Drone-acharya: Why Ukraine's Op Spider Web could be a gamechanger in traditional warfare

On June 1, 2025, Ukraine launched a coordinated wave of drone strikes deep into Russian territory in what it later revealed as Operation Spider Web—a complex, multi-region offensive using small, low-cost FPV (first-person-view) drones. The strikes, which targeted military airfields across five regions including Murmansk, Irkutsk, Ivanovo, Ryazan, and Amur , reportedly damaged or destroyed up to 41 Russian military aircraft, including strategic bombers and early-warning radar planes.

The Ukrainian Security Service (SBU), which claimed responsibility for the operation, said the drones were covertly transported across Russian territory and launched from makeshift enclosures hidden in civilian-looking trucks. Once in proximity to the target airfields, the drone swarms were deployed and flown directly at parked aircraft. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy called the operation a “brilliant” achievement and said it had been in planning for 18 months.

A Strategic Shift in Warfare

What makes Operation Spider Web particularly significant is its challenge to conventional air power doctrine. Rather than deploying expensive fighter jets or cruise missiles, Ukraine relied on commercially available drones retrofitted with explosives. These drones—reportedly costing as little as $500 each—were used to damage multi-million-dollar aircraft, including Tu-95 and Tu-22M3 bombers. Ukrainian sources estimate that roughly one-third of Russia’s strategic bomber fleet was impacted.

This cost-asymmetry underscores the increasing prominence of asymmetric warfare in modern conflict. For decades, air power has been dominated by nations with vast industrial capacity and high-tech fleets. Operation Spider Web demonstrates that even states without traditional air superiority can leverage low-cost, decentralised systems to strike high-value targets deep behind enemy lines.

And unlike conventional air campaigns which require months of planning, air superiority, refuelling tankers, and satellite coordination, Spider Web was logistically lean. The drones were moved via civilian infrastructure, deployed from wooden sheds mounted on trucks, and operated using basic FPV equipment. In effect, Ukraine turned the battlefield into a live experiment in low-cost attritional warfare—with results that may redefine the economics of future conflict.

Limitations of Traditional Defence



Russian air defences—designed primarily to intercept long-range missiles and high-speed aircraft—reportedly struggled to counter the low-flying, slow-moving drones. By launching the drones from within Russian territory, Ukraine effectively bypassed radar coverage and air defence infrastructure.

Even highly protected airfields in Murmansk and Irkutsk saw multiple aircraft catch fire. Satellite imagery confirmed damage to Tu-95MS strategic bombers, which are among the most iconic assets in Russia’s strategic arsenal. At Belaya air base in Irkutsk, footage captured multiple long-range Tu-22M3 bombers in flames.

Russia’s Ministry of Defence acknowledged several aircraft were damaged but tried to downplay the scope, calling the attacks “terrorist acts.” However, prominent pro-Kremlin bloggers admitted that the loss of these bombers dealt a serious blow to Russia’s long-range air capabilities.

The effectiveness of Spider Web also highlighted a major tactical blind spot: the absence of counter-drone perimeter systems at static bases. Traditional air bases are built to defend against hostile aircraft or cruise missiles, not kamikaze drones flying at treetop level launched from trucks just outside the fence.

Implications for Global Defence Planning



The implications extend far beyond Ukraine and Russia. Militaries worldwide are now reassessing the security of their static assets—airfields, command centres, radar stations. If Russia, with its vast geography and layered air defences, could be infiltrated so deeply, what does that say for the survivability of similar assets in the Middle East, East Asia, or the Indo-Pacific?

Spider Web’s tactical ingenuity—transporting drone launchers in trucks disguised as civilian vehicles—demonstrated that even peer-to-peer conflicts can feature asymmetric surprises. Militaries like the United States, China, Israel, and India have already begun investing in loitering munitions and counter-drone technologies. However, the scale and sophistication of Spider Web showed that small actors can deploy strategic effects with minimal resources, particularly if they combine tactical innovation with covert logistics.

The cost-efficiency of drones also raises procurement questions for defence planners. A single modern fighter jet can cost $80–120 million. A bomber even more. By contrast, a $500 drone that can incapacitate such an aircraft delivers an almost unmatchable return on investment.

Escalation Risks and Nuclear Shadows

The most delicate aspect of Operation Spider Web is that it targeted nuclear-capable strategic bombers. While there is no evidence Ukraine targeted nuclear warheads or command-and-control nodes, the strike hit Russia’s long-range nuclear deterrent platforms.

That fact alone escalates the strategic stakes. Moscow’s nuclear doctrine includes strong emphasis on retaliation if its strategic assets are threatened. Though Russia did not escalate militarily in direct response to the strikes, nationalist figures and military bloggers called for overwhelming retaliation, including suggestions of nuclear sabre-rattling.

This underscores the blurring lines between conventional and strategic assets in modern warfare. A small drone attacking a Tu-95MS can cause not only material damage, but strategic ambiguity. Did Ukraine mean to challenge Russia’s nuclear deterrent? Or simply reduce its missile-launching capacity?

In the age of drone warfare, such distinctions are increasingly difficult to manage—especially when actions are viral, deniable, and visible to millions on social media.

The End of Sanctuary



Perhaps the most significant impact of Operation Spider Web is psychological. It signals the end of the long-held assumption that rear-echelon bases are immune to attack. Civilian footage of explosions at distant airbases circulated widely on social media, undercutting the Kremlin’s messaging that the war remains contained to the Ukrainian front.

Russia’s rear has been breached not just by missiles or sabotage, but by software-defined warfare. In a world where digital networks can coordinate attacks in real-time, and where drones can be deployed from civilian zones, the very notion of front lines becomes obsolete.

The fear is not just what drones can hit today, but what they might target tomorrow—early-warning radars, fuel depots, communication nodes. In a country as vast as Russia, defending every such node is impossible.

What Comes Next?

In the immediate term, Russia is likely to invest heavily in anti-drone defences: radar nets that detect low-slow-small (LSS) targets, jamming equipment, perimeter sensors, laser interceptors. But even these require time, money, and technical adaptation.

Meanwhile, Ukraine has signalled that such attacks are repeatable. If Spider Web was the pilot project, its successors may be broader in scope. With no shortage of technical expertise, wartime urgency, and international sympathy, Ukraine is well-positioned to double down on swarm warfare.

The next iteration may not just aim at parked aircraft. It could go after moving trains, radar sites, oil refineries, or digital infrastructure. If that happens, drone warfare will no longer be an exception—it will be the rule. Ukraine’s June 1 drone offensive marked one of the most ambitious and far-reaching operations of the conflict so far. By using improvised, low-cost drone swarms, Kyiv demonstrated that traditional air power can be countered not by conventional air forces, but by unconventional tactics. Operation Spider Web was not merely a tactical success—it redefined air defence paradigms and revealed the vulnerability of even the most fortified military assets. For Russia, it was a wake-up call. For the rest of the world, it was a blueprint. The message is clear: in 21st-century conflict, ingenuity may matter more than inventory. And in the right hands, a $500 drone can defeat a billion-dollar air strategy.