I really believe Ukraine will be getting advanced fighter aircraft sooner than later

[Cheezoholic]

The logistical and training challenge to maintain and arm these aircraft is an intense heavy load. Getting experienced pilots ready to fly and train their fellow airmen in them isn't as difficult. The UK is working on it and I'd bet other NATO nations, including us, have Ukrainian personnel in country getting crash courses on those very things amongst other weaponry and tactics. This report says upwards of 30k Ukrainian personnel are already in or coming to the UK to be trained on NATO aircraft amongst other things. I was surprised by that number.

So to Fat Man, Europe's not doing shit to help us help Ukraine? Go wipe your ass if you can reach it

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-extends-ukraine-military-training-to-pilots-and-marines-as-president-zelenskyy-makes-first-visit-to-the-uk-since-russian-invasion

[Stinky The Clown]

1. I'm not sure, but I don't think the 30K includes pilots, but the bigger number are support

Crew chiefs, ordnance, mechanics, and similar. One pilot needs a pretty big crew to keep his plane armed and flying.

[jmbar2]

2. Poland steps up!

Link to tweet

[mitch96]

3. Some say this is not enough or advanced enough aircraft to make a difference. I think it

will, l if anything buy time till the west gets it act together and allows F-16, Gripen or EuroFighters to go to Ukraine. MIGS and SU fighters are like with like.
They need air SUPERIORITY aircraft better than MIGS or SU fighters..
m

[Just A Box Of Rain]

4. The Russians are afraid to fly their aircraft because they (rightly) fear UKR air defenses

would shoot them down.

They same would (and is) true the other way around. The Russian S-300 (and S-400) anti-aircraft systems are deadly.

The Biden Administration is wise in seeing that Western military aid is better spent on armaments that make a bigger difference towards helping Ukraine in this critical conflict.

[Cheezoholic]

5. I agree but still think something like F-16's or even some pre Euro fighter's

are going to be needed. Mostly for ground support. The ability for the troops on the ground to call in airstrikes is huge. Russia is utilizing most of their aircraft for long distance cruise missile launch's and some ground support close to their borders probably for the reasons you suggest. The F16 was designed for both air to air and ground support roles. Ukraine has virtually nothing from the air to support ground troops or attack Russian forces and for reasons you stated they need to be very selective in the use of the few they do have.

F16's have a proven track record against S300/400 in Syria by the Israelis but for Ukraine it would be highly dependent on the avionic war systems they would be allowed to have. I'm also sure the use of any aircraft they receive would be limited by the supplying country to within pre 2014 Ukrainian borders.

Plus like many have stated, the hardest part of getting them something like F-16's isn't training their existing pilots it's the ground support and maintenance required. Their ground crews would be dealing with completely new systems to them and logistically keeping parts and equipment flowing in for the aircraft is going to be a challenge. An experienced stick and rudder pilot can fly anything with a stick and rudder with a lot less training.

I agree with the current approach from the Biden administration but I really do think the west has to get Ukraine some sort of effective ground support from the air within the next 6 months or less. I don't think Ukraine can win a long term grind with Russia and I also think there's enough opposition in the west that it will grow weary of a longer drawn out conflict. These aircraft are the game changer that can save Ukraine and are worth the risk of any threats from Vlad and/or even Xi. Just my 2 cents respectfully

[Just A Box Of Rain]

6. I continue to believe the time, money, and energy would be better spent on

vastly expanding Ukraine's anti-aircraft defense systems, and providing more HIMARS, artillery, tanks, APCs, anti-ship missiles, and both aerial and naval drones, in addition to small arms, MPADS, anti-tank missiles, and ammunition.

I don't see F-16s being a game changer, and the resources needed to support them would be huge and hugely expensive.

Aerial attack drones could provide the capacity for strategic strikes from the air without all the costs and risks of trying to build a complex and extremely expensive conventional air force infrastructure during wartime, especially given the high-probability the Russians could shoot these planes down.

In the hierarchy of priorities, the F-16s don't seem like the answer to me (or more critically) the experts in the military and Biden Administration who have reached the same conclusion.