the first f-16 fighter jet lost by the ukrainian army was actually a serious accidental injury?
2024-09-10
한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina
according to the global times, on august 29, local time, the ukrainian military confirmed that an f-16 fighter jet crashed on the 26th and the pilot died. the general staff of the ukrainian armed forces issued a statement saying that the f-16 fighter jet lost contact and crashed while performing a mission to intercept russian air targets with the air defense forces, resulting in the death of 30-year-old ukrainian air force pilot lieutenant colonel alexi mes.
this was the first time that the ukrainian military received an american-made f-16 fighter jet and took off to fight, intercepting missiles and drones launched by russia into ukraine. however, there is still no accurate information from ukraine about how the f-16 crashed.
why did the f-16, which was praised as a "magic weapon", crash? what impact might its crash have on ukraine?
text | shi hong, executive editor of shipborne weapons
editor | pu haiyan outlook think tank
this article is an original article from outlook think tank. if you need to reprint it, please indicate the source outlook think tank (zhczyj) and the author information at the beginning of the article, otherwise legal responsibility will be strictly pursued.
1
the pilot died unexpectedly
the earliest news about the death of ukrainian air force pilot lieutenant colonel alexey metz came from the "war zone" column of the american "power" website. according to the news, former ukrainian air force commander oreshchuk posted a video on social media, but it was not processed properly, resulting in a building feature in the video revealing the deployment location of the f-16 fighter jets - an air force base in ivano-frankivsk oblast in western ukraine. subsequently, when the russian army launched a large-scale missile and drone attack on the entire territory of ukraine, the ivano-frankivsk air force base was also targeted.
on october 10, 2020, an f-16 fighter jet performed a flight show at the houston air show in the united states. photo by lao chengyue, xinhua news agency
according to the russian news agency tass, sergei lebedev from the pro-russian underground resistance organization said in the "telegram" that the reinforced hangars storing two f-16 fighter jets at the ivano-frankovsk air force base were destroyed by russian missiles, and the fuel depot and base barracks of the ivano-frankovsk air force base were also destroyed by the attack of the russian "geranium" 2 drone. in addition, the russian missile and drone attacks also caused casualties among several ukrainian pilots, ground crew and foreign instructors. later, the mayor of lutsk in northwestern ukraine, polishchuk, revealed for the first time on social media that f-16 fighter pilot alexei metz had died. at that time, this news made everyone think that alexei metz was killed by the russian army on the ground.
however, people soon learned through the statement issued by the ukrainian air force and the news released by ukrainian president zelensky on social media that lieutenant colonel alexi metz died when the f-16 crashed while he was flying it for an interception operation. now, people's attention is focused on the f-16, because this is the first f-16 fighter jet officially confirmed to have been lost by the ukrainian air force in the air, and the pilot was killed. so the question is, why did the f-16 driven by metz crash? why didn't metz parachute?
however, ukraine has not yet elaborated on how the f-16 crashed, so people have to analyze the possible causes of the crash one by one, excluding the less likely ones, and the only one left is the most likely cause of the crash.
2
it turned out to be a serious accidental injury?
the common reasons for fighter planes to crash in the air are as follows: first, bad weather and environmental conditions; second, serious mechanical failure of the fighter plane; third, serious control errors made by the pilot; fourth, being shot down by air-to-air missiles or anti-aircraft missiles. let's analyze the probability of these reasons one by one.
the first is weather and environment. although ukraine is not completely flat, it does not have any steep mountains or valleys. the overall terrain is very flat, and the weather conditions on the day of the accident were also good, so the possibility that the crash was caused by bad weather and environmental conditions can be ruled out first.
the second reason is the fighter jets themselves. although the f-16s delivered by nato to ukraine are old aircraft with an average age of 40 years, nato countries have strong maintenance capabilities, and after mid-term improvements and upgrades, these old f-16s are not in bad condition. the netherlands, denmark, norway, and belgium, which nato promised to provide f-16s to ukraine, have just retired their f-16s. before delivery to ukraine, they were carefully inspected and upgraded with core technology, and there were no problems with the mechanical condition. moreover, the ukrainian air force received the aircraft for less than a month and carried out only a few experience flights, so the f-16 would not be in a very bad condition, so the possibility of serious mechanical failure can basically be ruled out.
the third reason is that the pilots made serious operational errors, which is more likely. because the ukrainian pilots came from a crash course and were operating american fighter jets, they were definitely not proficient. f-16 fighter pilots in nato countries usually need three years of training to "graduate" and be qualified to drive. the pilots selected by ukraine to receive f-16 fighter pilot training in nato countries only had nine months of training time, and they had to receive three months of intensive english training before driving training, and the actual driving training time was only half a year. the f-16 is completely different from the soviet-made mig-29 and su-27 fighters in terms of overall design, cockpit layout, and control requirements. for example, soviet-made fighter jets all have a central joystick, while the f-16 has a side joystick. for ukrainian pilots who are accustomed to operating soviet-made fighter jets, it is very difficult to switch to operating the f-16. therefore, the ukrainian pilots who have undergone crash training will inevitably not be able to reach the same level of proficiency as operating soviet-made fighter jets in operating the f-16, and it is not ruled out that they will be in a hurry and make operational errors in air combat.
however, according to the statement of the ukrainian air force and the news released by zelensky, we can know for sure that the combat mission of metz flying the f-16 that day was to intercept russian missiles and drones, not to engage in air combat with russian aerospace forces fighters. intercepting missiles and drones does not require fighters to make drastic maneuvers, and the difficulty is not much different from aerial target shooting. the psychological pressure on the pilots to operate the f-16 fighters is not great, and serious control errors will not occur. moreover, ukrainian air force officials interviewed by the us media also said that the preliminary investigation can basically rule out the possibility of pilot control errors.
since the above three reasons for the crash of the f-16 are unlikely, the remaining last reason is very likely, that is, the f-16 piloted by mace was hit in the air and crashed.
considering that there was no air combat between russia and ukraine at the time, and there has been no news of any accidental injury to the ukrainian air force pilots who took off at the time, the possibility that the f-16 piloted by metz was shot down by an air-to-air missile has been basically ruled out. the remaining possibility is that it was shot down by an air defense missile.
however, the russian army did not come forward to claim that it was its own air defense forces that shot down the f-16, which ruled out the possibility that the f-16 was shot down by the russian air defense missile system. the last possibility left was that the f-16 piloted by metz was shot down by the ukrainian air defense missile, which was an accidental injury.
this is a photo of the patriot missile defense system at the "juniper cobra 2018" joint anti-missile military exercise held at hatzor air force base in israel on march 8, 2018. photo by xinhua news agency reporter guo yu
marianna bezuglaia, a member of the verkhovna rada of ukraine, who is known as the "female military supervisor" of ukraine, publicly stated on social media that the f-16 piloted by metz was shot down by the american-made "patriot" air defense missile equipped by the ukrainian army. it was due to problems in the coordination of the ukrainian army during the combat, and it was not the pilot's fault.
in addition, although the u.s. department of defense refused to comment on bezuglaia's statement, it did not deny the situation, which also means that the probability that the f-16 piloted by metz was shot down by the patriot missile is very high. and this can also explain why metz did not parachute, that is, metz did not expect the patriot missile to attack his aircraft, so he did not have the awareness of air maneuvering to evade. when he found that the patriot missile was flying towards him, it was too late to evade it. the warhead of the patriot missile was very powerful and directly blew up the f-16 in the air. metz had no chance to activate the ejection seat at all.
there is another piece of evidence that shows that the f-16 was most likely accidentally hit by the ukrainian army. that is, the ukrainian air force commander oreshchuk was dismissed by zelensky soon after the f-16 crashed, and it was in the form of a "public execution" without any face.
according to common sense, it is normal for a fighter jet to be damaged in combat. before this, the ukrainian army had nearly 100 soviet-made fighter jets shot down by the russian army in the air and blown up by the russian army on the ground, and oreshchuk was not blamed. it was just an f-16 that crashed in combat, and oreshchuk was quickly dismissed, which is very unreasonable. the only explanation is that there was indeed a serious accidental injury. moreover, when zelensky issued the dismissal order for oreshchuk, he also specifically said that "the ukrainian air force needs to be reorganized", which seems to convey that the f-16 crashed due to accidental injury.
3
"magic artifact" becomes "tofu dregs"
a ukrainian f-16 fighter jet crashed during its debut, killing the pilot. this caused a huge shock and was a heavy blow to the morale of the ukrainian army.
before the f-16 was delivered to ukraine, it was highly praised by many media outlets, as if ukraine could defeat all enemies and turn the tide of the war as long as it had the f-16. but in fact, the f-16 is just a fourth-generation light fighter that has been around for half a century, and it only plays a supporting role in the us air force. european countries in nato also look down on the f-16 now, otherwise why would they retire a large number of them and replace them with the us-made f-35?
the video released by the russian army showed that the ukrainian army's leopard 2a6 tanks and m2a2 infantry fighting vehicles were destroyed.
in terms of overall technical and tactical performance, there is no essential difference between the f-16 and the mig-29. there is no such thing as the f-16 being far superior to the mig-29. otherwise, there would be no need for the polish air force to be equipped with dozens of mig-29s before the outbreak of the russo-ukrainian conflict.
deliberately exaggerating how powerful the f-16 is is itself a form of "overpraising". just like many weapons and equipment that nato provided to ukraine before, such as the leopard 2a6, m1a1sa, challenger 2 main battle tanks, m2a2 ods bradley infantry fighting vehicles, m109a6, as90, pzh-2000 155mm self-propelled howitzers, m777 155mm towed howitzers, himars, m270 multiple rocket launchers, storm shadow air-launched cruise missiles, army tactical missile systems, etc., all of which were hyped up before they went on stage, but immediately became inconspicuous after they went on stage, and a large number of them were destroyed by the russian army, making nato look bad. among them, after the leopard 2a6 tanks were destroyed by the russian army, the stock price of its manufacturer, german rheinmetall, also fell.
after the myths of western weapons were shattered one after another, the f-16 was once again deified and was still touted as a "magic weapon". what was the result? like the leopard 2a6, it was exposed in its first battle. however, the leopard 2a6 was at least clearly destroyed by the russian army, but the f-16 crashed on the battlefield in an unclear manner, attracting global attention.
it is not shameful for a weapon to be damaged on the battlefield, but if you deliberately exaggerate its role before it goes into battle, the result is "the higher you praise it, the worse it falls", which will not only make you lose face and seriously damage your own morale, but also turn a weapon from a "magic weapon" into "tofu dregs". now the whole world knows that the f-16 is just so-so, and even military novices have completely lost their sense of mystery and admiration for the f-16.
this incident is likely to cause the ukrainian army to become more cautious and hesitant in the subsequent use of f-16s, which is not conducive to the f-16's combat effectiveness. nato is also depressed now, and the speed of delivering f-16s to ukraine may slow down. for the russian army, morale is naturally boosted. although the crash of the ukrainian f-16 this time was not the result of the russian army, it also shows that the f-16 is not something that cannot be shot down. the su-35s and su-30sm fighters owned by the russian army still have a technical advantage of about half a generation over the second-hand f-16s received by ukraine. the russian s-300, s-400, s-350, and "buk" air defense missile systems are not inferior to the american "patriot" in terms of technical and tactical performance, and are fully capable of intercepting f-16s.
4
the united states goes back on its word?
however, battlefield competition is a spiral, "you have a plan, i have a ladder." in addition to continuing to upgrade the technology of the f-16s provided to ukraine, nato may also provide ukraine with more advanced airborne weapons, especially beyond-visual-range weapons.
for example, according to a recent reuters report, a us official said that the us is close to reaching an agreement with ukraine to provide ukraine with the agm-158 joint air-to-surface standoff missile (jassm) for integration into f-16 fighter jets, thus giving the f-16 standoff strike capability. there are currently three models of agm-158: the basic agm-158a has a maximum range of 370 kilometers; the agm-158b has a maximum range of 970 kilometers; and the agm-158c is an anti-ship model, also known as the long-range anti-ship missile (lrasm), with a maximum range of more than 900 kilometers. even if the us only provides ukraine with the basic agm-158a, it will allow the f-16 to launch attacks outside the range of most russian air defense systems, greatly improving its own safety.
however, russia has issued a serious warning about this news, because this move will mean a further escalation of the russian-ukrainian conflict, and russia will take severe retaliatory measures. the united states is also cautious, because this will not only make russia very angry, increase the probability of a direct conflict between the united states and russia, but may also trigger a series of other reactions.
as we all know, in order to reduce the military threat it faces, the united states has previously strictly prohibited other countries and regions from exporting missiles with a range of more than 300 kilometers. violators will be subject to us sanctions. initially, this us practice caused dissatisfaction among many countries and regions. but later everyone found that this us practice objectively reduced the probability of regional missile proliferation and armed conflict, so they all complied with it.
however, if the united states provides ukraine with agm-158, it means that the united states takes the lead in violating the rules it has set, which will inevitably lead to imitations around the world, resulting in the proliferation of missiles with a range of more than 300 kilometers, which in turn will bring greater military threats to the united states. if the united states goes back on its word, the final result will be to shoot itself in the foot.
