Brilliantly stated. NATO would never even consider launching ground attacks without overwhelming air support, yet this is exactly what Ukraine has been forced to do, and Western armchair generals are criticizing them for their offensive going “slower than expected”.

@jonijuhanisaari2055

9 ай бұрын

I believe that Russia is too greedy and stambols it's feet.

@cmavuso6068

9 ай бұрын

It's wishful thinking, and it's so sad

@gwopgetta2091

9 ай бұрын

So what ? Ukraine is a independent country ? This isn’t the only nation that has been at war in recent years why must we arm them so much when we don’t arm other nations ?

@aerial558

9 ай бұрын

The west has always tiptoed around Putin for years? Ukrainian haven’t too fight his military with one hand behind there back. They need fighter jets and fast!

@ronarnett4811

9 ай бұрын

@douglasgray

Good talk sir, I always go out of my way to listen to you, the adult in the room.

Excellent interview. Just one point - I don’t see the Ukrainians agreeing to a ceasefire because they know that this would not be an end to the matter.

@bungeechord1

9 ай бұрын

Maybe they can use a pause to get trained pilots in play and tanks going.

@stc3145

9 ай бұрын

Indeed. Without them joining nato or something the war will never end

@1738Creations

9 ай бұрын

There doesn't need to be a ceasefire, the ukrainazis have been wiped out. They have nothing left to fight with so what threat are they Russia. Which was Russians goal from the start; to stop the 9 years of ukrainazis executing Russian civilians. Something you apparently support. Oh no, did I burst your fake news bubble with a dose of reality.

@dpelpal

9 ай бұрын

Ukraine has already won the war. Every military commander in every single industrialized nation has said as much. The russian losses in Kharkiv and Kherson were the deciding factor....there may still be fighting and dying, but that's where history will say russia lost the war.

@IliyaOsnovikov

9 ай бұрын

@@stc3145 This war started because they were trying to join NATO.

Blessings, peace and luck from California to Ukraine 🙏🙏✌🍀💙💛

Michael Clarke at his best: clear, factual, very patient, very capable. And for once a Times Radio interviewer who really listens. Let's hope policy makers do too, so that "as long as it takes" for Ukraine to win takes not so long.

@benjaminskeer5145

9 ай бұрын

I agree

@bogdanobradovic7621

9 ай бұрын

Ukriane will not win, simply because they are the ally or evil, evil will always loose. Now keep coping. Every country that gives weapons to Ukriane will have to pay huge reperations to Russia, NATO has been outclassed.

@davidweare813

9 ай бұрын

More like Mr Pastry than a Proffesor!

The challenge is going to be keeping the F-16 intact while it’s on the ground. The plane needs a long runway that shows up on satellite

Professor Clarke is a well-informed and talented speaker. He hits the nail on the head.

@shsh-he5qg

9 ай бұрын

What nail was that ? 😂

Prof Michael Clarke once again giving a clear precise and straight to the point interview, always gives easy digestable speeches about these complex subjects.

@shsh-he5qg

9 ай бұрын

😂 that’s funny

@daviddoran3673

9 ай бұрын

The Ukraine was defeated many months ago yet this Neocon warmonger is trying his best to prolong the slaughter of Ukrainian conscripts....unforgivable.

@raymondc5473

9 ай бұрын

What a load of nonsense and propaganda.

@raymondc5473

9 ай бұрын

@@karmakazi101 bah bah little sheep

@cskvision

9 ай бұрын

@@raymondc5473 how would you know? You likely never bothered to watch the whole interview and use your brain in the process.

It’s always a pleasure to listen to Mr Clarke. I wish the interviewer would be more responsive to what the professor is saying. She seems to attached to her script.

This one of the better commentators on Times. He does not 'blackpill' but does not indulge in the mindless optimism of some of the others

Him and Ben Hodges have been the best western generals to comment on the war.

@paddington1670

9 ай бұрын

yup

@terjeoseberg990

9 ай бұрын

Russia doesn’t have air dominance. If they did, they wouldn’t be afraid to fly over Ukrainian controlled airspace.

@alangordon3283

9 ай бұрын

He’s not a General .

@AubMar

9 ай бұрын

Although not a Gen, I respect Bill Browder too!

@Memovox

9 ай бұрын

Really..? What makes you think so? Did they predict NATO/Ukraine losing the war?

Great interview, He explains things very clearly, and excellent questions, thank you😊

Fabulous insight, as always. There is another point that comes out from what he said: It is the tardiness of the politicians that is once again the problem. Significant numbers of F16s at the beginning of the counter-offensive would likely have made it much more successful.

Really find Clarke's analyses to be as exact and realistic if not better thought out than other analysts commenting on this war.

@Xenomorphine

9 ай бұрын

The quality of his analyses are... Variable. It wasn't too many months ago that he casually referred to Taiwan as effectively being PRC territory and somehow not independent. He was also among those at the start claiming it woudl be compeltely impossible to institute a no-fly zone around Ukraine, forgetting that stealth aircraft exist.

@richardhole5301

9 ай бұрын

He is my absolute favorite!

@ccc_the_painful_truth

9 ай бұрын

Except he is consistently wrong?🤣🤑

@trescatrevor

9 ай бұрын

If Ukraine needs longer runways for the F16 s, would it be possible to install the catcher ropes that they use on aircraft carriers instead? And also build ramps at the take off end as we do on our ships. These would be easier to hide from Russia's reconisonce.

@ccc_the_painful_truth

9 ай бұрын

Taiwan is part of China and will formally be repatriated within the next 10 years. So at least he got that right. It would be impossible for NATO to institute a no-fly, because NATO pretends it is not in Ukraine, because that would start WW3. So he got that right too. So how can he be so completely wrong on Ukraine? Copium and cash I assume

Around 13:55 Michael Clarke omits a fourth possible end to the war, which is economic. Russia's financial reserves, although still substantial due to sales of gas & oil at inflated prices last year, will not outlast Western sanctions as long as they remain in place. Russia's economic viability is a fraction of what it was, and we've seen the first major cracks this week in the Ruble dropping to 100 to the $ and a huge hike in the interest rate..

So disappointed pilots hadn't been trained and F16s delivered earlier so they could be threading their way around a more successful Ukrainian offensive as we speak.

@dixonpinfold2582

9 ай бұрын

Don't discount the possibility that talk of long delays is a ruse. It seems to me that the F-16s will likely enter service in Ukraine somewhat earlier than the Russians are being led to believe.

@littlerainyone

9 ай бұрын

Same here. Austin, Miley, Sullivan & Biden say they were worried about escalation, but it's more like they were worried about potential political blowback from any bold moves. If General "Stormin" Norman or Secretary Colin Powell were our war planners, the Ukrainians would have started training a year ago and already have F16s in the air by now.

@bogtrottername7001

9 ай бұрын

@@dixonpinfold2582I've been thinking the same thing for months - let's all hope this is true !

One of the other main pluses is weapon system compatibility - any MiG is going to require mods to be able to carry things like Storm Shadow, etc. Having the F-16 allows them to carry a huge number of NATO weapons.

@Memovox

9 ай бұрын

NATO/Ukraine has lost the war. How about you spare some Ukrainian lives and focus on your own little island?

@terencefield3204

9 ай бұрын

Go boil your hed amateur

@FraserChapman

9 ай бұрын

@@Memovox For the same reason the UK didn't give up on Russia when the Nazi's attacked them...The west helped massively with lend lease etc. At a certain point - all that is required for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing.

@Memovox

9 ай бұрын

@@FraserChapman . This time around, you don't hold the moral high ground, - not even by a long shot. Nor will you get to write the history. Zelensky has people like Andriy Biletsky in his ranks, not to mention the widespread Bandera ideology. There's no coming back from that, and you being an apologist makes your grandparents spin in their graves.

@alainpannetier2543

9 ай бұрын

@@Memovox 3 days. Cry.

How many times has the US greenlit F-16s to Ukraine in the last 6 months? 5? They should have had them for this counter offensive.

@1738Creations

9 ай бұрын

Read the news dent head. They're ukrainazis are too dumb to fly them. They're being sent to other countries to learn, which has been stated to take up to a 9 months to train 6. Ooooo. The Russians are terrified of 6 nazis in outdated aircraft when Russia has destroyed every weapon NATO has sent the ukrainazis. Won't hear that in your fake news bubble.

@Digmen1

9 ай бұрын

Yes I keep hearing that F16 are being sent, and have been authorised Why does it take so long We are lucky there is not a war on!

@Mark5mith

9 ай бұрын

They should, but as usual it's more complicated than that, training, maintenance, spares, runways etc complicate the matter, I wish they'd have done it from the start but here we are.

@loverofTheWay-TheTRUTH-TheLife

9 ай бұрын

No sir the Biden administration has vacilated since Ukraine requested this aircraft almost from the beginning of the war. Another weapons Ukraine has asked for is the ATACM misiles that can hit targets 200+ miles, without these Russia supply lines storage and military target cannot be hit like the Kirch Bridge. FACTS! They've been more concerned about how Russia will react once these place them on the loosing foot! Disgusting! And on top of all this, the pentagon spokesperson has the audacity to complain or so insinuate that Ukrainian offensive advances have not been effective as they thought. Really mind blowing!

@lechefski

9 ай бұрын

Oi, if you've ever had friends training to be even regular pilots you should know that it takes years of study and practice... even if the US greenlit the F-16s at the very beginning of the invasion, it's doubtful the new pilots wouldn't be more than liabilities at the front.

Michael Clarke, great as always! The interviewer dod a good job as well

Michael Clarke excellent as usual 👍

Former F18's from Australia or Gripen C's would be a good fit. the Gripen has the ability to fire the Meteor missile. Both have off airfield capability and the Gripen is a lot easier service than the F16 but the numbers and maintenance support will be good. I agree that these should have been delivered last year.

@DARDA360

9 ай бұрын

they say - not enough Gripen crafts around

@malgorzataojoj4256

9 ай бұрын

@@DARDA360 yes, that's a probable problem. But Zelensky asked Sweden for Jas Gripen today

@warrenash5370

9 ай бұрын

Gripen have been denied.

@voggunn

9 ай бұрын

@@warrenash5370 I saw an article from 2022 where Sweden had ruled out the transfer of Gripen C simply because the Swedish Air Force still needed them, however as production has ramped up for the new Gripen E which will replace existing air frames this may free up increased numbers of the C variant over time. I saw an recent article where the Swedish Defense Minister had said they are willing to start flight simulator training for Ukrainian pilots as a first step.

@voggunn

9 ай бұрын

@@warrenash5370 Yes saw the article but I get the idea that the Swedish Government is hinting that a fresh look at this issue is not off the table once NATO membership is granted, probably in the Autumn.

Thank God for Great Britain, logic and reason, and the concepts of hold fast, and steady on. Thank you Prof Clarke for one of the best take-downs on warfighting I've heard in a while, in this case air and ground warfare, regarding F-16s. As a former Navy A-7 pilot, I can attest he nailed the role and value of these aircraft and their potential to negate current Russian tactical advantage over the trenches of Zaporizhia, Ukraine. I'd also add that they also bring the potential to provide a mighty air defense boost versus the many missiles Russia uses to pound Ukraine nightly. That is no small contribution too. Slava Ukraine!

Michael Clarke always gives the best updates on Ukraine. He has a very good insight into what is happening on all aspects of this terrible war. The interviewer here asked many good questions. I had often wondered about some of these things myself. She did a very good job.

Great interview, thanks! Good questions from the interviewer, paired with the deep knowledge of Prof Michael Clarke on the subject, was an absolute treat.

they're going to need a western supplied airforce eventually. so why not speed this all up to 100%.

@Memovox

9 ай бұрын

Russia will decide what Ukraine (or what will be left of it) will or will not have.

@uku4171

9 ай бұрын

@@Memovox 🤣😆 no

@robertroot3790

9 ай бұрын

@joshuap9580--you nailed it

@zx9mel

9 ай бұрын

Why are you a warmonger ? What about a Peace Plan ? Why is no one calling for a ceasefire and negotiations ?

@nicolasolton

9 ай бұрын

​@@zx9melZelensky stated that negotiations can begin as soon as Putin pulls his troops back behind the international border. I think that no one seriously thinks Putin will do this without being forced to do so.

The point about experienced pilots being trained in shorter time frames is quite valid. The real question would be who flies the current planes. Of course the ideal solution would be a few experienced pilots and simultaneously training new pilots. The F-16 isn't the best plane, but it is good enough and available in sufficient quantities to make a difference. Ideally they can provide cover from behind Ukrainian lines and take out the KA-52 helicopters. The fact that they are also well equipped to deliver JDAM weapons also would make a difference. They carry much longer ranged air to air missiles than anything in the current Ukrainian air force. The support logistics are already up and running in Europe, and the USA has about 1000 in storage that were recently retired. The USA is saving them in case we got into a real shooting war with Russia. Well, someone is in a real shooting war with Russia. Make no mistake, a war with China could also use them, but the heavy lifting in the Pacific would be the carriers and F-16s are not carrier aircraft.

@markus717

9 ай бұрын

Ukraine only needs to maintain 1 or 2 F-16's per front-line sector in a CAP (Combat Air Patrol) 100 km behind the front, to completely neutralize the deadly RuZZian KA-52's choppers that destroy AFU armour.

@PhonoDirect

9 ай бұрын

Well, there is a problem though. It is almost impossible to re-train a soviet style fighter pilot to the F-16's logic. It is a very well acknowledged fact. That is why young pilots free of a subconscious soviet routine are much preferred for the training. Now, where do you want to find those in the present Ukraine? You can even take the existing pilots front the front line, as those are needed in fight.

@john_in_phoenix

9 ай бұрын

@@PhonoDirect All I can say is that your assertion is the direct opposite of the pilots the US air force trained from Ukraine in order to answer this question. Apparently they found experienced Ukrainian pilots with good English skills could transition in as little as 4 months. It takes the US Air Force longer for native English speakers with zero experience.

@artemg9753

9 ай бұрын

@@markus717 I would say that even half of the f-16 will cope with this task. So, you can safely cut planes and pilots in half.

@ldhorricks

8 ай бұрын

acknowledge by who...Ukrainians have been very adept at learning very quickly on all sorts of new modern weapons systems@@PhonoDirect

Thank you Michael Clark and THANKYOU to the interviewing journalist.

Having the Moral high ground is priceless, I must say I agree with the Professor

@RenegadeSound

9 ай бұрын

Yes , you cannot prosecute that which you are also guilty of .

USA needs to let Ukraine 🇺🇦 fight for their freedom any possible means

@paulmurphy8549

9 ай бұрын

America has never let any country fight.britian was mortgaged to the yanks until second Iraq war.last payments cancelled when tony Blair went in with George Bush

@magikclown

9 ай бұрын

The US deliberately triggered this war in the first place.

@dan9002

9 ай бұрын

Democrats believe in fighting fair not in crushing the enemy.

@yellowtunes2756

9 ай бұрын

Should they also let Donbas for fight freedom against Ukraine?

@HdHd-hp6qz

9 ай бұрын

300000 Ukrainians dead and rising using American weapons. I think if I was the Ukrainian leader I wouldn’t allow that Mel any of my countrymen to die before I try to negotiate especially after I’ve made myself a billionaire in the process.

Professor Michael Clarke is Fabulous ❤ , Awesome interview, 👍good work by the Journalist ⭐ ❤💙💛❤Slava Ukraini❤💙💛❤

I have always wanted more than the 3 minutes with Mr Clarke than you get on the telly. Brilliant in depth expert opinion, great interview

The person being interviewed has a better mic than the “Professional Host” doing the interview with a 5$ mic in a construction area. Very professional.

I can't say that I agree with him about the west suffering war fatigue and getting tired of supporting Ukraine As an American I can tell you that we have a short attention span and usually want everything right away However, we are also crazy stubborn and it is that stubbornness that has gotten us to where we are today Keep in mind that we stayed in Afghanistan for 20 years because we just refused to admit that we couldn't wipe out the Taliban and win

Why is the us saying that the ukraine pilots need 4 months english training 1st then 4-6 months of training??

@terjeoseberg990

9 ай бұрын

They should have started training 1,000 Ukrainian pilots over a year ago.

@khiem1939

9 ай бұрын

Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson, AZ has trained thousands of foreign pilots, NOT ALL of them were English speakers, but they learned how to fly A-10s, F-16s and other American aircraft!

@zankfrappawdeezil5566

9 ай бұрын

ever tried to fly an F15?, never mind not knowing English fluently. (both verbally & grammatically)..go try!!@@terjeoseberg990

Time to start producing more armaments.

@ccc_the_painful_truth

9 ай бұрын

🤣🤣

@TheLocalLt

9 ай бұрын

America has already tripled production of artillery shells

@ccc_the_painful_truth

9 ай бұрын

🤣Triple a very small number - you get s small number.

I scour KZread on a regular basis for interviews with Clarke. He's informative, frank and sensible . The critics that pop up from time to time in Comments sections under his videos are transparently pro-Russian.

Professor Clarke has some patience. It annoys me to no end when you get these interviewers, especially ones that look like they've just left education, have a list of questions in front of them and they just reel them off. He's already answered half your questions without you even asking them. How about using some critical thinking.

@csh5414

9 ай бұрын

He gets paid to listen to and answer these questions, dumb or not. He brings nothing new to the table. Do some research.

Short answer is: Yes it could be a game changer, provided the sent amount is SUFFICIENT in quantity. If not, then it's gonna help but it won't be a game changer. Either way, Zelenskyy has exhibited extreme decisiveness, he's determined that Ukraine must move forward with or without F16s or long range missiles. The idea is to keep Russians on their toes all the time, there's no rest allowed.

@briandbeaudin9166

9 ай бұрын

An F-16 in a particular battle space will be a game changer! Whatever they get will change the Russian calculus on the battlefield as the Russian pilots will be very afraid of the F-16's longer radar capabilities!

@zx9mel

9 ай бұрын

Zelensky has sent his nation's men and women to their doom. And you applaud that ???

@dessmith7658

9 ай бұрын

Russia will bomb f16 base

@yellowtunes2756

9 ай бұрын

How exactly few dozens of 50yo planes will "keep Russians on their toes" ? Ukraine had hundreds of planes when war started and vast majority of them was gone after a few months

@rogerphelps9939

9 ай бұрын

Wrong. The F16s are a lot younger than both Russian tanks and naval assets.@@yellowtunes2756

Professor Michael Clarke is the best, thank you.

I have to hope that Ukrainian pilots are already training and preparing for a much earlier deployment of F-16s that is somehow being kept secret. This would actually make sense, at least more sense than US policy so far in this matter.

@briandbeaudin9166

9 ай бұрын

Except that they don't have long enough runways, currently.

@user-tc5ys6xn4b

9 ай бұрын

Your hope will remain JUST that. A hope....A dream

@dacabe1

9 ай бұрын

And the magic pill that can condense many many years of training into months. It would almost be easier to train brand new pilots than to convert from ex soviet to us aircraft

@alexco5881

9 ай бұрын

The storm shadow was maybe, not confirmed for months. Then we got a kaboom

@lechefski

9 ай бұрын

Poland has been training them already since May, there may be other countries as well. The pilots are just the tip of the iceberg, I hope they're training the crews early as well since there are dozens of roles that need technical training beyond just the pilots, and many of those roles require years of training.

Oh, they're dreaming about a victory over Russia again.😄

@andrewcornibert8035

9 ай бұрын

Only intelligent comment. People think they are watching a movie with wizards and unicorns

And quality is a quantity of its own merits. Proper tools and motivations should ultimately win, given chance and opportunity. Thank you for this excellent interview.

One of the best interviews you have done, thank you Paul Australia.

Radio Times is by far the best platform about Ukraine. Well done to all.

The Best aircraft for Ukraine would be the Swedish Gripen, it doesn't need an airfield, only a road that is longer than 700 m, can be refueled and rearmed from a truck within 10 minutes! Sláva Ukrajinē 🇺🇦 from 🇨🇿

@littlerainyone

9 ай бұрын

You are right. But there are very few (perhaps zero) Gripens available. That's why Clarke does not say the F16 is best aircraft but rather the "optimal" aircraft.

If if if and if again. Lol

@alexanderlazarev3570

9 ай бұрын

Agree, never-ending ifs.

Congrats to the journalist for asking some really good questions

Absolutely crucial is, can Ukraine protect the F16 planes when they are on the ground

@Digmen1

9 ай бұрын

Lets hope they are building runways and underground bunkers now (starting 6 months ago)

@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311

9 ай бұрын

The Russians just hit an ammunition train 70km behind the lines - and photographed the hit with a drone... so highly unlikely.

@agh0x01

9 ай бұрын

They are likely to lose at least some aircraft in Russian missile strikes on airfields, but this would not mean the Ukrainian air force is not a viable and invaluable asset.

@paulthomas-hh2kv

9 ай бұрын

Think Russia will use the small nukes rather than lose Crimea also worry about f-16’s heading towards Moscow rather than front line. Ukraine would like to get us all into this war

The F16's has a very wide range of loadouts which makes it the optimum choice as Clarke says. NATO will be able able to provide a much wider range of Ewar, A-A and A-G munitions which aren't compatible with Ukraine's current stock of MIGs

@uku4171

9 ай бұрын

HARM 🤤

@TheKievKen

9 ай бұрын

Migs with the right pylons installed can carry most of these armaments already. Hence storm shadow.

Well Michael said this is not a onflict between NATO and Russia and that is BS when in fact it is Ukraine provides the ground /stage

Great direct interview with short questions and detailed accurate responses.

There is also a number of F18 fighters coming up for retirement from western airforces as they transition to F35s. Those airfra.mes could be updated and sold to Ukraine.

@timthetiny7538

9 ай бұрын

Updates take years

@glennbateman4483

9 ай бұрын

​@@timthetiny7538they've already been updated

@oldmanriver1955

9 ай бұрын

The Australian F18s need to be refurbished and ready and will take some time. They have been in storage awaiting sale and are just not ready to go for some time, although, noises indicate that this is happening.

Great interview as always by Michael Clarke

I am quite late to the party, but wanted to add my voice to the many people who were as impressed by the questions from the young lady interviewing Professor Michael Clarke, AND Professor Clarke's brilliant & well-explained analysis. A superbly illuminating discussion! Thank you!👍👍 FWIW, my only disagreement with Professor Clarke would be regarding the drones. IMHO, predicting the impact of the drones on the political situation in Russia, and the war overall, relies upon an assessment of the psychological nature of Putin, Shoigu, Gerasomov, and Putin's inner circle of oligarchs, as well as the predominant psyche & culture within the general Russian population. FWIW, I will defer to Ukrainian understanding of these factors, along with nations such as Lithuanian, Estonia, Latvia, Poland & Finland, as they know the Russians better than most westerners. Therefore, I will continue to trust the Ukrainian leadership with respect to the issue & their overall strategy.🤔 Last, I shall heartily commend Professor Clarke for being quite frank regarding the way the U.S.A. (and somewhat, Germany) has handled its response to the illegal, unprovoked invasions by the Russian Federation in 2014 & 2022. His analysis & conclusions were, IMHO, spot one regarding the need for the U.S.A. to provide the equipment, weaponry & munitions that Ukraine & a whole host of highly-experienced military leaders/analysts (*) have identified as crucial for Ukraine to (a) decisively defeat (**) the evil Russian war machine, (b) liberate 100% of its rightful, sovereign territory, and (c) put an end to the war crimes, ecocide, destruction of cities, blockades of grain shipments, and so on. As Professor Clarke pointed out, the U.S.A. (and somewhat, Germany) has, time & time again, contradicted its own excuses for not providing the equipment, weaponry & munitions Ukraine has requested since February 2022, plus the U.S.A. has delayed or continued to refuse material support (***) which could have moved the war much closer to its conclusion by the end of 2023.😡 FWIW, as much as I would rather believe otherwise, I am now convinced that the U.S.A. and Germany are only interested in ensuring that Ukraine does not fall to the Russian Federation, but at the same time, they have endeavoured to make it all but impossible for Ukraine to defeat Russia & liberate all of its territory in 2023 (and, likely, in 2024). 😡This is even more infuriating than the fact that the U.S.A. & Germany were the only nations to disagree with offering Ukraine an invitation to join NATO (a move that, BTW, would not trigger Article 5)!😡 (*) U.S. Lt. General [ret.] Ben Hodges, U.S. General [ret.] Phillip Breedlove, U.K. General [ret.] Sir Richard Shirreff, and others. (Please check out their great interviews on this channel!) (**) Neither President Biden, nor any member of his administration have had the guts to say that the U.S.A. wants Ukraine to WIN this war, and they have never stated that the U.S.A. will support Ukraine until Ukraine WINS the war. Instead, they repeatedly use the nebulous & meaningless phrase 'we will support Ukraine....as long as it takes.', without ever stating what "it" means! (***) Especially ATACMS, which would have enabled Ukraine to destroy Russian assets deep behind enemy lines (literally anywhere in occupied Crimea) before beginning counter-offensive operations.....but also F-16s which, as Professor Clarke pointed out, could have done much to protect the lives of Ukrainian men, women & children in the cities, AND if provided in a timely manner, could have enabled the Armed Forces of Ukrainian to conduct much more aggressive & successful counter-offensive(s) that could have resulted in strategically decisive victories this summer.

Good questions. excellent answers! Thank you for accurate analysis and quality news!

I think the Saab Gripen would have been the ideal choice for Ukraine's situation, since they were developed on the assumption that Sweden would be facing precisely the situation that Ukraine is now caught up in. Especially since they are able to use stretches of ordinary road in place of runways and fixed air bases. Thus they're harder for enemy artillery to find, and can operate pretty much anywhere. They would also, in all probability, have already arrived in Ukraine and could have been in use for months already.

@oldmanriver1955

9 ай бұрын

They are not readily available in numbers at a reasonable cost. Yes they are the best solution for Ukraine considering the combat situations at the moment.

@anthonywilson-qk6bl

9 ай бұрын

Absolutely agree, this system would be ideal for Ukraine. They need the ability to spread their air forces across the country. Using local road networks

@mrkeogh

9 ай бұрын

They're the best aircraft available, but not in the quantities needed or on a timescale that would help Ukraine. They'd be an excellent choice for a Ukrainian national fighter jet program to replace their Soviet-era fighter-bombers and whatever F-16s they do get next year, but that's 5-10 years away 🤷🏻‍♂️

@djosearth3618

9 ай бұрын

not enough numbers/spare parts/trained tecnicians and operators.

@brownmold

9 ай бұрын

So why didn't NATO buy large numbers of the Gripen in a timely fashion? Because with fewer than 350 airframes built, it is not at all available. Those countries using them aren't prone to give them up. The Gripen shows the superior design philosophy behind what air power for moderately wealthy countries should look like. Not fantasies around F22 or F35.

Not a single A-10 was lost on the battlefield my friend. A-10 pilots welcome everything that the enemy can throw at them. You might want to think about what you said about A-10 pilots not wanting to fly their missions. A-10 pilots are the MOST fearless pilot in the sky. That is why they are flying A-10s and not F-16s.

@khiem1939

9 ай бұрын

True, that's why my State Senator was an A-10 combat pilot in the Gulf Wars, bye the way, she is very much a WOMAN!

@davidcpugh8743

9 ай бұрын

I loved Warthogs overhead. Was infantryman on the zero line.

@timthetiny7538

9 ай бұрын

Because the A10s don't go in until we have air superioritt

@appstratum9747

9 ай бұрын

A10s would not survive in this battle space, unfortunately. I've heard an A10 pilot - Kim Campbell - talking about how her A10 was brought down by ground fire (a SAM/MANPAD missile hitting the horizontal stabiliser) over Baghdad while she was providing close air support for American troops on the ground close to the River Tigris. She managed to limp home but came very close to ejecting at the outset. The aircraft was instantly very badly damaged by the missile. The sheer density of more modern MANPADS and S300 systems along the front line will make for a much more hostile environment than Baghdad. An S300 would make mincemeat of any A10 that it engaged. It's a very formidable weapon and the warhead is devastating: around 300lb (of more) of high explosive and fragmentary material. An AIM-120 AMRAAM warhead - more than enough to do the job - is around 45lb, less than one sixth of the size. I grew up with American A10s flying and exercising constantly around my home in the UK during the Cold War, over relatively flat farmland and treelines very similar to the battlefield in southern Ukraine. I'm well aware how hard they are to spot and what they can and can't do while flying at low altitude. I grew rather fond of the whine that the aircraft makes as it skims the treetops. It's an awesome aircraft, to be sure - a real legend - but the lack of a permissive environment in southern and eastern Ukraine would result in terrible losses, I fear. Fearlessness is admirable. But realism is more valuable in this theatre of operations at this particular moment in time. The F16, with the right armament, would almost certainly do the job (albeit not nearly as well as the A10 in terms of the kinetic effect that it brings to the table) but much more safely and with far greater flexibility to take out things like battlefield helicopters, Su-25s and so on. The the A10 would be close to useless at this sort of radar-guided air-to-air warfare where situational awareness of the sky rules. Let's put it like this: A10 pilots - all of whom love the Warthog - that have switched to the F35 are a lot happier with the F35. Again, without exception as far as I can tell. That's because they're much more likely to come home and they can do the same job (in some ways more effectively but mostly differently) in the F35 these days. The Warthog still has a place, in my view. But just not over this particular battlefield at this moment in time. At least while the threat environment still remains so dangerous for it. If the SAM element of the Russian Armed Forces were taken care of first, then it would be a different story.

@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311

9 ай бұрын

A10s are decades out of date. Modern Russian SAMs would knock them out of the sky before they reach the front line.

I love this man, very calm , but knows his stuff

Glory to Ukraine !! To the heroes !! 🇺🇦🦖✊

Michael Clarke is always spot-on with his analysis, thank you.

Great content. 👍

If Professor Clarke were giving us this interview on 18 August 2022 (instead of today 18 August 2023) it would be wondrous news! It would mean that: very likely by April or May of 2023, Ukraine might have two or three squadrons of F16s with sufficient support (infrastructure, pilots, mechanics, etc.). This will almost certainly make Ukrainian progress forward less costly and faster. But sadly, it has taken more than a year for the U.S. to give the green light on this F16 allocation. So that means that Ukraine probably will not have F16s in sufficient numbers and with sufficient support to get nominal operational capacity from them until April or May of 2024. That means that for the next 8 to 10 months, Ukaine must continue its offensive efforts with a more profound air disadvantage than was ever necessary. A stark point that is made all the more poignant by the fact that this war began in 2014, and virtually no military support was provided until about 2017 or 2018, and even then it was quite limited. The Biden administration has skirted right along the border of being despicable in its partial, hesitant, conditional, and arbitrarily limited support and most other "Western partners" have been little better.

These people are just here to tell you all kinds of “ FEEL GOOD FANTASY “ 😂🤷‍♂️🤦‍♂️

I couldn't agree more with Gen. Clarke, except regarding the drone strikes. Anyway, this eternal delay of aircraft is so painful to watch. It's costing everyone so much. Also, I would love F-16s paired with the A-10s in Ukraine, as some more knowledgeable than me have said.

@fuzzylogiceire

9 ай бұрын

He's not a general, he's an academic.

@timthetiny7538

9 ай бұрын

A10s are useless without control of the air

@uku4171

9 ай бұрын

@@timthetiny7538 They aren't useless, just as the Frogfoot hasn't been useless. They would just have high loss rates. And he said "F-16s paired with the A-10s" not just A-10s. A-10s could provide payload capacity for decoys and better CAS capabilities while the F-16 could work on AA and SEAD. This is of course assuming that the West would give enough missiles for AA and SEAD.

@ccc_the_painful_truth

9 ай бұрын

I'd love to see the A10 too, in a real warzone, not shooting up camel jockeys. Might be bad for arms sales though, watching a truck with wings blown out the sky within minutes. 🤣🤑

Plenty hot rod pilots in west will happily volunteer for Ukraine. And ground crew. Pilots will arrive as fast as the jets.

@paulcornwall7258

9 ай бұрын

yeah if they want to die because thats wat will happen there be destroyed like all the other wonder weapons around

the interviewer did a very professional job!

Thank you for great interview, Clarke is the best!

Australia asked Ukraine last year if it wanted its 40 spare FA18s, training, training equipment and spares (these are the same planes that Canada recently bought to plug its capability gap in NATO). The planes are seriously upgraded ground attack fighters that can operate on Ukrainian airstrips. The response from Ukraine has been………crickets. Why?

@blechtic

9 ай бұрын

Well, obviously they don't communicate via press releases. That is another type of plane, requiring another type training (flying, maintenance, etc.) and parts supply, which is smaller than F-16's, because there were fewer of them made and being flown. Building an F-18 support chain for Ukraine might be a problem. Also, I'm not sure the Hornet has been integrated with as many armaments as the Falcon, because there aren't as many operators, so Ukraine might have to scrounge around for specific ground-attack weapons instead of *types of* weapons. The timetable might be an issue, too. When can Australia provide them? When do they have replacements for them? Tomorrow or a year or two from now? And what is the state of those airframes? Do they still have some time left in them? They wear out, experience fatigue. What if they start dropping from the sky after a year? You could lose experienced pilots and, in any case, they'd have to start the whole thing all over again once those planes are done (pretty soon). The training takes time and keeps pilots and crew out of active service. F-16s are currently in service with life left in them and there are so many of them around that a couple from here and some from there can get you quite a collection without affecting the providing countries. Those 40 Auzzie could become just 20 planes even if they were okay, because the rest might need to become spare parts. Then there's the future aspect. What is left after the war, or even just a year or two from now, will form the basis of the Ukrainian air force for quite some time. AFAIK the F-18 doesn't get more updates, they are being phased out. Their upgrade-path is the Super Hornet, which is an entirely different plane. (It's like 20% scaled-up?) I think F-16 upgrade path (Viper) uses (mostly?) the same airframe, so it is future-proof for the time being, and with many of the current operators getting F-35s, Ukraine could now, or later, buy those planes and get them upgraded and life-extended. Their airforce would have continuity. That's what I'm thinking, anyway. Also, I don't think they want to create a political distraction or give a chance for excuses to not getting the F-16s. Once they are in the bag, so to speak, I can see them maybe also wanting the F-18s to fly around for a while, if they can make all of it work.

@seanlander9321

9 ай бұрын

@@blechtic The average life in each plane is 2500 hours remaining. The issue is, that if Ukraine had taken up the offer last year it would have had pilots and planes for this offensive. It sounds as though Ukraine wanted to ensure that it would get F-16s and nothing else.

@michaelmazowiecki9195

9 ай бұрын

Usual issue of US approval and permissions

The F16 is a great all rounder. If Ukraine were given retired 2 engine jets from the west that are less numerous, they’d likely have older electronics and instruments. There will not be much dogfighting, though there could be some. Success will likely come down to radar and advanced missiles and guided bombs.

@Intentspunk19

9 ай бұрын

It's the only way long term security is possible for Ukraine.

@khiem1939

9 ай бұрын

Dogfighting is of wars PAST! Today most modern aircraft shoot down the enemy aircraft from over the horizon!

@Memovox

9 ай бұрын

@@Intentspunk19 Do you seriously believe the West will be allowed to use Ukraine as a proxy indefinitely?

@begraa

9 ай бұрын

Absolutely crucial is, can Ukraine protect the F16 planes when they are on the ground

Are there no British journalists willing to work for Times Radio? Thank goodness people like Michael Clark and Sean Bell are better at their jobs. Always excellent at answering the same questions over and over again. Every American I know is terrified of nuclear war.....not in Europe, but in the US. That is verging on delusional, but it is keeping them terrified and holding back victory for Ukraine.

It would be interesting to see if a ski jump approach could be used for F-16 for the shorter runways. Russians previously flew SU-27/35 from their carrier without catapults using a ski jump arrangement.

@DissectGibberish

9 ай бұрын

There's also the sling, for example what is used on aircraft carriers.

@sidharthcs2110

9 ай бұрын

Won't be long enough for F16. Flankers have huge wings.

@Completeaerogeek

9 ай бұрын

@@sidharthcs2110 Well, it worked for the MiG 29 which has much smaller wings. The MiG 29 and F-16 have very similar wing loading. The USN has studied it extensively. There are papers online you can access.

Why does Times Radio keep rolling out high school juniors as interviewers who is just reading a rote list of prepared questions that the interviewee has just answered....?

@ccc_the_painful_truth

9 ай бұрын

Because that's how NATO like it 🤑🤑

Exactly! The first expert to say this about Putin!!

Excellent, informative interview. Thank you!

Interesting to see Western Ukraine is 'coping' with yet another game changer!😂😂😂

Really genuine question - was this a Sixth Form/under grad project to ask questions ❓

@ccc_the_painful_truth

9 ай бұрын

Real journalists are too embarrassed

Thank you 💛

Michael clarke talks about the f16s firing first without saying the russians can also fire first.

Absolutely right about the pilot training and F-16s. Why in God's name are we training so incredibly few pilots? We should be training 50-100 experienced pilots on the F-16 and giving novice fighter pilot training to another 100 Ukrainian pilots. Its not like they can really currently train their own given their air fleet is tiny and has to be grounded outside combat missions. That way they can be ready to go as soon as the transfer is done and maintenance capacity put into place. The West is going to lose Ukraine the war if they keep tying one arm and leg behind their backs. We should also be sending ATACAMS, Taurus and long range air-to-air and Himars munitions in order to allow Ukraine to absolutely devastate Russian logistics in all their depth. Also incredible that we are still not mass producing any kit that both we and Ukraine drastically need. Honestly incomprehensible. This war and authoritarian militarism is not going away unless we make it. Also absolutely right about Russian leadership and society honestly believing Ukraine has no right to exist. And if people really want to spare Ukrainian lives, end this war now, and do it on the cheap, then we should be intervening directly as we did in the Gulf War, not allowing this to go on and on and devastate land, lives and livelihoods, all to not upset Putin. Ukraine has a sovereign right to its territories, more than any nation I know, as its borders were not only recognised and guaranteed by Russia, the US, the UK, China, and Germany, they were also confirmed by Ukraine's 1991 referendum were a vast majority voted in favour of independence in every Oblast!. No other nation on Earth can claim such legitimacy.

@jonnyde

9 ай бұрын

EXACTLY

Don't forget Ukraine already had an air force

The F-16’s can do a lot more than this: 1. They can carry JDAM’s 2. They can project power over the Black Sea with Harpoon anti-ship missiles 3. They have good ground attack capability 4. They can stay up longer than the Mig-29’a 5. They can mount combat air patrols and help take down Russian cruise missiles 6. They can take out the Russian Ka-52 attack helicopters at a distance.

@jonnyde

9 ай бұрын

are you sure about your point 5 ?? IF YES: At what kind of range is it optimal ??

OhhhhhH, some sweet sweet Michael Clarke. I don’t know why you people don’t have him all the time

Could the protection of F16s allow the safer combined tactical use of the suggested offer of the soon to be decommissioned warthog ground attack planes. Would they make an effective combination? The Warthog might perform better on the front line than some Russian attack helicopters which seem to be doing so much damage to the Ukrainian front lines.

@uku4171

9 ай бұрын

Probably, but unlikely that it would happen considering you'd need both pilots and technicians trained for the A-10 as well as F-16. Also, the A-10 gets a bad rap these days.

@VeeFTeeS

9 ай бұрын

no. they will be shoot down quickly by s400

Absolutely brilliant overview of the Ukraine/Russia war!!

The F16 should have been offered sooner, however, hindsight's a great thing, a fighter jet is a sum of its part's but hopefully they will get that sorted.

These jets ... If flown properly... Will allow Ukraines winter offensive to finish the war by Christmas.. Ukraine needs to keep applying pressure in their current offensive and take out as much Russian missile launchers and other air defense equipment as possible.

@Kavala76

9 ай бұрын

WOW!! What colour are the clouds where you are? SMH

That is great. Good knowledge

Amazing interview thank you!

The point a lot of people are missing here is that the immediate benefit is not air to air or air to ground but anti shipping. An F-16 can carry 2 Harpoon long range anti ship missiles per aircraft. With a squadron of F-16s Ukraine could make the Black Sea unviable for the Russian fleet.

@TH-ux9qk

9 ай бұрын

One Answer: S550

@Completeaerogeek

9 ай бұрын

​@@TH-ux9qk Ha. That's funny. They barely got the S-500 into production. What do they have - maybe a handful of those in existence and none in Ukraine? and they can't operate effectively without AWACS. Radar is constrained by the curvature of the Earth. AIM-120D will deal with any AWACS the Russian care to put up- the very few they have and HARMs are quite good at dealing with GBAD, particularly the large multi frequency arrays, as are needed by the S-300/400. Mind you the Ukrainians are doing a pretty good job of eliminating these as it is. If the S-300/400/500 were so effective there would be no Ukrainian aircraft flying combat sorties yet strangely there still are, day after day...And with much older less capable aircraft. F-16 also = no more TU-95s over the Black Sea and with Harpoon, more Black Sea Fleet scrap iron on the ocean floor to keep the Moskva company....

Also air superiority is not in how many jets you have but how well you use them I believe if Ukraine is well trained on the F16 then their air force and air supiority will be much better then Russia they no longer seem to have good pilots plus their air craft seems to have many manufacturing flaws I've seen them just fall out of the air for no reason at all

@Realist369

9 ай бұрын

Lies lies and more lies 👆😂😂

I disagree with Clarke's suggestion that there could be a series of wars between Russia and Ukraine over the coming decades. Why? Because NATO is already leaning on Ukraine to consider a negotiated settlement, including NATO membership for Ukraine.

Those F16 are going to be scrap metal just like the Himars and Patroit Missiles 😂😂😂

Sir, how about the usa do a filler , by supplying apache helicopters, I think that would help in the meantime , thank u..

@LuisMarquez-ui6sr

9 ай бұрын

Supply your mom fool alongvwith any fighter jet and they are going to loose anyway.

Russia doesn’t have air dominance. If they did, they wouldn’t be afraid to fly over Ukrainian controlled airspace.

@paulmurphy8549

9 ай бұрын

Ukraine Russia big countries its flight time there and back is the issue more then what they can do .that's why they shoot from border run out of fuel.some fighter jets in Britain have only 7 minutes at full throttle

@terjeoseberg990

9 ай бұрын

@@paulmurphy8549, It has nothing to do with fuel. The Russian cowards are afraid to get shot down.

@uku4171

9 ай бұрын

They have air superiority, but the airspace is still too contested.

@terjeoseberg990

9 ай бұрын

@@uku4171, Wrong. Russia does not have air superiority. They have air parity. Go educate yourself bro.

@uku4171

9 ай бұрын

@@terjeoseberg990Not parity when they keep successfully using helicopters

How can you hide longer runways ?? When they have satellites that can spot all that ?????

The F-16 will take the KA-52 out of the fight. It will also force the Russians to return to air to air with their fighters. That will all but stop the bombing runs. The F-16 will change the dynamic as long as they are not sacrificed needlessly. If a SEAD/EW squadron is included in the mix the UAF will be able to take out the SAMs more effectively. With a mix of F-16 and MIG Squadrons the UAF will be able to run fighters with SEAD/EW and bombing attacks at the same time. It is critical that there is enough western SAM coverage to protect the runways and airfields that the aircraft operate out of.

Hi Professor Clarke. Your knowledge is comforting.

does anyone really believe that there are any airfields in Ukraine that can support the F-16? Because of itsw slung scoop, the F-16 needs well manicured airstrips, not the block pavement strips that are typical of Ukrainian airfields. And the strips must be kept free of debris and rubble. I've been told no airstrips exist in Ukraine that are suitable for the F-16.. I also imagine that if a field is prepared for the F-16, it would be obvious and would likely be attacked.

@ccc_the_painful_truth

9 ай бұрын

They will keep them in Poland, they will only launch the missiles from Ukrainian airspace, to avoid NATO firing directly on Russia.

Completely wrong, as usual. This is not about air vs air but about survival in the air defence environment. F16s cannot operate in Ukraine in anything other than stand-off. That is useful, sure, but limited. They wouldn’t last 5 minutes in CAS role. However, the idea that they match up to SU35s is laughable. The other problem is safe bases to operate from.

Talking about talking to the clouds. What a load of twaddle 😂😂😂😂