How the US could be vulnerable to the same kind of drone swarm attack Ukraine unleashed on Russia's bomber fleet
Ukraine's shock drone strike on Russia's strategic bomber fleet this week has generals and analysts taking a new look at threats to high-value United States aircraft at bases in the homeland and abroad – and the situation is worrisome.
'It's an eyebrow-raising moment,' Gen. David Allvin, the US Air Force chief of staff, said at a defense conference in Washington on Tuesday, adding that the US is vulnerable to similar attacks.
'There is no sanctuary even in the US homeland – particularly given that our bases back home are essentially completely unhardened,' Thomas Shugart, an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), told CNN.
By 'unhardened,' Shugart means there aren't enough shelters in which US warplanes can be parked that are tough enough to protect them from airstrikes, be it from drones or missiles.
Ukrainian military officials said 41 Russian aircraft were hit in last Sunday's attacks, including strategic bombers and surveillance planes, with some destroyed and others damaged.
Later analysis shows at least 12 planes destroyed or damaged, and reviews of satellite imagery were continuing.
The Ukrainian operation used drones smuggled into Russian territory, hidden in wooden mobile houses atop trucks and driven close to four Russian air bases, according to Ukrainian sources.
Once near the bases, the roofs of the mobile houses were remotely opened, and the drones deployed to launch their strikes.
The Russian planes were sitting uncovered on the tarmac at the bases, much as US warplanes are at facilities at home and abroad.
'We are pretty vulnerable,' retired US Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal told CNN's Anderson Cooper on Tuesday.
'We've got a lot of high-value assets that are extraordinarily expensive,' McChrystal said.
The Ukrainians said their attacks destroyed $7 billion worth of Russian aircraft. By comparison, a single US Air Force B-2 bomber costs $2 billion. And the US has only 20 of them.
Shugart co-authored a report for the Hudson Institute in January highlighting the threat to US military installations from China in the event of any conflict between the superpowers.
'People's Liberation Army (PLA) strike forces of aircraft, ground-based missile launchers, surface and subsurface vessels, and special forces can attack US aircraft and their supporting systems at airfields globally, including in the continental United States,' Shugart and fellow author Timothy Walton wrote.
War game simulations and analyses show 'the overwhelming majority of US aircraft losses would likely occur on the ground at airfields (and that the losses could be ruinous),' Shugart and Walton wrote.
A report from Air and Space Forces magazine last year pointed out that Anderson Air Force Base on the Pacific island of Guam – perhaps the US' most important air facility in the Pacific – which has hosted rotations of those $2 billion B-2 bombers, as well as B-1 and B-52 bombers, has no hardened shelters.
Allvin, the USAF chief of staff, admitted the problem on Tuesday.
'Right now, I don't think it's where we need to be,' Allvin told a conference of the CNAS.
McChrystal said the US must look at how to protect its bases and the aircraft on them but also how it monitors the areas around those facilities.
'It widens the spectrum of the threats you've got to deal with,' McChrystal said.
But all that costs money, and Allvin said that presents the US with a budget dilemma.
Does it spend defense dollars on hardened shelters and ways to stop drones and missiles from attacking US bases, or does it use more resources on offensive weapons that take the fight to the enemy?
'If all we are doing is playing defense and can't shoot back, then that's not a good use of our money,' Allvin told the CNAS conference.
'We've always known that hardening our bases is something we needed to do,' Allvin said, but other items have been given budget priority.
Hardened aircraft shelters aren't flashy and are unlikely to generate the headlines of other defense projects, including planes like the new B-21 bombers, each of which is expected to cost around $700 million.
And US President Donald Trump said recently the Air Force will build a new stealth fighter, the F-47, with an initial cost of $300 million per aircraft.
'The F-47 is an amazing aircraft, but it's going to die on the ground if we don't protect it,' Allvin said.
Meanwhile, a hardened shelter costs around $30 million, according to Shugart and Walton.
Last month Trump revealed another form of air defense for the US mainland, the Golden Dome missile shield, expected to cost at least $175 billion.
Despite the huge price tag, it's designed to counter long-range threats, like intercontinental ballistic missiles fired from a different hemisphere.
In Russia's case, the vastness of its territory was seen as a strength in its war with Ukraine. One of the air bases hit in Ukraine's Operation 'Spiderweb' was closer to Tokyo than Kyiv.
But now Russia's size is a weakness, writes David Kirichenko on the Ukraine Watch blog of the Atlantic Council.
Every border crossing may be an infiltration point; every cargo container on every highway or rail line must be treated with suspicion.
'This is a logistical nightmare,' Kirichenko said.
And there is a direct analogy to the United States.
US Air Force bomber bases are usually well inland, but accessible to vehicles large and small.
For instance, all 20 B-2 bombers are stationed at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. It's about 600 miles from the nearest coastline, the Gulf of Mexico, but only about 25 miles south of Interstate 70, one of the main east-west traffic arteries in the US, with thousands of commercial vehicles passing by daily.
Dyess Air Force Base in Texas, one of the homes of US B-1 bombers, sits just south of another major east-west commercial artery, Interstate 20.
'Think of all the containers and illegal entrants inside our borders,' said Carl Schuster, a former director of operations at the US Pacific Command's Joint Intelligence Center.
'That connection will trigger alarm in some US circles,' he said.
Meanwhile, in the Pacific, even better US offensive firepower, like Gen. Allvin would like to have, might not be enough in the event of a conflict with China.
That's because the PLA has made a concerted effort to protect its aircraft during its massive military buildup under leader Xi Jinping, according to the Hudson Institute report.
China has more than 650 hardened aircraft shelters at airfields within 1,150 miles of the Taiwan Strait, the report says.
But Shugart and Walton argue the best move Washington could make would be to make Beijing build more – by improving US strike capabilities in Asia.
'In response the… PLA would likely continue to spend funds on additional costly passive and active defense measures and in turn would have less to devote to alternative investments, including strike and other power projection capabilities,' they said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Black America Web
6 minutes ago
- Black America Web
Elon Musk Claims Trump's Name Is On The Epstein List, Taco Trump Threatens To End Phony Stark's Government Contracts
Source: The Washington Post / Getty / Elon Musk / Donald Trump It should come as no surprise that the bromance between these two ego maniacs would have come to a fiery end. We knew this day would come, but no one had Musk and Trump beefing with each other so soon on their bingo cards. The alleged ketamine abuser couldn't keep his disdain for Trump's 'one big beautiful bill,' calling it a 'disgusting abomination.' 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' Musk began. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' Trump was uncharacteristically quiet following Musk's initial comments about his legislative centerpiece of his second presidency, the 'one big beautiful bill.' That all changed when Trump finally 'clapped back' at Musk while taking questions during his meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Trump said he was 'very surprised' and 'disappointed' by his former financier's comments about his stupid bill, claiming the Tesla chief saw the bill and understood its inner workings better than anybody, while suggesting that Musk was mad because of the removal of subsidies and mandates for electric vehicles. Elon Musk Had Time For Donald Trump Musk responded in real time via his 'former platform,' X, formerly Twitter, with a flurry of posts on X accusing Trump of 'ingratitude' and 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election,' while refuting the orange menace's claims. 'Keep the EV/solar incentive cuts in the bill, even though no oil & gas subsidies are touched (very unfair!!), but ditch the MOUNTAIN of DISGUSTING PORK in the bill,' Musk wrote. Oh, and he wasn't done. Musk then hit the president with a low blow, writing, 'Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!' Donald Trump Claps Back Trump finally fired back on his platform, Truth Social, by threatening to cut Musk's government contracts. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts. I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it.' Felon 47 wrote. Musk replied by threatening to decommission SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft, which could be detrimental to the International Space Station and NASA, as it is described as 'the only spacecraft currently flying that is capable of returning significant amounts of cargo to Earth' and can seat seven passengers. Musk also agreed with a post stating that Trump should be impeached and replaced by JD Vance. Oh, this is getting spicy. While all of this was going on, CNN reports that Tesla stocks took a hit and Musk's net worth shrank. Per CNN : Tesla shares plummeted 15% this afternoon as Elon Musk's battle with President Donald Trump intensified. Trump threatened in a social media post to target Musk's business empire. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. The Tesla selloff has wiped off more than $150 billion off the market value of Telsa, which started the day worth nearly $1.1 trillion. It has also erased a chunk off the net worth of Musk, the world's richest person. Social media has pulled up all the seats, grabbed some popcorn and are currently watching Musk go at with Trump and his supporters, you can see those reactions in the gallery below. Elon Musk Claims Trump's Name Is On The Epstein List, Taco Trump Threatens To End Phony Stark's Government Contracts was originally published on Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE


Fox News
18 minutes ago
- Fox News
Deadly drone wars are already here and the US is horribly unprepared
The massive Ukrainian drone strike on Russia has strong implications for the future of all warfare. The sophisticated operation taught us that the use of low-cost, highly scalable, lethal drone technology is here to stay. Our leaders must pay attention, because the Ukraine-Russia war is a blueprint for not only how we will fight future wars but how we will have to defend ourselves from a more sophisticated and capable enemy than ever before. America's defense leaders need to start reflecting on the realities of modern warfare and fully understand that, as a country, we are not ready. Some people still want to try and deny these very small, handheld first-person view (FPV) drones that cost only a few hundred dollars are not the future of warfare. They need to wake up. That's the wrong mentality, and it makes the U.S. less prepared. In the case of the Ukraine operation, they utilized a few good sources, some cheap trucks, and low-cost drones with munitions that managed to destroy over 40 strategic bombers worth billions. Not millions, billions. The U.S. government, on the other hand, will spend $10 billion dollars on an aircraft carrier that takes a decade to build and likely now could be destroyed by a modern-day swarm of unmanned surface vehicles, the same ones that have pushed the entire Russian Black Sea Fleet out of the Black Sea. Our defense procurement priorities are misguided. The Russians, Ukrainians, Iranians and even the Chinese are starting to treat drones not like we typically do as surveillance. They treat them like they do artillery rounds. This is ammunition and ammunition needs to be produced in massive quantities. They collectively have their manufacturers producing millions per year, yet our government gets excited when a U.S. manufacturer can produce 100 drones a month. The Ukraine operation should also highlight just how vulnerable we are as a country to similar attacks from our enemy. Sadly, history has shown that the U.S. government will likely only change its archaic laws after we have a catastrophic attack on U.S. soil. Currently, we don't allow for the needed widespread use of counter-drone and electronic warfare systems. We should be asking our leaders, why do we have to wait for fellow Americans to get hurt before doing something? The truth is, we are not prepared defensively for what the state of drone technology currently is globally. People now easily have access to lethal capabilities at low costs that were before only allotted to first-world countries with massive budgets. The technology is proliferating at an alarming rate. Thankfully, we have a few companies up to the task. Andy Yakulis, CEO of the defense startup Vector Defense, focused on preparing our soldiers for the next generation of drone warfare, told me recently that: "We don't have a drone technology problem, we have a contracting problem. We have a federal government and defense department procurement problem. Our defense industrial base is broken, and the big prime contractors just don't get it and aren't incentivized to adapt to this modern way of warfare because the money keeps rolling out to the same large defense contractors in from our government. We need to streamline the process for defense innovators, companies who understand the threats." He's right, the technology and expertise in America exists today to stop future attacks and to protect Americans. We will never fight another war without drone technology and AI playing some of the most critical roles. We just aren't moving federal government budgets quickly enough to fix it, and we need to before it's too late.


Newsweek
26 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Map Reveals 'Russia's Plans' That Would Cross Trump's Red Line
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Russia plans to seize half of Ukraine by the end of next year, according to Kyiv, which has released a map outlining purported territorial expansion plans that could put Moscow on a collision course with President Donald Trump's repeated calls for peace talks. Ukrainian Presidential Office Deputy Head Colonel Pavlo Palisa made the claims, and they were followed by Trump warning that he would use further sanctions against Moscow if the war dragged on. Newsweek has contacted the White House and the Kremlin for comment. File photo: Donald Trump shakes hands with Vladimir Putin (right) in Helsinki on July 16, 2018. File photo: Donald Trump shakes hands with Vladimir Putin (right) in Helsinki on July 16, It Matters The map presented by Kyiv shows territorial intentions far beyond the formal demands Moscow has made before it would agree to a ceasefire. But Trump has warned of further sanctions on Russia if it drags out peace negotiations. A bipartisan sanctions bill in the U.S. seeks to impose a 500-percent levy on imports from countries that buy Russian oil and raw materials. What To Know Palisa told reporters Thursday that Russia intends to capture all of Ukraine's Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts by September 1 and create a buffer zone along the northern Ukrainian-Russian border by the end of this year. Palisa also said Moscow intended to occupy all of Ukraine on the east (left) bank of the Dnieper River and capture the regions of Odesa and Mykolaiv by the end of 2026, which would deprive Ukraine of access to the Black Sea. The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) published a map Palisa had presented. It pointed to Moscow's plans to seize roughly 85,000 additional square miles of Ukrainian territory and hold a total of 129,000 square miles by the end of 2026, over half the total area of Ukraine. Yuriy Boyechko, founder of Hope for Ukraine, which helps those living on the front line, told Newsweek that Moscow will not stop its current offensive until December and warned that it will occupy new regions of Ukraine by the end of 2025. However, the Washington, D.C., think tank ISW said Friday that Russian forces are highly unlikely to be able to make the advances Palisa suggested in this time frame, given the current pace of Moscow's advances, and if Ukraine continues to receive Western aid. The ISW said that Palisa's map suggests Moscow will try to seize and leverage positions in Zaporizhzhia and Dnipropetrovsk regions to push on and capture all of Donetsk and Luhansk. This graphic from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) shows what Ukraine said on June 5 2025 are Russia's territorial expansion plans. This graphic from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) shows what Ukraine said on June 5 2025 are Russia's territorial expansion plans. Institute for the Study of War Russian forces would also purportedly try to seize Kherson Oblast and create a "buffer zone" along the border in northern Ukraine by the end of this year. But neither of these scenarios is likely in this period, the ISW said. In Donetsk, Russia had only advanced around 30 miles from the outskirts of Avdiivka in the last 15 months. Moscow would struggle to capture the rest of Kherson region, which required crossing the Dnieper River, the ISW added. But Russia's plans as described by Palisa far exceed Moscow's formal territorial demands it has made as terms to any ceasefire or long-term peace deal, which Trump has pushed for. U.S. Bipartisan Sanctions Bill The Wall Street Journal reported that the White House is trying to get Republican Senator Lindsey Graham to soften the "bone crushing" sanctions bill against Russia he introduced along with Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal. However, Trump administration officials have called on Graham to water down the legislation, congressional aides told the WSJ by inserting waivers allowing Trump to choose which entities get sanctioned and changing the word "shall" to "may." Republican Senator Roger Wicker said on Wednesday said that Trump had asked the Senate to postpone voting on the bill, which, if implemented, would impose measures that include: a 500 percent tariff on imports from any country that buys Russian oil, gas, uranium and other products. the prohibition of any investments by U.S. financial institutions that benefit the Russian government. the prohibition on listing or trading of Russian entities on United States securities exchanges. sanctions on financial institutions linked to the Russian Government, such as the Russian Central Bank, and Russian banks. sanctions on Russian officials, including Putin, his cabinet ministers and military chiefs. Boyechko, from Hope for Ukraine, told Newsweek that tough U.S. sanctions were essential to maintaining American credibility, especially after what he described as a "complete disaster" for U.S. diplomacy in the past four months in which Putin ignored Trump's 30-day ceasefire proposal. "Putin used the four months of empty peace talks to regroup, and now the Russians have begun their summer offensive campaign, taking over 100 square kilometers [38 square miles] of new territory, including some villages in the Sumy region," Boyechko added. What People Are Saying Ukrainian Presidential Office Deputy Head Colonel Pavlo Palisa said Thursday: Russia's "plan for next year is to occupy the whole part of Ukraine which is situated on the left bank of the Dnieper River," and "occupy the Odesa and Mykolaiv regions to cut Ukraine's access to the Black Sea." President Donald Trump said about U.S. sanctions: "If I think Russia will not be making a deal or stopping the bloodshed … I'll use it if it's necessary." He added: "I'm OK with it. I haven't decided to use it. It's a very strong bill." Yuriy Boyechko, founder of Hope for Ukraine, told Newsweek: "Russians will not stop their offensive until November or December, so, unless the U.S. and Western allies get serious by applying severe sanctions and getting more weapons to Ukraine, we are looking at new regions of Ukraine occupied by Russians by the end of 2025." What Happens Next Regardless of the battlefield predictions made by Kyiv, all eyes will be on what Trump does regarding the U.S. bipartisan bill against Russia; Graham said it has the backing of 72 senators and sufficient support in the House of Representatives. .