F-16 Shoots Down SU-34? Fighter Pilots React!

[@DoubleFractals]

This is the defenition of "Trust me bro"

[@rendesvouz2822]

@@DoubleFractals Oh no! This definition in the LGBTQ countries will sond like «thrust me, bro!» 😆😂🤣🤗

[@UmutCtak-rq9ro]

@@rendesvouz2822♿️

[@0Ignition0]

My god the amount of ads in that webpage is incredible

[@fox_the_apprentice]

Which is a good reminder that even the FBI recommends using an ad blocker!

[@johndavies5985]

It's true! It was shot down by the ghost of Kiev.

[@GreatIJ]

it's a lie, like ghost of kiev

[@hoghogwild]

@@GreatIJ Great story, never let things like facts get in the way of a good story.

[@ryanseet8314]

@@GreatIJwell I knew it! The Russians are liars. Only the Russian claim this ya? Just so you know

[@SR-September]

you smoke a lot of weed

[@r200ti]

I think you'll find it was shot down twice by the ghost of Kiev. Then a third time by that granny who throws things at jets to take them out. Joking aside the scary thing is the people who write these narratives are the same ones who write the bs the us, UK and EU leaders spout.

[@Semendrija123]

Also, here is my take on the Su-57 and S-70 case! Su-57 and S-70 work in tandem, and the Felon is also exchanging data with a drone via S-111 data link that uses encrypted, directional (instead of omnidirectional) LPI data transfer. It is obvious that the Su-57 pilot was trying to regain the control over the drone, or trying to assess visually any kind of anomaly that might be present, that might be the cause of malfunction. S-70 in combat missions is not controlled by the ground crew, the drone is autonomous and can be controlled by the Su-57 pilot if needed, so there is no need for any other Russian fighter, other than the Su-57 to escort the S-70. Also, both aircraft were flying at considerable altitude above the Ukraine territory, and that would de suicidal for any 4th generation fighter! Next, at the altitude where you get stable contrail formation, which is at about 10000 m, and at the max speed of the drone, which is around Mach 0,84, there is no Russian fighter plane, other than Su-57, that can make such a turn after the missile hit! The plane changed its 90 deg. heading in about 5 seconds, which translates to an average turn rate of 18 deg/s. At that altitude and speed Su-27 has 8,6 deg/s sustained turn rate, and 15,5 deg/s instantaneous turn rate, so it is more than obvious that no Flanker could make such a sharp turn under similar conditions! And I was assuming that the S-70 was flying at its top speed, which might not be the case, and if that is the case, the performance of the Flanker would be even worse!

[@vovin8132]

The S-70 doesn't need to fly alongside the Su-57 and has been doing autonomous missions the entire conflict. Allegedly, a good portion of those videos we watch of kamikazi drones hitting HVTs, such as SAM systems, are from S-70s, while other times they are Orlan drones or whatever.

[@vovin8132]

@@ShadeAKAhayate Re-read what I said, which was that the S-70/Orlons are FILMING the drone/iskander/artillery strikes. Where do you think that daily footage comes from?

[@Semendrija123]

@@vovin8132 true, it doesn’t need to fly alongside the Su-57, but S-70 is the part of the “loyal wingman” concept, and it can increase the Felon’s combat capability and survivability, and vice versa. One of the main reasons why Russians have introduced the Su-57 two seater patent is exactly because they intend Su-57 to be a stealthy command post for other combat jets and drones.

[@Semendrija123]

Here is my educated guess?! There is always possibility that the F-16 was the one that killed the Su-34, but in reality chances are extremely low! Su-34’s are operating behind the contact lines because they use glide bombs with the range between 40-70 km on average (latest versions have 90 km range). They carry serious EW suite, and have huge PESA radar with the range that dwarfs the radar range of the Ukraine F-16. But that is the least of problems for the F-16! Su-34 are flying under cover of the Su-35S, Su-30SM2, Su-57 and Mig-31BM (Su-35S being most commonly used air superiority fighter in the region). All those fighters are flying at high altitude while having the electronically scanned radars with extremely long range that can support hypersonic missiles like R-37M and izd. 810 with the 300-400 km range! We already have confirmed kills of the low flying Ukraine fighter against the ground clutter at incredible ranges, going from 125 km, all the way up to the 213/217 km! Su-35S have also achieved the BVR kills with the R-77-1 missile at the distance of 90 km. That is about two times the range of the longest AIM-120 kill. For all this information we have pilots interviews, and even the HUD footage Russian MoD has released. What is even worse for the F-16, all along the contact line there is Russian IAD’s with the S-400, S-350, S-300, Buk M3 etc. that is also linked with the AWACS. Russians are the first that have used the AWACS and S-400 with the ARH missiles to shoot the low flying Ukraine fighters behind the horizon! So, to fly high in the F-16 is the recipe to die 100%! Only option that the Ukraine pilots are using is to fly extremely low, but even then the Russian fighters are picking them up from extreme distances, and we even have the video footage of the extremely low flying Ukraine Mig-29 being destroyed by the Su-35S long range missiles deep inside Ukraine territory (unfortunately the pilot didn’t survive). F-16 would need to carry external fuel tanks (which increase RCS) to be able to reach the contact line at low altitude, and it would be most likely discovered by the Russians at considerable distance. Also, flying low and subsonic will reduce the range of the AIM-120B to almost unusable levels (AIM-120B has optimal firing range of about 50 km according to open sources). Taking all this into consideration, it is practically impossible for the Ukraine F-16 to reach the Su-34’s operating behind the contact lines without being detected by the ground based radars, high flying Russian fighters, and AWACS. Ukraine F-16 simply doesn’t have the capability and the missile range to reach the heavily protected Su-34!

[@Semendrija123]

Also, here is my take on the Su-57 and S-70 case! Su-57 and S-70 work in tandem, and the Felon is also exchanging data with a drone via S-111 data link that uses encrypted, directional (instead of omnidirectional) LPI data transfer. It is obvious that the Su-57 pilot was trying to regain the control over the drone, or trying to assess visually any kind of anomaly that might be present, that might be the cause of malfunction. S-70 in combat missions is not controlled by the ground crew, the drone is autonomous and can be controlled by the Su-57 pilot if needed, so there is no need for any other Russian fighter, other than the Su-57 to escort the S-70. Also, both aircraft were flying at considerable altitude above the Ukraine territory, and that would de suicidal for any 4th generation fighter! Next, at the altitude where you get stable contrail formation, which is at about 10000 m, and at the max speed of the drone, which is around Mach 0,84, there is no Russian fighter plane, other than Su-57, that can make such a turn after the missile hit! The plane changed its 90 deg. heading in about 5 seconds, which translates to an average turn rate of 18 deg/s. At that altitude and speed Su-27 has 8,6 deg/s sustained turn rate, and 15,5 deg/s instantaneous turn rate, so it is more than obvious that no Flanker could make such a sharp turn under similar conditions! And I was assuming that the S-70 was flying at its top speed, which might not be the case, and if that is the case, the performance of the Flanker would be even worse!

[@ahamed_althaf]

Well said 💯

[@oldfashionedwrx3574]

Yep, this adds up

[@DIREWOLFx75]

"Only option that the Ukraine pilots are using is to fly extremely low, but even then the Russian fighters are picking them up from extreme distances" Yup, that's what MiG-31 is exceptional at, as it was originally designed with the mission of shooting down terrainfollowing cruise missiles, an extremely difficult task, finding and hitting an aircraft flying like that is considerably easier. And they've only improved it since then. "Taking all this into consideration, it is practically impossible for the Ukraine F-16 to reach the Su-34’s operating behind the contact lines without being detected by the ground based radars, high flying Russian fighters, and AWACS. Ukraine F-16 simply doesn’t have the capability and the missile range to reach the heavily protected Su-34!" Indeed.

[@tetispinkman9135]

Those awacses which fly at least 300km range after 2 were shot down can't see shit. Migs31 are almost never used. Su35 are indeed the most dangerous thing to f16. But they can't possibly fly with working radars all the time. The take to much of battery and fuel when operating, plus the extreme ranges are achieved by focusing radar on very small degree , leaving huge blind spots. So f16 could dhoot down su34​@@DIREWOLFx75

[@0612Devil]

Great to see Shanghai back on the program!

[@theolddog5129]

Here from the UK. I've watched quite a few of your YT videos and find your level-headed/balanced analysis of matters really interesting.

[@matt-rn8ge]

They need your boy Tim back on

[@petunized]

Balanced? Far from it. They are just carefull at this point

[@craftsman40]

You guys are a breath of fresh air. So unbiased in a sea of agenda based platforms. Keep it up, Sirs!

[@ramrod9556]

The Ghost of Kiev has returned. I am skeptical of any Ukraine report.

[@goodshipkaraboudjan]

Da Comrade, only Chairman Putin reveals the truth.

[@ryanseet8314]

It’s a Russian claim, just so you know

[@Br1cht]

@@goodshipkaraboudjan the ukies often lies though.

[@_Coffee4Closers]

Yeah, only it's a RUSSIAN report.

[@愛を込めてロシアから]

@@ryanseet8314 Russia claimed that f16 shot down su34? What?

[@matthewnewnham-runner-writer]

FWIW, I agree with all three of you, @Mover, @Gonky & @Shanghai. (Former RAF Lakenheath F-111 guy here.)

[@tikabass]

As far as we know the F-16s have been flying an average of 0 sorties per week since the day 1 mishap.

[@Xterminate13]

Well said. All I can say is well said.

[@愛を込めてロシアから]

Reported by who?

[@jetfighter200]

Reported by „fighterbomber“ but that it was an F-16 was claimed from twitter

[@愛を込めてロシアから]

@@jetfighter200 He wrote a long message in the style of "you have to be an idiot to think like that" I can quote "Никто наш Су-34 не сбивал. Тем более обоссаный F-16 с ссыкунами за рулем, на который охотятся вообще все с момента появления его на Украине"

[@gadingnicolas1394]

@@愛を込めてロシアから Fighterbpmber stated the difficulty of these hard working machines can cause issues in different aspects. Su-34 are piloted by both experienced pros or newly recruits with varying condition of the plane (as the hardest working plane in the front lines right now), could be a combination of multiple issues causing the downing the Su-34. "Could" be a mix of new pilots and wear & tear with addition of malfunction, but no answers til now though.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

@@gadingnicolas1394 Except for the tiny issue that there's been no credible reports of any Su-34s lost recently.

[@cxngo8124]

I believe Russian mil bloggers were the first to make this claim.

[@tibor1234]

In the end something happed somewhere, maybe.

[@jimfast5921]

Ukraine doesn’t fly f16 near combat line what are you talking about

[@warfarenotwarfair5655]

Right 😂

[@DIREWOLFx75]

@@warfarenotwarfair5655 Any UA aircraft going closer than 200km to frontlines have roughly 50% of getting shot down, increasing rapidly the closer they get. Where do you think they lost most of their 750-ish aircraft in the last 2+ years?

[@KPX-nl4nt]

Орков вроде вас всегда легко заметить.

[@KPX-nl4nt]

@@DIREWOLFx75Nice try but Ukraine never had anywhere near 750 aircraft. I have no idea where you’re getting that number from, comrade.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

@@KPX-nl4nt "I have no idea where you’re getting that number from, comrade." You can easily find(if you bother to spend the effort to search for it) that UA started 2022 with just over 500 combat aircraft in service. Nearly 200 MiG-29s upgraded by Nato. About 70 Su-27. 140+ Su-24. And around 100 Su-25. Since start of 2022, they've been given another 150+ MiG-29s, and over 100 Su-25s. They've also lost some of their 50 Aero L-39 Albatros trainers/light strike. They have also cobbled together some additional planes from spare parts, wrecks and mothballed planes that were no longer possible to return to service. Exact numbers are very uncertain but likely around 10-20 Su-25, 20-30 MiG-29s and a handful of other aircrafts. Meanwhile, Russian MoD lists over 650 UA aircraft CONFIRMED shot down. And you can pretend whatever you wish, but they're wellknown for UNDER-reporting enemy casualties. And already back in 2022, the Turkish intel report that leaked stated UA had lost over 400 aircraft even that early. The israeli intel report from almost the same time listed almost as many. You can pretend whatever you want, reality remains the truth regardless.

[@vaunfestus9768]

More ghost of kiev B.S.

[@marcgatto9675]

First time I've heard this. Wait and see on that.

[@ajstyles5704]

No need, it happened inside Russia, nothing in US Arsenal can reach over 40km that f16 can carry for air targets. So it need to be much closer and that ain't happening.

[@RedTail1-1]

That comment is everything wrong with the world currently... No matter what you say, someone takes it to mean something wildly different that has nothing to do with what you said.

[@antibulletdodger101]

Well, on the other hand, if anything that can be considered critique is labelled as trolling I think it´s better to disable commenting on the videos.

[@stinkyfungus]

I can only offer this you guys... If somone decided that a large chunk of say... washington, arizona, or florida was "thiers" and started dumping ordinance on it... killing american civilians Would you just say "lets just stop and have a beer and talk about it" Or "let them keep it for now" ? Just food for thought.

[@lunarweasel]

Amen. What do we stand for if not stopping Putin? What if the world clamped down HARD on Hitler early pre-Poland?

[@mercb3ast]

It would be more like, the sitting President of the USA is chased out of the country by far right ethno-nationalists. Texas decided it wanted increased autonomy because the person they voted for was removed from power. The new president of the USA sent the army to assert control over Texas, at which point Texas went into open rebellion. About 2 years after that, Mexico starts to heavily support Texas. 6 years later, The USA is still bombing the ever loving shit out of Texas. Texas asks Mexico for a defensive military alliance. Mexico says yes. The USA begins massing troops on the Texas border, again, and begins carrying out over 1,000 artillery strikes per day on Texas. And then Mexico invades the USA citing its defensive alliance with Texas as the casus belli. There, I fixed your analogy for you.

[@nath9091]

That's not what happened. It'd be like if a very anti Hispanic government came to power in a coup in DC, California and Texas declare for Mexico and DC sent troops to attack them (assume Mexico is much more powerful and California and Texas are majority Hispanic). There's deep cultural and ethnic tensions going on in this war which get brushed over. Ukraine systematically implemented laws prior to hot war to restrict use of the Russian language in media and any publication and imprisoned political parties which were more amenable to Russia.Also there comes a point where the situation is messed up so you go with the best scenario which is potentially give up limited territory you haven't held in a decade and cant take militarily and then maybe get security guarantees. The war is extremely unlikely to resume as a hot war given it did spiral out of control so that's less of a concern. Russia will still be hit with sanctions so while Ukraine will be devastated for decades to come It's not like Russia is sitting pretty either.

[@mp40submachinegun81]

​@nath9091 Source: RT February 22 2014. Motion to "remove Viktor Yanukovych from the post of president of Ukraine" Unanimously passes the freely and democratically elected Ukrainian rada (parliament) 328 votes in favour, 0 against. Every single vote was cast by a democratically elected member of parliament. Also banning russian😂 Zelensky himself didnt even start to learn ukrainian until 2016. His tv show "Servant of the people" which basically created his political career was filmed in russian. Russian speakers are so oppressed they can be president while hardly speaking ukrainian 😂

[@rjyeezy76]

How to pilots keep a clear and calm mind in the midst of extreme danger? Are there certain training exercises, or is it just a god given talent?

[@nenadmomic]

I started following this channel (Mover), besides that I am fighter jet enthusiast, but because of his objective and factual approach to any topic. Being, at least when it comes to commenting, neutral.

[@gerumarc]

There are currently no reports of any deployments of the F-16. The loss of at least one machine has so far been confirmed. Since the first delivery only included 6 machines, there are a maximum of 5 machines ready for use. But there were also two massive air raids by the Russians on the airfield where these planes were possibly stationed. The Russians probably deployed an Iskander or a Kinzhal for each shelter where an F-16 was suspected. Therefore, contrary to the success story, it is entirely possible that Ukraine no longer has an operational F-16.

[@gregorybrennan8539]

Now I have to like Fighter Jocks, dam!

[@Kellyh7777]

Okay gents. For the record, I'm neither a bot nor a troll, however I am an historical war film researcher. What I respect is you're each genuinely objective from the perspective of your experience. However I'll add a vital caveat to your caring comments on stopping the attritional warfare. There I'm afraid lies the biggest gap in that equation. Ukrainian soldiers for the most part, have no interest in fighting, but they do. Russians are sold out to take Ukraine. Consider for a moment the US was in the same position, even going back to when England invaded. It's a perspective view. Russia historically has never ceased to invade through arrangement, zero times. The closest example is Afghanistan when America helped.

[@64mickh]

“To when England invaded”? Are you referring to 1812?

[@ReallyAtlanta]

Most important two things they said: "What's verified what's not verified." Also my buddy in the greyish shirt said "I just wish they'd stop fighting." We are in a new day and age where we can "see" everything that's happening and talk about it but there's too much in the way between what really happened and what anybody can throw out on the internet and say. Finally, "stop fighting". Nobody nowadays wants to be lobbing missiles, bullets, bombs, etc. etc. when we are an intelligent human race and we can tell what's actually going on, on a deeper level than 20 year ago.

"nobody wants" well tell that to the Russians who keep doing it.

[@jimblair6458]

You sound like a hippy!

[@DollyRanch]

If you want to ignore what the Russian commander-in-chief says and thinks you won't get anywhere. For him, this started in 2008. And yes the invasion in Georgia was connected to Ukraine politically, it caused a political crisis which set the stage for the civil war five years later

[@愛を込めてロシアから]

Don't worry, it'll be over in a couple of years

@@愛を込めてロシアから bru, nobody wants to live in Russia. Everything smells like crap. You guys do your thing in stairways. I guess that's why you live in the west? Go home to Mother Russia! Enjoy your craptastic stairways.

[@DataWaveTaGo]

Gentlemen, This is my first look at your channel. Noted: Presentation is a mixed bag of foggy-facts re: knowledge of weapons systems per segment title. Excessive cross-talk. Spurious "fact checking". I'm only at the 1:47 time mark & I've had enough. Anyway - all the best...

[@cdyjv118]

Have a nice day!

[@TheKid9678]

I would think the Ukrainians would have some crash site footage, if the shoot down was true.

[@TedFanat]

This is not the case AT ALL. A lot of crash sites are undiscovered for a long time

[@265justy]

Crash site might be in a Russian controlled area..

[@TheKid9678]

@@265justy That's possible.

[@simulatedpilot3441]

Bro they would have already released the gun cam footage

[@Juandinggong]

@@265justyyou see pic of all crashes

[@quasar7968]

"Trust me"

[@1BigBen]

to be fair, it was most likely a MIM-104 as they had already been moved closer to front line at that time and have taken down SU-34 before. now it will still be a few years before they say it, but the lose of Ukrainian F-16 was Blue on Blue and it was down by MIM-104. also we are still few weeks from Raytheon delivery of new production of AIM-120c8 with range of 160km to Ukraine, up to now its max of 120km now with fleet of just 39 MiG-29, 14 Su-24, 11 Su-25, 19 Su-27 and 7 to 15 F-16A* the likelihood that F-16 was send to boarder is soon is low. (* keep in mind 6+ of they may be waiting for ride with a AN-124 to Ukraine)

[@bestchoiceaccess9928]

If that is true, it will be all over the news until the end of this conflict.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@Mugdorna]

The F16s in Ukrainian service are older models. (with relatively inexperienced pilots on the aircraft) So F-16 vs Su-34 may not be as easy as you guys seem to think.

[@Christmas-Cooter]

No, don't say pro-Kremlin three times fast, that's how they get you.

[@oldfashionedwrx3574]

No way it did, i love the viper btw

[@FastPaull]

For god sake, get this man Ublock origin

[@ИлимДжапаркулов-р8щ]

F16: Oops I did it again 😊😊

[@guitargyro]

Gonky's comment of "Stop fighting" is like: "Hey, I know somebody broke into your house and is now raping your wife but if you just stop trying to fight the guy off your wife and sit down and discuss how much of your house to give the intruder so he stops raping your wife..."

[@rendesvouz2822]

Oh, it sounds like you know quite well the situation when somebody intrudes in your residence and rapes your wife. Your cognitive associations are very bright and colourful, dude. Grandpa Sigmund Freud salutes you and wishes all the very best to your wife for her well recovery.

[@theheretic569]

The Russians have no issue claiming that an aircraft was shot down by friendly fire if they want to try and prevent Ukraine from getting credit. So I'm guessing they don't know for sure at this point.

[@jameshastey3058]

The Su-34 Fullback is the successor to the old Su-24 Fencer (which was the Soviet equivalent to the F-111) given it's side-by-side crew layout - albeit with a decent A2A ability, the Russian equivalent to the F-15E Strike Eagle is the Sukhoi Su-30 (the Su-30SM or Su-30M2 are the most current version in the Russian Air Force) - and like the F-15E, the Su-30 seats it's two crew in tandem. That said, I can see where a wise man on the Ukrainian or Western side might hold off admitting that an F-16 actually made the shootdown for the benefit of trying to keep Moscow from retaliating elsewhere against the West or jeopardizing the flow of Western arms to Ukraine. At the same time, I don't buy into the idea that the Russians would claim to have accidentally shot down their own plane just to keep the Ukrainians from getting credit. I could more likely see the Russians denying the loss as long as possible (including painting another Su-34 up with the downed one's serial number temporarily for the media to see).

[@Kaatu-barada-nikto]

American journalist Patrick Lancaster takes viewers into Russian trenches with real combat operations. It doesn't get any more real than this.

[@TheGranicd]

"Source" is iffy Telegram channel. Both sides use trojan channels. Those with credibility disprove this.

[@matthewgibbs6886]

they shot down 50 out of 35 su's

[@CtRAlTtAb]

So they have -15 left?

[@karlgreene2177]

I don't believe it as they lied before!

[@AllAboutMe-cy9xj]

More like the Su went down due to equipment failure and Ukraine is trying to take the credit.

[@warfarenotwarfair5655]

Ukraine hasn't taken any credit 😂

[@DIREWOLFx75]

There is no known loss of a Su-34... Also, unlike F-35, Su-34 has a good record for reliability.

[@AllAboutMe-cy9xj]

@@warfarenotwarfair5655 Ukraine propagandist certainly are.

[@MiG-31893]

@@DIREWOLFx75Unlike Su-57, there are accually more than 12 F-35. Also at least F-35 didn’t have to be withdrawn from service so that their engine nozzles can be replaced because Russia finally realized that massive circular engines aren’t stealth. Look up a picture of Su-57s cockpit and compare it to F-35. You’ll see the difference.

[@CtRAlTtAb]

​​​@@MiG-31893 Russia always knew that they needed to replace the Su-57's engines, and they did. And yes, you're correct, the F-35 and Su-57 have different cockpits as they are two different fighters. You can't seriously be basing your opinion about fighters on how the cockpits of them look? Propaganda at its finest. Oh yeah, and you knew you were lying when you said they have 12 Su-57s. There are around 34 as of recently. Still a low amount, but it still means that you'll do anything to win an argument to cope with the fact that the Su-57 is a good fighter.

[@jefrysax]

if I compare the Russian Ukrainian war, I would compare it more with the Kursk Offensive from WW2 .... but with lower intensity and often switching initiative ..

[@Bluelagoonstudios]

Tactical it makes no sense, the F16 that got downed was used to shoot down drones and intercept missiles. They don't have many F16s, yet. So for me, this is bogus. I think these will be used for defensive roles. At this moment. And indeed, if this really happened, it would be in every Ukraine newspaper. So far I didn't see that. That's not easy without video of the event. And even that can be manipulated.

[@pattygman4675]

What happened to the good ol gun camera video? That clear things up quickly. Don’t see much of that these days. Even a sanitised version would do.

[@AMOUREDD]

If it happened,by now we would be looking at the scrap from a sat footage

[@ajstyles5704]

It's inside Russia. No way they can reach there, the only ones truly testing the Patriots are the mig31s.

[@antibulletdodger101]

If anything that can be considered critique is labelled as trolling I think you should turn the comments off on the videos. Let´s say Russia occupied a couple of states in the US. My suggestion would be not to fight back, but to negotiate. I´m not hoping for a Russian victory, but you should at least sit down and talk about it.

[@deanmartin1447]

Russia didnt steal Ukraine. Ukraine was trying to get membership into NATO therefore putting a missle defense syatem in Russa's backyard. Lets also not forget Ukraine use to be apart of the USSR.

[@tikabass]

Not a defense system. Nuclear missiles. When the Russians asked Blinken for guarantees that NATO would not deploy nuclear missiles in Ukraine, Blinken answered "We can discuss on the number of nuclear missiles, but not on their presence".

[@VWaudiRULEs]

Bullshit. russia (low cap r), a totalitarian terrorist state, has no right to decided what Ukraine, a sovereign nation and a founding member of the UN, has the right to do regarding its geopolitical orientation. A NATO membership would have only given Ukraine security and russia would not have been able to invade. The ussr (a violent, aggressive dictatorship that has killed more people than Hitler) is dead and russia has no business trying to resurrect it by force. This is what russia really wants and that is why it is so pissed about NATO. Also no modern state wants to be close with russia - only corrupt pseudo-feudal regimes do. No onw has threatened russian sovereignty at any point (even Hitler's invasion occurred after both regimes cooperated and attacked other sovereign states). It also begs the question why russia would be worried about Ukraine potentially deploying a missile defense system on its own territory. Ukraine is NOT russia's backyard.

[@VWaudiRULEs]

@@tikabass There was no plan for any missiles in Ukraine, and if NATO wanted them, they don't need Ukraine - they can deploy them in Poland, the Baltic states or Turkey. So all you said is total and complete bullshit. Also, it is russia that has nuclear missiles in Klainingrad.

[@tikabass]

@@VWaudiRULEs nazi, with a little n and a little zizi.

[@JimHoward]

I bet the SU-34 was shot down by a Frogfoot or an old Flanker. For the same reason almost every Luftwaffe pilot shot down in the Battle of Britain claims a Spitfire did it. Even though Hurricanes killed almost as many Germans as did the Spitfire. If you get shot down, at least it is slightly easier on the delicate fighter pilot ego that the enemy's best plane did the deed.

[@AdamosDad]

Ukraine may have been told to keep it on the downlow to not stir up international💩

[@Buildinc1]

I’m calling bullshit on this one. The Ukrainians would have had pics and milked this for all it’s worth.

[@icaleinns6233]

Well, to say Russia fucked up would be a bit of an understatement, don't ya think?

[@JasonAGregg]

It’s interesting you are talking about the war and not just the aviation side of things. I’ve started looking at the conflict as something of a civil war between two former members of the USSR, but I’m sure that can’t be an original take.

[@deantait8326]

A needless war. A land dispute that could have been avoided! Money War!

That's the Russian propaganda take, yes. Russia invaded Ukraine because it wants it as a vassal state. Imagine the same happening to your country and then some foreigner goes like "just stop fighting and give them your land." Bru.

[@JasonAGregg]

Guess I’m not a consumer of Russian propaganda, but I’ll take your word for it. These two countries used to be in one country and it was 35 years ago. For better or worse, Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons when the USSR came apart, right? Shipped them north to Russia, I mean. And then the West kept NATO going as if there was still a unified “Soviet” threat, and now we’re seeing a quasi-civil war with calls to integrate one of the combatants into the alliance. It’s not a recipe for “All quiet on the Eastern front”.

​@@JasonAGregg Man, you've not read a single good history book in your life. You may not think that you're not a consumer of Russian propaganda but you're using their main talking points just fine. Stop, this is embarrassing.

[@mercb3ast]

No, Russia invaded because it wanted Ukraine to maintain its neutrality which it promised in 1990 with its declaration of sovereignty, and in 1996 when it ratified its own constitution enshrining the concept of perpetual non-aligned status. Whether or not Russia SHOULD have invaded for that reason I suppose depends on your own POV, however, THAT is the reason why Russia invaded. It's only in the west where we treat the idea of a nation being neutral, as a puppet or vassal of our geopolitical rivals. It's the classic, if you're not with us, you're therefore against us. Ukraine was neutral, but according to the west, that meant it was a puppet. You should take your own advice and actually read some history books on the subject. Instead of parroting state department propaganda.

[@jerseyshoredroneservices225]

How much footage have we seen of F-16s doing anything? The Ukrainians are prolific video creators however they have been very quiet about anything related to the vipers. The only exception I'm aware of is the acknowledgment of the one that was lost but we haven't seen anything about what they've been doing. I don't know if the Viper shot down the 34 but I do know that no pictures doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[@petunized]

When something relly happens there, you have tonns of videos from various angles. Just like with the S-70 and Su-57. So yeah, no video in modern world means it didnt happen

[@vovin8132]

They lost all of their F-16s and pilots weeks ago in cruise missile strikes

[@warfarenotwarfair5655]

WW1 warfare fought with actual WW1 weapons 😂

[@tomcook5813]

So, the SU34 does roughly the same job the F111 did?

[@keyboard_g]

Pretty much right on the money. The Su34 I believe is fairly maneuverable for its size, but its a big flanker stuffed with radar and carries a big payload.

[@265justy]

The F-111 would be more comparable so the SU-24 Fencer. The SU-34 is more comparable to the F-15E...

[@hoghogwild]

@@265justy Side by side seating in both the Su-34 and F-111.

[@265justy]

@@hoghogwild No.. I think swing wing type aircraft and being in general the same shape, same size, same role and from the same era prevail over 2 seat side by side. An A-6 Intruder was also side by side seating arrangement but would not compare it to an SU-34..

[@lagrangewei]

@@265justy 34 is alot bigger than 15...

[@warfarenotwarfair5655]

Ukraine Mlmight not want to disclose an F-16 shot down a Russian aircraft depending on which side of the border it took place and the Russian government might not want to admit that openly to it's citizens to avoid political embarrassment.

[@nrauhauser]

The Ukrainians will often talk smack about successes, but this is NOT universal. There are numerous instances where something has happened and they pointedly stay mum about specifics. Russian losses due to friendly fire are many and the "mil-bloggers" as a source is pretty solid - if you look at Suchomimus channel's coverage of primarily armor losses, the combination of what pro-Kremlin bloggers say in the moment, compared with video releases by Ukrainian units ... there's an implicit grade of source when referring to "mil bloggers" and I'd render it as "unofficial but generally reliable". There is what would be a surprising amount of information that comes out this way from Russian operations, stuff that would get immediately shut down by a NATO country's counter-intel function.

[@mercb3ast]

This SU-34 was not shot down by an F-16. It doesn't make sense, at all, when you dig a little into this and find out the acknowledged specifics. The SU was shot down in Russian airspace. Somewhere around 50KM inside the Russian lines. Is it possible Ukraine somehow put an S-300 close enough to do it? That is FAAAAAAAAR more likely than an F-16 flying into Russian airspace to engage an SU-34. That F-16 would have had to run the gauntlet from about 250 KM out to even get close enough to shoot, because Russian AD would be all over it like white on rice.

[@nrauhauser]

@@mercb3ast Early AMRAAM have a range of at least 100km, latest are good out past 160km. It's entirely plausible that an F-16 well behind all the protection of the front lines was responsible for the Su-34 kill. The other method that's been seen are long range hits from Patriot, like the takedown of the A-50 over the Sea of Azov. Every time the Ukrainians manage a new hit on rare air assets, either flying or sitting, the Russians pause, then move back. It's a big win no matter how they did it.

[@愛を込めてロシアから]

@@nrauhauser No, early amraam missiles could barely hit a target at 70 km, and the real maximum target range was about 40 km. And in order for amraam to overcome more than 100 km, you need to climb 15 km and accelerate to 700m/s, which is more than 2M at such an altitude and physically impossible for the f16 even without loading. I'm not even talking about the fact that the A 50 fell almost 300km from the front line so maybe enough bullshit for today?

[@bestestusername]

If neither side comments it makes sense, russia does not want to make the 16 look like a winner and ukraine will want to keep on the low down if the 16 is working well for them. Both sides have have reason to make no comment. If ukraine air feilds get hammered over the next few weeks we know what happened

[@mercb3ast]

If the F-16 shot it down, then these are new Stealth F-16s, because the shoot down occurred around 50 KM inside Russia.

[@bestestusername]

@@mercb3ast we won't know for a long time as nobody is admitting anything which is odd.Somebody is usually bragging about this sort of thing

[@acoustic5738]

Would it be true, there would be cockpit and awacs data...where is it? This is not true.

[@SophiaIce]

3 clowns making money of dumb viewers while spreading false information.

[@jimfast5921]

When I did no hear that

[@bullseye8509]

No way.

[@marktisdale7935]

The bots are heavy in your comment section.

[@evilmedic13]

Finally FIRST!!!! Love you guys!

[@borilia]

Ha ha! Dream on guys!

[@something-kinesis]

Do these guys really think that the Su-34 that crashed on Russian territory was shot down by F-16s that don't fly close to the front line? When Ukraine doesn't have any victories you need imagine it.

[@SA80TAGE]

is it not more like a Russian Intruder?

[@jameshastey3058]

In a way - but with Mach 2+ capability, an airframe rated for 9+ G, and a massive PESA radar and long range ARH air to air missiles in addition to a massive A2G weapons load.

[@TrevorCrook-c1s]

F16 uses Aim120 air to air missile . Mach 1. Range 160 kms. Russian fighters use R37. Mach 6. Range 400 kms The chances of this scenario being true is zero

[@graphbobby]

The fact that you think that 2 speed and 2 range numbers completely define the capabilities of two opposing forces in air combat tells me that you know very close to nothing about air combat.

[@TrevorCrook-c1s]

@@graphbobby So range and speed don’t mean a thing ? 🤣 Name the capabilities the 30 year old Aim 120 has that the 5 year old hypersonic r37 doesn’t ? An SU57 recently shot down a f16 from a distance of 213 kms . A world record

[@graphbobby]

@@TrevorCrook-c1s An R-37 has absolutely no capabilities when you are not carrying one, which would be quite typical for an Su-34 on an bombing run, because the R-37 is heavy (besides the fact that I could not find any evidence that the Su-34 can carry it at all; various other aircraft, like variants of the Su-30/35 and MiG-31, can). Even IF you can carry it, you would have to be able to select a target for it, and then guide it to the target, for it to be useful, and that depends on lots of other factors, like e.g., your aircraft's datalink capabilities, supporting aircraft sensor capabilities and range, supporting aircraft datalink capabilities and compatibility, opposing force's presence and capabilities of - or absence of - electronic warfare resources, RoE & ability to identify targets to meet RoE, to name just a few. Only then, after lots of other conditions are met, the speed an range of the actual weapon deployed become significant factors - but again, among several other factors.

[@ypw510]

⁠@@graphbobby I’m pretty sure an AMRAAM is faster than Mach 1. Public info is lacking, but it’s supposedly at least Mach 4. And it’s nowhere near as heavy as an R-37.

[@IFlyTanks]

First the F-16 uses data link to help the Aim120 C/D locate its target and has the ability to reach out and touch you max range of 97 Nautical miles. Even still it has its own radar and can go terminal any time if it gets a clear picture. The AIM120D which has been stated to be a real possibility in theater and reaches speeds of Mach 4 not Mach 1. Even the C model can be deadly out to 65 Nautical Miles. In fact if the pilot is worth his salt the plane will be AT Mach 1 and above the cons before the missile even leaves the rail. If he cranks and defends properly keeping the SU-34 in his radar cone, there is a very real possibility of him scoring a hit on a SU-34. And just because an R37 has hyper-sonic speed and longer range does not mean he hit his target. Also the R37's purported speed is Mach 5 at best. In short there are a ton of things that go into an actual missile being fired.. speed and distance are but 2 of them.

[@awdturbopowah773]

lol another video with Russian cope spreading like wildfire in the comments. All the jokes about “the ghost of Kiev” ignoring that if the Ukrainians didn’t shoot it down, your own stupid troops did 😂 either way isn’t good for you.

[@Wannes_]

Maybe the Su-34 got shot down where the F-16 wasn't supposed to be ? Because we're still limiting where Ukraine can use the weapons we hand them ...

[@guyb7995]

One problem with the whole stop and talk over a beer about the land is that RU will not genuinely engage in the discussions and will only use it as an opportunity to regroup to strike again. I do wonder if someone breaks into your home if you would stop and have a beer with then to discuss what possessions of yours they can take and what they should leave behind.

[@robertmarks2379]

The only thing reported was a su34 was lost and then all Ukraines "expert military war blogging youtubers" who seem to get there scripts directly from zelensky jumped on the idea it was F16 with AIM9 lol

[@JLamont45]

Why are you reporting on woulda coulda shoulda? Lame

[@94520shatto]

. Really? ********** A THINKABOUT ********** Everything on the Internet may, can and probably will change. At any time. In a Library, printed on a page, Nothing ever has nor will change. . Verify everything from everyone, everywhere. Then trust. As far as you can throw them.

[@fullysynthetic]

Three stooges 😂

[@tompell3032]

Yeah right ! they also told you that Ukraine won the battles of Bahkmut, Mariupol, Krynsky, and Selidovo, etc etc... LMFAO..

[@AleksHawk]

Есть определённо правильная мысль, если ф16 будет выполнять задачу по ударам наземных целей а су34 по каким то причинам будет работать по воздушным целям то с большой долей вероятности ф16 станет добычей, и наоборот если су34 будет сосредоточен на наземных целях а ф16 будет работать по воздушным то су34 станет добычей, но это если говорить об ситуации в неком вакууме, но с учётом разных факторов исход может быть совершенно разный, всё будет зависеть от качества лётчиков и от качества осведомлённости и Радио Борьбы сторон конфликта.

[@Egodriver71]

F-111

[@PhilippSeven]

This is not true, russian pilot and blogger“Fighter Bomber” said the plane wasn’t shot down, it went down because of pilot error. It was a young crew fresh out of school. This blogger can be trusted, because he is a pilot himself and in general has not been seen in misrepresentation of facts before. And by the way, he respects Ukrainian pilots.

[@CtRAlTtAb]

Confirmation bias

[@constanciomwenecio-qt1ht]

Propaganda 😂😂😂😂

[@paulrun111]

You cant trust a U mil blogger.... Just my opinion

[@swayzefan3600]

its russian milbloggers

[@ryanseet8314]

But it’s a R mil blogger…..so can we trust him then?

[@paulrun111]

@@ryanseet8314 no can't trust them either

[@Craig-fl8jj]

The only place American fighters dominate....on game systems

[@persistentwind]

I love how the trolls already showed up!

[@acoustic5738]

Political us elections are deplorable. The idea to cotinue suporting Ukraine should not be right or left motivated. Cant wait for their stupid elections to be over.

[@persistentwind]

@acoustic5738 You're right. The fight is over allowing communism to expand or defend a democratic society. It is a political decision but both parties should see the value in standing up for what America was founded on. The CCP is watching closely because this impacts the decisions they will make in the future.

[@EyeInTheSkypaulmcmenamin]

Point to note, both NASAM's and F16's both use AIM-120's, maybe Ukraine doesn't want to acknowledge which system released the weapon. Russia now has to use more resources to scour the battlefield to try and find a forward deployed NASAM's while on the other side Russian pilots may not be as willing to get as close to the front line to release their ordnance in case they fall victim to F16's.

[@ozzyphil74]

There was no F16 shoot down. The F16s have not even be confirmed to deploy any where close to the front line. This is just speculation that is baseless since were it true, the Ukrainians would have been all over it.

[@rajeshkumarm6441]

Don’t watch too many Hollywood movies and CNN fake clips. US fighters dominate on airspace with no air defence

[@steoderfragt1821]

It sounds like you could benefit from insight from someone with real experience in intelligence, as everyone has some bias. An expert can help distinguish what's credible. If you doubt this story, why trust a random Telegram account? Why bring this up at all?

[@indy500tabasco8]

👽👽👽👽im bored👽👽👽👽

[@AlanTheBest97]

I try to be level headed here. But I belive it looks pretty true to me. I cant see how friendly fire would be the cause. The Su34 is only operated by Russia and has a distinct radar signature. Manpads maybe, but it also looks the part... Cant see how a Russian did this...

[@mandtgrant]

So if russia invaded Alaska, you guys would suggest just stopping the fight and giving it to russia? Peace through surrender? Glad you guys are out

[@mercb3ast]

That's not the right analogy. This is the right analogy. First, for this theoretical, Alaska is left wing, and Russia is stronger than the USA. Here is the correct analogy. In late 2013, large protests occur in Washington. Obama had been trying to negotiate EU associate status for the USA, but, the loss of trade revenue from breaking things off with Russia would have cost the USA hundreds of billions of dollars. The EU offered basically nothing to offset this. Russia instead came in with a debt relief package and an aid package that was much bigger. So Obama decided to go with that deal. This is what sparked the protests. The protests turned violent, and it was presumed the government began shooting protestors. In the chaos that followed, a small group of ultra far right ethno-nationalist let's call them "Neo-Nazis", threatened the life of Obama and his family, and fearing his assassination, Obama fled the country. Alaska, being a left leaning state, was not happy about their president being removed. It also turned out that the new government in Washington investigated the shootings at the Eurowashington protests, and found that an undisclosed third party was shooting protestors AND government security forces. Alaska petitions the government in Washington for increased autonomy, so they can be economically closer to Russia, and preserve their Russo-Alaskan culture and heritage. Instead of saying "Ok", Washington sends the National Guard and the Armed Forces to take control of Alaska. Reaching Alaska, national guard units, and regular army units that originated in Alaska, or other states sympathetic to Alaska and Obama, switch sides. Alaska declares independence. Two years later, Russia begins to heavily support Alaska. During this time, Washington unleashes far right neo-nazi militias like "Lake Superior Battalion" and "Right Sekt0r" into Alaska. 8 years after all this went down, with Washington constantly bombing and launching artillery strikes into Alaska, killing over 10k US citizens residing in Alaska, Alaska asks Russia for a security agreement. Russia says yes. As this is happening, Washington has begun massing troops on the Alaska border, and has begun carrying up as many as 1,000 artillery strikes per day into Alaska. Alaska IS shooting back, but, they are outgunned, and the number of strikes into Alaska, versus strikes into the lower 48 is disproportionately in favor of the US. About 10 days after this escalation of "ceasefire" violations observed by the UNs OSCE, Russia activates its security clause with Alaska, and invades the USA. Now, did Russia promise support to Alaska when Alaska first thought about independence? Almost certainly. Was Russia involved in 2014 and 2015 on the ground in Alaska? Not really. The CIA reported that as of the middle of Oct 2015, it had recorded 56 Russians involved in the fighting in Alaska (there is an actual report by the SBU of Ukraine saying exactly this btw).

[@愛を込めてロシアから]

@@user-641g2g1szxcy If you are not ready to understand what is written there, then you should not go to fight as part of the armed forces of Ukraine. And this is understandable because you have too developed clip thinking and you are ready to divide the world only into black and white, you cannot fit an explanation longer than one sentence in your head

[@愛を込めてロシアから]

@@user-641g2g1szxcy he`s right

[@mandtgrant]

@@mercb3ast Get help

[@sitrep123able]

Stop saying Falcon its Viperrrrrrr 😂

[@jerseyshoredroneservices225]

I get what he's saying about the trenches but it's not World War 1 unless WW 1 had cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, drones, patriots and all the rest of this stuff. Russia's progress this year was only possible because of its glide bombs that weren't present in World War 1. The citizens of Kherson are being sniped with Russian drone trainees before they go to the front lines. Not something that happened in World War 1. The list goes on and on...

[@bad_blood_studios]

Yeah, even if it's real... A fighter against a bomber is hardly a fight, it's not something you brag about.

[@patrioticgunner8034]

Video proof? “ Trust me bro” kinda proof?

[@brandtbollers3183]

Shit

[@drb996]

If Ukraine or Nato says it chances are it is a lie.

[@grindcorejoe6661]

In contrast to russian state propaganda

[@愛を込めてロシアから]

@@grindcorejoe6661 which ones?

[@TheTruth-vi1nf]

An F16 shoot down a SU-34? Show me clear proof of that. The F16 is massively outclassed by the SU-34. Its my understanding that the SU-34 has superior radar and weapons. Also why is this not being reported by other sources?

[@mercb3ast]

The same reason most media outlets in the west are not reporting that Ukraine is being brutally smashed in this war.

[@GibrilBangura-c2t]

The Raid in Ukraine for young guys is getting out of control Zelensky is busy spreading democracy by fire by force 😂😂

[@jeffhedrich3551]

NATO is the greatest intelligence and military alliance in history. Also NATO: we aren’t certain if an F16 shot down an Su34.

[@awesomeairplanememes]

What the public knows isn't what nato knows

[@petunized]

They were certain that Russian SAM shot down Malasian boeing over Ukraine. So certain, that only after an hour after the event, the press was flooded with the articles

[@ajstyles5704]

​@@awesomeairplanememesit happened inside Russia, nothing the freaking f16 by any logic, common sense and physics would reach that SU34.

[@jeffhedrich3551]

@@awesomeairplanememes don’t be so sure about that. NATO is largely run by idiots these days. Plus, if it were true it would be a massive massive PR push. They are not going to keep this a secret.

[@awesomeairplanememes]

@ajstyles5704 I never said anything about the F-16, all I said is that what NATO knows isn't what the public knows