🎥 Join our KZread members and patrons to unlock exclusive content! Our community is currently enjoying deep dives into the First Punic War, Pacific War, history of Prussia, Italian Unification Wars, Russo-Japanese War, Albigensian Crusade, and Xenophon’s Anabasis. Become a part of this exclusive circle: kzread.info/dron/MmaBzfCCwZ2KqaBJjkj0fw.htmljoin or patron: www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals and Paypal paypal.me/kingsangenerals as well!

@raptorblarg2284

9 ай бұрын

The reason that the F-16 is so cheap and was developed so quickly was because so much time and money was spent developing the F-15. The F-16 used all that tech to reach what it became. Also the first AIM-9 was fired in anger in the Korean war. It was either an AIM-9 A or B.

@DeeGray-pq3lg

9 ай бұрын

Is there anyway else to become member without spending month and like your videos

@spendor9377

9 ай бұрын

Brilliant documentary. 👏👏👏

@MrGksarathy

9 ай бұрын

Disappointed that you guys have perpetuated the lies of the Fighter Plane Mafia.

@TheRezro

9 ай бұрын

@KingsandGenerals Sorry, but I must protest that! Fighter Mafia have nothing to do with development of F-16, A-10 or "saving" F-15. Pierre Spray is notorious liar and his involvement in F-16 was designing sounds in the cockpit. While story of rebel experts sound cool. They did not have real impact on the projects, but were bunch of "journalists" who did have a "opinions" but zero influence. And some of them possibly known John Boid. Though this respected pilot generally disagree with they claims. They declared early prototype of F-16 they dream machine for features like lack of radar (sic!). Not understanding that it is used only for aviation tests and plane always was meant to be a normal multi-purpose fighter (it always did have ground attack mod) and not something intended for dogfight. Yes, they idea was something like F-86 Sabre (sic!). Development of A-10 has nothing to do with them, beside that guy from Pentagon Wars have similar idea. And his false claims are yet another story. Anyway, simple fact is that Fighter Mafia is not real and those fanbous were not real military experts and didn't actually have impact on those projects.

Can I also remind everyone that "The Fighter Mafia" also didn't want a radar in the F-16? Seriously, they have better PR than they have actual merits.

@mikond

9 ай бұрын

small correction, that was the F-15 but still yeah... fighter mafia is bunch of idiots nobody should listen to.

@jakesully2868

9 ай бұрын

Fact.

@thomasvandevelde8157

9 ай бұрын

I thought I was the only one hearing some massive myths here. I expect Pierre Spray to pop up in the video any moment, claiming he designed the P-51 Mustang before he did the F-16 ;-)

@emwhaibee

9 ай бұрын

F18s then??

@dirgniflesuoh7950

9 ай бұрын

Ooops ...

Game changer are 1 million trained soldiers, 10000 tanks, 10000 self propelled howitzer, 10000 IFV etc. Not 10 this 10 that.

@haakoflo

9 ай бұрын

That kind of force might be enough to take Moscow, which would almost certainly trigger nuclear war. With a few dozen F-16s sent now, and a stead supply of new equipment (more fighters, tanks, amunition, etc), it's possible that the 2024 summer offensive is able to make some breakthroughs.

@SoulRocketMan

7 ай бұрын

@@haakoflokeep dreaming.

I would not cite the fighter mafia, they actually went out of their way to sabotage technological progress in aircraft. And when new planes were finally fielded, they took credit for them without contributing anything.

@TheRezro

9 ай бұрын

Furthermore they were not members of the procurement or designer team. Pierre Sprey was sound designer for cockpit. He was laughed and kicked out from office, when he "save" F-15 with his "ideas". And Boid was not a member of Fighter Mafia. He in fact loved F-15.

@logank444

9 ай бұрын

Lazerpig

Im always skeptical when I hear how something is a "game changer". The F-16, western tanks, and HIMARS are not "wunderweapons". There is no such thing and there probably never will be. However, what they are, is force multipliers. The real magic happens when they are in adequate numbers. Properly used and maintained by highly skilled professional soldiers, and most importantly, working together like a well coordinated sports team.

@alexd832

9 ай бұрын

This should be top comment

@badluck5647

9 ай бұрын

People misunderstand the game changer is in logistics and not capabilities. For example, the cluster bombs aren't a game changer due to their capabilities. They are a game changer because they give Ukraine access to way more artillery ammunition. Meanwhile, the F-16 is a game changer not because of air supremacy dreams or combine arms maneuvers. They are game changer due to all the new weapons platforms the Ukrainians get access to. Ukraine has been rationing their ground based missiles due to supply issues, but now they can supplement those supplies with new air based weapon platforms.

@haakoflo

9 ай бұрын

There ARE wonderweapons in NATO's arsenals. Primarily the F-35s. Nato just doesn't want to give them to Ukraine. If Ukraine can use soon-to-be-phased-out Nato equipment to seriously harm the Russian Army, and maybe more importantly, their air defenses, that's a win-win for the US armed forces.

@DubhghlasMacDubhghlas

9 ай бұрын

@@haakoflo F35 isn't even wonderweapon. If it was then why did US allow other countries to buy it. F22 is closer to a wounderweapon since it is a better in a dog fight than the F35, but still falls short.

@sshumkaer

9 ай бұрын

Everything you just mentioned were game changer literally by definition

It's surprising to see you guys fall for a common historical myth for once. The contribution of the 'Fighter Plane Mafia' to the F-16 as well as other aircraft designs has at this point been largely discredited as a fabrication made for the purposes of self-promotion by the likes of Boyd and Sprey. Hope you can make a correction to the development history of the aircraft!

@lightningwingdragon973

9 ай бұрын

We keep trying, but they go back and re add it to the wiki

@MrGksarathy

9 ай бұрын

Seriously? That actually sucks, especially since good creators like LazerPig have been shouting about this for years now.

@thomasvandevelde8157

9 ай бұрын

The Great Pierre Spray knows better! I almost expected them to say he designed the F-16 lol

@davidhughes8357

9 ай бұрын

Good grief! gentlemen!!!

@MrGksarathy

9 ай бұрын

@@thomasvandevelde8157 I read that in LazerPig's voice, lol.

At 3:34 ya might wanna double check that about John Boyd and Tom Christie. Their only contribution to the F-15 and F-16 was a computer model that showed how control services could affect flight characteristics. Not to mention "Energy Maneuverability Theory" was mostly a copy and paste of Edward Rutowski's "Energy Approach to the General Aircraft Performance Problem."

@user-wk3ru2ry3v

9 ай бұрын

Thank you it annoys me every time I see the fighter maffia get credited with anything, for anyone who hasn’t heard about them yet they are just prolific liars

@EK-gr9gd

9 ай бұрын

The F-4 was / is a pure ""energy fighter". The plane wasn't as bad as everyone wants to tell the public. the only deficits were, insufficient training, fixed by "Red Flag" and "Top Gun", and the lack of guns and AAMs designed to cope with dogfights. AIM-7/9 were designed to counter bombers not fighters.

@davidfuller581

9 ай бұрын

@@EK-gr9gd The F-4 was not designed to be a turn and burn dogfighter though, not really. It was still decent at it for sure (given its roughly 3:1 kill to loss ratio in Vietnam), but it wasn't primarily built for it.

@EK-gr9gd

9 ай бұрын

@@davidfuller581 But the twin J79 produced enough thrust to cope with any NVAF FISHBEDs and FRESCOs. The plane itself wasn't the problem, doctrine, training and a missing gun were. The original F-4 was designed as a fleet defender and escort fighter, not as a dogfighter, like F-8 or F-5, but the poor performance against North Vietnam wasn't the fault of the aircraft.

@TheRezro

9 ай бұрын

Boid wasn't a member of fighter mafia. F-4 was designed as interceptor, what was the reason for its issues.

"Fighter Mafia..." *me...? *LazePig: Heavy breathing seriously we just got over the whole Lazerpig/ Red episode and now Kings and Generals threw this out (insert nervous laugh)

The start of the video is funny - you're talking about Vipers but showing F-4 Phantoms and a MiG-21. Also - the "Fighter Mafia" is a self-aggrandizing myth.

@hctim96

9 ай бұрын

Agree with the F4 comment and disagree with the "Fighter Mafia" comment. you are wrong. Tell that to John Boyd and Thomas P Christie.

@RemusValeryain

9 ай бұрын

Nah, the fighter mafia is a myth. They claim to have built everything yet were never on any projects

@jackzhang8677

9 ай бұрын

@@hctim96there were a lot more people in the fighter mafia than Boyd and Christie, and while those two had some success with their energy-maneuver theory, a lot of their positions were bunk. If the fighter mafia had their way, no modern American fighter would have a radar or missiles like the AIM-120 and AGM-65. Their ideal fighter was an F-5 with two heat seekers and an A-10 with just its gun.

@davidfuller581

9 ай бұрын

@@hctim96 Neither of them were accomplished fighter pilots, Boyd in particular was a self-aggrandizing jackass who only served one tour in Korea (where he got no kills) and then as an instructor would stunt on trainees to make himself look better than he was.

@Blank27

9 ай бұрын

The F-16's going to Ukraine won't be vipers, they'll be F-16 A/B Block 20 MLU.

I would avoid the rabbit hole of the "fighter plane mafia" LazerPig did some great videos on them

@josepnebotrius872

9 ай бұрын

Also binkov and Perun

The early B roll footage was of the F4 Phantom II, not the F16

@ChucksSEADnDEAD

9 ай бұрын

Because they were talking about it.

@OGKenG

9 ай бұрын

I was wondering who was going to say that.

9:24 The aim-9 was actually first used in the Taiwan strait by Taiwanese F-86 Sabers in 1958

A game changer? Absolutely not - does anyone remember the Gulf War? The U.S. didn't just "bring a few F-16's" to the party. They brought half the entire Air Force with every aircraft type for every role including AWAC's and JSTAR's. Dedicated ECM packages and SEAD missions by the score. And they brought years of combat training and expertise. (Oh, and six carrier air wings.) Add the Brit's and the French and the Saudi's. Even at just the tactical level the air tasking was enormous and F-16's were just a part of it along with the A-6's, A-7's, A-10's, F-18's and Marine Harriers. Even B-52's were employed tactically and the Brit's and French had their own assets. Does anyone think Ukraine is going to turn a few F-16's into a war winner with the Russians? I don't; but as the commentary in this video was fond of stating... "we won't know for sure until it's tried".

The fighter mafia would have hated the f16. Thing has “useless” radar, missiles, computers etc.

@danielmolinar8669

9 ай бұрын

And yet, they "made it", supposedly

The first combat use of The aim-9 sidewinder was between China and Taiwan. In fact one of these got stuck in a MIG after it was retrieved from the landed aircraft the Soviets reverse-engineered to develop aa2 atoll missile

@FLJBeliever1776

9 ай бұрын

Second Taiwan Strait Crisis and it got 13 PLAAF MiGs with lucky number 14 returning to base with a dud lodged in the wing root. The Soviet researchers who took the missile apart were stunned by the seemingly organic intelligence of the Sidewinder. Incidentally, a lot of those researchers were Ukrainian too.

@andrewabrams1535

9 ай бұрын

It was nice point!

@GenXerReacts

9 ай бұрын

@@FLJBeliever1776 It wasn't a dud. But seeing as the missile was new the pilot shooting the missile didn't properly arm the missile before firing it into the Chinese aircraft. At least that's what I've been told.

@roderickhamilton9891

9 ай бұрын

F-86's, right?

@Sakai070

9 ай бұрын

@@roderickhamilton9891 correct

Hi, is it possible to give metric values on all the figures you will mention? There are times that you mention metric only, and there are times that you use US system only. I know that a large portion of your viewers are from the US, and the majority of said viewers are not educated/unfamiliar with the metric system, but 99% of the rest of the viewers living outside the US are metric system users, so it will be fair if both systems are displayed consistently. Thanks

@KingsandGenerals

9 ай бұрын

That is a good point I always forget about, apologies

@A2Z1Two3

9 ай бұрын

So American viewers of this channel are not educated ?

@timmommens901

9 ай бұрын

🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦✌🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦

@iamaloafofbread8926

9 ай бұрын

Skill issue :v But in seriousness, I'm sure he will help you with that

@user-xl7ul7iy1x

Ай бұрын

Большая часть США не имеет образования? Я правильно вас понял?

First it was javelin, then Tow anti tank missiles, then Himars, then Leopards, then Cluster bombs and now F16s. I wonder what's going to be next zumwalt class or gerald R. Ford that's going to be game changer?

@user-kw5bz1rd7p

8 ай бұрын

Javelin and Himars played their part. Javelins helped Ukraine defeat Russian troops in Kyiv and Chernigov. Himars helped liberate the Kharkov region and Kherson. War is constantly changing and the West needs to respond to these challenges

@discipleofdagon8195

8 ай бұрын

how many munitions depots got blown up by HIMARS again?

The fighter mafia? Good grief. The people who think a pair of binoculars and a service revolver are better than radar and tracking missiles because it means you don’t end up “relying on technology”.

@Anglomachian

9 ай бұрын

@@piotrd.4850 ahh yes, which is why modern jet fighters have switched from over the horizon missiles back to machine gun dog fighting.

Short answer: No Long answer: It’s a platform that’s a decent Dog Fighter, has out maneuvered and out-sped Russian Air Defense Systems in other countries, and most importantly is able to integrate Storm Shadow, and other long range munitions with out needing a Frankenstein grafting by Sergei in the garage. It also means Ukraine can retire the Sukhoi-24, the Russian equivalent of F-14 in terms of hard to replace and maintain parts. And relegate them to training craft or less dangerous fronts to conduct strikes. This also means the Russians who have spent over a year trying to destroy Ukraines only jet capable of being made usable for Western munitions efforts just went down the drain. And would have to start over… While Ukraine uses it to make the lives of every Russian hell in the same manner Russia has. It’s not strategically devastating, but getting possibly all 43 of Denmarks F-16s would be a sad day for Russia.

@umjackd

9 ай бұрын

People get caught up on individual weapon systems, and media like to play up the drama by asking if one weapon would win the war. The truth is that, especially in the low numbers being provided, there's always time for an opponent to adapt.

@Sufferingzify

9 ай бұрын

It has now become easier to destroy these units, as they would need manicured runways to operate from, unlike the SU-24 and SU-25 that hopped runways and highways being resupplied and rearmed on non-ideal surfaces. The first manicured runways spotted on satellites will be cratered and hangers struck.

@lachbullen8014

9 ай бұрын

Ukrainian Air Force will probably won't retire the su-24 anytime soon depending on what variant it is they might still have a use for it also it might not be such a bad idea for former Soviet Bloc to donate their Soviet error equipment it's kind of ironic that Ukraine a former Soviet subjects is fighting against their former overlords with Soviet era equipment mixed in with western..

@davidryan7386

9 ай бұрын

​@@SufferingzifyRussia will do whatever it takes to punk these. Including carpet bombing the airports they use.

@blazinchalice

9 ай бұрын

​@Sufferingzify I hope Ukraine and NATO allies read this YT comment because you obviously thought of something that nobody else has considered yet! You have to get promoted to the highest echelons of decision-making immediately!

It would've been better if they were given many months ago, in time for the counter offensive.

@kecko91

9 ай бұрын

They did.

@scottyd3138

9 ай бұрын

Exactly. You should lead nato bud!

@scottyd3138

9 ай бұрын

​@@kecko91no they didnt

@plaubelmakina8916

9 ай бұрын

Which has been a spectacular failure.

@scottyd3138

9 ай бұрын

@@plaubelmakina8916 no it hasn't. Cope harder

The fighter mafia is probably the biggest clown show in aviation and it is debatable how much influence (if any) they had on the f16

@guydreamr

9 ай бұрын

Reasons?

@kameronjones7139

9 ай бұрын

@guydreamr They have lied about numerous things (like help making the a10). Some of the plane they advocated for didn't even have radar or warning receivers. They hated the f15 because of avionics in it claiming it to be not necessary (this was proven very much wrong) They have claimed the f35 wouldn't be survivable or even good. Now it is loved by the pilots who fly it. They are just not credible at all.

@MrGksarathy

9 ай бұрын

​@@guydreamrThere is plenty of evidence that the Fighter Mafia actually initially opposed the F-16 during development because it was "too expensive" and had too much technology. That, and most of them only briefly served on design committees, and they over exaggerated their roles when they did.

@guydreamr

9 ай бұрын

@@MrGksarathyI see, where is this evidence then?

@MrGksarathy

9 ай бұрын

@@guydreamr I would watch the KZreadr LazerPig for a good breakdown, but from what I can gather, this is from internal DoD records that have either been declassified or never were.

I'm not sure it will be a game changer, but the F-16 has a track record that seems to say that it will definitely have a significant impact at the very least. But then again, you can't always use the past to predict the future, no matter how reliable the operational history is.

@blueldrrich84

9 ай бұрын

More importantly, I think there are 2 factors here: maintaining and training. If Ukraine lacks pilots to use the planes, and skilled engineers with parts to repair and maintain them, then we might as well donate money instead of planes. Because without proper support and skill they won't make a difference.

@scottyd3138

9 ай бұрын

@@muzzleflash1 you realize you can build runways? 🫨🫨

@Benjamin-wy4dj

9 ай бұрын

One factor not explained in the video is which variant / version of the F16s Ukraine will be getting. Older F16s will not provide significant advantage or a quantum leap in capability. It will at best level the table against the Russians. My feeing is the west will be donating older F16s models that are unwanted for their operational use due to obselences and are seeking to replace their F16s with next gen fighters such as the F35s or the alternative cost effective solution are the newer 4th gen fighters. Old F16 models may not necessarily be capable of employing some of the weapons mentioned in the video such as newer versions of the Sidewinder missiles, JDAMs and AIM 120. If the West chooses to donate F16 Model A & B models, then it will not provide any huge bridge in capacility against the russians. The more newer F16 C/D models are the much preferred options and would defitnely help Ukraine but those models too are limited in the weapons the fighters can employ. Upgrades / Modifications are needed for the F16s being donated to ukraine for more versatility and range of options

@haakoflo

9 ай бұрын

@@blueldrrich84 Ukraine is already trying to recruit both ground crew and pilots from Nato countries to serve in their air force. I think we will see that they will have ample access to very highly trained personell. I would also expect them to try to fly exclusively over Ukrainian controlled territory, to to minimize the risk that these pilots will be used for propaganda purposes by the Kremlin if captured.

@haakoflo

9 ай бұрын

@@Benjamin-wy4dj The information is easy to look up. These are mostly older models, that underwent an upgrade about 20 years ago with electronics and weapons availability comparable to Block 50/52. While not ideal dogfighters, these can carry all the weapon systems and electronics pods needed to be a big threat to Russian air defenses and ground forces, while themselves flying under cover from NATO-supplied Patriot and Nasam systems. And I think it should be obvious that these are just the first of several batches. Ukraine could receive hundreds before the end of next summer.

They will certainly help. Will they win air superiority for Ukraine? Probably not. They will however keep the skies contested, as after 18 months of fighting with a technological disadvantage the Ukrainian air force will have taken substantial losses.

@carlflaherty2215

9 ай бұрын

Not enough of them are being provided.

@superyamky

9 ай бұрын

Better than nothing ig

@carlflaherty2215

9 ай бұрын

@@superyamky Much better than nothing, but the U.S. needs to get directly involved. (Disclosure: I'm an American.) Some of those A-10s that we're retiring would also be a huge help.

@4Fixerdave

9 ай бұрын

@@carlflaherty2215 "Not enough of them are being provided." A couple on standby loaded with ARAAM, waiting for NATO surveillance to indicate incoming threats, could drastically reduce the Russian glide-bombs etc.. A couple of them packed with JDAMS that can be targeted in-flight could solve a lot of problems on an offensive. And, a couple of then flying together on the deck over some cheering Ukrainian soldiers will most definitely improve morale and saturate KZread for a week :) And really, considering the main use for Ukrainian and Russian aircraft is to pitch up and lob unguided rockets... how could even a few properly equipped aircraft not make a noticeable difference?

@haakoflo

9 ай бұрын

At present, the control of the air over Ukraine is mostly decided by SAMs (Surface-to-Air missiles), not by fighters fighting fighters. Neither Russia nor Ukraine have equipment that is well suited to supress or destroy enemy air defenses (DEAD/SEAD missions). There is very little reason for Ukraine to use a tiny number of F-16s for air supremacy in the beginning. Patriots and other air defense systems is the only way to do that until much larger numbers arrive. However, with the F-16's, Ukraine suddenly gains access to several new systems for going after enemy air defenses, both in terms of getting full potential out of the HARM missiles, better ECM/countermeasures pods, and the ability to use systems such as the Mavericks to shoot ground tarkets (including missile batteries) that do not emit radar waves.

The importance of F-16 is not in the amount of damage caused, but in the nesessity to respond to the possibility of causing such damage. Thus, four HIMARS in late spring of 2022 changed the course of battles by forcing russians to move ammunition thefts deeper to the rear.

Many said that Leo and Chally will be game changer. The result ?

@hafor2846

9 ай бұрын

Ukraine's not running out of tanks, that's the result...

An F-4 phantom right at the start of the video about F-16. Moved on.

I am really disappointed that K&G can't distinguish F4 with F16!!

@ProvidenceNL

9 ай бұрын

Yeah this is pretty terrible.

@AGenericAccount

9 ай бұрын

The model changes later in the video. They're talking about the phantom and the fighter mafia before they get to the f16.

They needed them months ago, would've been a great help for Ukraine's summer offensive. Now, they won't get them until next year and Ukraine's armoured forces will have to rebuilt in order for them to launch a new offensive in 2024. Perhaps they would've been a game changer if Ukraine had them at the beginning of this year.

@vivecald-vehk6978

9 ай бұрын

More flipflopping from America, who is more worried about a potential threat in the Pacific as opposed to the actual fkn conflict in Ukraine

@knoahbody69

9 ай бұрын

@@piotrd.4850 Translation: "I'm a putinbot."

@robertmusilbronson3118

9 ай бұрын

​@@knoahbody69translation: im a ukrbot. Just dn get lost in translations, lil' bot

@oleksii000

9 ай бұрын

@@robertmusilbronson3118so your translation and logic to the first comment would be this: the Ukrainians trusted the treaties they have signed and did not want to spend billions of dollars into the army it would not need had those treaties be worth anything, so you’ll blame them for that. Did I get that right? So countries like NK that prioritises military over its people by starving them to death is something everyone should look up to. Do you really want your children to live in a world like that?

@robertmusilbronson3118

9 ай бұрын

@@oleksii000 yeah the thing is i live in another ex communist country, romania, so i know perfectly well how things are with the armed forces before the US starts pumping $ and expertise to bolster them against Russia. Although romania is way richer than ukr, but the army is a clusterfrak. So the first comment rly made sense to me

Mistake at 8:04. It's not 17 hours maintenance per 1 hour airborne after each flight. First, it's man-hours, not hours. Those man-hours can be split up among several people to accomplish a faster turnaround. Second, that maintenance is not done after EACH flight. Those are average figures that take into account all of the work to be done over the expected life of the aircraft. That includes everything from routine maintenance to a major engine overhaul.

Improvement: Yes, Game changer: No. The HARM missiles will be more effective but Ukraine lacks airborne radars and air refueling tankers.

@ChucksSEADnDEAD

9 ай бұрын

You wouldn't need air refueling. The frontline is quite close.

The jets featured in the intro are F4 Phantoms, not F16s

@GrifonXT

9 ай бұрын

you have to understand that he has no content to do a video he just want want viewers to click and watch................................... i am sure that all content in this video was stolen from internet to do this video

Are you assuming that the donated fighters will have all the latest avionics used by the Western countries?

@MrGksarathy

9 ай бұрын

They will have most of them, from what I've heard, and considering that Ukraine's current air defenses have already worked to prevent total Russian air superiority, I think the F-16s the Ukrainians are getting will be enough to give them actual control of their skies.

No single weapon system can win a war. In this case, specifically, you are trying to introduce a complex weapons system to a country that has no experience operating it, and no logistical system in place to support it. Because of these facts, I see the F-16 having little to no impact on the outcome on the conflict. All you have to do is look back at France at the beginning of World War II to see a good example what will most likely happen. France attempted to introduce the DW.520 and Hawk 75 aircrafts at the same time Germany invaded Poland. Even with the 8 months of the "phony war" period, France was unable to incorporate these aircraft in any useable numbers sufficient enough to change the outcome of the German invasion. Even small changes in basic equipment, such as Italy's attempt to move their battle rifle from a 6.5 caliber round to a new 7.35 caliber round at the beginning of World War II, was quickly abandoned because the Italians lacked the manufacturing and logistical bases needed to convert their army to the new rifle/round while fighting the allies (basically, just Britain after France's defeat).

@abesapien9930

9 ай бұрын

Good info

@benghazi4216

9 ай бұрын

According to RUSI, and Dr Justin Bronk, a squadron of Gripens would make a clear impact on the air war, so a few more F16's and you have the same result.

@haakoflo

9 ай бұрын

No single weapon can win wars. But complete lack of one type of weapons may cause you to lose it, or at least ensure you won't win it. To go on an offensive without at least partial control of the air, is extremely difficult. Obviously, a few dozen F-16 is not enough on its own. But if they receive maybe 200-400 by next summer, it may be enough t make a big difference. Especially if these first ones are used to pummel Ukrainian air defenses for the next 9 months or so.

@skyhunter996

9 ай бұрын

​@@haakofloain't no chance they get 200, even if they do they don't have that many pilots

@sshumkaer

9 ай бұрын

Incorrect the Himars in this war had been given proper munitions could have won the war In UUkraine. As defined driving Russia out of my land.

At the beginning of the video you were talking about Ukraine getting F-16 fighters, yet you were showing clip after clip of older F-4 Phantom II jets. Couldn't you find any b-roll clips of F-16's or did you think we wouldn't notice?

@danieln6700

9 ай бұрын

He was talking about f4s

*Ukraine gets f-16 *Video showing f-4 phantom

Doesn't matter how sophisticated the jets are, as it all comes down to the pilots.

Hi, everyone from NCD who's all talking smack on the Fighter "Mafia." I was half expecting a Pierre Sprey reference in here, as well

The entire opening doesn’t show f16s - come on guys you are way better than that

No matter what technology is given to Ukraine as long as they aren't given at the same time. Nothing will change...

@haakoflo

9 ай бұрын

For Nato, a "win" means that Ukraine doesn't lose the war, and ideally is able to very slowly regain some of the territory taken by Russia. Nato countries have NO incentive to give Ukraine enough weapons to be able to crush Russia completely. That would be like cornering an agressive dog, and may lead to nukes. At some point, this war is going to be decided by what population grows weary of the war first. As both sides grow more weary, chances are a negotiated peace eventually becomes a possibility.

@williamhenning4700

9 ай бұрын

@@haakoflo​​⁠​​⁠ Lol. You think Putin is like the “frog in boiling water” and that if we just slow drip aid enough that’ll prevent him from noticing and using his nukes as leverage? Man, the Chinese are going to eat us alive…

@albatrapstar9030

9 ай бұрын

@haakoflo your right as they could of done that a year ago and demolished Russian forces nato and us is smart chipping away at the Russian forces slowly. I guarantee if Russia didn't have nukes this war would of been over long ago.

@linming5610

9 ай бұрын

@@albatrapstar9030 not really, it takes time to train a competent military. Especially of one without extensive military culture and history. This war is really going to last more than a year one way or another. It's just a matter of making concessions too Russia but apparently, the west has been too comfortable lately. Refusing to give Russia the space it needed to exercise it influence. Well, Russia is too corrupt in the first place so I don't really know how the heck this problem will ever be solved. Thee only way I could think of is changing leadership make Russia flatten it's corruption and give back Ukraine. But that would make Russia get stronger. Will US allow Russia get stronger? Yeah, I don't really know.

@albatrapstar9030

9 ай бұрын

@linming5610 Russia has been corrupt since time but even if not corrupt they are not that bright. how could they possibly get stronger when you destroy there army and cripple there economy? they are using ww2 tanks USA is so advanced in tech and war 100 years ahead of any nation they can't be matched nato in conventional war vs russia alone would demolish russian forces in a few weeks they are way ahead dont forget ukraine has a population of 50 million its twice the size of Germany and they are all willing to fight. if Nato and USA trained and equipped them early and gave them max firepower artillery f16s f35s they would completely destroy Russian forces within a year . but that would cause a nuke exchange because putin would be executed by his own people. USA and nato are chipping away at Russia to avoid a nuclear war.

OH GOD NO NOT THE MYTH OF FIGHTER JET MAFIA

At 0:43 Airplanes shown on screen.... Those airplanes have on canopies and noses, upturned wingtips, into control surfaces coming off the tail and about 120° pointed downwards....those are not F-16s, they are F-4 Phantom IIs.

The topic which I would suggest is the geopolitical change in the world which the Russian illegal invasion against Ukraine caused. In Europe Finland and Sweden, formerly neutral countries, applied NATO membership against Putin´s wishes and many European countries started to reduce their dependency of Russian energy sources in order to reduce the Russian influence. It would be smart to analyze that development and the consequences of the Russian invasion globally.

@BlessedAreTheCheesemakers

9 ай бұрын

no single person could have kick-started the rebirth of militarism in Europe like Vlad has

@sadiqali9486

9 ай бұрын

Cheap energy from Russia no longer there has negatively impacted the west. To which degree I don't know. First country to go against NATO and not get obliterated. Russia seems fine and their economy is doing ok. Made BRICS come together and more effort of dedollarisation. Ukraine is propped up by Western support if elections change that support will go way down. If they don't run out of manpower first. Nations in Africa took notes and are rebelling against western control. Middle Eastern countries and Iran have maintained ties with Russia how this will play out I'm not sure.

@sadiqali9486

9 ай бұрын

Also Ukraine is having manpower issues already.

@carlflaherty2215

9 ай бұрын

@sadiqali9486 And the excessively limited resources that the U.S. has provided to Ukraine has NOT helped. (Yes, I'm an American.)

@sobolzeev

9 ай бұрын

@@carlflaherty2215 They have. HIMARS stopped the Russian Nazi army summer offensive in 2022.

It takes a helluva lot more than just training the pilots... I believe the US Airforce assigns about 50 qualified personnel to keep just one F-16 going. The Ukrainians currently working hard on upgrading some airfields to the standards required. MiG-29 and Su-27 can close off the air intakes to operate from "unimproved airstrips", unthinkable with the F-16. In addition to the vast maintenance infrastructure, those airfields will require sophisticated missile defense systems, we can be safely assume the Rooskies will try their level best to take them out from distance. A lot of variables in this equation you haven't even touched.

@haakoflo

9 ай бұрын

Just wait, and I think you will see that large numbers of western "volunteers", possibly quite well paid, will be quartered near the air fields that will operate F-16s. Possibly well over half of the pilots and senior ground crew. It's simply a lot cheaper to hire foreigners for most of these jobs than locals, even if they have to pay wages above what western personell get during wartime as risk compensation. For some, though, and especially pilots, they love their job so much that it will prove very easy to motivate them to fly live missions, even without unusually high compensation. Ukraine really only needs to have 5-10 Ukrainian pilots, to serve as the face of the force. The rest can be foreigners.

@aoife1122

9 ай бұрын

@@haakoflo A very valid point indeed. I'm pretty sure, Ukraine will be in possession of an extensive list with names of "retired" pilots and maintenance personnel in the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Poland, etc who may be looking for new "job opportunities."

@MrGksarathy

9 ай бұрын

​@@haakofloThat being said, Ukrainian ground crews are in fact being trained abroad as we speak.

@coffeebreakchat2450

9 ай бұрын

@@wawaweewa9159 Exchanging tarmac for precision long range missiles is something Ukraine would do all day every day! Decoy airframes and continuous rotation of planes may make prolonged suppression of airfields prohibitively expensive for Russia.

5:48 the great info aside, that was a relaxing first-person trip.

0:36 Are F-Phantoms...

I came across a Perun video some weeks ago which suggested that Zelenskyy is also lobbying for Swedish Gripen fighters and Meteor missiles. Would love to see a discussion of how those might affect the battlespace. Gripens are notably cheaper and less maintenance-intensive than Falcons, which might be important for Ukrainian logistics and ground crews. I don’t know enough about the Meteor to comment on its effect, but Perun described it as more or less the best air-to-air missile in current production.

@mightymagnus

9 ай бұрын

Yes, it is a way better plane but it is not produced in the same numbers. But technically it is far superior (except range and no nuclear capability which are rather benefits for Ukraine), one of the best things for Ukraine would be that Gripen can use normal roads for landing and take-off (F16 needs perfect airfields).

@nobodyherepal3292

9 ай бұрын

@@piotrd.4850good thing it doesn’t take 5 years to train on a Gripen then 😉

@nobodyherepal3292

9 ай бұрын

@@mightymagnusthe F-16 can take off from Highway strips too. It was designed to do so off West German highways in the Cold War.

@mightymagnus

9 ай бұрын

@@nobodyherepal3292 , as I understand they still need almost perfect condition runway while the Gripen can handle messy runway too

@nobodyherepal3292

9 ай бұрын

@@mightymagnus again, the F-16 was expect to operate off ad-hoc runways under nuclear fallout conditions in west Germany during the Cold War, if it went hot. I don’t know we’re people keep getting this idea that our 4th Gen fighters are high maintenance.

Surprising to see all the non-F16 pictures at the start of this clip!

Why did the video start with F-4 Phantoms, not F-16s?

Any weapons will be good for the ukrainian army ... thanks for covering the conflict with so much details !! Love your video as always

F-4 Phantoms are NOT F-16s! F-4s 1960s F-16s 80s to now.

Small thing you mentioned the sidewinder was first fired in anger in the Vietnam war. It was first fired in combat over the Taiwan Strait by a Taiwan Sabre at a PRC MIG in 1958. One warhead actually failed to explode after hitting a target the PRC MIG flew back to base with the missle lodged into the plane. The PRC removed it and gave it to the Soviets who used it to make their own air to air missles

@sandybennett_itsme

9 ай бұрын

I wonder how the copies compare to current technology?

@apollo4619

9 ай бұрын

@@sandybennett_itsme Current Russian IR missiles are descendants of that original reverse engineered sidewinder

Jack of all trades, master of none .....and their going to have fun with all the maintenance required for the Viper.

Very bad quality, I'm surprised you uploaded such a thing. Just a few issues by way of example: You start mentioning the F16 and you are showing the F4. The sidewinder only has IR version, not semi-active radar head. Your sidewinder model when you first talk about it is wrong. Your description of the JDAM is childish to say the least, it makes it very apparent that you got no idea what you are talking about. You are mentioning that UA's fighters are old, implying that the F16s will be a huge step up but in reality, the F16AMs that UA is gonna receive have only minor upgrades since they were introduced and have nothing in common with modern F16Vs (that would truly be a step-up in capabilities if provided). More than that I cannot say, it's the first time that I couldn't finish a video of yours because of it being such a low quality and full of mistakes...

No game changer here just another target

Might want to double check your research, the "fighter mafia" was not responsible for the F16, if they were it would be effectively just an engine with wings and a gun and enough fuel for a brief dogfight.

The F16 is called a Viper because it quick, agile, and clearly dangerous when close to it along with the show....

Small number's of F-16's are not going to cause a significant effect on the ground war in the first several months. More likely, I think, is that the first shipents are sent mostly to desentisize the Russian civilian population to Ukraine receiving jets. Militarily, their best use may be to start attriting Russian air defense systems by performing mostly DEAD/SEAD missions, so that as larger numbers start to arrive, Ukraine may achieve parity and maybe some level of superiority next summer. I would be surprised if the Biden administration doesn't already have a plan in mind for how to maximally benefit from any Ukrainian breakthroughs by having them relatively close in time to the 2024 elections.

Why are you showing F-4s instead of F-16s?

Ok, those are F-4 Phantoms in the intro, right?

Is there a reason why the video starts off showing F-4s in the intro, though? I get that F-4s are talked about in the first part, but the intro only mentions F-16s, so it's odd. 😅

MIG 29s and SU 27s aren't the only ones Russia has. SU 30 , SU 35 are also present, not to mention SU 27 upgrades

Those are F-4 Phantoms in the intro my guy, not F-16's

Hope you make the Pacific War series public at some point.

Yippee I had little hope I’d get my every Sunday update before it’s too late. But voilà , it’s here

It wont be a game changer, they said the modern MBT's were game changers which were not. Dont forget that the F16 is almost a 50 year old aircraft, sure its capable but the Russians have modern AA equipment.

@ChucksSEADnDEAD

9 ай бұрын

The modern Russian AA is also 50-40 years old. Most of it is upgraded 70s-80s tech. S-400? Upgraded S-300 which is 80s. Tor? 80s. Buk? Even older.

Those are not F16 Falcons, they are F4 Phantoms.

Just to correctyou there, the S34 is mainky a fighter bomber. Its the su35 flanker that has the same radar as the Mig31. Thats the one causing a lot of problems for the UAF

I’m expecting initial good results, then right back to grind.

"The Fighter Mafia" didn't make shit they just stole credit for the people who actually did the work! You'd expect better research from such a channel but here we are...

Can you please explain how anti aircraft works in moderne warfare? It’s a mystery for me how Ukraine is able to protect it skys? Thanks

@glenncunningham6397

9 ай бұрын

You're probably better off reading about that on the internet. Nobody that actually knows anything about Air Defense Systems is going to provide any information in this forum.

@davidfuller581

9 ай бұрын

Radar guided surface to air missiles more or less.

Never seen winglets on a missle before. Is that a throw away winglet on the aim 9?

Is it just me or did this video use imaged of Phantom jets and not F-16s at the beginning? I'd think there were plenty of F-16 video to use. I dunno, not a really big deal but seems a detail to get right.

Why do you talk about the f16 but show clips of f4 phantom2 at the start

I've been searching and waiting for this kind of explanatory video about the adoption of a new fighter jet to Ukraine, which takes exactly this type of overall and pedagogic approach when educating the viewer. In my view *_Kings and Generals_* excels at being instructive and has the great habit of explaining rather complex topics from the ground up. This is an art which not that many (similar) channels master to such an impressive degree. *_Kudos._*

6:52 Love it how they use the M-134 Minigun (7.62mm x 51mm NATO) to represent the M-61 Vulcan (20mm x 102mm).🤣

Great video!

F-16 being donated to the Ukrainian Air Force isn't such a bad idea and just having one aircraft capable of Performing multiple roles reduces the logistical and maintenance burdens on the cruise it also gives them wide tactical approach in air operations depending on how many f-16 they get and it also depends on what model..

@FelixstoweFoamForge

9 ай бұрын

It certainly does. According to wiki, The Netherland airforce flies F16 A block 20 models with an MLU to take then to rough parity with a B model block 40 or 50. Certainly not a modern jet. And it doesn't have half the capabilities this vid claims.

@carlflaherty2215

9 ай бұрын

The Allies aren't providing enough. 😢

@arnijulian6241

9 ай бұрын

F16 is great fighter jet for the USA but in Ukraine it is not well suited for the infrastructure is not in place. A russian Sukhoi Su-35 & Sukhoi Su-30 for perspective have identical take Off Distance:550 metre=1,804.44 feet Landing Distance: SU35=670 metre & Su30 750metres= 2,460.60 feet. An armed F-16: Takeoff - 3600ft Landing - 4100ft. USA & EU are so thick they haven't considered the only a few dozen of Ukraine's airfields are asphalt or concrete & I doubt 1/2 of these strips could take a F16 ground pressure in take off with-it after burner pointed to the ground. Only the USA consider relaying an airstrip fanatical viable being mister money man making that printer go brrr. The Eurofighter Typhoon & Russian design are made the way they are for a multitude of reasons. Go to even east Germany you will find it difficult to find suitable infrastructure for an F16 much less in Eastern Europe. USA tends to just land their assets in the UK for these reasons mentioned & more as Western Europe. Limited airfields for Ukraine means limited direction of approach & withdraw in air sorties. Mind everyone national pride will get in the way of simple calculations & realities as is some common with 21st century USA that can't tell a man or a women apart in their courts for fvck sake.

@lachbullen8014

9 ай бұрын

@@FelixstoweFoamForge don't rely on Wikipedia 100% completely.

@lachbullen8014

9 ай бұрын

@@carlflaherty2215 that's probably because the politicians are dragging their feet..

Javelins, HIRMARS, Leopards , Challengers were all game changers.... 😅

@987ujhpl

9 ай бұрын

Changed how we discuss the war

@ClassicFormulaOne1

9 ай бұрын

ATACAM'S soon too. Russians are already getting punished hard.

@marcdc6809

9 ай бұрын

Without Javelins the Russians would have taken Kyiv in 3 days... Without Himars the Russians would still hold on tightly to Kherson... And now the Ukrainians are well on the offensive... against the mightiest arsenal of hardware and the most Spartan warrior state the world has to offer (in numbers)...

@987ujhpl

9 ай бұрын

@@marcdc6809 Isn't USA the mightiest in the world?

@Mr.Byrnes

9 ай бұрын

@@987ujhplYes, but the Russians like to pretend they’re the “best”

Why do they keep showing F-4s when talking about F-16s?

People really watching this on mute for asking why the F-4 is shown at the start.

We are on the brink of an Atomic War and you talk about this as if sending Jets would help to end this horrible war?

@emilchan5379

9 ай бұрын

Please stop with the fear-mongering. We are not on the brink of nuclear war. The world was at a much greater risk of nuclear war during the Cold War, yet here we are.

@Irgendwas_geistreiches

9 ай бұрын

@@henryhudson9556 Yes we are: 1. several provinces were formally included into the russian territory. And as Putin said, Russia would defend its borders against attacks with everyting they have. 2. For years and years it was NATO‘s plan to expand itself to surround Russia. For further explanation about this topic i recommend Dr. Daniele Ganser. 3. The massive arms deliveries to Ukraine by countries not even directly threatened by Russia is another provocation. I hope that my english isn‘t too insufficient, i am from Germany.

Just like how the leopards, bradleys and challengers were game changers

What about to train the Ghost of Kiev to Fly F-16 rather than Mig 29

I thought this was about F-16 as the opening CGI footage were f4 phantom s !

@laserpig where are you?

It would be interesting to see Kings and Generals do a comparison between F16 and the Swedish Gripen fighter jet.

@wpatrickw2012

9 ай бұрын

I would also like to see the Gripen compared with the F-18.

Why did you start the video showing f-4 phantoms?

In the intro, you are showing F-4s!

Talk about F-16 shows CG images of F-4 Phantoms confused I am

Well this video is just factually inaccurate.

Hell yeah, brother.

Those are F4 fighters from Vietnam era at the beginning of the video

i'll ignore the fact the fighter mafia had no input whatsoever in any decision regaring any plane that was actually tested or made it past being a drawing on a paper. didn't the fighter mafia try to sabotage every modern plane the US has made? in fact, in the f-16, they literally tried to remove everything from the project that made it successful. they opposed radar, missiles (or any smart weapon for that matter), safety measures, enough fuel, communication devices, targeting computers, ability to tell friend from foe, and everything that makes a modern fighter effective. oh, and their proposed design was half the speed of the actual f-16. putting on part with early jets from the end of ww2 in fact, their idea was to put pilots in the jet equivalent of the japanese zero (highly maneuvrable barebones dogfighter), which is a plane concept that couldn't even survive the second world war. for the cost, the reason the f-16 was cheaper than the f-15 (the argument the fighter mafia like to use) is because the f-16 used a lot of the technologies and knowledge that was gained through the f-15 development, so of course its development cost would be lower. last thing, calling Boyd and Christie geniuses is like calling me a qualified architect just because i made a really nice building in minecraft once. it's easy to claim you are a genius pilot if all you have ever faced are rookies you are teaching the basics of combat

How could Pregozhin's death affect the war in Ukraine?

@fern1009

9 ай бұрын

Nothing in the short term - in the long term it may be considered a flashpoints in Russia's crumbling status as a governable state as of its current iteration and with Wagner shut down the Russian military is going to have to find another vector for bodies to throw into the trenches - although that was already going to be the case regardless. So I guess not much?

@umjackd

9 ай бұрын

Not much. Wagner was already out of the war. How it affects Russian internal politics, on the other hand...

@drebue7065

9 ай бұрын

@@umjackd will this speed up the crumbling power structure of Russian elites?

@Chuck_Hooks

9 ай бұрын

Fewer hot dogs available.

@guydreamr

9 ай бұрын

@@Chuck_Hooks One less cook in Putin's retinue.

At first F4s had no cannons. The air war changed after they got them bc the early missles had problems. Also russia has a doctrine which does not focus on air suppremecy, thats why they dont try that hard.

@davidfuller581

9 ай бұрын

And yet, only the USAF added guns. The USN didn't, but training took care of most of their issues.

@kameronjones7139

9 ай бұрын

@@davidfuller581 and air to air missile got most of the kills by a wide margin after the implemented better training at "top gun" school

@haakoflo

9 ай бұрын

@@davidfuller581 Which is still the case for F-35. Only the A-models have guns.

F4 phantom had air to air missiles but was limited with regards to machine gun. Hence, Top Gun school!

Is it just me? Or was that f4 phantom II shown in the video described as f16?..

There’s some other inaccuracies in the animation on top of the confusing f4 b-roll. The scene about air to air weapons. The description talks about the aim7 sparrow and shows the aim120, and vice versa. The aim 120 is the more modern and smaller missile. Also the f16 POV scene has the oldest version of the instrument panel. Maybe an f16A todays f16 are modern inside with screens and what not. I won’t fault the research or script here but it does seem the animation is mismatched in places.

I love the analysis, historical background the channel achieves every single time. And the flight simulation? Just amazing. It looked all very realistic.

Proud Patron🥳