A equipment they have operated, but coming in distant second place is still dead, even if it’s a huge improvement over MiG-29.

If they still have those ASC-890s and they are datalinked to the F-16s, they could perhaps briefly solve the radar problem (with a lot of risk to a high end, two plane force) but the AIM-120s range limits compared to R-37 is so stark as to make a successful AAM engagement almost hopeless. Certainly it would at a minimum have to be something of an ambush against unsuspecting targets or targets whose escorts were heavily jammed, or both.

What ever happened to those AWACS anyway? Never heard anything about them after the donation announcement. Did that deal never go through?
 
Last edited:
Galaxy said:
That fine that you say Ukraine had 12 SU-24s but even according to bias ORYX they already lost 20. Ukrainians had inherited at least 120 SU-24s so they had a lot.
Click to expand...
How exactly is Oryx biased? They only count destroyed vehicles with photo/video proof with metadata on both sides, which means significantly undercounting losses.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom