Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

Defense Speak Interpreted: Extreme Financial Disparity in Drones and Missiles

There has been a lot of publicity about the cost of U.S. weapons used in the Iran conflict since it started on Feb. 28. Several aspects of the conflict deserve attention to explain extreme financial disparity. 

Iran uses both drones and missiles. In particular, Iran’s Shahed drones are a family of Iranian-designed UAVs primarily known for their widespread use as cost-effective, one-way "kamikaze" (suicide) attack munitions. Drones have become a disruptive force in modern warfare by overwhelming expensive air defense systems with low-cost mass deployment.

Drones can be guided in flight by several methods: radio, wire, or sophisticated terrain scanning programming. Also, it is possible for drones to “loiter” over a target area until an appropriate target is acquired. Drones are powered by engines and typically use propellers. Drones can have wings to help generate lift.

Missiles are the whole weapon (munitions) and are launched without the possibility of return. Most are launched vertically and usually have a pre-planned “ballistic” trajectory into the atmosphere. Cruise missiles are special in that they are launched horizontally and fly at slower speeds/low altitudes. They can possibly be redirected during the flight. Missiles have jet or rocket engines; however, missiles travel at high speeds and cannot loiter.

The operation of drones using AI is now possible, especially in environments where drone navigation is jammed, such as GPS spoofing. However, while AI handles complex calculations, obstacle avoidance, and tracking, most AI drones, especially in military defense, still retain a "human-in-the-loop" requirement, where a person makes the final decision to engage a target or confirm an operation.

Iran has developed very sophisticated drones, as evidenced by its supply to Russia against Ukraine. Iran has had at least four years to upgrade its drones in combat situations. Their drones demonstrate the most extreme financial disparity for the U.S. and Israel because the weapons to intercept and destroy drones cost much more than the drone manufacturing cost.

Also, it is common to mix drones and missiles in the same attack. This greatly complicates the interception and destruction problem for the defensive side.

Iran has relied more heavily on drone launches than missile launches by overall volume, but uses missiles for rapid, high-impact strikes. During the current, ongoing conflict, Iran has launched hundreds of one-way attack drones (such as the Shahed series) as well as hundreds of ballistic and cruise missiles. 

There are primary differences in how they function.

Iranian Shahed 136.

Drones

• Volume: Iran has historically launched a higher volume of drones than missiles, utilizing them to overwhelm regional air defenses.
• Speed: Drones (often called "suicide" or "loitering" munitions) are much slower, taking hours to reach their targets.
• Cost and strategy: They are significantly cheaper to produce and deploy, allowing Iran to saturate an area, force adversaries to expend expensive interceptor missiles, and gather real-time targeting data.

Missiles

• Volume: Iran deploys fewer missiles by comparison, holding large inventories in underground "missile cities" to ensure a prolonged capability to strike. 
• Speed: Ballistic missiles travel at extreme speeds (often hypersonic during the terminal phase), impacting targets in minutes, which drastically reduces the reaction time for air defenses.
• Cost and strategy: Missiles are far more expensive and complex to build. Iran reserves them for targets where speed, heavy warheads, and the ability to penetrate heavily fortified air defenses are critical.

Joint U.S. and Israeli military operations have significantly degraded Iran's launch infrastructure, causing overall launch rates to drop by up to 90%. However, U.S. intelligence reports indicate that Tehran has actively exploited recent ceasefires to restart and accelerate its domestic missile and drone production lines.

The U.S. has used drones/UAVs longer than Iran, dating back to the Gulf Wars of 20 years ago. We know the exploits of the Reaper drones and targeted strikes on personnel and vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we remember these drones as carrying rockets used on ground targets very effectively.

However, the U.S. has used sophisticated drones, and not concentrated on weaponized one-way drones, or enough anti-drone countermeasures. A current list of U.S. military drones includes:

• Shield AI V-BAT: A vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) drone widely used for reconnaissance and defense applications.
• AeroVironment: Key platforms include the JUMP 20 (VTOL) and the backpack-deployable RQ-20 Puma.
• Anduril Ghost X: An autonomous modular drone designed for expeditionary operations and complex environments.
• General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper: The premier strategic Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle (UCAV) of the U.S. military.

The missiles being used by the U.S. include: 

• Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAM): Deployed from U.S. Navy warships to conduct hundreds of strikes against Iranian radar sites, drone launch facilities, and deeply buried nuclear facilities. 
• Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS): Fired from ground-based M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) to target Iranian naval vessels and coastal assets. 
• Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM): U.S. forces used these next-generation short-range ballistic missiles to target Iranian ships, marking their operational combat debut. 
• GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP): Deployed by B-2 stealth bombers, these 30,000-pound "bunker-buster" bombs have been used to penetrate deep underground facilities such as the Natanz and Fordow nuclear sites.

U.S. anti-drone weapons, formally known as Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS), combine directed-energy, electronic warfare, and kinetic interceptors. These systems are designed to detect, track, and neutralize hostile UAVs, ranging from small quadcopters to complex drone swarms.

Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs)

DEWs represent the U.S. military's most cost-effective approach, destroying drone electronics or physical structures using lasers or microwaves rather than expensive physical missiles. 

• High-Power Microwaves (HPMs): Systems like Epirus's Leonidas emit high-frequency electromagnetic pulses that overwhelm a drone's internal electronics and force swarms to fail. 
• High-energy lasers: The U.S. Army has deployed and continuously upgraded production-ready energy cannons. These solid-state laser beams target and destroy mid-to-small UAVs at a cost of less than $5 per engagement. 

Kinetic Interceptors and Munitions

For heavier or fast-moving threats, the military uses physical "hard kill" systems to physically destroy the drones.

• Coyote interceptors: Manufactured by Raytheon, Coyote missiles are deployed via ground launchers. They are heavily utilized for neutralizing low-flying, highly maneuverable drone threats and have seen scaled-up military procurement. 
• VAMPIRE Kits: The Vehicle Agnostic Modular Palletized ISR Rocket Equipment (VAMPIRE) kit turns standard pickup and cargo beds into mobile launch platforms for 70 mm laser-guided rockets. It has been successfully supplied to international allies like Ukraine to counter Russian drones. 
• M-LIDS and MADIS: The Army’s Mobile-Low, Slow, Small Unmanned Aircraft Integrated Defeat System (M-LIDS) and the Marine Corps’ Marine Air Defense Integrated System (MADIS) pair 30 mm cannons with kinetic interceptors and electronic warfare.

Detection and Command Systems

Defeating a swarm or a drone requires intelligent detection before a weapon can be fired. 

• Anduril Lattice: An autonomous operating system that uses radar, optical sensors, and machine learning algorithms to autonomously detect and track battlefield threats. 
• AiON: A command-and-control solution developed by Northrop Grumman that incorporates AI decision aids to command and coordinate multiple anti-drone systems from a centralized location.

Cost Disparity
The cost disparity between drones and missiles is highly variable. Drones can range from a few hundred dollars for consumer quadcopters to millions for large, high-altitude military platforms (like the MQ-9 Reaper). Missiles are very expensive, precision-guided pieces of aerospace engineering. Interceptor missiles can easily cost millions of dollars each, which is why defense forces have increasingly used them to counter cheaper drones.

Iranian attack drones, such as the Shahed, cost between $20,000 and $50,000 to produce. Iran’s ballistic missiles cost $1 million to $2 million per unit. In contrast, U.S. and allied interceptor missiles, such as Patriot or surface-to-air missiles used to shoot them down, cost between $1 million and $4 million each. Advanced U.S. interceptors (e.g., THAAD) cost up to $12 million per missile.

This extreme financial disparity creates a massive cost-imposing strategy for Iran to use. This economic imbalance is forcing the U.S. and its allies to pivot toward cheaper counter-UAS weapons. U.S. Central Command said more than 12,000 targets were hit during Operation Epic Fury, which CSIS found significantly drew down America’s stockpiles of TLAMs, as well as two vital interceptors: the THAAD and the Patriot. A bipartisan policy research organization estimates that more than 1,000 Tomahawk missiles were launched, far exceeding the average annual procurement of 86 over the past decade. That replenishment could take until 2030 or 2031. It also determined that up to 290 THAAD interceptors were used, with those reserves returning to prior levels only by mid-to-late 2029.

Suffice it to say that we have not heard the last of extreme financial disparity.

Denny Fritz was a 20-year direct employee of MacDermid Inc. and retired after 12 years as a senior engineer supporting the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Crane, Indiana.