Ukraine destroys more than 40 military aircraft in drone attack deep in Russia

Scale and impact of the attack

• Many commenters see destroying ~40 aircraft (possibly ~⅓ of Russia’s strategic bomber fleet) as militarily and symbolically huge, especially since these bombers regularly strike Ukrainian cities.
• Emphasis that the planes are old, hard or impossible for Russia to replace at scale; the “best third” may have been on the tarmac, fueled and armed, preparing a major raid.
• Some skepticism about exact numbers, but multiple videos showing bombers engulfed in flames convince many that the loss is substantial.

Drones and the changing nature of war and security

• Drones are seen as having fundamentally changed warfare: cheap, precise, and able to penetrate deep into “safe” rear areas.
• Commenters extrapolate to personal and homeland security: no airfield, base, or strategic facility can be assumed safe; similar methods could be used by future terrorists or lone actors.
• Fiber‑optic and AI‑guided drones are highlighted as especially dangerous because they are resistant to jamming and may eventually become fully autonomous.

How the operation likely worked

• Widely discussed: drones hidden in modified trucks/containers pre‑positioned inside Russia, close to the bases.
• Control links: likely a mix of 3G/4G with local SIMs, fiber‑optic tethers, and autopilots (e.g., ArduPilot) with AI visual targeting trained on bomber shapes.
• Launches appeared sequential (seconds apart) to reduce pilot load and collision risk. Some reports note latency in the video feeds but slow, deliberate terminal guidance onto wings and fuel tanks.

Vulnerabilities and defenses

• Airbases near civilian infrastructure and roads are seen as inherently vulnerable; simple hangars, nets, and dispersion would already have made this operation harder.
• Discussion of radar, small‑object tracking, APS‑style systems, lasers, and C‑RAM: the technology exists in pieces, but scalable, affordable base‑level defense is immature.
• Many expect a new “drone tax” on all critical infrastructure (physical hardening, nets, local counter‑UAS systems).

Nuclear and geopolitical implications

• Some worry about degrading one leg of Russia’s nuclear triad and “use‑it‑or‑lose‑it” pressures; others argue bombers are the least critical leg and already dual‑use strike platforms.
• Debate over whether this pushes the world closer to wider war vs. being a necessary response to ongoing Russian terror bombing.
• Broader argument over NATO, US policy, and whether Ukraine is acting mainly as an autonomous defender or a proxy, with strong pushback against framing this purely as US strategy.

Ethics, terrorism, and the future

• Most frame the strike as legitimate: military targets during an ongoing invasion, reducing civilian terror.
• Some note that the same methods could be repurposed for non‑state terrorism or targeted assassinations, making the world more fragile even beyond Ukraine.