(Image by NEIVANMADE)
Last night in comments Beautiful Plumage asked:
Hi Adam, thank you for this series.
Considering the Aussie hornets – if the training & supply/repair networks for F-16s* was so unworkable until now, what makes these planes any easier to integrate with Ukraine’s MOD? Are they similar to other UKR aircraft?
First, you’re most welcome. As is everyone else. Now to the actual question, the reason the FA/18s would be a better fit was described in detail by Tyler Rogoway at The War Room’s The Drive in April, which we referenced in an update during April. Here’s what Rogoway wrote, which answers your question:
The original plan was for Air USA to acquire 46 Hornets. Canada had bought 25 prior to the deal with Air USA to help bolster its aging CF-18 fleet. The Australian Hornets are largely upgraded to an A++ standard, which gives them the capabilities of newer F/A-18Cs, including the type’s upgraded AN/APG-73 radar.
In addition, these Hornets have never been battered around on an aircraft carrier or exposed to constant salt water during deployment. So we are talking about nearly four dozen highly relevant and well-cared-for fighters here. This is pretty much the size of Ukraine’s MiG-29 fleet, prior to recent transfers from NATO supporters, the type serving as the backbone of its current fighter force.
Yes, the F-16 has the most impressive training and support infrastructure, but the F/A-18 still has that infrastructure, as well, and will be flooded with spare parts as more Hornets retire. More on that in a moment.
In terms of capabilities and performance, the F/A-18 is arguably better suited for Ukraine than the F-16. As a twin-engine design that excels at slow-speed handling, it is more in line with Ukraine’s MiG-29 and Su-27 fleets. Its very robust carrier-capable landing gear is also better suited for Ukraine’s Soviet-era airfield infrastructure and potential for distributed and austere operations, which Ukraine has been executing to make targeting harder for Russian forces. Like the F-16, it can carry pretty much anything that would be available to Ukraine now and in the future and can be quickly adapted to handle new capabilities if need be.
While upgraded with advanced targeting pods, Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems (JHMCS), and many other enhancements, the ex-RAAF jets are not cutting edge and would present reduced technological risk in their current form. This makes them deliverable with minimal modifications.
The Hornet does not need to be the final fighter answer for Ukraine, either. Maybe F-16s will one day come, but the Hornet is available right now and fits well with their existing fighter mindset. It has the potential to get Ukraine into the 4th generation Western fighter game as soon as possible.
When you factor all this in, Australia’s unwanted Hornets present an incredible opportunity. One that is literally just sitting there for the taking. But what about training? Who could get aviators and maintainers up to snuff and how fast could they do it?
But one could argue no matter what type Ukraine gets, existing governmental training pipelines are not well set up for getting aircrews into combat as fast as possible. And by any account, this takes time to achieve. Here is where the private sector could come in.
Decades of knowledge have been gained by instructor pilots and maintainers on how to teach flying and supporting these aircraft. The Hornet was the mainstay of the Navy and Marines for many years, as well as a fixture in aforementioned foreign air arms. Private contractors could step in to rapidly train Ukrainians on the Hornet outside of, or in conjunction with, the far more rigid existing government-ran pipelines.
Under such an arrangement, the syllabus could be totally tailored to Ukraine’s needs and focus on converting as many pilots as possible as fast as possible based on their own individual needs, as well. Also, the mission sets they would need to perform would be more limited, at least to start, which could accelerate training.
Without all the red tape of a government-run training enterprise, pilots and ground crew could be generated quicker and some could argue, at least under these unique circumstances, better. Even a situation where government training handles some aspects of the syllabus and contractors take care of others could be a workable solution under these incredibly tight time constraints.
There’s more at the link, but I think that answers your question. I think the first sentence of Rogoway’s article also answers Sebastian’s question about how many F/A-18s would be available.
Here is President Zelenskyy’s address from earlier today. Video below, English transcript after the jump.
War for Ukraine Day 468: (Some of) You Have Questions, I (May) Have AnswersPost + Comments (81)