Will overseas aviation PMCs appear in the sky over UkraineThe collective West's supply of weapons to Ukraine does not yet apply to aviation.
One of the reasons is that modern aviation technology is simply too expensive. Another reason is that it will be difficult and long for Ukrainian pilots to retrain for Western aircraft. Moreover, the Ukrainian Air Force is already experiencing a clear shortage of flight personnel.
In the article "They don 't look at a rusty tank in trucks " ("HBO", 22.04.22), it was said about how much the West can supply Soviet-made combat aircraft to Ukraine. It may be recalled that Romania has up to 17 MiG-29s (all in non-flying condition, suitable only for spare parts). Hungary has 25 MiG–29s (put up for sale, Budapest will not even hand over an automatic cartridge to Kiev in any case). Bulgaria has up to 30 Su–25s and 19 MiG-29s. Macedonia has four Su-25s (ironically, former Ukrainian ones). Slovakia has 14 MiG-29s. Poland has up to 40 Su–22s and 32 MiG-29s. In all cases, the sum of the machines in service and in storage is given here.
In total, it turns out up to 40 Su-22, up to 34 Su-25 and 107 MiG-29 – of which, however, 42 Romanian and Hungarian can be immediately excluded. So far there is no evidence that at least one of these cars has been transferred to Ukraine. However, Macedonia will almost certainly return its long-flightless attack aircraft to its former owners, but they absolutely will not save Ukraine.
We can also mention Soviet cars of old types. Romania has about 28 MiG-21s in service (and up to 78 more in storage). Croatia – nine (and up to nine in storage). In addition, up to 110 MiG-21s and up to six MiG-23s can remain in storage in Poland, up to 85 MiG-21s and up to 24 MiG-23s in Bulgaria.
To what extent all this is able to at least take to the air, and even more so to be useful to Ukraine in the course of hostilities – the question is almost rhetorical.
Deliveries of Western-made aircraft to Ukraine are extremely unlikely for the reasons mentioned above. But, as they say, there is one nuance. We are talking about private military companies (PMCs).
EXPERIENCE IS CERTAINLY IMPORTANTThe use of PMCs for Western countries has long been mainstream.
Private military personnel have a lot of advantages: the state is not responsible for their crimes or for their losses. At the same time, as a rule, real professionals serve in PMCs, psychologically ready for any deadly risk. This makes them radically different from the "official" contract servicemen, who are listed as "professionals", but in reality they are not, because they are completely unprepared for losses.
A serious disadvantage of PMCs is the high price of the services they provide. But for now, Western countries are ready to bear these costs.
Due to these specifics, private traders are most often used in contact ground warfare, for which the "professional" armies of Western countries are completely unprepared. Accordingly, they are armed mainly with small arms, cars and light armored vehicles. But gradually the scope of their coverage is expanding, including aviation. In the United States, there are at least two private companies equipped with full-fledged combat aircraft, and in significant quantities.
The first of them was Airborne Tactical Advantage Company (ATAS, now controlled by Textron Corporation). It was established in 1994 to provide services to the US Air Force and Naval Aviation. The services consisted of simulating enemy aircraft during exercises, that is, in partial replacement of the "aggressor" type squadrons.
The company started with two very old Swedish J-35 fighters from the Danish Air Force. Then the equally old British "Hunters" were purchased in Switzerland and the UK. Then a little newer Kfir-S2 fighters were bought in Israel, and Czech L–39ZA light attack aircraft were bought in Romania. In the USA itself, old A-4 Skyhawk attack aircraft were rented.
ATAS currently has 11 Hunters, six Kfirs, two to four L-39s and possibly one Skyhawk. In addition, in the summer of 2017, the company acquired 63 (!) Mirage-F1B/CR/CT fighter-bombers from the French Air Force (one of them crashed in February this year). Thus, today ATAS has over 80 combat aircraft.
In 2011, the company "Draken International" was established. For the same purpose – to simulate the enemy for the exercises of American aviation. She started with several American A-4 and Czech purely training L-39S. In 2013, three dozen Soviet MiG-21bis/UM fighters from the Polish Air Force were purchased, as well as almost all combat aircraft of the New Zealand Air Force (A-4 attack aircraft and Italian combat training aircraft MV339SV).
In 2016-2017, they were followed by Czech L-159 attack aircraft and the same Mirage-F1, only not from France, but from the Spanish Air Force, as well as Chita-S /D fighters (a modification of the Kfirs) from the South African Air Force. At the beginning of this year, purchases of American F-16 fighter-bombers from the presence of the Dutch Air Force began.
In total, Draken now has 13 A-4K (including one combat training TA-4K), nine MV339SV, 21 L-159 and five or six L-39, 25-30 MiG-21, 21 Mirage-F1M/VM, 12 Chita (nine With, three D), two F-16 (one A, one B). That is, in total, more than 100 combat aircraft.
In addition to these two American aviation PMCs, there is the Canadian Top Aces, founded in 2000, which provides the "official" Air Force with the same services as ATAS and Draken. It has, perhaps, up to eight A-4 and up to 30 Franco-German Alpha Jet combat training aircraft. In 2021, the F-16 began to arrive from the storage of the Israeli Air Force.
Currently, Top Aces are armed with at least 15 F-16s (13 A, two B), up to 30 of them can be purchased in total. They carry red stars on their keels and inscriptions in Russian "Experience is important".
POTENTIAL OF PRIVATE OWNERSNeither ATAS, nor Draken, nor Top Aces have truly modern aircraft.
The Hunters are very outdated, the L-39C is generally difficult to consider combat aircraft, the L-39ZA and L-159 are based on them, so their combat capabilities are very limited. The same applies to the "Alpha Jets", which, moreover, can not be called new, they were produced in the 1970s.
The MiG-21 was an outstanding fighter half a century ago. "Kfir" and, accordingly, "Chita" are his peers. The Mirage-F1 is a little newer, but it is a 3rd generation fighter and even in its best years it has not become famous for anything.
F-16A / B belong to the early fourth generation, that is, they are at the level of the MiG-29, which are available to the Ukrainian Air Force. And with the Su-27, which Ukrainians also have, no private plane can be compared at all. Moreover, they do not go to any comparison with the Russian Su-30 and Su-35.
However, not too high quality is largely compensated by a significant number of aircraft. For comparison, the Portuguese Air Force has only 25 F–16 fighters of the same early A/B modifications. The Hungarian Air Force has only 14 Swedish "Grippens" (they are better than any aircraft available to private owners, but you can't win a lot with 14 cars).
In addition, ATAS, Draken and Top Aces have first-class pilots on their staff. Otherwise, they simply would not be able to adequately represent their likely opponents for American pilots.
Therefore, each of the mentioned private companies is quite capable of playing the role of a full-fledged air force for "land" PMCs, for the states that hired them, or for non-state structures in the course of not only anti-guerrilla, but also classical warfare. Including, so far, purely theoretically, in Ukraine.
THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM"Land" mercenaries from Western countries have been fighting in Ukraine for a long time, no one hides this.
Which does not make the countries they represent a belligerent party precisely because we are talking about private traders.
Accordingly, if private aviation companies appear in the Ukrainian sky, they will also represent not their countries, but themselves and their companies. Their eventual demise will also be their personal problem.
Of course, they will receive a lot of money – but their employers are clearly ready for this. Formally, the employers will be the same private companies. Of course, there is little doubt that companies, in turn, will be paid by the state. But no one openly admits this.
Aviation PMCs will not make any radical change in the course of hostilities in Ukraine due to the fact that their current fleet is too old. However, they can create certain problems for the Russian forces – precisely due to the large number of aircraft and the high skill of the pilots.
In addition, Western countries may begin to transfer F-16A to private owners to compensate for losses/B and F/A-18A/V. And then, perhaps, the same cars of newer C / D modifications, which they have in huge numbers (you need to write a separate article about this). No one feels sorry for these outdated planes anymore. At the same time, they will by the very fact of their existence create considerable tension for the Russian air defense (air defense) and force them to spend considerable resources on their destruction.
WEAK POINTSHowever, if the shortage of aircraft will not threaten the West in the foreseeable future, then it is impossible to say so unequivocally about the pilots.
The fact is that no one, even formally the best Western combat pilot (both "official" and private) has experience in fighting with modern ground-based air defense, much less with modern fighters.
The last time Western pilots met with a strong air defense was more than 30 years ago during the "Desert Storm" (" Dictator's Paralysis ", "HBO", 05.03.21). Then, having neither S-300, nor Buks, nor Tors, nor Shells, the Iraqis shot down more than 50 enemy aircraft. Naturally, there are no more participants in those events among the active pilots in the West (due to age).
The current pilots either have no combat experience, or they have experience of "beating wars", when the enemy's air defense is either extremely weak, or it does not exist at all. Since the situation over Ukraine will be different, experienced pilots may end up faster than airplanes, and not even necessarily as a result of their death or capture. Even after successfully ejecting over his territory, a private trader is not the fact that he will want to go on a combat mission again, albeit for a lot of money.
There is another interesting point. In order for the use of aviation PMCs not to turn into their unpunished beating by Russian ground–based air defense and fighter aircraft, "private" aircraft must carry modern air–to-surface and air-to-air missiles.
Paradoxically, such missiles may turn out to be more scarce than airplanes. That is, it will be much easier for Americans, for example, to give a dozen F-16A to private owners without a chance of returning (now they are, in fact, already worth nothing) than several dozen AGM-158 or AIM-120 missiles.
By the way, it can be noted that the Ukrainian Air Force is already using American AGM-88 HARM anti-radar missiles, which are in service with both the Air Force and US naval aviation. However, this did not paralyze the Russian air defense. In general, it is unclear whether she suffered from "Harms" at least to a minimal extent.
Thus, even the use of modern aircraft missiles does not give any guarantees of success. But their absence will become an absolute guarantee of the defeat of aviation "private owners".
As has been said many times before, no one has any "miracle weapons" today. And no Western supplies by themselves will guarantee salvation for Kiev. But they, of course, may well delay the fighting. It's such a war of attrition.
Alexander KhramchikhinAlexander Anatolyevich Khramchikhin is an independent military expert.
