Cost asymmetry has fundamentally ruined advancements in air defence. Expensive interceptors were designed to counter expensive ballistic missiles. However, the modern battlefield is no longer defined only by technological superiority, but also by the capacity to sustain prolonged conflict.
For military strategists, this shift is an important factor in war-gaming future scenarios.
BIG SHIFT
According to some reports, in just the first 100 hours of hostilities, Iran is thought to have launched over 2,000 Shahed-type munitions along with hundreds of cheap ballistic missiles targeting US, Israel and Gulf countries. These countries responded with their layered interceptors, primarily using Patriot PAC-3 (each costing $3-4 million), THAAD interceptors ($12-15 million), SM-2 ($2.5-3 million), SM-6 ($4-5 million) and Iron Dome ($2-4 million).
Also read | India’s EV boom outpaces charging infrastructure, tests network limits
While the estimates of US and Israel losses are still unknown, Gulf countries alone may have fired more than 800 Patriots—much higher than the total Patriot deliveries to Ukraine over the last five years. Despite their reporting more than 90% interception, the economy of attrition equation is strongly in favour of Iran.
India too faced a similar situation during Op Sindoor when Pakistan launched several waves of saturation attacks using cheap Chinese, Turkish and Azeri drones. India achieved a nearly 100% interceptionratio using 40mm L-70, 23mm Zu-23 twin gun and other ground-based interceptors without succumbing to as dramatic a cost imbalance.The question is not only of costs but other factors like exhaustion of interceptors, leaving the defences vulnerable after a while. Cheap drones have also been reported to have been able to destroy multiple American AN/TPY2 radar systems (valued at approximately $1 billion each), E-3 Sentry airborne warning aircraft (valued at $500 million) and multiple KC-135 Stratotankers (valued at $80 million).
From the Indian perspective, with Pakistan buying off the shelf cheap drones from China, Türkiye, Azerbaijan and other countries, India must be ready to counter Pakistan’s volume tactics. Like India, Pakistan would have also learned its lessons from Op Sindoor and will be poised to refine its attacks and its munition strategy in the future.
SATURATION TO INNOVATION
This played out in the Russia-Ukraine war as well. By early 2026, with the help of cheap Chinese components, Russia is thought to have been producing 400 Geran-2 drone units daily at Alabuga, Tatarstan.
While the cost per drone was $20,000– 50,000, these platforms compelled Ukraine to expend costly NASAMS and Patriot missiles early in the conflict, creating cost-exchange ratios of more than 85:1 against defenders.
Also read | Weight-loss drug craze for Ozempic, Mounjaro surges in India amid safety concerns
Ukraine was quick in adapting, and has not only inverted this ratio but also reduced its reliance on the West. It developed its own technology backed by certain European countries and started mass production of low-cost interceptor drones priced at $1,000-5,000.
Today these drones account for one in three aerial kills. The country’s annual drone production surpasses millions, and the Ukrainian defence sector revenues have hit $6.3 billion in 2025. The pivot to this strategy was through decentralised, privateled manufacturing, underscoring Ukraine’s economic agility.
Likewise, India must also balance out its economics in a two-front scenario with Pakistan and China, and such actions will be able to prevent the fiscal exhaustion that initially troubled Ukraine.
NEEDED: ALTERNATIVES
US and its allies spending close to $20 billion within the first week of war on interceptors alone clearly highlights the need for other cost-effective alternatives to counter such threats. Some alternatives like targeting drones through aerial gun systems on attack helicopters have since been improvised, while Israel’s development of direct energy weapons is a clear technological leap.
A saturation attack must be dealt with saturation only. That means it is a question of the scale of production. India has a lot to learn. An ideal system of layered air defence using guns, missiles, direct energy weapons, electro-magnetic spectrums, jammers and other passive measures must be developed on a scale to maintain defensive superiority without prohibitive costs.
BUILDING RESILIENCE
Iran has been able to sustain the war for so long because of its resilient industrial base, which remains dispersed, decentralised, low-tech, independent and hence resilient to enemy targeting. It created a stockpile of tens of thousands of projectiles much before the start of the war and till date, no one knows how many missiles and drones it currently has.
Russia has indigenised 90% of assembly, using cheap North Korean labour and Chinese components for exponential scales of production. Similarly, Ukraine’s wartime surge.
Everything has fallen on three factors —cost, scale and resilience. While high-end and expensive systems are important, developing a layered, resilient, cost-effective system will prevent fiscal haemorrhage.
PLUG THE GAPS
Operation Sindoor reinforced the need for India’s two-front preparedness against Pakistan’s Chinese-backed asymmetric tactics, and China’s potential drone or missile barrages along the Line of Actual Control. It also revealed several capability gaps.
India’s layered air defence involving S-400, Akash, Pechora and other surface-to-air missiles augmented by gun systems, jammers and other electronic warfare tools are a good answer.
The Indian system of Akash Teer enabled realtime sensor fusion, rapid target allocation and costoptimised engagement sequences that not only prioritised targets and allocated suitable air defence system to counter them but also conserved expensive interceptors for higher-value threats.
But cost of engagement remains a primary issue. For the first time, our legacy guns like L-70 and Zu-23 2B, which were often overlooked in modernisation processes, have been proved invaluable against small, slow-moving drones.
India’s industrial depth and innovation will prove key in the development of counter-UAS solutions, loitering munitions, micro-munitions and electronic tools, which can fill the existing gaps in swarm handling.
After all, wars are no longer won by the most advanced systems, but by the side that can afford to keep fighting.
Views expressed here are the author’s own, and not EconomicTimes.com’s
