3-D rendering of the Iranian Shahid-136 drone, a device with two triangle-shaped wings attached to a central fuselage. It has an engine the size of a small motorcycle and carries 110 pounds of explosives.
engine the size of a small motorcycle
carries 110 pounds of explosives
The biggest benefit of a war with Iran is that it has proven itself a surprisingly capable adversary against the United States. In addition to its willingness to go on the offensive, Iran has forced the US and its regional allies to confront the rise of cheap drones on the battlefield.
An Iranian drone made with commercial-grade technology costs about $35,000 to build. That’s a fraction of the cost of the high-tech military interceptors sometimes used to shoot them down.
Cheap drones transformed the war in Ukraine, and they enabled the Iranians to exploit a gap in US defense investment, which has historically prioritized precise but expensive solutions.
Countering drones has been a major priority for the Pentagon for years, according to Michael C. Horowitz, a Pentagon official in the Biden administration. “But there has been no impetus to implement any solution on a large scale,” he said.
In just the first six days, the US spent $11.3 billion on the war with Iran. The White House and the Pentagon have not provided updated estimates, but the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank, estimated in early April that the U.S. had spent approx. $25 and $35 billion In the war, the cost of the interceptor was very high. Many missile defense experts also fear that interceptor stockpiles are now becoming dangerously low.
Here are some of the ways the US and its allies have countered Iran’s drones, and why it could be so costly.
air strikes
In an ideal scenario, an early warning aircraft spots a drone when it is several hundred miles away from the target, and a fighter jet, such as an F-16, is dispatched from a military base. The F-16 can then use the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) II rocket to shoot down the drone from approximately six miles away.
3-D rendering of an F-16 fighter jet firing an APKWS II rocket from under a wing. As per air defense protocol, two to three rockets are fired per drone. Two APKWS II rockets and an hour of flight for the F-16 cost about $65,000, a little less than twice as much as the Iranian Shaheed-136.
Two to three interceptors were fired per drone
These types of defensive air patrols are cost effective, but not always available due to the vast scope of the conflict. Iran has also targeted early warning aircraft that the US needs to detect a drone at the distance, According to NBC News.
Another option for detecting and shooting down drones is a variety of ground-based detection systems, but all of these systems are at a disadvantage, as their ability to detect low-flying drones is limited due to the curvature of the Earth.
anti-drone defense systems
One ground-based defense system that the US and its allies have created specifically to counter drones at short ranges is Coyote. It can intercept drones up to about nine miles away.
3-D rendering of the Coyote Block 2 interceptor, which looks like a three-foot tube with a small rocket at one end. The two Coyotes cost about $253,000, or about seven times more than the Iranian Shaheed-136.
Coyote is significantly cheaper than many other ground-based defense systems available to the US and its allies and has been historically effective in protecting critical assets. But despite being both effective and cost-efficient, relatively few Coyotes have been purchased by the US military in recent years.
When Iran-backed militias launched attacks on U.S. ground troops in the region in 2023 and 2024, there were so few Coyotes available that troops had to shuffle the system between eight different bases in the region almost daily. A report by the New American Security CenterA Washington think tank.
ship based anti missile defense
Many of the long-range ground-based defense systems that the US and its allies could use to counter drones are more expensive, because they are designed to shoot down aircraft and ballistic missiles, not drones. For example, a Navy destroyer’s built-in radar system can detect a drone from up to 30 miles away and shoot it down with a Standard Missile 2 (SM-2) interceptor. As with air-based attacks, military protocol states that at least two missiles will be fired.
3-D rendering of the deck of a Navy destroyer firing an SM-2 missile from a built-in launcher, which looks like a 15-foot missile launching from an open grid on the ship’s surface. Two SM-2 missiles cost about $4.2 million, about 120 times more than the Iranian Shaheed-136.
This misalignment between America’s defense systems and current warfare strategy began after the Cold War, when the anticipated threats were short, fast, high-yield projectiles, not large-scale drone raids.
Given the low price, Iran often launches several Shaheed-136 drones at a time. The drone is programmed with a destination before launch and can travel approximately 1,500 miles, putting targets throughout the Middle East within reach.
“This class of low-cost precision strike did not exist at the time most U.S. air defenses were developed,” Mr. Horowitz said.
ground based anti missile defense
The Army’s standard air-defense system is the Patriot. Typically deployed at a military base, it can shoot down a drone from about 27 miles away with a PAC-3 missile segment enhancement interceptor. As per military protocol, at least two missiles should be fired.
3-D rendering of a Patriot launcher loaded with 17-foot PAC-3 MSE missiles, resembling a tilted shipping container with scaffolding. The price of two PAC-3 MSE missiles is about $8 million, which is about 220 times more than the price of the Iranian Shaheed-136.
Patriot missile defense system
Stacey Pettyjohn, a senior fellow and director of the defense program at the Center for a New American Security, said air defense training teaches service members to prioritize using long-range defense systems “to eat as many apples as possible,” but they are the most expensive.
But an expensive defense can still be economically useful to protect a valuable target, especially those that are difficult to repair or replace, such as a nearly $1.1 billion radar at a military base in Qatar and a $500 million air defense sensor at a base in Jordan that were damaged early in the conflict.
ground based guns
Finally, there is what one might call a last resort: the ground-based gun. When a drone is about a mile or less away from its target, something like a Centurion C-RAM can begin firing rapidly to shoot the drone down.
3-D rendering of the Centurion C-RAM, which resembles a gun mounted on a rotating, cylindrical stand. The gun fires 75 rounds of ammunition per second. The cost of firing the gun for five seconds is $30,000, slightly less than an Iranian Shaheed-136.
Centurion counter-rockets, artillery and mortars
Fires 375 rounds of ammunition in 5 seconds
Although it is quite cost effective, the Centurion C-RAM is not the best option as it has a very short range.
interceptor drone
There is also what one might call the future of combat drones: AI-powered interceptor drones. Interceptor drones like the Merops Surveyor can theoretically hunt and shoot down enemy projectiles from short ranges.
A 3-D rendering of a Surveyor drone, which looks like a three-foot tube with wings and a tail. The Merops drone costs about $30,000, slightly less than an Iranian Shaheed-136.
Merops System: Surveyor Drone
Former Google chief executive Eric Schmidt founded a company to develop the Merops counter-drone system in collaboration with Ukrainian fighters, who have already been countering Iranian drones in their war with Russia for years.
The US sent thousands of MEROPS units to the Middle East after the conflict began, but it is unclear whether they have been deployed. In the middle of the war the army established training on this system Reported by Business Insider.
Other efforts to reduce the cost-per-shot ratio of taking out drones have failed.
Pentagon invested More than one billion dollars in fiscal year 2024 are researching directed energy weapons, or lasers, that would cost only $3 per shot and have a range of 12 miles. Those systems have not yet been used in the field.
Despite the cost imbalance, the real fear for many in the defense community is the depleting stockpile of munitions.
“My fear is that we will run out of these things,” said Tom Caraco, director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “It’s not that we can’t afford them, but that we’ll run out before we can replace them.”
