Because Ukraine SU-27's don't have active seeker missiles and radars are outdated.
This is only one of many factors but it is the only one that can be considered a "game changer".
The other factors are:
- ability to train new pilots and technicians in any country using F-16s which solves a much greater problem than availability of the aircraft
- ability to repair engines and sub-systems in any country using F-16s
- ability to replenish fighter losses and parts from existing stocks which exceed available fighters and parts for MiG-29/Su-27 by 1-2 orders of magnitude
- ability to sustain F-16s with NATO munition stocks
- ability to use NATO tactics devised for F-16s.
NATO tactics can change a lot because NATO aims to "average out" all pilot skill and focus on teamwork and standards while Russia and Ukraine still maintain an older approach where individual skill matters more. NATO training performs better at war but is more expensive in peacetime. We'll see if Ukraine will listen to good advice or if they will repeat the failure of their 2023 offensive.
But the
game changer is ability to use active radar homing in air-to-air combat.
On that:
----
Semi-active radar homing (SARH) works like this:
The fighter uses radar in "track while scan" (TWS) mode to identify potential targets within beam range. TWS can track multiple targets but can only illuminate one. If I remember correctly only the F-15 and MiG-31 had radars capable of illuminating more than single target at once. Su-27s using N001 radar can only guide a single missile to target.
When the target is engaged, the radar switches to guidance mode and produces a single high power focused beam that can be read by the SARH guidance system of the missile at launch range. That radar beam is very characteristic and this is how radar warning systems can tell the difference between being tracked and engaged. The missile follows the echo of the target-tracking beam from launch to the target.
If at any time the tracking beam loses the target the missile doesn't know where to fly. More modern systems use intermittent guidance because even the "continuous" radar signal is not technically continuous, so they have the ability to reacquire target but only if the loss of signal is very short. If the fighter has to perform evasive maneuvers it loses the target and a SARH missile like R-27 fails automatically.
This is also the real reason why Desert Storm was such a blowout - high operating ceiling and radar range put F-15 using SARH AIM-7s in a one-sided contest against all Iraqi fighters with SARH missiles other than MiG-25 which had speed and ceiling advantage over F-15.
Active radar homing (ARH) works like this:
The fighter uses TWS to identify targets within beam range. ARH missiles can be lauched at multiple targets without the need for illumination and the RWR assumes that it's only tracking signal. The target data is sent to the missile via datalink that receives signal encoded in the tracking radar beam. At terminal stage the radar in the missile guidance section is turned on and the missile acquires the target on its own.
SARH missiles require the fighter to illuminate the target from launch to arrival at target before another missile is launched. ARH missiles can be launched in volleys and updates can be sent for as long as the radar is capable of tracking the target.
----
Now all you need to do is imagine a simple turn-based mechanic in a computer or a board game to understand how much of a leap in capabilities of any air force is the introduction of ARH missiles if the opponent uses SARH. This was the main reason why Russia was panicking during the late 90s/early 00s and why GBAD and MiG-31 modernisation was a priority. AIM-120 was being introduced by all US allies while they had no ARH missile of their own for standard use. R-77 was only fully introduced after 2010s so MiG-31 with its ability to guide multiple SARH R-33s (as well as the large missile being easier to upgrade with ARH in R-33M variant) was the actual backbone of the air defenses.
In a hypothetical contest between NATO and WP in 1990 it's a bloodbath on both sides. In a hypotetical contest between US and Russia in 2000 it's Desert Storm because one side has ARH and the other doesn't.
Ukraine being able to use ARH missiles means that a single fighter can engage multiple targets. It doesn't have to focus on a single Su-34 while risking getting shot down by Su-35 but it can shoot one missile at Su-34 and another at Su-35 and a HARM at a SAM radar then perform evasive maneuvers vs Su-35 and SAMs then reacquire all three targets if the first salvo misses - with a standard load of 4 AIM-120s and 2 AGM-88s.
Payload is also relevant. MiG-29 can only carry 2 R-27s while Su-27 can carry 6. This is why MiG-29s have been lost at a greater rate (37) compared to SU-27s (11) since they only get two shots at longer (~50km) range and have 1/3 of the loiter time of a Flanker.
With ARH Ukraine will finally have the same moves available to its air assets as Russia has had since the beginning of war. Even if F-16 underperforms vs Su-35 they will play by the same rules. Right now it's a game of football with only one goal - on Ukraine's side of the pitch. F-16 with AMRAAM/HARM puts one on Russia's half as well.
Which is likely why Russia will try to go all in and attack the airfields where the F-16s will be based even at the cost of high losses to its aircraft. The idea is to make any further F-16 transfer "unaffordable" since every asset transferred to Ukraine must be paid for in internal accounting of the allied countries. If all or most F-16s are destroyed then all the sunken cost is wasted unless Russia loses disproportionately high number of aircraft (and pilots) in the operation.
A combined attack of cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and airstrikes is likely. However F-16s will be very effective in fighting cruise missiles so these will have to be very large operations indeed with airstrikes being complemented by escort to fight off F-16 in the air and I don't know if VKS has managed to acquire the skill to pull them off. Those are
not easy (or cheap). In NATO only US, UK and France have practical experience of those.
F-16's will likely come with Aim-120c7's and if they come with Harm receiving pod and centerline EW pod they will be able to take advantage of the Harms 150km range.
There's a lot of confusion about AMRAAM variants. I'll try not to mess it up too much.
- All the variants from AIM-120A introduced in 1991 up to AIM-120C5 are developed using AIM-120A body. The C variants have only smaller wings. The internal systems are different and C3 was a major upgrade but the range is not that different.
- AIM-120C7 is ~10kg heavier redesign with a new motor but it was introduced in 2003 and achieved IOC in 2008. From F-16 it likely has a maximum range of ~100km at the most which means effective range of 60-70km. Good for R-77s but no counter to R-37.
- AIM-120C-8 and D are further improved versions using C7 body with maximum ranges of 160+ km. Can't be used by F-16s other than V.
- AMRAAM-ER which is an entirely different missile with ESSM body and AIM-120D head.
Also I am not sure if MLU can carry C-7s as MLU was developed in 1990s but perhaps upgrades have been made for Ukraine.
The
AN/AQ-213 Harm Targeting System will be a much more important capability than C-7.
It's what Wild Weasels use and it will allow the fighter to fly CAP and SEAD simultaneously without the need for pre-mission planning.
However the could probably contest Russians in airspace above Black Sea.
And very effectively! I've written on that in January 2023 using maps I made before Russian retreat from Kherson in November 2022:
The war is a good way for nato to degrade Russian capabilities using Ukrainian blood. It's a good trade. Not if this war continue at a relatively slow pace, where Russia has the time to slowly turn their economy into a war economy and gain the chances to upgrade and improve their fighting...
www.sinodefenceforum.com
Also I didn't include the airfield in
Izmail with a 1,7km runway:
Not much help in the North and East but Crimea is in trouble, and by extension the Black Sea.
----
Here are some other posts concerning air domain in this war:
October 2022 - general condition of VKS after 8 months of war
A number issues to consider here. Firstly, NATO ISR are not some magical all-seeing eye, and are subject to the same limitations of range, endurance, availability, geography and weather as everyone else’s. Not even bring in decoys, deception, jamming and good old fashioned camouflage etc...
www.sinodefenceforum.com
August 2022 - aircraft losses:
Russia's economy will stand but long term the damage will be massive. Industry and R&D are going to be hit hard. IMO the only way out for Russia is to economically integrate with China if it wants to survive as a great power (i.e. not becoming a low-value commodity/resource-dominated export...
www.sinodefenceforum.com
August 2022 - HARM:
totally destroyed By the Ghos of Kiev. Ukraine is more useful the stupid Javelin top cage on the turret That seems more like protection against the AFU's jihadi tactics of droping grenades from drones, which seems to be a rather common nowadays after the Ukranians are running out of...
www.sinodefenceforum.com
July 2022 - Snake Island, has maps of radar horizons, ranges, bases etc.
I do not know how long the deliveries are estimated, but if they are in the short term, it would be the entry of NATO using the conflict with Ukraine I guess Russia will announce a new phase of its operation It doesn't matter if the US sends 2,000 M1A2 tanks to the Kiev regime. Without...
www.sinodefenceforum.com
June 2022 - main problems of VKS
So with Azot plant apparently surrounded now. are we gonna have Azovstal 2.0 Situation ? and considering that it's a chemical plant. I'm curious how much Ammonium Nitrate does it strore ?
www.sinodefenceforum.com
And as always I recommend my thread on Desert Storm which is the second closest example of modern peer conflict for which we have good data (USAF Gulf War survey):
The following is a collection of maps, tables and quotations from publicly available sources with heavy emphasis on Government Accountability Office's report "Operation Desert Storm - Evaluation of the Air Campaign". I divided the whole set into five posts: air superiority over Iraq -...
www.sinodefenceforum.com
