Dutch-supplied fighter jets in Ukraine show limited impact on battlefield, experts say

The F-16 fighter jets supplied to Ukraine by the Netherlands and other allies have not delivered a decisive battlefield breakthrough, according to military experts. They cite limited operational availability, shortages of missiles, and ongoing maintenance problems.

Only a small portion of the F-16 fleet is currently combat-ready, NOS reports. Many aircraft are awaiting urgent maintenance. In addition, there is a shortage of missiles for the jets. This shortage has been aggravated by competing demand linked to the war in the Middle East.

Jack Watling, a defense expert at the British think tank Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) said the fleet faces fundamental integration problems. In an interview with NOS, he said these issues have even contributed to “tragic incidents of friendly fire.” He added that Ukrainian forces are unable to fully use the aircraft’s offensive capabilities.

Watling said the F-16s are mainly used to shoot down Shahed drones and cruise missiles. This increased operational use has further strained maintenance capacity.

Justin Bronk, an airpower expert at RUSI, said, “Fully committing to the F-16s was ‘a big mistake.’” He argued that the Swedish Gripen would have been a better choice. He also said political dynamics made it difficult to promote alternatives. “That made it very difficult to argue for the Swedish Gripen without it being interpreted as undermining Ukraine’s call for fighter jets,” he said.

Swedish military expert and professor Johan Huovinen said the Gripen, if delivered earlier with Meteor air-to-air missiles, could have changed conditions at the front. The Meteor missile is designed to intercept Russian glide bombs at distance. “If the Gripen had been delivered in 2023–2024 with the Meteor missile, which can take out Russian glide bombs, then the situation at the front might have looked different,” he said. He added that he supported the Gripen option after Russia’s invasion began.

Commodore Bert de Smit, project director for Ukraine at the Dutch Ministry of Defense and former director of air force operations, rejected the view that the Gripen would necessarily have made a major difference. He called that conclusion “bold.” He said Ukrainian crews quickly learned to conduct complex missions using the F-16. “What surprised us was the speed with which they were able to conduct certain complex missions with the F-16,” he said.

De Smit said the decision to supply F-16s reflected expectations that the aircraft could significantly affect the war. He also said countries contributed what they were able to provide. For the Netherlands, that contribution was F-16 aircraft.

He added that Ukrainian and expert assessments had also favored the Gripen because of its ability to operate with Meteor missiles and potentially keep Russian aircraft farther away.

Bronk said Ukraine has endured more than 150,000 Russian glide bomb attacks. These include bombs weighing 500, 1,500, and in some cases 3,000 kilograms. He said these weapons have caused extensive destruction and heavy casualties. They have also weakened Ukraine’s ability to hold ground positions. “They have caused far more damage, killed many more people and been far more destructive to Ukraine’s ability to hold key positions on the ground,” he said.

Bronk added that the F-16 could not address this threat. “No matter how excellent the jet is, it never offered a way to solve that issue,” he said.

Ukrainian air force spokesperson Yevhen Ihnat told NOS that the F-16 has been effective in defensive roles. These include intercepting missiles and drones. He said that out of roughly 3,000 intercepted attacks, 2,200 were shot down by F-16s.

De Smit said the level of F-16 activity has exceeded expectations. “There has been far more flying than we ever could have imagined,” he said.

Watling said the aircraft’s current use is costly and inefficient. He said it has not changed offensive outcomes on the battlefield. “Ultimately, we ended up with the least efficient and least effective solution,” he said.