How to ruin an F-16?

[Lunatik]

Iraq wants to buy 36 U.S. F-16 fighters. Older models can be had for under $50 million each, while the latest versions go for about $75 million. It would take at least five years to train Iraqi pilots and ground crews to effectively use and maintain such aircraft. Even then, there will probably be problems. The historical experience has been that, in Arab countries, buying such high tech warplanes, run into personnel problems. Pilots are often selected more for their loyalty to the government, than for their flying skills. Ground crew jobs pay well, and are sometimes given out at gifts to loyal supporters of whoever is running the government at the moment. As a result, the high-tech aircraft tend to be flown by substandard pilots, and not available for operations (because of poor maintenance) as much as in Western air forces.

The U.S. government has to approve this purchase which, given the recession going on in the United States, may be difficult to turn down.​

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htproc/articles/20080907.aspx​

 

[rock45]

Vipers

I think high end Vipers are in the $85/90 mil range with goodies.

In generalArab or Middle East country/air force don't maintain and services their Viper/Eagles/Hornets, without some help. It would be interesting forming a list of known Russian or former Eastern Block countries that have help keep Russian made gear flying, in the same general region?

Only two possibles comes to mind and that's Pakistan and Turkey. Pakistan's trainers have flown UAE Mirage 2000-5/9 fighter and American made Block-60 Vipers, and service most of UAE air force in general. They service Saudi's aircraft not sure if they work on F-15s or not. They service Kuwaits Mirage F1 but not sure about the Hornets, this guy on this other forum told me they do but don't fly them. I can't confirm it either way maybe somebody here knows?

I think Turkey soon if not already because of the production rights sold to them for upgrading F-16s. Not sure if there kits and only parts or sections are built in Turkey but one must assume in time they will be.

I read that Pakistan's Navy is invloved in training Sudan's navy so maybe their invloved in their AF as well. Sudan does have a few Chinese built aircraft J-7s I think and Q-5s, Pakistan know the Chinese types. Learning about Sudan's few Mig-29s would be useful since India flies that type.

If it is true that Pakistan pilots had Frances best Mirage 2000-5 and 9, the two seat strike type and Block-60 with the first production ASEA radar in Pakistan, did the Chinese get to look under the hood?

Does anybody know if Pakistan might have help with Iran's F-5 fleet?

 

[A Can of Man]

I think a lot of Middle Eastern countries look for US contractors to help with maintenance.

 

[UnitedSomalia]

Iraq had never had problems maintaining their air force before the 1991 sanctions kicked in, Iraqis, Iranians, and Egyptians are very adaptive and independent people, they are not like the useless Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and Kuwait. Iraqi at its height maintained one of the largest air forces in the world, and had very skilled pilots from the Iran-Iraq war. Iran is currently reverse engineering many of the parts needed to maintain its air force and currently building their own aircrafts based on American and Russian designs with sanctions in effect which is a testament to their ingenuity.

I for one think that it will be a mistake for the Iraqis to buy the F-16s because that will be another way for the Americans to have control of their military and if Iraqis act in a way that doesn't serve America's interests all America has to do is refuse parts and services like they did to Chavez of Venezuela. It will also be better for Iraqis to buy Russian equipment in which they are accustomed to and would be easier for them to maintain and fly. Russia has comparable planes available that are on par with the F-16 such as the SU-27s and MIG-29s, and planes that far outperform the F-16s such as the MIG-30, MIG-35, SU-35 and such.

 

[SHERMAN]

Well, it would stand to reason that they would buy Russian planes, after all any of their existing aircrew and groundcrew are adapted to those. However, I very much doubt the US would allow such a deal to go through, and with the US right now in military controll, its impossible for the Iraqis to do much about that.

 

[rock45]

F-16 are better investments

UnitedSomalia

Iraq had never had problems maintaining their air force before the 1991 sanctions kicked in, Iraqis, Iranians, and Egyptians are very adaptive and independent people,

I don’t agree with you on that and I’ll try to explain why
Iraq – I was never impressed with them in general that had more assets to work with then Iran but could never put them away. Their aircraft were the lesser export models Mig-21, Mig-23, Mig-25, and a few Mig-29, most of the big Mig-29 order was canceled and MIG sold off the frames as upgrades and replacements over years. All of these aircraft are short ranged, poor radar, older cockpit layouts, average to poor missiles, short engine life’s, Iraq should have bought more F1 Mirages they were the Iraqi’s favorite. I once heard a rumor that France almost had a large Mirage 2000 order but the 91 war broke out.

they are not like the useless Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and Kuwait.

I kind of agree with you on these countries Pakistan provides a lot of training and support for Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Kuwait, not sure about Bahrain.

Iraqi at its height maintained one of the largest air forces in the world, and had very skilled pilots from the Iran-Iraq war.

Very skill would apply they were effective and eight years of fighting showed they weren’t.

Iran is currently reverse engineering many of the parts needed to maintain its air force and currently building their own aircrafts based on American and Russian designs with sanctions in effect which is a testament to their ingenuity.

Twenty-five old F-5 design paste on aircraft? Basically useless frame just like the F-14s that they manage to get up to fly in those Photoshop flights for the press. If one of the reasons the USN dropped them was maintenance how useful would 30 year old early model Iranian Tomcat could be, really. Pull some heavy Gs and go in afterburners a few times and the Iranian pilots will be hoping the ejection handles still work.
A testament on how they back themselves into a corner and let there air force drop to all time low in modern equipment. Basically a small European NATO country with tanker support to win against Irans AF. Most of Iran's aircraft couldn't run three combat sorties in a row most likely.

I for one think that it will be a mistake for the Iraqis to buy the F-16s because that will be another way for the Americans to have control of their military and if Iraqis act in a way that doesn't serve America's interests all America has to do is refuse parts and services like they did to Chavez of Venezuela.

With any government there is a chance that bans, etc, if you mess with the supplier. The US and European Oil & Gas companies are very interested in Iraq’s oil so once Iraq gets the outsiders out and groups & people stop killing each other many countries and not just the US will be falling over themselves to sell them fighter and other equipment. This means they wouldn’t want to lose a good oil rich customer. There be kissing there ass like Saudi Arabia.
Chavez is his own worst enemy in ways and he screwing over his own country daily you make it sound like he’s a good world leader or something. Oil production is down, takes away basic rights, government control everything his laws not the Venezuelan Congress or people vote, his way of no way, and you think he good?

It will also be better for Iraqis to buy Russian equipment in which they are accustomed to and would be easier for them to maintain and fly.

The same Russia made equipment that didn’t help Iraq against half trained Iranians for eight years? There is an Iraqi Mig-25 pilot on this other forum I’m in I’ll PM him and ask him a few questions. He did mention once that the Iraqis like the Mig-21 much better than the Mig-23s. Why buy worthless crap that suck when it flying and not even made anymore.

Russia has comparable planes available that are on par with the F-16 such as the SU-27s and MIG-29s, and planes that far outperform the F-16s such as the MIG-30, MIG-35, SU-35 and such

Su-27 – Good platform but a dated designed really and Russia hasn’t even upgrade (2) regiments for themselves in like 10 years. Most of Russia’s Su-27s can’t even fire their best radar guided missile the AA-12? You rather be in a modern F-16.
Mig-29 – One of my favorites better rate of climb then a F-15C and good thrust, but built by MIG who’s taking four almost five years to delivered India’s Mig-29K (20) aircraft. A underrated aircraft with a poor record but still you rather be in a modern F-16. Russia’s Fulcrums or Flankers aren’t even at a Block-40 Vipers standard from 1991. How many Iraqi pilots trained in the late 80s would even be around or be useful in 2008? Iraq would be starting new anyway and Iraq got the money why buy a car without door handles.
Mig-35 – Vaporware not even produced the one that's flying is a Mig-29M with Mig-35 painted on it. All the new advance equipment, ASEA radar, warning devices, etc not built nor are producers lined up to even make the fancy equipment for it. Without an export order real production lines won't even be built.
You mention Mig-30 no such thing you meant Su-30 type most likely. A better overall platform because it has Israeli, BAE, South African, French, sub-systems in them, the goodies Russia just doesn’t make themselves well or not at all.
Su-35 – five testing aircraft made no real proof of the weapons systems, or radar, or newer engines that last a whooping 4,000 hours like American standards in 1982. Also the biggest target on the battle field not something I want to be in modern combat. Modern not like 10,000 row boats around a Russian Frigate.
American jet engines last for 10,000 hours compared to Russian 2,000 hours. The new Russian types that claim to go to 4,000 haven’t been made / sold yet to follow up this claim. Buying an F-16 is a first class working tested proven product compared anything Russian that a rich oil producing country could buy. Any western type is a better investment for Iraq or there end up like Iran old and useless air force in eight years.
Sorry for the long post

 

[SHERMAN]

actually that was a very good post, well done.

I think there is definetly a problem with assesing Russian hardware because it hardly saw combat in Russian hands against western countries(thank god). The last time Russian aircraft flew against western airforces(correct me if im wrong) was in the early 70s when they flew ot of Egypt. This was Mig-21 flown by Russians vs Mirage IIIs and F-4s flown by Israelis. The result was 5-0 to the Israelis, although they were outnoumbered. It was very long ago, but still an intresting thing to think about.

 

[A Can of Man]

Well Russian aircraft are supposed to outnumber their enemy. Part of their doctrine actually I believe.

 

[SHERMAN]

Well Russian aircraft are supposed to outnumber their enemy. Part of their doctrine actually I believe.

Well, that may be true, but there is a small problem. None of Russias clients can efford to outnoumber their enemy...The Syrians and Egyptians both paid the price for using russian doctrine of mass atacks when they had nothing close to the right ammount of equippment to do it. Im talking about land and air.

 

[A Can of Man]

So either way... Buy American. Buy AMRAAM.

 

[UnitedSomalia]

See Russian equipment is very rugged and reliable compared to their Western counterparts that need heavy maintenance, good landing strips and repairs very often. The thing that made Russian equipment look bad is the fact that they were operated by 3rd world pilots with little training who got the job through connections to the regime and not because of their qualifications. Also the Russian equipment these 3rd world countries had were stripped down export versions, because during the cold war Russia would not export their advance jets and toys outside the Warsaw pact so if they get shot down they wouldn't fall into Israeli or Western hands for analysis. I doubt those MiGs and Sukhois would have performed so bad had they been operated by Russian pilots and I doubt the Iraqi air force of 800 jets would have performed badly in the 1991 Gulf war had those planes been operated by Russian pilots instead of Iraqi pilots, it would also have been hard for the coalition to obtain air superiority so easily. Lets also remember when East Germany reintegrated with West Germany and those MiG-29s of the former East German air force were tested against their western counterparts, those MiGs best their American counterparts. It goes to show you that MiG and Sukhois can be just as deadly if not more when operated by highly trained pilots such as Russian or East Germans.

The Russians have very potent arms industry and with the latest infusion of all those oil money and order from other countries, the T-95 will began to be supplied to the Russian army in 2009 and the Russians are investing heavy money to get the SU-35 and SU-45 to be produced, As Putin stated so Russia could have air crafts that can be more than a match for their American counterpart F-22 and F-35, that can also be complimented with the already produced SU-30s.

 

[rock45]

rugged

See Russian equipment is very rugged and reliable compared to their Western counterparts that need heavy maintenance, good landing strips and repairs very often.

Russian aircraft are reliable? Been reading those types of comments for years it's not like Russia uses dirt or grass air stripes for their fighters. Rocks of other debris on the runways will take out or damage Russian engines as well. Western type aircraft and not just American have a huge known advantage over Russian type from fighters to transports as far maintenance

Russian equipment look bad is the fact that they were operated by 3rd world pilots with little training who got the job through connections to the regime and not because of their qualifications

I agree in part with this statement but not entirely Russia in most cases provides the training. Russia doesn’t train much differently then how they train their customers because that’s all they have. Russia lacks in advance training for their own forces and lots of times the trainers get more flight time in other countries do the training.
If you just grab an average squadron of Su-27s or Mig-29s from Russia and move their maintenance equipment, spares, pilots etc, into“Red Flag” type training. You would see how poorly trained they really are compared to most modern air forces. Look at the very basic 80s style of fighting Russia was able to muster up against the Georgians. They had fifty plus year old pilots flying 20 years bombers turn into recon aircraft, Su-24s, Su-25 (I like the Su-25 a lot good aircraft needs to be modernized) lack of smart weapons, poor target selection, and much more. Russia hasn’t been good at this for twenty five years with then own forces so how could they train their customers? Do you see the point I’m trying to make it starts at home. Russia is shells of what they were in 1970 and no way near the production giants they once were military wise producing modern weapons, they lost the Cold War. Reading a few of your post I don’t think I’m going to convince you but look it up. Look at the training levels, look up how their support their customer during and after sales, look up India’s first Mig-29 purchases, India’s and China’s Flanker sales and productions, China’s lack of new sales with Russia, you could find articles on how Russian small units are training with ammo from the 70s, and much more. The fact is very few countries that have changed over from Russian to western ever go back to Russian. Most western built weapons and not just from the United States last longer, perform better, then Russian built. Yes Russia cost less and some case the customer can’t afford or doesn’t has access to western type weapons thus the reason why Russia still get sales. Pay attention closely to what’s being sold and you’ll see 7 out 10 times its really not modern or new weapons or equipment being sold.

because during the cold war Russia would not export their advance jets and toys outside the Warsaw pact so if they get shot down they wouldn't fall into Israeli or Western hands for analysis

This is an old way of thinking like pre 1975, Israel is one of the most advance arms maker in the world what do you think Russia producers anymore that Israel, America, or other modern western countries don’t make better already or know of. The US knew right away when that Mig-25 landed in Japan that Russia was way behind the west knew right then.

I doubt those MiGs and Sukhois would have performed so bad had they been operated by Russian pilots and I doubt the Iraqi air force of 800 jets would have performed badly in the 1991 Gulf war had those planes been operated by Russian pilots instead of Iraqi pilots, it would also have been hard for the coalition to obtain air superiority so easily.

Iraq Sukhois if any would have been Su-17/20/22, not any Su-27/30. The end result would have been the same again it comes down to maintenance, training, equipment. How many of those 800 aircraft are even flyable? Russian pilots don’t get training time anywhere on the same level as NATO pilots and crews, their radar’s and command and control would have been destroyed the same way, maybe a few extra sorties but the end would have came. Try to look past the American or Israeli feelings you have and look just at the platform itself and who’s flying it. I agree good pilots can get more from a aircraft but even good pilots in a Mig23 from 1976 going up against good F-15C pilots supported by AWACS. Look at how Russia just fought in 2008 with what they had and how they used it and that’s in conflict where they moved forces and equipment into the region beforehand too. Do you really think it would have turned out much different in Iraq in 1991 with Russian forces?

I answer the other part of your post soon didn't want to make this another lost post. If you have any questions ask away. You made a comment about US supporting certain sides in Africa I have to find the post but I have some questions for you. I'll post them in the correct thead not here.

 

[UnitedSomalia]

The American and Western jets are often operated by technically capable nations with some sort of technical know how and infrastructer. Nations such as European nations, Taiwan, Pakistan, Turkey and Israeli have the technical know how to maintain these Western Aircraft, their pilots are also well trained and promoted due to their competence. Nations such as Egypt, Morocco, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and such would not be able to operate and service those aircrafts if it wasn't for Western or Pakistani technicians. Now look at the countries that operate Russian jets, they are all African and poor Asian countries that have no technical know how to service the aircraft properly and who don't have the money need to maintain foreign technicians like the Gulf countries can, so their aircrafts are usually in poor conditions. The only nations that buy Russian equipment and have the ability to train their own pilots and have the technical know how to maintain the Russians jets properly are China and India. That is the difference between the Western and Russian equipment, the Western equipment are operated by nations with technical know how or have the money to pay for foreign technicians whil Russian equipment is bought by poor 3rd world nations.

You think those American F-15s and F-16s would have achieved air superiority against a Russian force operation SU-30s, SU-27s, MiG-29s, and MiG-31s in Iraq? No! The reason Western equipment always looked so good is because they went against a generation older and stripped down export versions of Russian jets that were operated by 3rd world or small nations. In Serbia, in the Middle East, in Latin America, in Asia those F-15s, F-16s, F-14s went against MiG-21s, MiG-17s, MiG-15s, SU-7s and such which were generally decades older in comparison to their Western counterparts and had export version radars and missiles. Had those F-15s, F-16s, F-14s went against updated MiG-29s, MiG-31s, SU-27s, SU-30s I believe the Western jets hype would be deflated.

Also look at how Russian MiG-29s operated by East German air force beat their American counterparts in F-15s I believe, when Germany became unified. Also look at how Indian SU-30s performed at red flag against their Western counterparts with F-16s, F-15s, Rafaels, and F-18s. This is testaments to how up to date Russian jets with capable pilots can perform.

 

[SHERMAN]

In Korea, Vietnam, Middle east, all those cases it was same generation fighters. Mirage IIIs flown by Israelis defeated russian pilots in the eraly 70s, when the Russians were in "top-shape". Mig-25 the big threat was shot down easily by F-15s. You cant ignore everything that happened in the last 40 years...

 

[rock45]

aircraft

You think those American F-15s and F-16s would have achieved air superiority against a Russian force operation SU-30s, SU-27s, MiG-29s, and MiG-31s in Iraq?

To begin with were talking about the first Gulf War right? Iraq didn't have SU-30s, SU-27s, and MiG-31s. So putting Russian pilots in the Iraqi aircraft at that time wouldnt changed much for the training and maintenance reasons I listed. Look it up most of Russia fighter don't have the best AA-12, so even these Su-27, Su-30, and the cold war beast Mig-31 would fail as well. The US and friends had more advance fighters supported by AWACS, tanker support, ground air bases to operate from, plus carriers nearby and I think in the Red Sea as well.

They sell better aircraft then they have for themselves they would have lost badly. Besides that fact Russia not could draw 300 aircraft to deploy to Iraq in 1991 or now for that fact.

Look at how they fought in 2008 and what they used? Look at the platforms most of the gear is from the 80s up and down all their forces in every branch.

You mentioned the US going up against went against MiG-21s, MiG-17s, MiG-15s, SU-7s and such which were generally decades older in comparison to their Western counterparts. Is that the US fault? Should the US have taken out retirement A-7 and F-4, would have won anyway before of training and better equipment.

Had those F-15s, F-16s, F-14s went against updated MiG-29s, MiG-31s, SU-27s, SU-30s I believe the Western jets hype would be deflated

.
This is the part your not getting there are no upgraded Russian fighters. Even the Su-27M1 is mainly a solftware upgrade and cockpit, not even a radar. There exported Su-30 MKI has a good radar but not the Russian types. Russia doesn't have any thing to really compare to western types as far operating equipment and training standards. There are Russians on different forums I'm in who say the same thing what make you think you know more about their equipment they they do.

Also look at how Russian MiG-29s operated by East German air force beat their American counterparts in F-15s I believe, when Germany became unified

I'm a Mig-29 fan so I'll try to explain yes Fulcrums have won more of the of the pre-arrange mock training fights, more so early on. But there arrange in way that the two fighter would have to fight, that's not how air comabt is fought in real life. In most cases old F-4 had to guide the Fulcrums into the pre-arrange battle zone because of the Fulcrums poor radar. I hope you see that its a bad thing if in battle I can see you first and you can't see me. That mean in simple basic terms I can get my aircraft which has better range to boot into a better firing position in which to shoot my missiles. I ask you who do yu think going to win if it was a real fight in live combat? The mock training/fights is very short and almost like you grab two people and throw them at each other and making them fight. This is because of the short flight time the basic Fulcrum has. The Fulcrum is a good turner and with the AA-11 HMS it did well in this type of a pre-arrange setup.

The Indian Su-30 MKI is a very different aircraft then anything Russia has its Israeli, BAE, and French sub systems in them. And India pilots who get more then 250 hours training time, Russia pilots get around 50. Try to move pass the Anti-American thinking the best parts of the Su-30 MK are not Russian nor are the Russians flying them. Russian pilots would fall over themselves to fly a Su-30 MKI then their 1998 Su-27

I like talking about aviation, tactics and follow arms deals as well one of my favorite hobbies but if you can't get past your way thinking and open up to ideas or input from others I won't bother answering anymore of your posts.

 

[A Can of Man]

In Korea the Russians flew a lot of the MiGs but they got shot down by the Americans all the same. It was a secret for almost forty years I think. But the kill ratio was like 12:1 and the MiG-15 wasn't an inferior aircraft to the F-86 in many respects.

 

[rock45]

Mig-15

I watch a few shows and read about the F-86 VS. Mig-15, and if flown right the Mig-15 should have done better. A perfect example on how good training and tactics teamed with strong maintenance works. The core training the Russian provided is where it stems from. The more vs. the better worked in WW-II really more near the end or say from 1943 on.

Russia just can’t get past that way of thinking after War World II the military leadership carried that into the early stages of the Cold War. The next group of rising military leaders to move up and advance had to play the game which made older way of thinking carry on a little longer.
Look at all the Middle East Wars, Pakistan-India, and the fighting in Africa years ago too currently and you’ll see Russian tactics still being used from years ago.

Going back in the past and giving a weak example, giving say Syria 600 tanks just isn’t good enough anymore nor is the terrain and situation the same.
Not that I wanted this to happen but in the 1973 War, if Egypt and Syria went after Israeli’s air bases and command and control in their early attacks it may have proved more effective. This type of fighting or training was not taught to its clients by the Russians because they themselves don’t have it. It comes back on many levels to the core training and thinking the Russian provide.
Look at the Georgian conflict and how a modern equipped and trained force may have operated.
1. Use tactical missiles or standoff/smart weapons to take out radar and command & control. Now your enemy is blinded and basically can’t be lead well because commutations’ are down or hurt badly. It’s a small country and it’s not like had (20) commander centers. Russia knows just about where everything is right? Special Forces would have blended in easy enough to do a little damage in this area. Very little of the above happen in a modern way.
2. The few Georgian air bases should have been taken out. Having enemy Su-25s flying I think on the third day of the conflict makes the Russia look so bad. It’s one of the points I’m trying to make to that anti-American, Russian equipment loving person to understand. Tactics and basic core training isn’t there.
3. Locating forward deployed heavy forces like artillery, tanks, dug in strong points, etc, and the few rear units supporting the forward deployed forces are. It’s not like the enemy or target forces had hundreds of thousands of troops deployed over a huge area. A modern military would have hit these assets first if not early on. Tactics and basic core training isn’t there, plus equipment. This was showed clearly in this conflict from day one.
4. Naval forces should have timed their anti-ship missile attacks at the same time air attacks were carried out. Confuse and overwhelmed your enemy.

 

[perseus]

In Korea the Russians flew a lot of the MiGs but they got shot down by the Americans all the same. It was a secret for almost forty years I think. But the kill ratio was like 12:1 and the MiG-15 wasn't an inferior aircraft to the F-86 in many respects.

I hear a great deal about claimed ratios, but these differ immensely. Here is Wiki on the Sabre

By the end of hostilities, F-86 pilots were credited with shooting down 792 MiGs for a loss of only 78 Sabres, a victory ratio of 10 to 1.[20] Postwar totals officially credited by the USAF are 379 kills for 103 Sabres lost,[21] amounting to a ratio of nearly 4 to 1. Modern research by Dorr, Lake and Thompson has claimed the actual ratio is closer to 2 to 1.[22]

The Soviet claims of downing over 600 Sabres[23] together with the Chinese claims[24] are considered exaggerated by the USAF.[citation needed].

Recent USAF records show that 224 F-86s were lost to all causes, including non-combat losses. But direct comparison of Sabre and MiG losses seem irrelevant, since primary targets for MiGs were heavy B-29 bombers and ground-attack aircraft, while the primary targets for Sabres were MiG-15s.

A recent RAND report[25] made reference to "recent scholarship" of F-86 vs. MiG-15 combat over Korea and concluded that the actual kill:loss ratio for the F-86 was 1.8:1 overall, and likely 1.3:1 against MiGs flown by Soviet pilots; however, the report has been under fire for various misrepresentations.[26]

If the overall ratio was anywhere near 2:1 then the Soviets must have been near parity at least.

Note the last part in bold is like comparing the RAF to Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain, the pilots and aircraft were only one part of the equation. It depends what you are trying to shoot down !

 

[rock45]

ratios

Thanks perseus very interesting it kind of explains a little better to me because aircraft vs. aircraft the Mig-15 should have done better. I always assume the US fielded more fighter near the end of the war and the better training kick in. The Mig-15s going after the B-29s makes perfect sense the Chinese and North Korans would have been very helpless against such attacks.

 

[A Can of Man]

But the pattern is like so: American hardware proved to be superior at every turn and the Russian hardware always seems to be hanging onto excuses.