Among military websites, the headlines are all atwitter
about the US’ use of the one-way, LUCAS, attack drone in the strikes against Iran.
Here’s a Military Times website headline[1]:
US Confirms First Combat Use of LUCAS One-Way Attack Drone in Iran Strikes
This is a simply stunning development and marks a new
chapter in strike warfare. From the
LUCAS performance specs, never before has any country had the ability to
deliver a maximum 40 lb payload to a distance of 500 miles at a cruise speed of
85 mph (74 kts). The closest the US has
come to this in the past is the one-way Tomahawk attack drone (sometimes referred to as a cruise missile) with a 1000 lb
warhead and a range of 1000 miles at a speed of Mach 0.74. (570 mph).
It’s embarrassing the way we’ve made a habit of proudly
trumpeting “new” technologies that have actually existed for many decades. That’s not to say that there isn’t a use for
a small, very slow missile (which is what a one-way drone is) with very low end
lethality but to brag that we’ve accomplished something remarkable is
humiliating and deceptive (or ignorant).
Here’s an example of an embarrassing attempt at praise from
Army Recognition website.
“overwhelm defenses” ? Isn’t that what we’ve done repeatedly when we’ve launched dozens of cruise missiles at targets over the years?
“massed, distributed
effects” ? Isn’t that a contradiction?
“expendable systems”
? Haven’t missiles always been
expendable?
“scalable” ? Haven’t
we always scaled operations as needed?
Well, sure, we’ve done all that for many decades but never
before have assembled all the accolades into a single press release. Now that’s an accomplishment!
Again, at $35,000 per unit, there may be a use for such a
weapon but to believe it is something new is just ignorant and embarrassing.
Warning: As usual, we are not going to discuss the
politics of the US decision to strike Iran, only the military aspects.
U.S. Central Command has moved Task Force Scorpion Strike into an operational posture, giving deployed forces a low-cost one-way attack drone capability designed to multiply strike capacity, absorb attrition, and overwhelm defenses through massed, distributed effects. Beyond adding another munition to the inventory, it effectively creates a new layer of “magazine depth” that can be launched quickly from dispersed sites, complicating enemy targeting and imposing unfavorable cost trades on air defenses. The shift matters less for a single drone’s performance than for what it signals: the U.S. military is now treating expendable systems as a scalable combat arm, not a niche experiment … [2]
“overwhelm defenses” ? Isn’t that what we’ve done repeatedly when we’ve launched dozens of cruise missiles at targets over the years?
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2026/02/28/us-confirms-first-combat-use-of-lucas-one-way-attack-drone-in-iran-strikes/
https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/aerospace-news/2026/u-s-central-command-deploys-first-operational-lucas-drone-unit-for-potential-iran-strikes#google_vignette
One advantage of a low flying drone flying at 85mph is that most radar is tuned to ignore objects going less than 100mph. Otherwise their screen is cluttered with cars on highways and large birds or flocks of birds.
ReplyDeleteThat used to be true and may still be on older systems but modern systems have pretty wide ranging (or adjustable) speed gates. If you see a large "flock of birds" on radar heading straight at you, you ought to assume they're not birds. Plus, not many flocks of birds fly 85 mph! This is also why we have optical and IR sensors for confirmation.
DeleteA related topic: We've had a naval base at Bahrain since 1948. I've written in the past that its a bad location nowadays. Its certainly not supporting the fleet during this war, and the families are stuck there. The 5th Fleet command and support elements should move to a safer location like Kenya, Perth Australia, or maybe southern Oman.
ReplyDelete"move to a safer location"
DeleteThat's one solution.
Alternatively, we could stay there and build up major defenses. For example, Bahrain. We knew Iran would attempt to strike back. We had all the warning we needed and yet something got through and hit the navy base or close to it. How could our alerted defenses be unable to stop an unsophisticated Iranian weapon? I have no idea what defenses we have there, if any, but they clearly weren't adequate.
Alternatively, we could make a habit of striking potential offensive threats before they become threats. Iran has threatened us for decades. If someone walks up to you, holding a gun, and says they're going to shoot you, is it wise to wait until the do to take action?
Ukraine war showed its value - consume enemies expensive SAM. Ukraine has no problem since US and Europe pay for these SAM but who will pay for Iran? Every SAM used on this kind of drone means a lost opportunity to intercept Tomahawk.
ReplyDeleteBTW, wishful thinking of Russia pays war reparations to Ukraine so Ukraine can use this money to pay US and Europe is a wishful thinking - FOREVER.