[Goose]

What is the answer?  More F16's?

More F-16s and even more pilots to fly both the ones Ukraine already has and the ones newly supplied. IMO the only way that can happen is the "Flying Tigers" approach where US citizen pilots fly for Ukraine. The US can "sell" F-16s that are going to the boneyard to Ukraine instead. I think $1.00 FOB wherever the aircraft are would be a fair price. Lots cheaper than paying to demilitarize them or preserve them. The Ukrainians should also be provided with APKWS rockets and associated pods, like these https://theaviationist.com/2025/07/19/f-...s-rockets/. 42 rockets on one aircraft may seem like a lot but with the strikes Russia is now mounting it is IMO required. So far this July Russia is averaging 234 drones per day into Ukraine, with a high of 700 in one day.
 
Obviously integrating and managing a force of around 100 aircraft would be a major task for Ukraine and it wouldn't be at all easy. However, Ukraine has shown itself to be quite adaptable and has accomplished things that few believed to be possible. This particular instance has the advantage that it isn't obvious there are any other choices available that can overcome the future scale of Russian drone attacks.
 
It would also be real helpful if an AWACS capability could be provided to organize the anti-drone battle. The AWACS can detect the drones using its MTI radar. It can then assign targets to F-16s loitering at low altitudes in Ukraine. These assignment will be designed to minimize the distance the aircraft have to fly between intercepts in so far as possible. The AWACS could also provide targeting information for ground-based SAMs of all types and in some cases reposition Ukrainian gun assets to engage targets the aircraft for some reason cannot. Against a drone traveling 136 mph there is often enough time to move gun systems 20 miles or so. The ASC-890s Ukraine already has may be able to provide this function. If not, I suspect Israel would be willing to sell EL/W-2085s to Ukraine. Italy might be willing to part with one of their G550 CAEW aircraft in order to speed up the delivery. https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/26734...spy-planes
 
IMO this plan is feasible and does not cross any real "red lines". It doesn't under international law make the US a combatant. "Neutral" nations can sell armament to combatants. It is perfectly legal. Russia might not be very happy about it but it isn't greatly different from things the US is currently doing. Will the US adopt this approach or one similar to it? IMO the answer is no. Possibly, just maybe the previous administration MIGHT have. IMO there is no chance the present administration will. Thus, the carnage will only increase.
 
Russia has realized that quantity has a quality all its own  in UAV warfare as well as in ground combat. These Shahed 136 replicas are much easier to build than ballistic missiles like the Iskander-M. They don't require nearly as many electronic parts that are difficult for Russia to obtain. They are also quite cheap. Previously, Ukraine was able to intercept the vast majority of the UAVs launched against it. That is no longer the case. The technology to do so exists, but Ukraine doesn't have it and if I am correct, cannot get it.

[Goose]

What is the answer?  More F16's?

More F-16s and even more pilots to fly both the ones Ukraine already has and the ones newly supplied. IMO the only way that can happen is the "Flying Tigers" approach where US citizen pilots fly for Ukraine. The US can "sell" F-16s that are going to the boneyard to Ukraine instead. I think $1.00 FOB wherever the aircraft are would be a fair price. Lots cheaper than paying to demilitarize them or preserve them. The Ukrainians should also be provided with APKWS rockets and associated pods, like these https://theaviationist.com/2025/07/19/f-...s-rockets/. 42 rockets on one aircraft may seem like a lot but with the strikes Russia is now mounting it is IMO required. So far this July Russia is averaging 234 drones per day into Ukraine, with a high of 700 in one day.
 
Obviously integrating and managing a force of around 100 aircraft would be a major task for Ukraine and it wouldn't be at all easy. However, Ukraine has shown itself to be quite adaptable and has accomplished things that few believed to be possible. This particular instance has the advantage that it isn't obvious there are any other choices available that can overcome the future scale of Russian drone attacks.
 
It would also be real helpful if an AWACS capability could be provided to organize the anti-drone battle. The AWACS can detect the drones using its MTI radar. It can then assign targets to F-16s loitering at low altitudes in Ukraine. These assignment will be designed to minimize the distance the aircraft have to fly between intercepts in so far as possible. The AWACS could also provide targeting information for ground-based SAMs of all types and in some cases reposition Ukrainian gun assets to engage targets the aircraft for some reason cannot. Against a drone traveling 136 mph there is often enough time to move gun systems 20 miles or so. The ASC-890s Ukraine already has may be able to provide this function. If not, I suspect Israel would be willing to sell EL/W-2085s to Ukraine. Italy might be willing to part with one of their G550 CAEW aircraft in order to speed up the delivery. https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/26734...spy-planes
 
IMO this plan is feasible and does not cross any real "red lines". It doesn't under international law make the US a combatant. "Neutral" nations can sell armament to combatants. It is perfectly legal. Russia might not be very happy about it but it isn't greatly different from things the US is currently doing. Will the US adopt this approach or one similar to it? IMO the answer is no. Possibly, just maybe the previous administration MIGHT have. IMO there is no chance the present administration will. Thus, the carnage will only increase.
 
Russia has realized that quantity has a quality all its own  in UAV warfare as well as in ground combat. These Shahed 136 replicas are much easier to build than ballistic missiles like the Iskander-M. They don't require nearly as many electronic parts that are difficult for Russia to obtain. They are also quite cheap. Previously, Ukraine was able to intercept the vast majority of the UAVs launched against it. That is no longer the case. The technology to do so exists, but Ukraine doesn't have it and if I am correct, cannot get it.