Tuesday, April 15, 2025
F-16 Shootdown: Why U.S. Could Be Behind The 2nd Confirmed Crash Of Ukraine’s Fighting Falcon: OPED
By Vijainder K Thakur
-April 14, 2025
On April 12, 2025, the Ukrainian Air Force reported the loss of an F-16 fighter jet during a combat mission in eastern Ukraine—marking the second confirmed F-16 loss since the aircraft’s operational induction in August 2024.
Unusually, the incident was acknowledged within hours, following initial reports on social media around 1:00 PM Kyiv time. At 2:42 PM, Acting President Volodymyr Zelenskyy publicly confirmed the loss on X.com, posting:
“Today, Captain Pavlo Ivanov was tragically killed during an F-16 combat mission. He was only 26. My condolences to his family and all of Pavlo’s brothers-in-arms
Military officials have provided the necessary reports on the situation. We are establishing all the circumstances…”
The Ukrainian Air Force formally announced the incident later that evening, at 9:23 PM Kyiv time, confirming both the aircraft loss and the death of Captain Ivanov.
Zelenskyy’s swift acknowledgment suggests a message beyond the facts themselves—something we will explore further in the narrative.
What Caused The Loss?
Ukrainian authorities have not disclosed the exact location or cause of the incident that led to the death of Captain Pavlo Ivanov, a former Su-25 pilot who had transitioned to the F-16.
This was an unusual transition, considering the dramatically different vintages and roles of the two fighters. It would best be explained by the paucity of fighter pilots in the war-ravaged country.
Following the shootdown, speculation surged over the circumstances surrounding the loss. A Telegram channel known for reliable reporting cited an eyewitness who claimed, “There was a Russian missile that was very close to an F-16 over Sumy.”
This prompted theories that the aircraft may have been brought down by a long-range R-37 (RVV-BD) air-to-air missile, potentially launched from a Russian Su-35, Su-57, or MiG-31BM. The R-37, launched from high altitude, can engage targets up to 300 km away.
The S-400 system was considered unlikely to be involved, as Western intelligence closely monitors its deployment and operational status.
However, the reliability of these eyewitness reports came into question. Several claimed the F-16 was “being chased by missiles” as it flew towards the Russian border—a scenario inconsistent with how such engagements work. A missile fired from Russian territory would likely engage the aircraft head-on, not from behind.
Inevitably, friendly fire theories began circulating, with some reports suggesting the F-16 was mistakenly downed by Ukrainian air defenses.
Speculation ended on April 13 when the Russian Ministry of Defence (RuMoD) issued a statement claiming responsibility:
“Air defenses shot down a Ukrainian F-16 aircraft, eight JDAM guided aerial bombs, seven US-made HIMARS missiles, and 207 fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicles.”
While the statement confirmed the F-16’s downing, it did not specify the weapon system or exact location involved.
File Image: F-16
What Likely Happened
Ukraine currently has a limited number of operational F-16s, with reports suggesting the fleet may not exceed 16 aircraft. Of these, only 6–8 are likely combat-ready at any given time. They are distributed across multiple air bases and primarily tasked with air defense, targeting Russian cruise missiles such as the stealthy Kh-101 and the less stealthy Kalibr. Occasionally, they are assigned strike missions.
For attacks on Russian ground targets across the border, Ukrainian F-16s employ Small Diameter Bombs (SDBs) and JDAM-ERs (Joint Direct Attack Munition – Extended Range). The range of these glide bombs depends on the release altitude, which typically ranges from 10,000 to 40,000 feet.
To target enemy radars and air defense systems, F-16s use the AGM-88 HARM missile. Unlike glide bombs, the HARM is a powered, high-speed weapon that accelerates to over Mach 2 within seconds of launch. Upon release, it appears to blast forward past the launching F-16, a visible contrast to the slower, gliding bombs. To the uninitiated, the HARM at launch could look like a missile going past the F-16.
To release any of these weapons effectively, F-16s must approach the Russian border at low altitude to minimize radar detection. Near the calculated release point, the aircraft climbs to achieve the required altitude and speed for weapon delivery—an action that exposes it to enemy radar.
Release points are carefully chosen to avoid detection by long-range air defense systems such as the S-400, with the goal of staying outside missile engagement zones. However, on April 12, Captain Pavlo Ivanov appears to have entered one of these zones.
There are two plausible explanations:
Conclusion
Acting President Zelensky announced the loss of a Ukrainian F-16 fighter jet on April 12, shortly after social media reports surfaced about a shootdown.
The following day, the Russian Ministry of Defence (RuMoD) confirmed the incident, crediting it to Russian air defenses.
For months—indeed, years—Ukrainian MiG-29s, Su-27s, and now F-16s have been conducting attacks using glide bombs and AGM-88 HARM missiles. This operational rhythm makes the question inevitable:
What Likely Happened
Ukraine currently has a limited number of operational F-16s, with reports suggesting the fleet may not exceed 16 aircraft. Of these, only 6–8 are likely combat-ready at any given time. They are distributed across multiple air bases and primarily tasked with air defense, targeting Russian cruise missiles such as the stealthy Kh-101 and the less stealthy Kalibr. Occasionally, they are assigned strike missions.
For attacks on Russian ground targets across the border, Ukrainian F-16s employ Small Diameter Bombs (SDBs) and JDAM-ERs (Joint Direct Attack Munition – Extended Range). The range of these glide bombs depends on the release altitude, which typically ranges from 10,000 to 40,000 feet.
To target enemy radars and air defense systems, F-16s use the AGM-88 HARM missile. Unlike glide bombs, the HARM is a powered, high-speed weapon that accelerates to over Mach 2 within seconds of launch. Upon release, it appears to blast forward past the launching F-16, a visible contrast to the slower, gliding bombs. To the uninitiated, the HARM at launch could look like a missile going past the F-16.
To release any of these weapons effectively, F-16s must approach the Russian border at low altitude to minimize radar detection. Near the calculated release point, the aircraft climbs to achieve the required altitude and speed for weapon delivery—an action that exposes it to enemy radar.
Release points are carefully chosen to avoid detection by long-range air defense systems such as the S-400, with the goal of staying outside missile engagement zones. However, on April 12, Captain Pavlo Ivanov appears to have entered one of these zones.
There are two plausible explanations:
- Pilot error in calculating or executing the release profile.
- Intelligence failure—Ukrainian forces may have been unaware of the exact position of Russian air defense systems in the area.
Acting President Zelensky announced the loss of a Ukrainian F-16 fighter jet on April 12, shortly after social media reports surfaced about a shootdown.
The following day, the Russian Ministry of Defence (RuMoD) confirmed the incident, crediting it to Russian air defenses.
For months—indeed, years—Ukrainian MiG-29s, Su-27s, and now F-16s have been conducting attacks using glide bombs and AGM-88 HARM missiles. This operational rhythm makes the question inevitable:
What went wrong on April 12?
As previously noted, two scenarios are plausible:
While pilot error is always a possibility, the latter scenario raises more serious implications. If Ukrainian forces were unaware of the S-400’s presence, it suggests that U.S./NATO may have withheld up-to-date ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) data.
If that is the case, Zelensky’s unusually swift public acknowledgment of the F-16’s loss—even before the Air Force officially confirmed it—could be seen as a deliberate political signal, perhaps intended to highlight the consequences of such intelligence shortfalls.
More broadly, this incident underscores the strategic fragility of Ukraine’s small F-16 fleet. Despite the aircraft’s capabilities, limited spares, trained crews, and persistent exposure to advanced Russian air defenses challenge the fleet’s sustaining operations.
If support gaps in intelligence-sharing persist, the implications for Ukraine’s ability to effectively deploy these high-value assets—and for the broader trajectory of the war—are deeply concerning.Vijainder K Thakur is a retired IAF Jaguar pilot, author, software architect, entrepreneur, and military analyst.
As previously noted, two scenarios are plausible:
- Pilot error—a miscalculation during the attack run.
- Intelligence gap—the Ukrainian Air Force was unaware of a nearby S-400 system.
While pilot error is always a possibility, the latter scenario raises more serious implications. If Ukrainian forces were unaware of the S-400’s presence, it suggests that U.S./NATO may have withheld up-to-date ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) data.
If that is the case, Zelensky’s unusually swift public acknowledgment of the F-16’s loss—even before the Air Force officially confirmed it—could be seen as a deliberate political signal, perhaps intended to highlight the consequences of such intelligence shortfalls.
More broadly, this incident underscores the strategic fragility of Ukraine’s small F-16 fleet. Despite the aircraft’s capabilities, limited spares, trained crews, and persistent exposure to advanced Russian air defenses challenge the fleet’s sustaining operations.
If support gaps in intelligence-sharing persist, the implications for Ukraine’s ability to effectively deploy these high-value assets—and for the broader trajectory of the war—are deeply concerning.Vijainder K Thakur is a retired IAF Jaguar pilot, author, software architect, entrepreneur, and military analyst.
The now frequent shootdowns of the advanced US fighterjets in various ongoing battlefields hide a FACT that no yanks militia know yet r not willing to admit.
ReplyDeleteThe Yank still have the maintaining personnel & expertise in keeping their military fleets on air, land & sea.
But the broken material supply chains have handicapped the workability of their maintainences. Moreover, many stocked key parts have been deplected due to incessantly supplying demands to keep the zionist state's fighterjets in the Palestine combat airzones. The blockage of the critically required rare earth materials by China have hampered their periodically working maintenances. Many existing fighterjets r either in cannibalistic stage (parts removed to supply the zionist state fleet) or key components r beyond normal workability stage.