Skip to comments.Ukraine crisis: US sends F-16 fighter jets to Poland
Posted on 03/06/2014 9:56:38 AM PST by lizol
17.42 Poland's defence ministry has confirmed that the US military will send 12 F-16 fighter jets and 300 service personnel to Poland next week for a training exercise whose scope was expanded in response to the crisis in neighbouring Ukraine.
Tomasz Siemoniak said the training exercise, centred on the Lask air force base in central Poland, was originally to have been smaller and involved only transport aircraft. He said Poland requested it be beefed up after Russia's intervention in Ukraine's Crimea Peninsula.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
But with no anti-missile system to protect them from a Russian first strike, what is their purpose? Also, a handful of jets within flying distance of one of the largest and most competent air forces in the world? Oh, there’s some good thinking.
Are we nuts or what?? There is absolutely no reason for these fighters except to antagonize.
We must show the world that we are DOING something!! /s
Common sense is not generally to be found in Washington DC. These days, the qualities needed to get elected often preclude the quality of good sense. The conventional wisdom on the Potomac is madness when it comes to foreign affairs.
LOL -- Russian pilots get almost no training.
There are several Patriot AA missile batteries in Poland.
Yep. Complete stipidity on our part to intervene. We don’t want a gayed up and feminized led military to try and take on a “real” army with “real men” who will twist them like pretzels if they engage in limp wrist-to-hand combat
This must be penance for abandoning Poland with our promised missile defense system that was aborted by Obama.
Just what kind of man-ly man would have made a decision like this?
“Russian pilots get almost no training.”
Given the huge investment a fighter represents that’s not likely true any longer. During the early ‘90’s, probably. Russia was broke. But, they’re rolling in oil money now. It would be foolish to have pilots who were not qualified to fight as well as their adversaries.
From what I read about the Patriots in Gulf 1, they just as frequently hit the ejected fuel tanks as the free-falling warhead. They were not nearly as good as the military claimd; the claims being for political purposes rather than military.
The Air Force should throw a few F-22’s into that mix.Or at least make the claim they’re doing that.
The Russian’s would never know untill they got stung.
Are the Russians’ missiles sufficiently trained?
The Patriots are several blocks advanced from where they were in ‘91. I’m not sure if the Pols have any of the ballistic intercept-capable missiles.
That is the reason.
Well, maybe the reason is, that one of your most loyal allies feels threatend by an agressive neighbour?
You know - North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, an alliance, brothers in arms (Afghanistan, Iraq), things like that.
Looks like an electronics pod on one of those. Not exactly a sneaky move.
A billion dollars that we pulled out of our ..... is certainly doing something. It’s called REALISTICALLY...a bribe....something forbidden by the 1994 Memorandum.
That’s a good point and I’m afraid (with all the mikes off) Poland shoved it to us on that little item.
“Also, a handful of jets within flying distance of one of the largest and most competent air forces in the world? Oh, theres some good thinking.”
I’m sure the whole point is to “appear” to be doing “something”, while that “something” is not actually threatening to the Sovie-— er Russia.
Like during the Sochi Olympics we sent 2 ships to ostensibly be in a position to evacuate Americans should there be a terrorist incident at the Games. You might expect that we would send an amphibious ready group built around one of our LHA/LHD helicopter carriers? Nope! Too provocative! Instead we sent a “command ship” and an obsolete frigate that lacked serious air defense capabilities (and the frigate ran aground outside a Turkish port).
Obama is perfected the art of getting credit for doing something without actually having done it.
“From what I read about the Patriots in Gulf 1, they just as frequently hit the ejected fuel tanks as the free-falling warhead. They were not nearly as good as the military claimd; the claims being for political purposes rather than military.”
Partially true: The part about the Patriots in the Gulf War not being as effective as advertised.
The Iraqi Scuds were not designed to separate the warhead (the way modern missiles do). If the warhead separated it was because the Iraqi missile was so poorly manufactured that it simply broke up. The Patriot (then) was designed for a center-of-mass kill, so quite naturally it would go for the falling rocket (rather than the tiny warhead that was spinning off course due to unplanned separation.)
I would point out that missile defense is mostly about software and radar capabilities, and those change fast. You probably shouldn’t assume that the Patriots used in the Gulf War are in any way representative of the Patriots in the field today, 24 years later.
In Operation Iraqi Freedom an F/A-18 returning from a patrol was locked onto by a Patriot battery. There were two alternatives available to the pilot — eject or destroy the radar with a HARM anti-radiation missile (to break the missile lock). The pilot did the latter & survived.
“You probably shouldnt assume that the Patriots used in the Gulf War are in any way representative of the Patriots in the field today, 24 years later.”
Many years ago as a Honeywell engineer I was in the position to suggest a no-cost upgrade that significantly improved a fielded system. The company said no. (They could have done it as systems cycled through for repairs.) If the customer didn’t pay for it they wouldn’t do it. So, I tried the other approach and the customer didn’t have any funding.
Years later I was working on a periodic obsolesce upgrade to an army system for another company. I found we were designing in parts that would be unavailable in just five years when longer-lived parts were available. I asked to switch to the longer lived parts and was told, “No, the contract says five years. If we put in those parts we won’t get to do this again in five years.”
So, how improved are the Patriots? Probably not as much as they could be.
You seem to be one of those FReepers who answer the earlier “Are we nuts?” query in the affirmative.
“So, how improved are the Patriots? Probably not as much as they could be.”
Well, you’ve shown the other side of the government contracting “coin”. That’s for sure. It’s why aircraft companies basically roll-over & allow a fully designed aircraft project to die just prior to entering production. Why? They don’t want to actually BUILD the thing, because typically fabrication gets spread among all aircraft companies, not just the award winner. What they DO WANT is to engineer the next aircraft. Because that is what they are — engineering companies.
“They dont want to actually BUILD the thing, because typically fabrication gets spread among all aircraft companies, not just the award winner”
Having spent a career on the engineering side I can verify that companies that suddently get a contract do have problems. Suddenly, the design engineers are not needed as much. Oh, they may get a few hours of support time here or there, but it’s not unusual to lay off a significant portion if there isn’t another design project to put them on.
Then, they have to figure out how they’ll produce the system and I’ve seen many a screw-up here. To optimize the profit for all the stuff they gave away at the negotiating table they decided, say, that they’ll use level 5 technicians (hairdressers, essentially) instead of highly trained level 1’s. Then there’s usually a cascade of failures due to laying off the engineers who could have transitioned it because they were too expensive. Then there are the empire builders and company politicians who are just out for themselves; the product be damned.
Just when I think I’ve seen ever failure possible somebody thinks up something new. (The paperless factory, for example, predicated on the idea that there will be no failures whatsoever...snicker.)
“You seem to be one of those FReepers who answer the earlier Are we nuts? query in the affirmative.”
If I’m nuts because I believe in stopping a tyrant once he tells you he’s on a mission to conquer terratory than so be it.
I don’t want to see the other former Soviet Republic’s getting reannexed by that tyrant Putin.Most notably Poland and the Czech Republic.Hell!I’m not even Polish or Czech for that matter.
Just someone who remembers history.
Why would Putin want Poland and the Czech Republic? Serious question from someone who has no idea.
“Why would Putin want Poland and the Czech Republic? Serious question from someone who has no idea.”
Why did the Russians want Eastern Germany?Why did Russia Want Poland?Hungary and Czechoslovakia the first Time they invaded it.Someone needs to read a history book.
In the Past Russia invaded those counties to use as a buffer against Germany who they have had a series of wars with.
But I can’t give them a pass because of that.After-all Russia is a Nuclear power while Germany and those other countries at present are not.
So Putin is afraid of Germany and that’s why he wants Poland and the Czech Republic?
“LOL — Russian pilots get almost no training.”
Old news. They have been rapidly increasing defense busget in recent years.