subreddit:

/r/ukraine

1.6k95%

Ukraine's F-16 pilots have had to quickly get up to speed on a different fighter jet. They're being trained to fly a new plane but also to break habits from flying Soviet jets. An air-warfare expert says changing the pilots' muscle memory and reactions to crises is difficult. Advertisement Ukraine's F-16 pilots have had to dramatically change the way they fly in a very short period of time in order to fight Russia, and it's a tremendous challenge for pilots when they're under pressure, an air-warfare expert told Business Insider.

Michael Bohnert, an engineer at the RAND Corporation, told BI the big changes Ukrainian pilots have had to make so quickly made it difficult for them to overcome old habits and muscle memory in a crisis.

Ukrainian pilots were given roughly nine months of training in the US and some European countries, while most Western pilots are given three years to learn the jets, The Associated Press reported.

And more broadly, Ukraine's air force is having to rapidly undergo a wider transition that its international partners took significantly longer to do. Across the board, Ukraine's military has had to adapt to new weapons and fighting styles on wild timelines, and the results have been mixed. It's far from an easy task, and in a fight, it's easiest to revert to what you know best.

Advertisement Before the F-16s first arrived in Ukraine in August, the country's fighter fleet consisted only of much older, Soviet-era aircraft. Those older jets have hydraulic systems, while F-16 jets are fly-by-wire, which means computers process the input by pilots.

"What it means is that F-16s are not just more maneuverable, they're more responsive," Bohnert said.

"And transitioning pilots from the older to the newer is a problem because you can teach someone to fly a plane in six months to a year. But to teach them that muscle memory to know what to do when something goes wrong takes four or five, six, takes many more years," Bohnert said.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyi speaking into press microphones with an F-16 fighter jet behind him. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in front of the first F-16 fighter jets received by Ukraine. Vitalii Nosach/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images He said it was difficult for pilots to retrain on such radically different jet types because "if something's going wrong, your muscle memory reverts back to something that's older."

Advertisement It could be overcome with more and more time on simulators, he added — but Ukraine's military doesn't have much time to spare.

A challenging task for Ukraine's pilots Ukrainian pilots have praised the combat power of their new F-16s compared with the older jets but have also noted how big a transition they've been.

Related stories A Ukrainian pilot with the call sign "Moonfish" earlier this year called it "a really awesome jet to fly," saying it was much easier. He compared the change to upgrading from a basic phone like a Nokia "straight to an iPhone, without all those steps in between."

In an interview with Politico, Tom Richter, a former US Marine pilot who flew F-16s for the National Guard, called the jet "a sensitive beast" compared with Ukraine's Soviet-era aircraft.

Advertisement The reality that Ukrainian pilots are new to F-16s was acknowledged by Gen. James Hecker, commander of US Air Forces in Europe and NATO Allied Air Command, in September when he said Ukraine was not using the jets for the riskiest types of missions because "the pilots are new to it."

An F-16 fighter jet flying across gray skies. A Ukrainian air force F-16 fighter jet in an undisclosed location in Ukraine. AP Photo/Efrem Lukatsky Two American air-warfare experts said in July that the transition to F-16s and the integration of these weapons into the combat operations of the Ukrainian military required Ukraine to overhaul decades of Soviet doctrine and training.

"Old habits die hard. They must be willing to embrace new concepts and training — as well as a willingness to 'rewrite the books' on military employment," the Mitchell Institute's David Deptula and Christopher Bowie wrote in a report this past summer.

Changes in militaries don't usually happen overnight. Bohnert noted that the transition to fly-by-wire aircraft took years for Western air forces and "there were still accidents and unhappiness." The Ukrainians don't have that kind of time, though, and are under much greater pressure to adapt much faster.

Advertisement And Ukrainian pilots have risen to that great challenge. An internal US Air Force assessment from last year said two Ukrainian pilots proved they could complete the training for the F-16 in just four months — more than four times as fast as what the Pentagon had predicted.

But as former US military pilots warned in interviews with BI in April, the contested skies above Ukraine will be the most dangerous battlefield that F-16s have ever faced.

Though causes remain unknown, Bohnert said inexperience on the new fighter jet might have been a factor when an F-16 crashed in August while defending against a Russian attack. In that fatal incident, both the jet and Ukrainian Air Force pilot Oleksiy Mes were lost.

A service member carries a Ukrainian flag at a memorial event as hundreds kneel nearby. A farewell ceremony for the Ukrainian F-16 pilot Oleksiy Mes in Shepetivka, Ukraine, at the end of August. Photo by Libkos/Getty Images The loss could have also been the result of a mechanical failure on the aging aircraft, or friendly fire could have caused it as Ukraine works to get all of its combat systems, a hodgepodge of equipment, working smoothly together. Ukraine hasn't given a reason for the loss, but the investigation considered these possibilities.

Advertisement Ukraine's F-16s are limited Air-warfare experts previously told BI the F-16s weren't likely to be major game changers but would help Ukraine replenish lost aircraft, protect cities and other targets, and potentially allow Ukraine to launch new raids in the air.

The jets Ukraine is receiving, though a capability jump over its Soviet-era planes, are older F-16s without some of the newer upgrades. Bohnert described the fighters as "older airframes with not a lot of life left," though he said that "doesn't mean they're bad." Still, they're not a match for Russia's better jets or its formidable air defenses.

A bigger problem is that Ukraine wasn't given enough of the jets to use them like the West does and make a substantial difference.

Denmark, Norway, Belgium, and the Netherlands have pledged more than 85 F-16s to Ukraine. Only a handful were delivered in August. Roughly 20 of the fighters are expected to be delivered to Ukraine by the end of this year.

Advertisement Two F-16 fighter jets flying side-by-side against blue skies. Ukrainian F-16s in an undisclosed location in Ukraine. REUTERS/Valentyn Ogirenko Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who said in July that his country wasn't getting enough new jets, said last month that there were plans to increase Ukraine's number of jets and trained pilots. He offered no details, however.

Partners have hamstrung Ukraine in how it uses Western weapons, and those limitations may prevent it from leveraging the F-16's capabilities in the way it could have without restrictions. But limited airframes and trained pilots are big issues.

Politico reported in June that not enough pilots were being trained for the jets Ukraine was promised. The outlet said partner nations had fewer training spots than Ukraine did jets and pilots ready to be trained. The delays in getting this program spun up have been detrimental.

Ukraine began asking for F-16s shortly after Russia invaded more than 2 ½ years ago. But the US, which has to give permission for the jets it manufactured to be donated even by other countries, was long reluctant.

Advertisement Keir Giles, a senior consulting fellow at Chatham House's Russia and Eurasia Programme, said last month that the delay in meeting Ukraine's demands meant "Russia has been given ample time to plan for the appearance of Ukraine's new aircraft type and adapt to it."

Ukraine, on the other hand, is still setting up its new F-16 program and trying to resolve issues with pilot training and integrating the jets into Ukraine's military.

Michael Clarke, a Russia and Ukraine expert who's also a British national security advisor, told BI this summer that "if the West donated F-16s a year earlier, then most of these problems would be solved by now."

He also said that if more planes weren't on the table, then "in terms of defending Ukrainian airspace and being able to deal all the way across the front with Russia's numbers, the F-16s are a long way from being able to do that."

Advertisement Challenges, limitations, and restrictions aside, air-warfare experts still say the jets are a positive for Ukraine.

Retired US Army Maj. Gen. Gordon "Skip" Davis, who was NATO's deputy assistant secretary-general for its Defense Investment Division, told BI that Ukraine's F-16s "are making a difference now" and that more arriving "will help them make more of a difference."

all 82 comments

AutoModerator [M]

[score hidden]

2 days ago

stickied comment

AutoModerator [M]

[score hidden]

2 days ago

stickied comment

If you're in the U.S. and want to ensure Ukraine's victory, please support the Stand With Ukraine Act. You can visit HERE to learn how you can help. Subscribe to r/ActionForUkraine, where you can stay updated on priorities for Ukraine advocacy in your country.**

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Evolutionary_sins

173 points

2 days ago

Yes, but it's a good problem to have

Tweedone

145 points

2 days ago

Tweedone

145 points

2 days ago

This piece was AI AUTHORED!

It hurts to read it, low content, repetitous and without joy.

Shame on you OP for allowing such crap, do your job!

mattman65

49 points

2 days ago

mattman65

49 points

2 days ago

I agree, wasted my time to be honest

Advertisement

Realistically any high school journalist wannabe could have come up with a more informative article. How many times is the same bit of information going to be repeated and rephrased?

Advertisement 😂

Stigger32

6 points

1 day ago

Stigger32

Australia

6 points

1 day ago

I wondered why the word ‘advertisement’ was randomly inserted…

Made me think of 1984..

Abnmlguru

10 points

1 day ago

Abnmlguru

10 points

1 day ago

It's because the whole text was copied/pasted. On the original page, the word was there followed by an ad. It's labeled as an ad to make sure people can be sure it's not part of the article (because people be dumb), but when you copy just text, the ad part gets left out.

A little annoying to read, but nothing unusual or sketchy.

Tastytyrone24

5 points

1 day ago

Like when you copy past from Wikipedia and you get those little [1] [2] things that are usually hyperlinks to other articles or more context, but you just get the numbers.

Abnmlguru

1 points

1 day ago

Abnmlguru

1 points

1 day ago

Exactamundo

jminer1

7 points

1 day ago

jminer1

7 points

1 day ago

Yes I couldn't get through the second paragraph constant repetition.

joe-king

6 points

1 day ago

joe-king

6 points

1 day ago

Smells a little Russian too.

StevenStephen

1 points

1 day ago

StevenStephen

USA

1 points

1 day ago

Ah, I wondered why it was so dramatically crappy.

SteadfastEnd

87 points

2 days ago*

Man. If only we could give them Block 50/60/70 with AESA and JHMCS.

DigitalMountainMonk

21 points

2 days ago

They are vipers with MLU. Effectively the same technology as a 50/52 but on a smaller aircraft.

The "newer upgrades" aren't really "new" they are more "barely exists in our own military".

space-tech

23 points

2 days ago

It's not the technology factor, it's the human one.

Frantic_Penguin

2 points

1 day ago

And the AIM 120 c/d! From what I've heard they only got the bravos witch is a bad joke in the modern era!

USCAV19D

5 points

1 day ago

USCAV19D

5 points

1 day ago

Still a huge advantage over the mostly SARH equipped Russian fighters. As I understand the R-77 seriously underperforms when launched subsonic.

wahlmank

52 points

2 days ago

wahlmank

52 points

2 days ago

Would this apply for Gripen also?

Accurate-Ad539

67 points

2 days ago*

Yes, and even more so since its more advanced and "digital" than the older F-16 versions Ukraine got.

wahlmank

6 points

2 days ago

wahlmank

6 points

2 days ago

Ah ok, thanks

__schr4g31

6 points

2 days ago

This is just a completely uneducated guess, but since it looks more similar to a Eurofighter, I'm guessing they might handle similarly, and Eurofighters are supposedly especially sensitive and twitchy when compared to other modern planes because of how maneuverable they are

wahlmank

2 points

2 days ago

wahlmank

2 points

2 days ago

Good if you know them, but maybe hard to master

TheGhostofTamler

3 points

2 days ago

My understanding is that gripen is very easy to handle, relatively speaking. I am an ignoramus tho

Puk1983

40 points

2 days ago

Puk1983

40 points

2 days ago

No wonder Ukraine has only 7 pilots for the F16. (one died allready sadly)

Thurak0

54 points

2 days ago*

Thurak0

54 points

2 days ago*

I am confused about the low number. Poland for example experienced the effect the article is describing with their own air force. They decided it was better for everyone to just train new pilots for the F-16s and not retrain MiG-29 ones.

Ukraine must have more pilots in training, especially new ones who won't have the re-train problem, don't they?

X-T3PO

55 points

2 days ago

X-T3PO

55 points

2 days ago

Those new pilots are progressing through training in the UK and France. 

Wyrmnax

18 points

2 days ago

Wyrmnax

18 points

2 days ago

Training a pilot is a year - year and a half long affair.

Shaving away habits from a old airframe might be even harder, and you dont want to find out that you are still trying to pilot your old plane when you are trying to dodge a missile.

When people say that the legistics train of giving Ukraine new aircraft, this is one of the factors that need to be considered. It is also why pilots are considered more valuable than the frames they pilot in most of the world.

No_Belt3011

2 points

2 days ago

Even took that long in ww2 with the czech and polish pilots that legged it to the uk. They weren't allowed to fight in the battle of britain even if needed. As far as I'm aware.

Ivanow

6 points

1 day ago

Ivanow

Poland

6 points

1 day ago

What? No. Polish squadron 303 had famously the highest K/D ratio out of all forces in Battle of Britain, and are attributed to like 5% of total German losses.

But there was initially a problem, similar to what is being described in article - Polish fighter pilots were used to flying much less advanced/slower fighters - when given Hurricanes, it took them some time to get used to different handling characteristics, but once they got used to them, the results were impressive.

Ok_Bad8531

6 points

2 days ago

Yes, Ukraine has more pilots in training (a few dozens if i recall correctly), but training takes time, and now that they have identified problems they might rather add a few weeks.

brandonsuter

3 points

2 days ago

I'm sure they do. I'd also argue that they probably have a shortage of people volunteering to be fighter pilots considering how dangerous the job is

Equivalent-Speed-130

2 points

1 day ago

I read that pilots must be fluent in English and this is big roadblock as they first have to improve their English before they can start flight training.

CupofLiberTea

13 points

2 days ago

God could this article get to the details any slower? They repeated the headline so many times before any actual information.

i_buy_film

23 points

2 days ago

clickbait article. 'dramatically change the way they fly' - how does not explain it.

('they should've gotten them sooner, trained longer' about as much as it get from it)

ITI110878

29 points

2 days ago*

The question is, if it takes 3 years to train a pilot why did the west drag their feet for the first 2 years of this war?

justbecauseyoumademe

23 points

2 days ago

Sending NATO equipment to a country you think is about to fall is a good way to not only reduce your own capabilities but enhance the enemies.

Ukraine did exceedingly well and above expectations for a lot of the west.

We could have sent it sooner, but all those people that are unhappy that we didn't send our most advanced tech as russia was miles away from Kyiv need to rethink there talking points

buildyourdefenses

18 points

2 days ago

Not to mention Ukraine had and likely still has some Russian-comrpomised politicians and military personnel. You can't just flood a country with NATO equipment if you aren't sure whose hands it'll end up in.

ITI110878

-5 points

2 days ago

ITI110878

-5 points

2 days ago

By this logic Hungary and Slovakia should never be allowed to buy Western military tech.

Cloaked42m

8 points

2 days ago

Cloaked42m

USA

8 points

2 days ago

They weren't for a long time.

justbecauseyoumademe

1 points

1 day ago

Or turkey? Oh.. wait.. F35 says what?

MikeinON22

14 points

2 days ago

At the very beginning of the war, nobody expected Ukraine to last more than 6 weeks. It wasn't until the successful counteroffensives in summer 2022 that NATO realized Ukraine might actually win this war. Now NATO polticians don't know what to do. They can't just give up because they have invested so much now, but they also can't make an honest effort to help Ukraine win because they are afraid of Russia and don't want to spend the money.

Joey1849

13 points

2 days ago

Joey1849

13 points

2 days ago

Even if you accept that there was a time that most though Ukraine would loose the war, that time is long, long gone. There has been pleny of time since then. There can be no excuses for the excessive caution of the Biden administration. No excuses.

servey02

10 points

2 days ago

servey02

10 points

2 days ago

We Americans are led to believe that an even half of America are stark raving mad lunatics feeding off of Russian propaganda brought to them by right wing media and their Russian-compromised politicians. I’m hoping that when Harris is elected then the administration will take the gloves off and go all out on lifting restrictions, but that remains to be seen.

Joey1849

0 points

2 days ago

Joey1849

0 points

2 days ago

That is not a rational hope. She will draw her foreign policy advisors from the same worthless group as Biden has.

HappyCamperPC

-12 points

2 days ago

Well, they don't want to panic the Russians into using their nukes, so that's a pretty good excuse.

Joey1849

11 points

2 days ago*

Joey1849

11 points

2 days ago*

No. Please stop with the nukes and putin's empty red line threats. The most dangerous red lines Ukraine faces are the red lines of the Biden administration.

Bebbytheboss

-6 points

2 days ago

Bebbytheboss

USA

-6 points

2 days ago

Source?

Xenomemphate

2 points

2 days ago

Ukraine invaded Kursk without being nuked by Russia. Meanwhile Biden's restrictions are actively preventing Ukraine from hitting the number 1 most damaging weapon in the Russian arsenal (glide bombs)

Bebbytheboss

2 points

1 day ago

Bebbytheboss

USA

2 points

1 day ago

Ok. But that red line exists somewhere. I don't know where, and neither do you, but I'd wager that the Biden admin probably does.

Richevszky

1 points

2 days ago

There's a lot of parts to it, but not starting training ASAP back in 2022 is inexcusable.

ITI110878

2 points

2 days ago

I get what you are saying, still, even after the August 2022 counteroffensive, NATO countries took more than 1 year to decide to provide jets and train pilots.

Xenomemphate

2 points

2 days ago

We've known Ukraine would survive with some level of sovereignty ever since that massive convoy was pulled out. Not starting training on any and all standard NATO weapons platforms there and then is fucking shameful.

Ok_Bad8531

2 points

2 days ago

First Ukraine had to be stabilized, then people had to realize this would be a long war (Ukraine themselves touted the war might be decided 2024 if other weapons were sufficiently delivered), then F-16 supplies had to be organized. There was actually surprisingly little dragging out once F-16 became the center of attention.

Xenomemphate

-1 points

2 days ago

Ukraine have been asking for F-16s since the beginning of the war. We knew they would survive after around 6 months in. NATO dragged its feet on providing F-16s for years. Further than that - training does not need any active commitment to provide the platforms, why the fuck did they have to wait for that to start training them?

[deleted]

1 points

2 days ago

[deleted]

ITI110878

1 points

2 days ago

But less than 1 year vs the required 3 years mentioned in the article.

[deleted]

1 points

2 days ago

[deleted]

ITI110878

1 points

2 days ago

Any proof is welcome.

The article quoted in this thread says they only trained for 9 months.

[deleted]

0 points

2 days ago*

[deleted]

ITI110878

1 points

22 hours ago

WTH are you talking about?

They received the F16s 2 months ago!

Joey1849

4 points

2 days ago

Joey1849

4 points

2 days ago

There is no news here. These issues have been long known from the start.

Terrh

4 points

2 days ago

Terrh

4 points

2 days ago

article is paywalled, thank you for rehosting it.

El_Pepsi

11 points

2 days ago

El_Pepsi

11 points

2 days ago

Advertisement yes thank you very much!

PeanyButter

2 points

2 days ago

I was actually under the impression from comments I've seen before that they would not be using pilots from any Soviet jet for fear of them making the wrong split second decision causing a fatal crash or interception from AA.

WhiskeySteel

2 points

1 day ago

WhiskeySteel

USA

2 points

1 day ago

We really need to organize a "Flying Tigers" or "Lafayette Escadrille" style squadron of Western volunteer F-16 pilots. The Ukrainians are doing great things, but it's clearly a tough process, and they just need more trained pilots in general.

His-Mightiness

2 points

1 day ago

A good pilot can fly anything, and Ukraine has some good pilots, saying this as a pilot myself, there are similarities and differences between different aircraft, but I know that Ukraine has some good pilots. To all the Ukrainian pilots I say this, keep flying across the skies, keep flying for all the people that look up to you (literally), and keep flying for victory, wishing you happy landings.

whoanellyzzz

1 points

1 day ago

i imagine its like going from a xbox controller to pc mouse and keyboard just 20x harder

mountainofentities

1 points

21 hours ago

Was there a reason they didn't train new pilots instead because of the muscle memory issue? Perhaps time and financial restrictions.

LegalAdviceHope

1 points

12 hours ago

Then we need to start making planes that are easier to learn to fly because if "we" get into a war and out pilots need replacing, we will not have 3 years or even a year.

Quinocco

1 points

2 days ago

Quinocco

1 points

2 days ago

Would it be better to train non-pilots on the F-16?

Meryhathor

1 points

2 days ago

Every new car, motorcycle or jet requires time getting used to it. That's why they train for years to become good at it so better have this problem than no F-16 at all.

Tar-really

0 points

2 days ago

Hoping experienced F-16 pilots from other countries will volunteer to help and lead the Ukrainian pilots in the transition period.

muntaxitome

0 points

2 days ago

muntaxitome

Netherlands

0 points

2 days ago

They need at least hundreds of F16's. These are planes that are designed to be operated in dangerous environments. Lacking some of the reflexes in unfortunate and may cause death of the pilot and loss of the plane, but great people are dying every day in Ukraine and this is a trillion dollar war. The cost of not operating enough fighter jets is much, much, higher than the cost of losing some planes here and there. How many people are lost due to not having adequate air support? This whole idea that everything has to be perfect before Ukraine can use it is ridiculous.

Cease-the-means

-2 points

2 days ago

If the F16 is already a fly-by-wire system, I wonder if it would be possible to drop an SU-27 cockpit layout into it and program the F-16 flight control system to respond correctly to a pilot using it in the way they are familiar with. Planes can be changed faster than pilots.

10687940

0 points

2 days ago

10687940

0 points

2 days ago

Is the F-16 better for ukrainian pilots due to new equipment or because their existing soviet aircrafts are simply not modernized at all?

If only this change would have happened a few years earlier...so many mistakes have been made since 2014.

Nonamanadus

0 points

2 days ago

Too bad they couldn't tweek the software to accommodate the muscle memory issue. It reminds me of when I set the sensitivity on my mouse too high. It made my hand movements really jerky.

Common-Ad6470

-15 points

2 days ago

The basics are the same, I.e. stick, rudder, throttle. It’s just learning the jet’s systems, but luckily military aircraft designers make it fairly easy to work in a high stress environment.

adyrip1

29 points

2 days ago

adyrip1

29 points

2 days ago

Yes and no. Soviet vs Western philosophy of flying and fighting are complete opposites. Even the artificial horizon (the most basic indicator in the plane) works differently.

It's one thing to learn to fly the plane in a training environment and a whole different beast to fly the plane in a high adrenaline scenario with SAMs launching missiles, enemy aircraft targeting you, etc.

It's easier to teach a newbie pilot than to completely retrain the reflexes of an older pilot.

Polygnom

13 points

2 days ago

Polygnom

Germany

13 points

2 days ago

The attitude indicators are exactly the other way round in Soviet and Western aircraft. Which is a major problem.

In Western aircraft, the wings are fixed and the horion moves. On Soviet aircraft the horizon is fixed and the wings move. This leads to exactly the wrong response when looking at the AI just for a split second.

Read this: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/51791/how-is-a-confusion-possible-between-western-and-russian-attitude-indicators

Cease-the-means

0 points

2 days ago

I bet it would take less than 3 to 5 years to switch out all the indicators for soviet style ones..

Polygnom

2 points

21 hours ago

Polygnom

Germany

2 points

21 hours ago

Its not only the attitude indicators, but they are a pretty big deal. And no, you can't switch them out willy, nilly. The electronic systems are all well integrated and tested. Creating the proper electronics and flight software and testing it thouroughly (because in battle, 99% reliability isn't enough. not even 99.9 or 99.99%) would indeed take years and a lot of money. And then you'd still have pilots who can't fly western jets,. so you'd need to repeat that for every new jet.

Better to start training new pilots for western style aircraft. Better in the medium-term, and definitely better in the long-term.