• sartalon@lemmy.worldEnglish
    53·
    1 year ago

    This sounds wildly implausible, or at least very exaggerated.

    I’ve worked on jets. If you put them in pieces, you are talking months (at least 3-6), to put them back together. Modern jets aren’t Legos. They are very complex machines that require testing and fine tuning.

    Most flight surface controls and engines parts have flight hour limits that are painstakingly logged so preventative maintenance maximizes service lifetime. When we transferred jets, we also delivered their maintenance history.

    When we mothball aircraft, we only remove certain components and basically seal it up. To take it out of mothball and reassemble it, under normal circumstances, you are talking 8 months.

    Maybe they surreptitiously transferred aircraft to Ukraine, I can believe that. But if they broke them down into individual parts and said, “Here you go!”, the proper response would be, “Go fuck yourself.”

    I imagine this story started out one way and has just been embellished each telling.

    • InfiniteStruggle@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      331·
      1 year ago

      Maybe they just rolled the jets there, took the hubcaps of the fuel inlet off of every one of them (so that they are “disassembled”) and then let ukraine know.

      So still technically correct and within international arms trade law, but the jets got through without needing too much reassembly.

      Maybe put some clingwrap or something over the inlet so moisture doesn’t get in.

      • avrachan@lemmings.worldEnglish
        52·
        1 year ago

        So still technically correct and within international arms trade law, but the jets got through without needing too much reassembly.

        that’s very interesting!!

        where can I learn international law regarding the transfer of military aircrafs?

  • kersploosh@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    461·
    1 year ago

    And where did you get those unmarked crates of R-27’s?

    They fell off a truck. Now stop asking questions.

  • mkwt@lemmy.worldEnglish
    17·
    1 year ago

    This reminds me of the beginning of lend lease. Where the us and Canada built a few air strips in the middle of nowhere that just happened to straddle the border.

    1. American factory pilot would fly brand new fighter plane and land carefully on the neutral American side of the runway and drive away.
    2. Somehow, the now abandoned salvage property would get towed to the other side
    3. British pilot in Dominion of Canada gets in and flies to United Kingdom.
    • AndyLikesCandy@reddthat.comEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      Came here for this. Need to find an island air strip where we store all the factory reject F35s to host some lost Ukrainian fishermen…

  • WoefKat@lemmy.mlEnglish
    142·
    1 year ago

    Whyd they even need the US’ blessing? Normally the country that manufactured the arms has a veto but in this case that was Russia. So who cares?

    Of course Russia would have vetoed these jets being used against them so it sounds like this 'rule ’ doesn’t always apply either.

    But well done to the polish. Of course they know what it’s like to be first on the chopping block, sadly.

    • AccmRazr@lemm.eeEnglish
      181·
      1 year ago

      It’s written in the Nitter link but Poland wanted the backing of the US in the event Russia would attack Poland. They wanted it to be an “Allied” decision as opposed to just a Polish decision.

    • crispy_kilt@feddit.deEnglish
      33·
      1 year ago

      Same reason Germany coordinates with the US when it comes to giving Ukraine weapons: the US is the only country in the world at the moment that is completely invincible, so having it share the responsibility is a good idea

        • crispy_kilt@feddit.deEnglish
          11·
          1 year ago

          Defending and attacking are two different things. I meant the US cannot be defeated by an attacker.

          • avrachan@lemmings.worldEnglish
            03·
            1 year ago

            then Russia makes a better example of a invincible empire.

            Sweden, France, Germany have all tried at their peak strength to conquer Russia and failed.

            USA with its geographical isolation has been lucky in that regard.

              • WoefKat@lemmy.mlEnglish
                1·
                1 year ago

                Yah a fully expendable population makes for unlimited cannon fodder :(

                Edit: Not saying Russians are expendable. Just saying that their previous dictatorships (and arguably the current!) considers them as such. I have nothing against Russians but I do against their governments.

                It’s mad to think this country has only had a democracy for a year or so in the 90s. Which began with the fall of the USSR and ended with Yeltsin’s coup.

                • crispy_kilt@feddit.deEnglish
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  Russians aren’t more expendable than any other human being. They’re just being treated as such by their fascist regime. I know it’s easy to start thinking badly of all of them because of the idiotic war, but they’re human beings too. The ones outside of the kremlin at least.