5 ms·

How long until an F35 is destroyed by a drone?

by hrdwdmrbl 6mo ago

FpUser 6mo ago
There US has more then 600 of those with more coming. Losing one is insignificant.
- Figs 6mo ago
  ~$100M/unit isn't exactly cheap to replace...
  - recursivecaveat 6mo ago
    One $100M aircraft vs 2800 $35K drones. I think the future is nobody builds such kind of fighter jets again.
    - crote 6mo ago
      It's even worse, actually. This attack seems to be done by a regular quadcopter, so suddenly you have to be worried about your $100M aircraft being destroyed by a $500 drone if your base security isn't absolutely perfect. The US has plenty of bases in the area, but considering the ease of an attack and the general anti-US sentiment of the region, projecting power into the Middle East is going to become an awful lot more difficult...
    - FpUser 6mo ago
      Wake me up when all F35 are sitting on airfields reachable by Iranian drones and unprotected and doing nothing but waiting to be hit
      - recursivecaveat 6mo ago
        V-weapons were also an encounterable weapon which could strike from beyond range. Massive boondoggle though, just a very expensive expensive way to deliver very few explosives; waste of industrial output.
- yodon 6mo ago
  Not sure if that's intended as sarcasm. Losing a >$100M asset is far from insignificant.
  - FpUser 6mo ago
    Look into how much current war costs already. And there is no end in sight yet. Loosing one F35 is insignificant (well maybe it will hurt someone's ego but that is about it).
- follie 6mo ago
  A squadron of F-35s is worth more than the Moskva. Russia had to fight hard to regain the title of biggest loser and it could lose that in a single incident. But more than the financial loss the loss of having invested in something stupid is felt when you can't use any of the related blunders as you intended and have to keep them at a distance from the cheap practical warfare.
  - FpUser 6mo ago
    >"A squadron of F-35s is worth more than the Moskva" In Lala land.
    - follie 6mo ago
      Right, as measured in the new Petroclown basket currency.
- crote 6mo ago
  Ukraine is currently building 4.5 million drones per year. That's one drone every 30 seconds. Lockheed Martin delivered a record 191 F35s in 2025. That's less than one F35 every 1.91 days. Iran has thrice the population of Ukraine and 1.5x (nominal) to 3x (PPP) the GDP. With Ukraine building 23560 drones for every F35 the US is building, it would be quite reasonable to expect Iran to be able to build a few thousand per F35 ass well. Iran already has a fairly mature drone industry supplying the Russian side of the UA-RU, after all. In other words: If it were to come to a race of attrition, the US can't afford to lose a single one. Even ignoring the massive cost difference, F35s simply cannot be constructed fast enough.
  - FpUser 6mo ago
    This assume that all F35 are sitting on unprotected fields waiting for all those drones to come. Which is utter BS. Sure the US can loose few in unfortunate circumstances and it wont matter much.
    - deleted 6mo ago
      [deleted]
iammjm 6mo ago
won't happen for now, drones are generally too slow for that. Unless it's stationary/on the ground. Ukrainians did manage to shoot down 2 russian KA-52 helicopters mid-flight last week though.
speed_spread 6mo ago
We already have rocket powered autonomous drones capable of destroying fighter planes, they're called missiles.

How long until an F35 is destroyed by a drone?

FpUser 6mo ago

There US has more then 600 of those with more coming. Losing one is insignificant.

Figs 6mo ago
~$100M/unit isn't exactly cheap to replace...
- recursivecaveat 6mo ago
  One $100M aircraft vs 2800 $35K drones. I think the future is nobody builds such kind of fighter jets again.
  - crote 6mo ago
    It's even worse, actually. This attack seems to be done by a regular quadcopter, so suddenly you have to be worried about your $100M aircraft being destroyed by a $500 drone if your base security isn't absolutely perfect. The US has plenty of bases in the area, but considering the ease of an attack and the general anti-US sentiment of the region, projecting power into the Middle East is going to become an awful lot more difficult...
  - FpUser 6mo ago
    Wake me up when all F35 are sitting on airfields reachable by Iranian drones and unprotected and doing nothing but waiting to be hit
    - recursivecaveat 6mo ago
      V-weapons were also an encounterable weapon which could strike from beyond range. Massive boondoggle though, just a very expensive expensive way to deliver very few explosives; waste of industrial output.
yodon 6mo ago
Not sure if that's intended as sarcasm. Losing a >$100M asset is far from insignificant.
- FpUser 6mo ago
  Look into how much current war costs already. And there is no end in sight yet. Loosing one F35 is insignificant (well maybe it will hurt someone's ego but that is about it).
follie 6mo ago
A squadron of F-35s is worth more than the Moskva. Russia had to fight hard to regain the title of biggest loser and it could lose that in a single incident. But more than the financial loss the loss of having invested in something stupid is felt when you can't use any of the related blunders as you intended and have to keep them at a distance from the cheap practical warfare.
- FpUser 6mo ago
  >"A squadron of F-35s is worth more than the Moskva" In Lala land.
  - follie 6mo ago
    Right, as measured in the new Petroclown basket currency.
crote 6mo ago
Ukraine is currently building 4.5 million drones per year. That's one drone every 30 seconds. Lockheed Martin delivered a record 191 F35s in 2025. That's less than one F35 every 1.91 days. Iran has thrice the population of Ukraine and 1.5x (nominal) to 3x (PPP) the GDP. With Ukraine building 23560 drones for every F35 the US is building, it would be quite reasonable to expect Iran to be able to build a few thousand per F35 ass well. Iran already has a fairly mature drone industry supplying the Russian side of the UA-RU, after all. In other words: If it were to come to a race of attrition, the US can't afford to lose a single one. Even ignoring the massive cost difference, F35s simply cannot be constructed fast enough.
- FpUser 6mo ago
  This assume that all F35 are sitting on unprotected fields waiting for all those drones to come. Which is utter BS. Sure the US can loose few in unfortunate circumstances and it wont matter much.
  - deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]

iammjm 6mo ago

won't happen for now, drones are generally too slow for that. Unless it's stationary/on the ground. Ukrainians did manage to shoot down 2 russian KA-52 helicopters mid-flight last week though.

speed_spread 6mo ago

We already have rocket powered autonomous drones capable of destroying fighter planes, they're called missiles.