[Goose]

I recently read an article which concluded that Russia was on the verge of becoming a failed state. It stated that despite Russian media releases, it is losing tanks at a faster rate than it can replace them or build new ones, Graft rears it ugly head. 

I have read several similar such things. I take them all, on both sides, with many grains of salt. Russia for sure has lots of problems, many of which are serious. It could be something so simple as the unavailability of eggs that catalyzes  the inexorable fall of the Russian Federation. Stranger things have happened.  It isn't wise to count on these prospective articles IMO, because even if they are unbiased it is very difficult to predict what will happen even in relatively open countries, let alone one as closed as Russia has become. The "fall" of the Soviet Union is a good example of the general failure to forecast the political future.

By their count, Russia and Ukraine are close to even in terms of tanks but Ukraine's biggest problem is its lack of air power. Russia can build fortified lines since it has not real airborne attack risk.

Exactly correct IMO. If Ukraine can generate even local air superiority over fortified spots, they can break through them with "reasonable" casualties. When that happens, Russia has a problem. Those "fortress" troops aren't very mobile. They can't "heal the breach" themselves. It requires a mobile reserve, and in the south Russia no longer has that. Obviously, even if some troops were dispatched to stop the Ukrainians they would be very vulnerable when moving.

The question is can Ukraine cobble together enough of an air force with the F-16s they will be getting to be effective and remain effective? It is a heavy lift. That is why IMO the US needs to make it clear to Ukraine that we will provide as many F-16s as they need as long as we can train the pilots to the minimal extent (at least) the we feel is necessary. Ukraine is going to lose aircraft. They need to lose aircraft. If you fly so safe that you don't get hit occasionally, you can't do your job. However, if you only have 40 or so airplanes (and no replacements available), your loss tolerance is almost nil.

The Russian air force has basically operated in "safe" mode for this whole war. How they get away with that I really don't understand. Stand-off weapons are great, but sometimes you do have to go "downtown". Perhaps during the initial phases of the war they convinced themselves it was "too dangerous". IMO all along the Russian air force has decided they don't want to die in Ukraine. If Ukraine generates local air superiority in critical battles, the Russian air force may have to rethink their approach. Let's hope we get to see it.

[Goose]

I recently read an article which concluded that Russia was on the verge of becoming a failed state. It stated that despite Russian media releases, it is losing tanks at a faster rate than it can replace them or build new ones, Graft rears it ugly head. 

I have read several similar such things. I take them all, on both sides, with many grains of salt. Russia for sure has lots of problems, many of which are serious. It could be something so simple as the unavailability of eggs that catalyzes  the inexorable fall of the Russian Federation. Stranger things have happened.  It isn't wise to count on these prospective articles IMO, because even if they are unbiased it is very difficult to predict what will happen even in relatively open countries, let alone one as closed as Russia has become. The "fall" of the Soviet Union is a good example of the general failure to forecast the political future.

By their count, Russia and Ukraine are close to even in terms of tanks but Ukraine's biggest problem is its lack of air power. Russia can build fortified lines since it has not real airborne attack risk.

Exactly correct IMO. If Ukraine can generate even local air superiority over fortified spots, they can break through them with "reasonable" casualties. When that happens, Russia has a problem. Those "fortress" troops aren't very mobile. They can't "heal the breach" themselves. It requires a mobile reserve, and in the south Russia no longer has that. Obviously, even if some troops were dispatched to stop the Ukrainians they would be very vulnerable when moving.

The question is can Ukraine cobble together enough of an air force with the F-16s they will be getting to be effective and remain effective? It is a heavy lift. That is why IMO the US needs to make it clear to Ukraine that we will provide as many F-16s as they need as long as we can train the pilots to the minimal extent (at least) the we feel is necessary. Ukraine is going to lose aircraft. They need to lose aircraft. If you fly so safe that you don't get hit occasionally, you can't do your job. However, if you only have 40 or so airplanes (and no replacements available), your loss tolerance is almost nil.

The Russian air force has basically operated in "safe" mode for this whole war. How they get away with that I really don't understand. Stand-off weapons are great, but sometimes you do have to go "downtown". Perhaps during the initial phases of the war they convinced themselves it was "too dangerous". IMO all along the Russian air force has decided they don't want to die in Ukraine. If Ukraine generates local air superiority in critical battles, the Russian air force may have to rethink their approach. Let's hope we get to see it.